Fox News’ Eric Bolling shared a campaign ad that he said was up for grabs for Joe Biden, Chris Christie, Rand Paul or Marco Rubio to use in 2016.
Biden: Amnesty For 11 Million Illegals Would Be ‘Granting Them The Dignity And Respect They Deserve’
(CNSNews.com) – Vice President Joe Biden said Wednesday that passing an immigration reform law that would give the estimated 11 million people in the country illegally a pathway to citizenship would be “granting them the dignity and respect they deserve.”
Speaking at the Conference on the Americas on Wednesday in Washington, D.C., Biden told attendees from countries throughout the Western Hemisphere that every nation has to make “tough choices.”
“In the United States, it means reforming our immigration system and 11 million undocumented men, women and children being able to come out of the shadows and be full participants in American life,” Biden said. “Imagine that – the dignity.
“My father would say, ‘it’s all about dignity,” Biden said. “Granting them the dignity and respect they deserve.”
Biden said not doing so would be disrespectful to the people living throughout the Americas.
Read More at CNS News . By Penny Starr.
Photo Credit: US Coast Guard (Creative Commons)
WASHINGTON— Vice President Joe Biden is praising U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and her authoritative role in the Obama administration.
Biden says Rice has, in his words, “the absolute, total, complete confidence of the president.” He says that when Rice speaks about foreign policy, nobody doubts that she’s speaking for President Barack Obama.
Read More at OfficialWire . By Josh Lederman.
Photo Credit: Floyd Brown Creative Commons
It’s been a rough last few years for the Grand Old Party. From utter vilification during the Bush years to two consecutive presidential election defeats, the Republican Party could use a little pick-me-up.
That’s why it seems so baffling that the two most prominent and accomplished rising stars of the GOP, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, have been getting so much hate from their own party.
This dynamic senatorial duo has been doing most of the heavy lifting for their party as of late. Sen. Cruz has really had his chance to shine staring down the Obama Administration on gun control. Now he’s at it again, throwing down the gauntlet to Vice President Joe Biden, challenging him to an hour-long debate on gun control. His fearless efforts have even earned him the praise of his enemies.
Sen. Paul, meanwhile, has served splendidly as the face of the resistance to the current Administration. Whether providing the only solid rebuttal to the State of the Union address, grilling then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the Benghazi debacle and suggesting she be removed from her position, or bringing the whole country to a standstill in a valiant filibuster against drone assassinations of American citizens without due process, Rand Paul has solidified his position as the de facto leader of the Republican Party. He may very well be the foremost GOP contender for a 2016 run for President.
Unfortunately, it seems like there’s no rest for these two weary leaders. Not even from their own party. Cruz has earned ire from fellow Republicans who wish out loud that he would just shut up and stop doing what he does best, never mind that the prevalence of the silent strategy is the reason such bold stands are needed in the first place. Even Paul, the GOP’s unequivocal workhorse, has faced ambushes from his own supposed comrades for standing up for the very principles the whole party is theoretically behind.
The Republican Party purports to stand for limited Constitutional government, personal responsibility, liberty, and a strong family. When said party bites the very hands that lead them into battle for those exact principles, something is clearly wrong. The GOP no longer represents the will of its patriotic American supporters, and is no longer deserving of their support.
Joel Valenzuela is the editor of The Desert Lynx
Photo credit: Gage Skidmore
COLUMBIA, S.C.— Vice President Joe Biden is scolding Republicans in Congress, telling Democrats in South Carolina that the new Republican Party is down on America.
Biden is questioning what Republicans don’t understand about the U.S. and the people who built the country and fought to defend it.
Photo credit: terrellaftermath
We all know that this nation has suffered several major attacks during the Obama administration; all troubling and all important. But the one that I don’t want to see swept under the rug of rogue leadership is the attack on September 11, 2012, when Al-Qaida operatives attacked the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. Four people were killed including our United States Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Is there no shame or boundaries to these vicious American-hating militants?
This past week, on April 17, 2013, U. S. House Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) questioned Secretary of State John Kerry in a Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing, where Rep. Rohrabacher suggested that this administration has been lying to Congress. Kerry replied (and I quote): “I will appoint somebody to work directly with you starting tomorrow, with you, Mr. Chairman, to have a review of anything you don’t think you’ve gotten that you’re supposed to get. Let’s get it done, folks.” (end quote).
Can you imagine an answer like that? And who is the person Secretary Kerry appointed? It’s his spin doctor; oh, I mean his newly appointed Chief of Staff Mr. David E Wade, a man Secretary Kerry has known for years. You see, David Wade worked with John Kerry on his failed 2004 run for the office of President of the United States. Mr. Wade was originally hired as a speechwriter. So now we have a word smith who has been appointed to uncover the truth about a situation that this administration seems to be attempting to cover up.
It is also interesting to note that Mr. David E. Wade is married to Vice-President Joe Biden’s former press secretary Elizabeth Alexander, who has since been appointed as an assistant U. S. Attorney. Talk about strange bedfellows. How much truth do you think we are going to get out of a spin doctor and a person who makes a living advocating issues for a price?
We need to keep a close watch on what is going on with this potentially tragic melodrama. Many of us intend to, Secretary Kerry.
You wouldn’t know it from watching the news, but instances of violence in American society have fallen precipitously over the past decade. At the same time, more Americans than ever are playing video games. Yet, a bipartisan group of members of Congress continue to insist that video games might be responsible for random acts of violence, despite overwhelming evidence and facts showing they are wrong.
Vice-President Joe Biden, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IW) and Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) are among the leading proponents of the belief that there is a link between violence and video games. And they believe that taxpayer dollars should foot the bill for studies to attempt to prove it. But trying to prove causation is folly.
A few months ago, Congressman Wolf, an Appropriations Committee cardinal responsible for doling out billions of taxpayer dollars to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and hundreds of other government agencies, demanded that the National Science Foundation (of which he oversees funding) conduct a study proving his point. The Foundation hired Communication Professor Brad J. Bushman of Ohio State University to do the study. Bushman was the obvious choice; for he once did a study that concluded that the Bible could be used to incite violence. If the Bible induces violence, perhaps so does Grand Theft Auto. Low and behold, the professor found the link! The professor concluded that there are theoretical reasons to believe that violent video games are even more harmful than violent TV programs or films. Rep. Wolf was happy, as were the bureaucrats who want more funding from Mr. Wolf. A Washington win-win, as they say, except for the taxpayers.
There is just one problem — the facts. More Americans play video games today than ever before. While the sales of video games have expanded exponentially, violence in the United States has fallen. Youth violence has fallen. Incidents of bullying have fallen. Even violent crimes by juveniles have fallen. In short, the taxpayers are left holding the bill for a theoretical study with no basis in reality.
But in Washington, one study is never enough. Sen. Charles Grassley wants his own study. Even the National Rifle Association (NRA) is happy to blame the video game industry to shift attention away from gun control. There have been over 130 studies on video games over the past decade, with most finding no link.
Chris Ferguson, a psychologist at Texas A&M International University, has conducted similar experiments and finds studies linking video games and violence to be trivial. “You know most of the debate now is really on to these minor acts of aggressiveness,” he said. “You know we’re talking about little children sticking their tongues out at each other and that sort of thing.” Ferguson says it’s easy to think that senseless video game violence can lead to senseless violence in the real world. But he says that’s mixing up two separate things. “Many of the games do have morally objectionable material, and I think that is where a lot of the debate on this issue went off the rails,” he said. “We kind of mistook our moral concerns about some of these video games, which are very valid — I find many of the games to be morally objectionable — and then assumed that what is morally objectionable is harmful.”
It will be interesting to see if Mr. Ferguson stands up to those (like Bushman) who seem to be in search of data to validate what they are already spouting as true. A bit of intellectual independence would be refreshing in today’s world.
The last thing the taxpayers need is mountains of money being spent on mountains of politically-driven studies to support the political agendas of those who wish to abridge the First Amendment.
Photo credit: dominicotine (Creative Commons)
There was only one Jack Kemp. God knows we need his all-American appeal to conservative and urban audiences at a time when the GOP is attempting frenzied “minority outreach.”
(I put “minority outreach” in quotes because involvement is more my cup of tea.)
That aside, Senator Rand Paul’s Howard University speech set the outreach march on steadier ground.
Instead of sounding like a Democrat with a removable “R,” he was himself, which is all American blacks (pro and con) should ask of him.
I don’t think I’m alone is saying I don’t need White folks adopting minstrel show phony drawls (see Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden), nor drop obvious applause lines based upon our religious or civil rights experience.
Just talk to us.
From the podium and during Q & A, he addressed his stance on issues like the Civil Rights Act that got him in hot water in the past.
One mistake I think Black folks make is demanding that those far removed from our community magically address us as if they’ve been lifelong insiders.
Rand Paul is obviously a White male libertarian and Republican US senator. Some of his conclusions on the GOP or icons like Ronald Reagan differ from those of the Black liberal mainstream.
That his conclusions differ from those of the Black liberal mainstream doesn’t necessarily make him a villain.
American Blacks of Paul’s generation should focus less on what happened in the past and more on what can be done now to distance ourselves from the limitations of yesteryear.
Rand Paul was born in the South three years ahead of me. We came of age in a region forced to confront its Apartheid by federal troops and legislative leveraging from the White Hosue and Capitol Hill.
A lot of Black liberals will charge that he doesn’t “get” Black folks. I wonder: does “Mt. Negro Dialect” Harry Reid “get” us any better?
I’d argue that Rand Paul’s decriminalization of what he calls “victimless drug crimes” alone has the potential to liberate several generations of Black men who chose drug-dealing as a profession.
That stance resonates far more with the Black liberal (and parts of the conservative) mainstream than with anti-drug hardliners like myself.
I consider crack, heroin, meth, and other chemical angels of slow motion death to be nothing less than satanic in their design and impact.
Drug decriminalization is a big libertarian coalition builder, and within it lies the glue for adding American Blacks who feel that the War on Drugs is racist.
This topic, along with libertarian aversion to intrusive policing and an aptly named “warfare state,” were rightly shared by Paul at Howard University- just like he does elsewhere.
I think he did ok during his Howard University speech, precisely because he remained himself and didn’t deviate from trademark philosophical positions.
I expect White folks to be themselves and not put on patronizing productions designed to pacify us.
Rand Paul did ok at Howard University and thus far is ok by me as someone offering the GOP political viagra if they’re willing to take it.
Donate/Stop Socialist Hate!
It was easier for Obama to run his campaign out of Chicago, where none of Hawaii’s communist past could haunt his campaign.
Hawaii may have been a US territory, but Moscow controlled the labor. When Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, Moscow placed a call to their Hawaiian operatives and told them to knock it until after the war.
We have Jack Kawano to thank for that piece of information. Jack Kawano was a member of the Longshoremen’s Union and joined the Communist Party of Hawaii in 1930. He helped organize the sugar plantation workers and rose up through the ranks to become President of the Longshoremen’s Union, Local 136.
Communist organizers from the mainland recognized his leadership abilities and invited him to join the “Traveler’s Club”, the communist underground.
It all came to an abrupt end when communist insurgents staged a revolution in 1949, holding the Hawaiian Islands in a state of siege for 177 days.
Kawano was so shaken by the violence that he offered to tell his story to the House Un-American Activities Committee.
He repeated his testimony in an interview with Richard English for the “Saturday Evening Post”, dated Feb. 2, 1952 in an titled “We Almost Lost Hawaii To The Reds.” If you can find a copy, it’s worth the read.
Kawano’s testimony shattered the Communist Party. He described his meetings with his communist advisors as “professional guys and teachers from the University of Hawaii”. They explained the theory of communism, by breaking a twig. Then they tied a dozen twigs together and explained that if the twigs work together, it’s impossible to break.
It’s a weak argument. All the twigs eventually go down in flames. In communism, the little guy does all the dirty work.
The bombshell came when Kawano revealed a plan to take over the leadership of the Democratic Party, which they called “unorganized and weak.” They planned to take over the Republican Party later on. Seems a little prophetic, doesn’t it?
Jack Kawano was one of forty-one communist delegates who attended the territorial convention of the Democratic Party in Hawaii.
Kawano described his trip to San Francisco for special indoctrination at party headquarters.
Kawano listened to lectures on communism for six weeks, describing the school as “mostly students from California, and one Mexican.”
He attended classes in Marxism, propaganda, and training in how to agitate the police. And finally, he was forced to listen to the complete history of the American labor movement and the Communist Party.
I’m surprised they didn’t die of boredom. I guess we should remember that the lectures were probably written by some intellectual genius from Berkeley.
And who needs training on how to agitate the police? I’ll just remind everyone that the students at UC Davis were pepper-sprayed in the face, and then they filed complaints against the university police. Still up to the same old tricks.
This gives us a much different picture of Barack Obama and makes the leadership of the Democratic Party look ridiculous.
I guess we can stop wondering why we only have two political parties. They couldn’t control more than two parties.
More than likely, this is the reason Joe Biden and his “fellow travelers” want Americans to turn in their guns. Gun control is the path of least resistance.
If organized labor is a weapon, that explains the flood of immigrant labor and Janet Napolitano’s feigned ignorance of anything suspicious.
I’m the same age as Bill and Hillary Clinton. My husband was a graduate student in the Russian Department at the University of California Davis, when Bill Clinton was running around Moscow. I know that any travel involving the Soviet Union required the cooperation of the KGB.
Add Hillary’s legal career getting a jumpstart from a couple of communist attorneys in Berkeley; I’m going to call that a yes.
I met my first Soviet Agent in 1970. He was following my husband. I stood there with a stupid look on my face while my husband chatted with the KGB. When I expressed my concern, he told me to mind my own business.
That marriage ended when the KGB arranged a job for him in Washington DC. He left me standing around Davis and took off. Never saw him again.
So don’t tell me that the University of Hawaii never had any communist organizers. I know all about how communists organize inside the Russian Departments.
I judge people by what they do, not what they say. All I’m hearing is the same old communist double-talk from years ago.
“Until you expose corruption and evil, you never know to what extraordinary measures they will go to cover it up.” -Anonymous
Uncle Joe Biden recently mocked Americans who were concerned that the government was trying to take away their Second Amendment rights, referring to us as the “black helicopter crowd.”
Apparently, Uncle Joe didn’t get the memo that the government is already confiscating guns.
The Veterans Administration has sent out tens of thousands of letters to so-called “incompetent” veterans, mandating them to turn in their guns and ammunition. The letter says in part:
A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both…
Of course, the letter doesn’t actually state what “incompetency” entails, which means a bureaucrat sitting in an office can arbitrarily determine whether to nullify the Second Amendment rights of a veteran.
It is presumed that one of the criteria for disarming a veteran is being diagnosed with PTSD—Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder—a mental condition in which the symptoms are so vague that virtually any veteran can be deemed to have PTSD.
One of the “benefits” of having PTSD, however, is that often the veteran is placed on psychotropic drugs (which is a plus for the drug companies) and a way to disqualify a veteran from owning a gun.
Coincidentally—or not so coincidentally—this is the same strategy being used in New York to disarm citizens.
New York police have begun confiscating guns from anyone taking anti-anxiety medication—that is, psychotropic drugs.
And we learned this week that the State of Missouri has turned over to the Social Security Administration the complete database of Missouri citizens who possess concealed carry permits. It was deemed a “mistake,” although the “mistake” apparently occurred twice. What is clear is that the Feds are trying to match up citizens with so-called “mental problems” who possess a concealed carry permit in order to duplicate what is being done in New York.
Perhaps we’re just a bunch of knuckle-dragging conspiracy theorists for thinking Barry Obama would try to nullify the Second Amendment.
Perhaps it is just a coincidence that there is currently a nationwide shortage of ammunition, which has been blamed on the Obama administration having stockpiled a staggering two billion rounds of ammunition.
Perhaps it is just a coincidence that Obama and his minions are wringing their hands decrying those evil assault weapons, while quietly ordering 7000 AR-15s for the Department of Homeland Security.
And perhaps Fast and Furious really was a mistake. Thousands of assault weapons were probably shipped to Mexican drug cartels because of a few low-level bureaucrats. Eric Holder probably knew nothing about it. Maybe it really wasn’t about blaming gun dealers for the violence in Mexico in order to clamp down on the public being able to purchase guns.
Or maybe, just maybe, Obama is doing what he said he wanted to do while a state senator: to enact a total gun ban.
Goodbye Second Amendment, hello Comrade Obama…