Gay Patriot Header Image

The Manchester suicide bomber

Per The Telegraph, The suicide bomber who killed 22 people and injured dozens more at the Manchester Arena has been named as 22-year-old Salman Abedi.

Born in Manchester in 1994, the second youngest of four children his parents were Libyan refugees who came to the UK to escape the Gaddafi regime.

His parents were both born in Libya but appear to have emigrated to London before moving to the Fallowfield area of south Manchester where they have lived for at least ten years.

He had become radicalised recently – it is not entirely clear when – and had worshipped at a local mosque that has, in the past, been accused of fund-raising for jihadists.

(They’re still changing the article, so you might not find the exact text above.)

I’m sorry to say that lots of us saw this coming. As of last night, the media weren’t releasing his name; the delay always means that the perpetrator is a left-winger or (more likely) a Muslim.

Also, for anyone who follows the situation of Europe drowning under its Muslim immigrants, a recurring theme is that the immigrants very often don’t work (the supposed reason for bringing them in), don’t integrate, and give birth to a second generation that is MORE radical and LESS integrated than the first.

Two for one!

Ann Coulter and Jesse Lee Peterson, together at last. Enjoy!

YouTube Preview Image

Pot, Kettle, Black

House Minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, says that Trump “talking about this [border] wall is expressing a sign of weakness.”

Umm…isn’t Pelosi showing weakness, by not retiring?

(I’m thinking of the mental weakness or illogic that she displays, as she talks on these issues. Also the spiritual weakness that keeps her clinging to power, rather than letting go and trying something new at age 77.)

Protestor spews illogic; is then shocked by logic

Via HotAir. I can’t add much to their commentary except to say, yeah, Tucker Carlson is sweet. This is how to argue with the Left. Stay friendly, have your brain turned on, and ask them to use theirs.

YouTube Preview Image

Around 3:39, the poor, drowning open-borders advocate actually calls the U.S.A. a “sovereign nation-state”. That’s correct, but, talk about being pushed off-script! When last I checked, controlling your own borders & immigration was a key part of being a sovereign nation-state.

MSDNC/Republican Establishment Baffled by Americans’ Concern for Their Economic Well-Being

Republican Governor and GOP candidate Scott Walker recently said that our entire immigration system, legal and illegal, needs to be overhauled and that even legal immigration may need to be reduced because the influx of cheap foreign labor is hurting the American middle class.

“In terms of legal immigration, how we need to approach that going forward is saying – the next president and the next Congress need to make decisions about a legal immigration system that’s based on, first and foremost, on protecting American workers and American wages,” Walker said Monday in an interview with Glenn Beck. “It is a fundamentally lost issue by many in elected positions today – what is this doing for American workers looking for jobs, what is this doing to wages, and we need to have that be at the forefront of our discussion going forward.”

MSDNC quickly jumped in to denounce this “hardline” position. John McCain and Orrin Hatch … very old and wealthy men who never need to worry about anyone in their families losing out on a job or an educational opportunity to an illegal immigrant… denounced the “hardline” radical position of favoring Americans over illegal immigrants. Voters who have actual skin in the game tend to see the issue differently.

There are over 42 million immigrants in the USA. Legal and immigration add nearly 2 million more people per year. That’s adding a city larger than Dallas to the American landscape each year; with the attendant demands on resources, infrastructure and services. This is on top of an economy that is stagnant at best. Like everything else the political class supports, this is an unsustainable situation unless turning the USA into a Third World country is the actual goal.

And the politicians remained baffled why no one trusts them with “Comprehensive Immigration Reform.” One clue might be that in 2006, Congress passed and President Bush signed a law requiring them to build a fence and secure the border. The law was gutted the very next year and only 37 out of 900 miles of actual fence was actually built. And they profess to be baffled that the public does not trust them to follow the next border security law they pass.

Donald Trump’s reforms would end “birthright citizen,” the notion that a person in the country illegally can still claim welfare and other benefits by dint of giving birth on American soil. There is no reason being born in the USA should automatically entitle one to citizenship, unless such citizenship means nothing. Which is how Obama, Jeb, Hillary, McCain and anyone else who would hand out citizenship at the border like it was a library card treats it. These politicians find it hateful and “rayciss” that some citizens actually want to save what’s left of the American culture and the American standard of living.

California is already well on its way to third world status; with a disappearing middle class, a swath of extreme wealth along the coast, a growing impoverished underclass, and a permanently embedded one-party government. This is the endgame of unrestricted immigration.

Aftermath of Emperor Barack’s immigration move?

First off, we here at GayPatriot are in favor of legal immigrants and controlled, legal immigration from other countries. We simply oppose *illegal* immigration because of the importance of border security in the age of terrorism; and because it’s illegal. The people who have done it began their American journey by consciously breaking America’s laws.

As President Obama unilaterally suspended deportations of certain illegal aliens in 2012, and then last week expanded it to millions more, he has made clear what his priorities are not:

  • Enforcing the law, as passed by previous Congresses and signed by previous Presidents: Not a priority.
  • Defending U.S. borders: Not a priority. (Has Obama seriously tried to improve border security? Of course not.)
  • Following the Constitution: Not a priority.
  • Saving taxpayer money: Not a priority.
  • Being true to his own previous statements and promises: Not a priority. Per link above, “In a Telemundo interview in September 2013, for example, Obama said that if he were to broaden the exception he made in 2012…’then essentially, I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally.'”
  • Racial and/or human sensitivity: Not a priority. Obama publicly reduced the people affected by his order to their supposed roles as people “who pick our fruit and make our beds.” (Guess he never makes his own bed, or cleans his own home? I do.)

Any of the first three points above – and certainly, all of the first three together – are violations of the President’s oath of office and grounds for impeachment. But let’s face it: as V has suggested, impeachment will never happen.

I blame the media because this is what you get, when a biased media covers for an egotistical President relentlessly: Hubris. Lawlessness. Government that is willfully, impeachably unconstitutional. With no accountability.

But speaking of the media, I must give some credit where it’s due. In the past, I’ve often noted that Jay Carney was Obama’s paid liar, and he probably still is, on some level. But even he admits that Obama is “literally” doing what he promised not to do. Also, credit the Washington Post for noticing how Obama’s pretense of innocence happens to be a lie.

So, what do you think Congressional Republicans will do with the illegal-immigration issue, from here? Up to now, GOP leaders have been soft on the issue of border security.

They’ve also been eager to be perceived (in the media, etc.) as pro-Latino. But I’m thinking that Obama just took all of that ground away from them: there is no possible way, now, that GOP leaders can ever be perceived as more pro-illegal immigrant or pro-Latino than Obama.

In that sense, Obama just took away any incentive that GOP leaders would have for compromising with him. I think that will blow up in Obama’s face. And I think he has just proven to the voters that Democrats truly don’t give a hoot about border security.(*)

NB: The first version of this post misquoted Obama slightly; the quote has been corrected.
(*) Again, because of its glaring absence from the Democrats’ real set of concerns.

Saturday Morning Content Dump

Mainly because I couldn’t bear the thought of Chris Hayes talking about teh buttsecks being the top item on the blog all weekend, here’s a few news stories to discuss.

Oh, BTW, have you heard the hypocrites at A&E are running Duck Dynasty marathons all Christmas week? You know, Phil Robertson gave the interview two months ago, and there was an A&E “minder” present during the interview. So, now this all comes out? Lends credence to the theory that the suits at A&E hated Duck Dynasty and were looking for a way to kill the franchise.

(more…)

The Obamacare implosion

A number of conservative commentators and writers have been speculating for some time how long it will be from the time it is implemented until Obamacare collapses under the weight of its own poorly-conceived structure.  I think few have anticipated the situation we’ve been witnessing in the past two weeks, where first the administration announces that businesses won’t have to comply with the “employer mandate” until January 2015, and more recently, that the administration won’t be investigating eligibility for Obamacare subsidies, thereby opening the door to massive fraud and abuse.

Although the reasons that the Obama administration is making these changes are cynically transparent to anyone who realizes that the Democrats don’t want to lose big in the 2014 election cycle when voters will have a chance to express their displeasure with Obamacare at the ballot box once again, the more interesting question at the moment concerns the meaning and implications of the administration’s latest maneuvers for its ability to enact policies and govern going forward.

I think some people believe the public is paying closer attention to all this than is most likely the case, but that doesn’t mean I’m not enjoying the triumphalism and mockery of the administration’s opponents.  After the last election, it’s refreshing to see the administration increasingly on the defensive over the actions it has taken with regard to its signature piece of legislation.  Even better is getting to watch the likes of Dick Durbin (D-IL) admit that the disastrous bill “needs changes and improvements.”

But beyond getting to see and hear the bill’s defenders feel the heat, it is gratifying to see pieces like this one speculating that the Republicans in Congress may wise up enough about the administration’s actions to finally kill “immigration reform”:

“They have shown no respect for traditional Constitutional separation of powers,” Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tenn., told National Review‘s John Fund about the impact of the Obamacare delays on the immigration debate, “and that makes it difficult to pass laws where the fear is that they will simply ignore the parts they don’t like.”

Rep. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, who is on the House Judiciary Committee and had been a member of a bipartisan group working on immigration reform, echoed Roe’s concerns on Meet the Press. “In fact, if you look at this Obamacare debacle that they have right now, this administration is actually deciding when and where to actually enforce the law. And that’s what some of us in the House are concerned about. If you give to this administration the authority to decide when they’re going to enforce the law, how they’re going to enforce the law … what’s going to happen is that we’re going to give legalization to 11 million people and Janet Napolitano is going to come to Congress and tell us that the border is already secure and nothing else needs to happen.”

Even the Wall Street Journal is writing about the administration’s actions in language reminiscent of that we saw with the rise of the Tea Party four years ago:

President Obama’s decision last week to suspend the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act may be welcome relief to businesses affected by this provision, but it raises grave concerns about his understanding of the role of the executive in our system of government

Article II, Section 3, of the Constitution states that the president “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This is a duty, not a discretionary power. While the president does have substantial discretion about how to enforce a law, he has no discretion about whether to do so.

This matter—the limits of executive power—has deep historical roots. During the period of royal absolutism, English monarchs asserted a right to dispense with parliamentary statutes they disliked. King James II’s use of the prerogative was a key grievance that lead to the Glorious Revolution of 1688. The very first provision of the English Bill of Rights of 1689—the most important precursor to the U.S. Constitution—declared that “the pretended power of suspending of laws, or the execution of laws, by regal authority, without consent of parliament, is illegal.”

Needless to say we can certainly hope that this lively piece by Tony Katz on Townhall.com is more than just a humorous reflection on the administration’s latest foibles:

For years the Right has said that the Obama Administration was thuggish, was hell bent on revenge, and was vindictive.

The IRS scandal was perhaps the tipping point. At first, The Left tried claimed that not just conservative and tea party groups, but progressives as well had been targeted. But, as the Inspector General’s report showed, that was not the case. Obama’s minions attacked Americans who disagreed with him. The Left knows they voted for hate.

Obama is not the man (messiah) they thought he was. The Left was blinded by his skin color and duped by mainstream media.

But now they know he lies. And now they know he surrounds himself with sycophants, ready and willing to lie for him, in poetry and prose.

Lets not let them ever forget it.

Obama’s Constant Strawman Shell Game

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 11:08 am - June 24, 2013.
Filed under: Illegal Immigration,Immigration Reform

Quick guess!  Did Barack Obama make the following remarks about  (A) his beloved Obamacare legislation, or (B) the Gang of Eight immigration legislation?

“[It] would reduce our deficits by almost a trillion dollars over the next two decades. And it will boost our economy by more than 5 percent. . . .”

If you said (B) — you win!

But if you said (A), you’d be right too.  You see,  Barack Obama has consistently governed by OVER-promising and UNDER-delivering in magnitudes of distances that the solar system would be proud of.

And now the Illegal Immigrants Get A Pass Bill of 2013 has become the new panacea for all of America’s economic woes.

I call bullshit.

RELATED QUESTION WHICH I WOULD LIKE ANSWERED: “Why Are Illegal Immigrants More Important Than American Citizens?

-Bruce (@GayPatriot)

Scandal central? Or a whole lot of talk that will amount to nothing?

As the scandals engulfing the Obama Administration have proliferated and “gotten legs” this week, many of the conservatives I know or whom I hear on the radio have started drawing comparisons with what happened under Nixon, bringing up the word “impeachment,” and hoping that as  it becomes evident that these activities were not accidents but part of a coordinated strategy, Obama will eventually resign, or at least some of those who hold key posts of power in this administration–such as Eric Holder–will resign and that the Administration will be hopelessly tainted as the truth becomes known.

I hear that talk, and I think, it would be nice, but I can’t see it happening.  Maybe Holder will resign.  Maybe.

I can imagine the press starting to subject the Obama Administration to a little more scrutiny in the future, but “a little more” than none is still only a little bit of scrutiny, hardly enough to make a significant difference in public opinion.  While the outrage surrounding all of this may be enough for the Republicans to hold the House and to gain control in the Senate in 2014, there will still be formidable problems, and we’ll still have a very divided country.  The low-information voters in the electorate will still be willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt because most of them are either unwilling to see him for the cynical, partisan character he is, or they are unable to do so.

It is possible that after a year or two of scandals and after the outrage that is sure to follow the full implementation of Obamacare, Obama will end his second term with even lower approval ratings than George W. Bush ended his, but at this point, I think that’s about the most we can hope for, that, and maybe Holder’s resignation.  I’m not even sure any of this will derail the immigration bill, which is looking more and more like the next legislative disaster coming down the pike.

I’m not trying to be pessimistic, merely practical.  In the lead-up to the election in November, I knew that what happened  with the administration’s lies about Benghazi was an outrage, but after the election, it seemed evident to me that Obama, Hillary, and the entire administration were going to get away without any consequences.  The American voters had failed to demand answers and accountability and had just re-elected Obama.

Now that the scandals are starting to illustrate the kinds of things conservatives have been saying about Obama for years and years now, some liberals are upset with Obama, but others are busy trying to find more ways to blame conservatives for making an issue of the problems.   In one of the most ironic defenses of Obama I have encountered so far, David Axelrod offered the “incompetence” excuse, namely, that the government is just too big for Obama to really know what’s going on, an excuse we are sure to hear echoed in the days ahead.  Forgive me if I can’t forget that in November the American electorate rejected a man who was renowned for his management skills and his ability to lead large organizations successfully, all so they could re-elect the “community organizer.”

So what do our readers think?  Am I just being pessimistic about all this?  Is the investigation of these scandals likely to have real and significant consequences for our government, or are they a lot of talk that will amount to nothing, or at least nothing much?

My Simple Immigration Plan

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 5:48 pm - April 22, 2013.
Filed under: Illegal Immigration,Immigration Reform

I tweeted a shorter version of this a few minutes ago.  But here is the longer version.

My plan: Any reform of United States immigration laws should be NO WEAKER than the weakest immigration laws of our two NAFTA partners – Canada & Mexico. 

My understanding is that Mexican immigration law is one of the toughest in the Western Hemisphere (irony alert).  And Canada has a very impressive guest worker/visa program that prevents the ridiculous influx of illegals like we see in the USA.

That’s it.

Discuss.

-Bruce (@GayPatriot)

Immigration Reform & NC Medicaid Proposal

Two lip-smackingly fun issues that I have posted on today at my other locales.

  1. How About Immigration Reform That Makes America Smarter? – Ricochet
  2. NC Gov. McCrory Unveils Sweeping Medicaid Reform – WatchdogWire, NC

-Bruce (@GayPatriot)