Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
( Don’t you dare “…try and paint all of Islam with the same brush!”)
9/26/2014 3:13:38 AM
This outburst reportedly took place in the afternoon of last week just prior to the president’s departure to Camp David. It was an informal briefing on the expanded bombing campaigns to take place in both Syria and Iraq. Halfway through the already very brief briefing, President Obama stood up clearly agitated, and walked out of the room…

( Don’t you dare “…try and paint all of Islam with the same brush!”

The casually dressed Obama returned to the briefing moments later with a senior adviser alongside him, though his mood continued to indicate he was still very upset.

The senior adviser made a couple pointed remarks to the Pentagon representatives, reminded them the president had already had a very busy day, and then both she and the president once again left the room.

Within seconds, Barack Obama returned again to the just concluded briefing, pointing at the still seated Pentagon staff and indicating how “inappropriate” it was to “try and paint all of Islam with the same brush.” The president repeated similar remarks, his mood going from agitation to outrage. His voice carried to several other West Wing offices.

The senior adviser, who did not originally return with the president into the briefing, suddenly re-appeared alongside him, as well as the president’s personal aide. She was smiling, and telling everyone “we’re done here” which she repeated several times and then led the president back out into the hallway.

News of the outburst reached senior Pentagon officials. They had no reaction. At least no reaction they shared with others.

Within the hour the president was flying off to Camp David, and not long after that, bombs were dropping in Syria.

THE MUST READ FOLLOW UP AVAILABLE HERE:

D.C. Whispers: “Mr. President, You Have No Choice. You’re Exposed Here.”



May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
28 words that Democrats really wish President Obama didn’t say today
10/3/2014 2:21:37 PM
I must agree with the writer here. 0bama sure made another blunder that sinks his party's chances even lower.

For the Records:
Average household income has declined by $3,000 since

the president took office, the GOP's Senate conference

said in a statement.

And gasoline prices are up 82 per cent since 2009.

Unemployment for Americans age 16-24 stands at 13 per

cent, the party reminded reporters in an email blast. More

than 9.6 million working-age Americans are out of work.

The most telling stat from Republicans, with the midterm

congressional elections a month away, is the claim that

the average household total of medical insurance

premiums has increased by $3,459 since Obama took

office.

The president famously promised that his Affordable Care

Act law would reduce those costs by $2.500 per

household, per year.

Even as U.S. Senate candidates in tight races are running

away from Obamacare as an Election Day issue, Obama

continues to embrace the landmark political achievement

on which he has wagered his place in history.

'There's a reason fewer [Republicans] are running against

Obamacare,' he claimed, 'because while good, affordable

health care might still be a fanged threat to freedom on

Fox News, it's working pretty well in the real world.'

"I think that underestimates the impact of an unpopular president (on video no less!) bluntly insisting that an election in 33 days is indeed a referendum on his policies. Republicans couldn't have written a better script than that."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6OIjjPKt1I

President Obama was at Northwestern University on Thursday to deliver an economic speech that, he and his team hoped, would lay out the case forwhy the public is better off today than they were six years ago -- even if they didn't feel it in their everday lives. Instead, Obama just gave every Republican ad-maker in the country more fodder for negative ads linking Democratic candidates to him.

Here are the four sentences that will draw all of the attention (they come more than two thirds of the way through the speech): "I am not on the ballot this fall. Michelle’s pretty happy about that. But make no mistake: these policies are on the ballot. Every single one of them." Boil those four sentences down even further and here's what you are left with: "Make no mistake: these policies are on the ballot. Every single one of them."

You can imagine Sen. Mark Pryor of Arkansas or Sen. Kay Hagan in North Carolina or Alison Lundergan Grimes in Kentucky grimacing when they heard those 28 words. That trio has spent much of the campaign insisting that this election is NOT about Barack Obama, that it is instead about a choice between themselves and their opponents.

The reason for this distancing strategy is obvious: President Obama is deeply unpopular in many of the states that will decide which party controls the majority in 2015. Of the seven seats rated "toss ups" by the non-partisan Cook Political Report, Obama lost four of them (Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana and North Carolina) in 2012. He also lost in three Democratic-held open seats -- Montana, South Dakota and West Virginia -- now viewed as sure-thing pickups for Republicans. If Republicans only won Democratic-held seats where Obama lost in 2012, they would pick up 7 seats -- one more than they need to recapture the majority.

In many of these states, Obama's numbers are in a (much) worse place today than in November 2012. Just four in ten Louisiana voters approve of how President Obama is doing his job in a recent CNN/Opinion Research poll. In Arkansas, Obama's approval rating is at 31 percent, according to anNBC/Marist poll. Even in Colorado, a state Obama won in 2008 and 2012, his approval rating sat at just 39 percent in another NBC/Marist survey.

It doesn't take a political mastermind to realize that an ad in which the President of the United States says "Make no mistake: These policies are on the ballot. Every single one of them" might not be helpful to the Democratic candidates trying to run away from him this November.

So, why did Obama say it? My guess is that he wanted to make the stakes clear to a Democratic base that, by virtually every polling measure I've seen, is less enthusiastic to turn out and vote on Nov. 4 than Republicans. The idea being that if you like Obama and his policies -- which his base, especially African Americans, still do -- then you need to show it by going out and voting. The Obama political team is working under the assumption that if you dislike President Obama, nothing he says or does is going to change that reality. So, why not show the Democratic base that this election is worth fighting for?

I think that underestimates the impact of an unpopular president (on video no less!) bluntly insisting that an election in 33 days is indeed a referendum on his policies. Republicans couldn't have written a better script than that.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/10/02/28-words-that-democrats-really-wish-president-obama-didnt-say-today/


May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ( Don’t you dare “…try and paint all of Islam with the same brush!”)
10/4/2014 6:33:08 AM
080214ebolaus

The more closely our team investigates the facts about Ebola here at Natural News, the more I’m convinced the United States government is intentionally trying to increase the spread of the outbreak rather than contain it. I realize this assertion may sound outlandish, but review the evidence below and decide for yourself. This story is extensively sourced with verifiable links.

As microbiologist Dr. Gil Mobley recently said in protest of all the lies and disinformation, “CDC is lying! … [and] If they’re not lying, they are grossly incompetent.” [1]

Here are the top ten pieces of evidence that point to the U.S. government seemingly wanting to see Ebola spread even more. Because, just as Dr. Mobley says, if all this isn’t intentional, then it’s a showcase of extreme incompetence on the part of government:

#1) Obama refuses to halt air travelers from infected countries from entering the United States

Ebola “patient zero” Thomas Eric Duncan flew right into the United States and walked through the international airports of both Washington D.C. and Dallas-Fort Worth. He was never asked about his country of origin and was never screened for any health conditions.

Why are people whose flights originate in Liberia and Sierra Leone still allowed to openly travel to large U.S. cities? Shouldn’t we use the immigration and customs infrastructure already in place at international airports to reject travelers from countries where Ebola is spreading out of control?

Strangely, the United States has far more stringent requirements for cats and dogs entering the country than it does for humans. Dogs and cats must enter the country with extensive health records, but international air travelers can apparently just fly right in even if they’re infected with Ebola.

#2) Texas family is quarantined in a home that still hasn’t been cleaned or decontaminated

“More than a week after a Liberian man fell ill with Ebola and four days after he was placed in isolation at a hospital in Dallas, the apartment where he was staying with four other people had not been cleaned and the sheets and dirty towels he used while sick remained in the home, health officials acknowledged on Thursday afternoon.” – NY Times [2] and Fox News [11]

Even though the home hasn’t been cleaned or decontaminated, family members of Thomas Eric Duncan have beenforced into isolation in this contaminated home and told they must submit to regular blood draws by the state.

Already, these family members escaped their isolation and began to mingle once again with the public, violating their isolation orders. The woman, Louise Troh, told reporters she is tired of being “locked up” with her family members. [3]

“Dallas officials said that relatives of the man infected with Ebola left their apartment after agreeing not to, which prompted officials to issue a confinement order overnight,” reports the LA Times. [4] “They were noncompliant with the request to stay home,” said Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins.

Isn’t it insane to force a family into quarantine in a home that’s clearly contaminated with Ebola? Doesn’t this almost prove that government authorities actually want this family to catch the disease and spread it? After all, how else could this family have been “allowed” to violate their isolation and start interacting with the public again? With hundreds (if not thousands) of CDC and Texas health authorities on location dealing with this Dallas outbreak, how could it be that not a single one of these persons was assigned to watching the Duncan household to make sure nobody left?

Cleaning of contaminated apartment delayed by government demand for a “permit”

What’s even more incredible is that the cleaning crew which was hired to sanitize the home was turned away because they were told they needed a Texas Dept. of Transportation permit to drive on state highways after cleaning the home.

“Brad Smith of the Cleaning Guys, which was hired to sanitize the apartment, said his company does not have the proper permits to transport hazardous waste on Texas highways. The company specializes in hazmat and biohazard cleaning services,” reports a local Fox affiliate. [7] “Smith said authorities sent his crew away late Thursday before they entered the apartment and told them to come back with proper permits. It’s unclear how long that will take. ‘The permit is being processed through DOT (the Department of Transportation) because it is a special permit,’ Smith said.”

In other words, a family is being forced to live in an Ebola-contaminated home while the cleaning of that home is delayed because somebody needs a permit to clean it? How insane does this get, really?

#3) The CDC continues to lie about modes of transmission for the Ebola virus

The CDC continues to ridiculously claim that Ebola only spreads through “direct contact of body fluids.” The agency continued to deny that Ebola can spread through the air for short distances and that Ebola can be acquired by touching contaminated surfaces.

The overall lie from the CDC is that Ebola is “difficult to catch.” But if that’s true, then why did so many doctors who are well trained in the prevention of infectious disease still manage to get infected? How did Dr. Kent Brantly get infected?

Even more, how did the NBC News cameraman now get infected even though he took extreme precautions to avoid touching anyone while also carefully washing his own skin and clothes each day?

“I am taking serious precautions and washing with chlorine regularly,” said Ashoka Mukpo, the 33-year-old cameraman, in a NY Daily News article. [9] Clearly this was not an individual who ran around touching infected Ebola patients. Yet he still got infected. How is this possible unless the CDC is lying?

Dr. Gil Mobley “said the CDC is ‘sugar-coating’ the risk of the virus spreading in the United States,” reports the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. [1]

Research has clearly shown that Ebola virus can ride on aerosols — airborne particles of water or spit — and infect people at a distance. [5] So why isn’t the CDC telling people the truth that Ebola can spread through the air?

And why aren’t frontline doctors and soldiers being told they need to wear full face respirators?

It’s almost as if the CDC wants this to spread in order to generate exactly the kind of pandemic panic that would generate billions of dollars in lucrative vaccine sales. They did it before, after all, with the swine flu scare. So why not use Ebola to also generate more profits for the vaccine makers?

#4) The FDA is openly threatening sellers of natural remedies that might be useful for slowing or stopping Ebola

Instead of encouraging people to boost their immune systems with nutritional therapies, natural remedies and superfoods, the FDA is actively going out of its way to threaten resellers of colloidal silver and essential oils.

Last week, the FDA threatened three companies with criminal prosecution if they didn’t take steps to dissociate their products from Ebola.

One company, the Natural Solutions Foundation, has since claimed that governments are actively seizing colloidal silver shipments to African nations in order to prevent Ebola victims from ever being treated with it. Are these authorities afraid that it might actually work?

Shouldn’t we be trying and testing every herb and natural remedy on the planet to find out how to stop Ebola? Or are we all supposed to wait around for the drug companies to manufacture an experimental vaccine and then put all our trust in that?

Doesn’t anybody realize the company testing the vaccine right now — GlaxoSmithKline — has a long criminal history of admitted felony crimes including the bribery of tens of thousands of doctors?

#5) People entering U.S. customs are not asked where they’ve been

“Yesterday, I came through international customs at the Atlanta airport,” said Dr. Gil Mobley when he recently entered the United States. “The only question they asked arriving passengers is if they had tobacco or alcohol.” – reported in the AJC. [1]

Apparently, U.S. customs is far more interested in determining whether you owe any import tax than whether you might be carrying a deadly pandemic virus. Is nobody in the U.S. government aware that an international pandemic is under way? How is it even possible that people are not being asked about their country of origin?

#6) The U.S. government knew about the outbreak in advance, but didn’t warn the public

It’s now clear that the U.S. government has long known this outbreak was coming but did nothing to warn the public.

In early September, the government sought to purchase 160,000 Ebola hazmat suits from a U.S. supplier.

Furthermore, according to this report on SHTFplan.com, “Disaster Assistance Response Teams were told to prepare to be activated in the month of October.”

Don’t you find it strange that while the government itself was gearing up for an October disaster, the public wasn’t told a thing about any of this?

#7) Even during a global pandemic outbreak, the U.S. government refuses to secure the southern U.S. border

If Ebola victims can fly into the United States, they can surely fly into Mexico, Central America and South America as well.

So why is the U.S. southern border still wide open with virtually zero security? The ability of infected Ebola victims to walk right across the border and into Texas (or other southern states) seems to be of no concern whatsoever to the Obama administration. The political goal of encouraging the maximum illegal immigration possible — and then granting amnesty to a wave of new voters — seems far more important than protecting America from a pandemic outbreak.

Many observers already believe that the mystery entero virus which has sent hundreds of U.S. children to hospitals all across the country probably entered the U.S. through the unsecured border. If Obama can send 3,000 U.S. troops to Sierra Leone, why can’t we send a few thousand enforcers to our own border with Mexico?

The insanity of leaving that border wide open during an international deadly pandemic is beyond description. This is beyond negligent; it is clearly deliberate.

#8) The government’s official advice of “don’t panic, don’t prepare” ensures a greater pandemic emergency during any outbreak

The U.S. government has actually gone out of its way to discourage the American people from taking basic preparedness precautions, long depicting preppers and survivalists as “radical elements” who might even pose a security risk to America, according to FBI warnings.

But in truth, preppers are the most calm people of all because they have nothing to fear from infrastructure disruptions, food supply shortages and even power grid failures. Preppers help keep communities safe and calm, and they’re the best positioned to help rebuild society after any pandemic.

So why does the U.S. government continue to demonize preppers? The intention, it seems, is to make sure nobody engages in preparedeness activities, thereby maximizing the victim status of the people. This, in turn, makes people more obedient to government because that’s where they must now turn for food, water, medicine and safety.

At every turn, the U.S. government seems to have encouraged victimization and actually taught people to do nothing for their own safety and preparedness. This is how nations are brought to their knees: strip away all self-reliance, then follow it up with a sweeping national catastrophe.

Learn real self-reliance for a pandemic outbreak at www.BioDefense.com

#9) The U.S. watched and waited, doing nothing during the original window of opportunity for halting Ebola six months ago

Ebola could have been stopped relatively easily in the spring of 2014. But even when infectious disease experts were sounding the warning many months ago, the U.S. government stood by and did nothing.

This was, in fact, a reflection of the entire international response which was lackluster at best. As Ebola ramped up into exponential growth, world political leaders were apparently too busy running for office and wooing voters to pay any attention to a deadly outbreak happening a continent away.

Obama’s dispatching of 3,000 troops long after the explosive spread of Ebola was already under way is nothing more than medical theater. The Pentagon’s ongoing construction of a reported 1,500 cots in makeshift medical tents isn’t going to make any kind of dent in a country where the CDC now estimates 1.4 million infections by the end of January.

Even worse, it exposes U.S. soldiers to a virus which we already know can be spread through the air. As Rand Paul recently asked, “Can you imagine if a whole ship full of our soldiers catch ebola?” [10]

Paul goes on to explain, “We should not underestimate the transmissibility of this… My suspicion is that it’s a lot more transmissible than that if people who are taking every precaution are getting it. There are people getting it who simply helped people get in or out of a taxicab.”

It’s hard not to consider the possibility that this was done in order to intentionally expose U.S. soldiers to Ebola, then bring them back home to spread the infection in yet more U.S. cities.

#10) The U.S. government has held the patent on Ebola since 2010

Finally, the U.S. government has claimed intellectual property ownership over the “invention” of the Ebola virus ever since 2010.

This brings up all sorts of important questions: Why did the government patent its “invention” of Ebola? Patents are filed in order to claim monopoly ownership over an invention. That’s the entire purpose of a patent, of course, and by patenting Ebola, the U.S. government is clearly stating that it believes it is the “inventor” of Ebola while seeking to restrict anyone else from using it.

Click here to read the patent for yourself.

Perhaps this is why Liberian scientist Dr. Cyril Broderick, Professor of Plant Pathology, believes Ebola is an engineered bioweapon. “Ebola is a genetically modified organism (GMO)” he declared in a front-page news story in the Liberian Observer. [8]

He goes on to explain:

[Horowitz] confirmed the existence of an American Military-Medical-Industry that conducts biological weapons tests under the guise of administering vaccinations to control diseases and improve the health of “black Africans overseas.”

SITES AROUND AFRICA, AND IN WEST AFRICA, HAVE OVER THE YEARS BEEN SET UP FOR TESTING EMERGING DISEASES, ESPECIALLY EBOLA

The World Health Organization (WHO) and several other UN Agencies have been implicated in selecting and enticing African countries to participate in the testing events, promoting vaccinations, but pursuing various testing regiments.

AFRICAN LEADERS AND AFRICAN COUNTRIES NEED TO TAKE THE LEAD IN DEFENDING BABIES, CHILDREN, AFRICAN WOMEN, AFRICAN MEN, AND THE ELDERLY. THESE CITIZENS DO NOT DESERVE TO BE USED AS GUINEA PIGS!

Learn more Ebola truth here

Get prepared now with the free downloadable audio files at www.BioDefense.com

Listen to the astonishing interview with Steve Quayle and Doug Hagmann:
www.hagmannandhagmann.com

Read Mac Slavo’s articles at www.SHTFplan.com

Sources for this article include:

www.naturalnews.com

[1] www.ajc.com

[2] www.nytimes.com

[3] dfw.cbslocal.com

[4] www.latimes.com

[5] www.shtfplan.com

[6] www.nydailynews.com

[7] q13fox.com

[8] www.liberianobserver.com

[9] www.nydailynews.com

[10] washington.cbslocal.com

[11] nation.foxnews.com

Source for this is here http://worldtruth.tv/do-these-ten-pieces-of-evidence-prove-the-u-s-government-is-actively-encouraging-an-ebola-outbreak-in-america/

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ( Don’t you dare “…try and paint all of Islam with the same brush!”)
11/21/2014 1:30:54 PM

Obamacare's next nasty surprise

Obamacare's next nasty surprise Obama Laughing

Obamacare has been full of surprises since a Democrat-controlled Congress passed the law in 2010 -- all of them bad. In 2015, things willget even worse(link is external):

People who didn’t have health insurance during 2014 may soon have to pay a penalty fee(link is external) that starts at $95 and goes up based on how much you earn. Some Americans know about the penalty, and they’ve budgeted for it or at least accepted its inevitability. But several million others could be in for a rude surprise when Washington assesses a fee they didn’t even know was coming.

The uninsured rate has fallen since Obamacare, as the ACA is known, went into effect at the start of 2014. But there are still roughly 40 million adult Americans(link is external) who lack health insurance, according to Census Department data. A recent poll by Gallup shows that about 55% of the uninsured plan to get insurance(link is external), while 35% say they’re willing to pay the fine for not having coverage. That leaves 10% of the uninsured — 4 million people or so -- who appear to be unaware they need to have insurance or pay a penalty. Plus, some of the 55% who say they plan to get coverage inevitably won’t, including a portion who probably don’t know they’ll get stuck paying a penalty.

The law has exemptions in place so poor people wouldn't have to pay a penalty. But those exemptions aren't widely known and even less publicized. And who is in charge of collecting the penalties? The IRS:

The IRS likely won’t be sending agents to doorsteps demanding payment. Its only method of collecting will be to withhold the money owed from tax refunds issued in 2015, for calendar year 2014.

It’s not clear how the IRS will collect from people who don’t get a refund. Still, it will require a deft touch by the IRS to collect money enforcing an unpopular law strongly opposed by the majority party in both houses of Congress, without triggering a furor.

As the IRS is incapable of applying a "deft touch" to anything, a "furor" is exactly what will happen. But probably not in the way the media thinks. IRS agents could for example, decide to seize welfare payments or disability checks to cover the penalities. As these sorts of payments go to people across the country, it means even Democrat congressmen could find their phones lighting-up with angry calls from the folks back home demanding to know why the IRS is taking away their foodstamps.

And that might result in Democrats turning against Obamacare. Right in time for the 2016 elections.

Tags:

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
How Obama blatantly disregards the law
11/30/2014 5:03:01 PM
This President has no intention of observing the LAWS of the country that he now resides as President of. I am aghast at how the ignorant support this charade of a presidency. It is saddening to know his education and work afterward were all a plan to thwart the true meaning of the US Constitution as our Founders had intended. He is a false person and history and the law will prove this in time. Unfortunately too late to stop the damage he has caused this country and its people ALL of Whom he is bound to represent but neglects against people of his own white race. Yes the First Black colored president is HALF White! Sad situation for all Americans!

President Obama likes to claim he’s been forced into rogue executive actions, laying the blame on an intransigent Congress. In fact, his lawlessness is coldly calculated, dating back to his days as a Chicago community organizer.

Consider what he wrote on page 276 of his 1995 memoir, “Dreams from My Father,” reflecting on his decision to study law: “I had things to learn in law school, things that would help me bring about real change. I would learn power’s currency in all its intricacy and detail, knowledge that I could now bring back to where it was needed…bring it back like Promethean fire.”

Obama fancies himself a modern-day Prometheus stealing laws from the oppressive Founding Fathers for the benefit of the oppressed.

“I just took an action to change the law!” he reminded Hispanic activists in Chicago last week, referring to his executive amnesty.

Learning to run around American law was his main purpose in attending Harvard Law School, where he quickly sidled up to Professor Derrick Bell, who bashed the Constitution as a form of “original sin.”

There was no reverence in studying the founding documents and the system they created, no desire to work within America’s legal framework and enforce existing law.

No, Obama didn’t study federal statutes to defend them. He studied them to game them, sabotage them. To abdicate them.

On Immigration

Modal Trigger

Faith leaders and activists protest immigrant deportations in front of the White House.Photo: AFP/Getty Images

Exhibit A is his illegal mass amnesty for illegals.

According to a new report by the Congressional Research Service, the Hill’s nonpartisan think tank, the president’s authority to grant amnesty is limited to illegal aliens facing emergency situations — such as wars or earthquakes, floods and droughts — that prevent their safe deportation.

The almost 5 million illegals getting a pass from Obama face no such hazards.

By giving them work permits, Obama’s also violating the Immigration and Nationality Act’s intent of protecting domestic labor.

“Congress is unlikely to have defined ‘unauthorized alien’ and prohibited the knowing hiring or employment of such aliens if it contemplated the executive branch granting work authorization” to millions of illegals, wrote CRS legislative attorneys Kate M. Manuel and Michael John Garcia.

What’s more, the Supreme Court in its 1985 “Heckler v. Cheney” decision struck down presidential policies that abdicate statutory duties.

“The Heckler Court expressly recognized the possibility of an executive agency ‘consciously and expressly adopt(ing) a general policy (of not enforcing the law) that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities,’” they added.

There is little doubt that ordering Homeland Security not to remove half the illegal population is an “extreme” policy. The president has “consciously” decided to abdicate the statutory duties Congress assigned him in the Immigration and Nationality Act, which expressly mandates illegal aliens “shall be detained for removal proceedings.”

On School Discipline

Modal Trigger

President Barack Obama visits first grade students at Gen. Clarence Tinker elementary school in Florida on Sept. 17.Photo: AP

But Obama’s not just flouting immigration statutes. He’s also reinterpreting the nation’s civil-rights laws.

For starters, Obama has directed his education secretary and attorney general to pressure public school districts to limit the number of minority students they suspend.

To comply with the policy, Minneapolis Public Schools and other districts have adopted de facto racial quotas in discipline.

“MPS must aggressively reduce the disproportionality between black and brown students and their white peers every year for the next four years,” the Minneapolis school superintendent explains. “This will begin with a 25 percent reduction in disproportionality by the end of this school year; 50 percent by 2016; 75 percent by 2017; and 100 percent by 2018.”

By referring lower and lower shares of black kids for discipline until they equal white levels, MPS is favoring one race over another in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

“The new discipline policy is legally and constitutionally suspect,” US Civil Rights Commissioner Peter Kirsanow asserted.

OBAMA’S ALSO REINTERPRETING THE NATION’S CIVIL-RIGHTS LAWS.

A federal appeals court in its 1997 People Who Care v. Rockford Board of Education decision declared unconstitutional a Rockford, Ill., policy that forbade school officials referring “a higher percentage of minority students than of white students for discipline.”

Former Education Department lawyer Hans Bader notes the court ruling also “explicitly rejected the argument that such a rule is permissible to prevent ‘disparate impact,’” a dubious civil rights theory not found in the text of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

“This provision cannot stand,” the Chicago-based 7th Circuit unanimously ruled. “Racial disciplinary quotas violate equity in its root sense. They entail either systematically over-punishing the innocent or under-punishing the guilty. They place race at war with justice.”

“In the event of litigation,” Kirsanow said, “I expect that the 8th Circuit (which includes Minnesota) will find its sister circuit’s reasoning persuasive.”

On Housing

Modal Trigger

Obama meets with federal financial regulators on Oct. 6.Photo: Getty Images)

Also, Obama is illegally rewriting both the Fair Housing Act and Equal Credit Opportunity Act in order to pressure lenders and insurers into setting quotas for minority homebuyers.

Last month, a federal judge stepped in on behalf of insurers. US District Judge Richard Leon struck down HUD’s 2013 rule using disparate impact to enforce the FHA against insurers. He said the administration had a lot of “chutzpah” reading disparate impact into the statute.

“This is yet another example of an administrative agency trying desperately to write into law that which Congress never intended to sanction,” he wrote in his opinion.

Leon ruled the FHA unambiguously prohibits only policies and practices that intentionally discriminate, not ones based on risk analysis and other legitimate business needs of the home insurance industry.

For the administration to claim otherwise is “wishful thinking on steroids,” the judge scolded.

Removing important risk factors from insurance rating plans just because they may have an adverse effect on favored groups would destroy accurate risk assessment and unfairly raise premiums for other policyholders, he said.

But that’s exactly what Obama seeks.

In the name of “racial equity,” he’s trying to eliminate risk-based pricing not only for home insurance policies but also home loans.

HUD has teamed up with the Justice Department and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to sue mortgage lenders for more than $1 trillion in disparate impact claims, arguing they charged minority borrowers a “racial surcharge.”

The Court is poised to stop this illegal witch hunt, after agreeing to hear a case against disparate impact brought by the state of Texas — Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. It’s widely expected to reach the same conclusion as the DC court.

“Fortunately for us all,” Leon concluded, “the Supreme Court is now perfectly positioned to finally address this issue in the not-too-distant future.”

On Hiring

Modal Trigger

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Chairwoman Jacqueline BerrienPhoto: AP

Meanwhile, EEOC Chairwoman Jacqueline Berrien, a former NAACP activist, is unlawfully expanding enforcement of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to pressure employers to hire minorities with criminal records.

For example, she recently sued Freeman Companies and Kaplan Higher Education Corp. for allegedly running discriminatory background checks on job applicants.

The charges were so egregiously groundless that both judges hearing the cases scolded her department for ever bringing them, before summarily tossing them out.

One judge slammed her prosecutors for using “cherry-picked” data and hiring expert witnesses who engaged in “scientific dishonesty.” In court documents, he also said they attempted to “pump up” statistics to make it look like employers were biased.

Both cases charged employers were racist simply for conducting criminal background checks and credit checks for all their job applicants, whites and blacks equally.

Even though, as the court pointed out, that’s exactly what Berrien and every other Cabinet official does before they hire their own workers for government jobs.

Nine state attorneys general recently complained the administration was “compel[ling] employers to hire convicted criminals.”

“We are troubled that your agency’s true purpose may not be the correct enforcement of the law, but rather the illegitimate expansion of Title VII protection to former criminals,” they wrote in a recent letter to Berrien. “It is not your agency’s role to expand the protections of Title VII under the pretext of preventing racial discrimination.

“If Congress wishes to protect former criminals from employment discrimination, it can amend the law,” they added. “Title VII’s prohibition on practices that have a disparate impact should not be used as just another regulatory tool to advance your agency’s policy agenda.”

But Berrien is not backing down. She has reissued her directive to employers to reconsider minority job applicants “screened out” due to criminal records.

Over and over, this administration has run roughshod over the stated will of legislators, even rewriting statutes to suit its radical agenda.

When Obama swore to faithfully execute the nation’s laws, he clearly intended to do no such thing.

Paul Sperry is a Hoover Institution media fellow and author of “The Great American Bank Robbery,” which exposes the racial politics behind the housing crisis.

http://nypost.com/2014/11/30/how-obama-blatantly-disregards-the-law/

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0


facebook
Like us on Facebook!