Monday, November 24, 2014

Hagel First Obama Domino to Fall After Midterms

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The Obama administration is cleaning house, or members of the failed Obama presidency are running for their political lives.  They each have their reasons, political ambitions, and the way the media has been spinning each departure, but the reality is clear: President Barack Obama is a failure (or a success, if you are a hard left statist calling for an authoritarian regime in the White House), and he is expanding the executive branch's powers in ways the framers of the United States Constitution never intended.  Many of Barry's hard left buddies do not want to be caught in the firestorm by the electorate who spoke loudly on November 4, 2014 that they do not approve, and in the case of Hagel, the first combat veteran to hold the office of Secretary of Defense, and the only Republican on the National Defense team, the pressure to resign became too intense.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, Obama's 2013 replacement for the departed Leon Panetta, has unexpectedly stepped down following the departure of Hillary Clinton last year, and Attorney General Eric Holder who announced he planned to give his resignation on September 25, 2014.  When the year began, Holder was one of three remaining members from Obama's original cabinet.

Hagel's departure is the first after the Republican sweep of the midterm elections three weeks ago.  He has been a scapegoat for the Obama team's national security failures, including criticism that the Obama administration responded too slowly to global crises such as ebola, and ISIS, even though Hagel was the lone member of Obama's staff to get it right regarding the Islamic State.  Hagel resigned under pressure, asked to step down by his highness, Obama the first.

The "decision to remove Mr. Hagel, 68, [is] a recognition that the threat from the Islamic State would require a different kind of skills than those that Mr. Hagel was brought on to employ. A Republican with military experience who was skeptical about the Iraq war, Mr. Hagel came in to manage the Afghanistan combat withdrawal and the shrinking Pentagon budget in the era of budget sequestration."

In other words, how the New York Times is trying to spin it, Hagel is a peace-nik, and what Obama has realized he needs is a war-monger, like the ones he hammered on as being dangerous people, while he was running in 2008.  However, the reality is, Hagel has seen ISIS for what they are, and his strategies insist that the President meet the threat with more force than he has, and demands that Obama recognize ISIS for the dangerous reality that the Muslim terror group represents - a contradiction to the President that just won't be tolerated.

The White House insists Hagel was not fired, he was simply pressured to resign (talk about double-speak), but the reality is that either critics of the administration have finally got their message through and the Big O is feeling the pressure, or the Obama administration is shifting gears to complete its metamorphosis into an authoritarian regime that won't tolerate anyone who makes "The One" look bad.

Prior to the announcement that Hagel would be gone, Obama officials were speculating on his possible replacement.  All of the potential candidates have a richer political defense background than Hagel could ever have dreamed of.  The leading candidate, a Pentagon veteran from the Bill Clinton years, Michele Fournoy, could give Obama another historical first.  If she is appointed, she would be the first woman to serve as Defense Secretary.

Dictators have consultative assemblies, teams that surround them that are loyalists, or they are removed.  Hagel's inability to fit in with Mr. Obama's circle of friends kept him on the outside.  The reality that he would be removed was not a matter of "if," but a matter of "when."  Hagel was like the court jester that failed to amuse the king, so he is being escorted out of the castle. . . voluntarily, we are told, of course.

A shuffling of cabinet members during the final term of a presidency, especially during what would be considered a lame duck period (though we all know that King Obama is anything but a lame duck), is not uncommon, but it is apparent that Hagel does not fit into Obama's plans, and needed to be removed.  Critics said Hagel failed to inspire confidence at the Pentagon, and struggled to fit into the Obama team, but that said, Obama advisers have also told President Obama to be careful with his choice for a replacement.  The President does not desire having another high-profile defense secretary in the mold of Mr. Gates, who went on to write a memoir of his years with Mr. Obama in which he sharply criticized the president.

Mr. Hagel did his peace-monger job.  He brought back the troops, slashed the Pentagon budget, and confused reporters with his unfocused and barely intelligible news conferences.  The nail in the coffin, however, came when Hagel dared to contradict President Obama regarding ISIS.  The Islamic State, according to Hagel, is an "imminent threat to every interest we have. . . beyond anything that we've seen."  Hagel also accurately stated, "They are beyond just a terrorist group. They marry ideology and a sophistication of strategic and tactical military prowess."  Hagel's comments recognizing ISIS as a serious threat that needed to be dealt with by the United States Military came mere months after Obama had called ISIS a junior varsity squad, and a minor threat.

Politico reports that Hagel's criticisms of the President's national security strategies did not stop with merely his public words about ISIS.  Behind the scenes, Hagel sent a memo to National Security Adviser Susan Rice sharply critical of the administration’s strategy for Syria.

Now that Hagel is on his way out, the only question that remains is, "Who's next?"

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Sunday, November 23, 2014

Israel Cornered Into War Against Iran

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Israel is surrounded by the enemy, existing against all odds, and winning wars against their Islamic foes when conventional wisdom has determined the Muslims should have already pushed the tiny Jewish nation into the sea.  As America's greatest ally, under President Obama, Israel has gotten no support from the West.  Now, the leadership of Israel has proclaimed that Israel may be in a position where the Middle Eastern nation has been cornered into war with Iran.

The United States has been trying to work out a deal with Iran, as American forces battle ISIS in Syria and Iraq.  Meanwhile, Palestinians have pounded Israel from the south at Gaza, and Muslim terrorists have killed Israeli civilians in Jerusalem.  Israel, surrounded by the enemy, feels the need to take action, especially now that a nuclear Iran has figured out how to work out a deal with the West that will allow the Islamic powerhouse to keep its nuclear capabilities.

Current proposals in the agreement with Iran has Israel prepared to take action.  With a stark warning, Israel has indicated that the provisions of the agreement between global powers and Iran guarantee the perpetuation of a crisis, backing Israel into a corner from which military force against Iran provides the only logical exit.

The agreement says that Iran must restrict its nuclear program for roughly ten years and cap its ability to produce fissile material for a weapon during that time to a minimum nine-month additional period, from the current three months.  The agreement would require Russia to convert Iran's current uranium stockpile into fuel rods for peaceful use ([sarcasm on] because, as everyone knows, we can trust Russia [sarcasm off]).  The proposal would also include an inspection regime that would attempt to follow the program's entire supply chain, from the mining of raw material to the syphoning of that material to various nuclear facilities across Iran.

Israel's leaders believe the best of a worst-case scenario, should that deal be reached, is for inspections to go perfectly and for Iran to choose to abide by the deal for the entire decade-long period.

But, we know that bad guys don't follow the rules, and that, as an Israeli official put it, "our intelligence agencies are not perfect."  The Israeli official added, "We did not know for years about Natanz and Qom. And inspection regimes are certainly not perfect. They weren't in the case in North Korea, and it isn't the case now – Iran's been giving the IAEA the run around for years about its past activities."

"What's going to happen with that?" the official continued. "Are they going to sweep that under the rug if there's a deal?"

Reports also reveal that the group of nations that is working on this deal with Iran, the United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, China and Germany – are willing to stop short of demanding full disclosure of any secret weapon work by Tehran.

In addition to all of that, the new agreement also removes the requirement for Iran to dismantle her nuclear infrastructure.

"Iran's not being asked to dismantle the nuclear infrastructure," the Israeli official said, having seen the proposal before the weekend. "Right now what they're talking about is something very different. They're talking about Ayatollah Khamenei allowing the P5+1 to save face."

"It's like the chemical weapons deal in Syria," the official said. "They didn't just say: Here, let's get rid of the stockpile and the weapons, but we will leave all the plants and assembly lines."

"You've not dismantled the infrastructure, you've basically tried to put limits that you think are going to be monitored by inspectors and intelligence," said the official, "and then after this period of time, Iran is basically free to do whatever it wants."

Israel knows its enemies, and knows that deception and lies are always a part of how Islamic countries negotiate.  Iran cannot be trusted, and the agreement leaves too many opportunities for Iran to expand the country's nuclear program.

The treatment of Iran as any other signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty –189 countries are members, including Iran – would allow Tehran to ultimately acquire "an industrial-sized capability," the Israelis say. "The breakout times [to a nuclear weapon] will be effectively zero."

"You've not only created a deal that leaves Iran as a threshold nuclear power today, because they have the capability to break out quickly if they wanted to," the Israeli official contended. "But you've also legitimized Iran as a military nuclear power in the future."

The Obama administration disagrees with Israel's assessment of the agreement, calling the agreement with Iran sufficient.

Israel's fears the agreement guarantees Iran as a military nuclear power, with no turning back, leaves Israel with one alternative.  With Iran given a free path to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power, Israel insists that the Jewish nation's only retort to the fundamentally flawed deal is force.  

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has threatened the use of force against Iran several times since 2009, even seeking authorization from his cabinet in 2011. Iran's program has since grown in size and scope.

War is not the preference, but may be necessary to stop the advancement of a nuclear Iran.  Reality has dictated that if Israel strikes Iran, it would be alone.  The Obama administration has no interest in assisting Israel in a strike against Iran.

Because of the reluctance of American assistance, the capabilities of Israel to launch a successful strike against Iran has been doubted.

"People have underestimated Israel many, many times in the past," said an Israeli official, "and they underestimate it now."

If Israel is cornered into war, and strikes Iran, whether the American government wishes to be involved, or not, the United States, and the rest of the world, will be pulled into the confrontation.  If war between Israel and Iran should erupt, all of the Islamic factions will join together to stand against Israel.

Israel's war may be something bigger than anyone can imagine, a battle for the Middle East of biblical proportions.  The fear is, the Obama administration may choose the wrong side of the conflict, once again.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

NFL Week 12 Predictions

by JASmius


SEASON vs. SPREAD: 79-82

The good news is the matchups aren't all unfavorable - our #1 rushing offense vs. the Chiefs' #20 rushing defense suggesting that another steady diet of Beast Mode and Russell Wilson scrambles are on the menu.  That had better work, because the passing matchup - our #31 passing offense vs. the Chiefs' #1 passing defense - isn't going anywhere.

The matchup that concerns me, though, is on the other side of the ball.  KC's #5 rushing offense against our #4 rushing defense doesn't sound like a disadvantage, but without Brandon Mebane to stop up the middle of the line, I can see Jamaal Charles and Knile Davis keeping the chains moving, and setting up play action possibilities for Alex Smith.  As injury ravaged as the LOB (entire defense) is, the last thing they need is to have to spend forty minutes on the Arrowhead tundra (snow is expected during the game) getting trampled up and down the field.

Seattle is going to have to force turnovers as an equalizer and - it's depressing that I even have to say this - hold onto the ball themselves if they're going to have a chance of pulling the upset.  The chances of about which I am not sanguine.

-Me, a week ago

I'd say I pretty much nailed that one, didn't I?

Unfortunately, it is true.  With no Brandon Mebane plugging up the middle of the D-line, no Bobby Wagner in the middle of the linebacker corps because of his turf toe injury, and strong safety Kam Chancellor's groin injury rendering him still a shadow of his usual fearsomely hard-hitting self, what had been the #4 rushing defense in the league got gashed and bashed for 191 yards on the ground, as Jamaal Charles ran wild for 159 of them, two untouched touchdowns, and just shy of eight yards per carry.  Chiefs quarterback Alex Smith was an invisible 11 for 16 for 108 yards through the air, but so what?  All he needed to do was hand the ball to J-Char and watch him go.

Meanwhile, Seattle still outrushed KC, as the Champs piled up 204 rushing yards, 124 of them by Marshawn Lynch and quarterback Russell Wilson collecting another 71.  Interestingly, and frustratingly, RW3 also turned in another trademark underrated passing passing performance, going 20 for 32, for 179 yard and two touchdowns against the NFL's top passing defense.

We even forced a couple of turnovers (both fumbles).

So it all came down to that fourth quarter possession, down 24-20, when we had a first and goal that became a fourth and goal at the Chiefs' two yard line.  After all the success the 'hawks had had on the ground all day, with a battering ram like Beast Mode ready to do what he does best, what play does Offensive Coordinator Darrell Bevell call?  A pass.  And to compound the teeth-gnashing, the throw into the back left corner of the end zone to wideout Doug (Don't Call Him "Pedestrian") Baldwin fell incomplete only because Chiefs cornerback Sean Smith shoved him before he could make a play on the ball, a blatant defensive pass interference penalty that should have been, but conspicuously was not, assessed, as NFL vice president of officiating Dean Blandino admitted this past Wednesday.  That call would have given the Champs a first and goal at the one and, for all intents and purposes, the game, just as the non-call took it away from them.

Instead, we have the league's "apologies".  Again.  Which is fine and all, except I don't see a column in the standings for "wins via apology".  If there was, the Seahawks would have two Lombardi Trophies instead of just one.  But that's another story.

So, the NFC West effectively decided, their playoff chances all but extinguished, the Seahawks entertain the league-best 9-1 Arizona Cardinals at Century Link today.  And, season records notwithstanding, the matchups are not encouraging....for the Cardinals.

Thanks to our #1 rushing attack, the Champs rank #11 offensively in the league versus Arizona's #20 offense (#11 in passing, second from the bottom on the ground).  It makes me wonder if the Cards are as good as their near-perfect record, or if they've just gotten lucky on a few big plays at the right time - which, to be fair, every "team of destiny" typically does to some degree when on a championship run, but this borders on abusing the privilege.

But, as the 'hawks proved anew last year, it's still, and always will be, defense that wins championships, and on that side of the ball Seattle, somehow, still ranks #3 overall (#3 vs. the pass, #7 vs. the run after last week's debacle), while Arizona is all the way down at #13, including third from the bottom in pass defense.

The complicating factor is the Cardinals' #3 rushing defense.  Which will win out on the ground when Seattle has the ball?  The irresistible force or the immovable object?  On that will today's game most probably turn.  If Beast Mode shoves it down their throats and RW3 scrambles and bootlegs them silly, quarterback Drew Stanton will have to "stretch" the field just to stay in the game.  If, by contrast, Beast Mode gets stuffed, and the Cards' "pedestrian" running backs take a cue from Jamaal Charles' success, it may be Russell Wilson's arm that has to save the day.

[Straight up picks indicated by asterisk (*); picks against the spread in parentheses (x).]

Houston* (-2)

Atlanta* (-3)

N.Y. Giants (+3.5)

New England* (-7)

Indianapolis* (-13.5)

Miami* (+7.5)

(Insane, I know, but the Dolphins do have the #2 defense in the league, and the Broncos lost to the Rams last week, so what the heck?)

Green Bay* (-9.5)

Arizona (+6.5)

St. Louis (+6)
San Diego*

Tampa (+6)

Philadelphia* (-11.5)

San Francisco* (-8.5)


N.Y. Jets
Buffalo* (-2.5)

(moved to Monday night and indoors at Detroit's Ford Field because Ralph Wilson Stadium currently looks like a gigantic tub of vanilla ice cream).

Baltimore* (+3.5)
New Orleans

Obama's War: Syrian Group Claims American Led Strikes Cause Over 900 Deaths

By Douglas V. Gibbs

President Barack Obama, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, may go down in history as a bigger war-monger than George W. Bush.  It is becoming increasingly apparent that boots on the ground will need to be used to hold positions in Syria and Iraq, and defend positions after ISIS has continued to move forward after American air-strikes has failed to cripple the terrorist organization.  Remember, this is the presidential candidate that in 2008 ran as an anti-war candidate, criticizing Bush's war in Iraq, calling Dubya a war-monger, and calling the American military action in Iraq illegal.  He vowed to pull Americans out of the Middle East, and to close Guantanamo Bay.  The military prison in a small American enclave in Cuba remains open, and after finally pulling a majority of U.S. personnel out of Afghanistan and Iraq, Barack Obama has Americans back in the area fighting against an enemy that has been merciless in its advances.

The complicit media has spun the decision to return Americans to the region as being Bush's fault, blaming the former Republican President for encouraging the anger among the "militants" of ISIS with his invasions, and having a hand in creating the group by leaving them without homes to go to.

Never mind the Obama administration's fueling of the crisis with delivery of weapons to local groups, funding of terrorist groups in the area, and backing a campaign to remove Assad - a dictator, no doubt, but one with a heavy enough hand that before the West began to meddle, he had these groups under control in his country.

While the liberal left progressive Democrats call the war in Syria, and the advance of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, a civil war, this writer sees it as something else.  War, destruction, and the enslavement of the enemy is what Islam does.  This is normal fare for Muslims.  The way to deal with it is to destroy the worst of them, and maintain a close eye on the rest.  Islam cannot be trusted, and the long-term goal of the Mohammadans is worldwide control through a massive Muslim caliphate.

There are differences between Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds, Wahabis, and so forth, but these are differences based on rivalries within the political and religious ranks of Islam.  These groups are rivals with each other, but we are the enemy, and they will set aside their differences, as al-Qaeda and ISIS has, in order to face who they believe to be the real enemy.

The propaganda war has always been a large part of how Islam fights their wars.  They know that The West has no stomach for war, and that our good nature has led us to abhor the realities of war.  We have ceased to fight wars in the manner that they were once fought, and now tippy-toe around trying to make sure there are no civilian casualties.  I hate war as much as the next person, and I am just as horrified when there are casualties, but the fact is, if we are going to engage in war, the reality is that there will be casualties.  That is a part of it all.

According to a group in Syria monitoring the warfare in their region, airstrikes led by American forces has killed over 900 people since September.  The number of civilians caught in the fighting (I wonder if "non-combatants" even exists in Islam - even "moderate" Muslims are potential terrorists simply because of the nature of Islam, and the teachings of the Koran these people are fed from infancy) does not dominate the numbers.  Most of the deaths are of members of the Islamic State group.

The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said Saturday that the U.S.-led airstrikes have killed 785 militants of the extremist Islamic State group. It said the strikes also have killed 72 militants of Syria's al-Qaeda affiliate, the Nusra Front.  The number of civilians killed is at 52, including eight women and five children.

At this point, those that read the Associated Press story about this are expected to slap their hands to their faces, and scream, "Women and children?  That's it.  This carnage has just got to stop!"

Again, I am saddened by their deaths, but that is the reality of war; a war we did not start, but one that exists because ISIS has decided to march through the Middle East and begin to create its own militant caliphate, while threatening to use the growing abilities of their expanding caliphate to attack the United States on American soil.

The punchline in all of it is that the anti-war candidate, the person who in 2008 had a love affair with groups like Code Pink, is now the person behind these deaths.  President Barack Obama, the Commander in Chief that decided that American interests are best served by killing these people, has become the war-monger he accused Bush of being.

Like his immigration speech last Thursday, the whole war thing, in regards to Barack Obama, is a great contradiction.

The hypocrisy of Barack Obama is deafening.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Ferguson Debacle on Hold

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Waiting. . . 

Saturday, November 22, 2014

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker Urged to Run for President, 2016

By Douglas V. Gibbs

My current political hero is Scott Walker.  He got elected on conservative principles, applied those conservative principles, turned the State of Wisconsin around economically, survived a recall election after taking on the unions, and then got elected again, all in a four year span, and all in a blue State.

He did not back down, and he did what he said he would.  A relentless, principled conservative in the Republican Party?  Absolutely.  Which is exactly why the establishment will fight tooth and nail to keep Mr. Walker down.

I believe the best Presidents are usually those with executive experience.  That is why in 2007 I chose Sarah Palin as being the best candidate for the GOP running mate in 2008 (of which she became!).  Governors have executive experience, making them great candidates.  I am sure there are exceptions to that rule, but when you have a State governor like Scott Walker that has shown he can excel in an executive position, why would you settle for a Senator or Congress critter?

My favorite President of the 20th Century is Calvin Coolidge (even over Ronald Reagan).  Reuters suggests that Walker may be the 21st Century version of Coolidge. . . and I think they are right.

Like Coolidge, Walker is a constitutionalist, and a staunch believer in the principles of limited government.  As James Madison told us in Federalist 45, "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."

The Republican sweep in the midterm election a few weeks ago gives the Republican Party the most seats in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1928. . . when Calvin Coolidge was President.

As a conservative, President Calvin Coolidge, after serving for a couple years as Vice President under President Harding, turned our nation around after faced with the threat of a recession at the end of hard left progressive Woodrow Wilson's presidency.  Even more-so than Harding, Coolidge reduced federal spending, reduced tax rates, stopped the massive number of unconstitutional federally funded public works projects (infrastructure is a State responsibility), and eliminated many regulations that hindered the private sector's growth.  The result?  The most prosperous decade in American History, the Roaring 20s.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is very Coolidge-like.  Under Coolidge, and his free-market friendly policies, innovation went hog-wild.  We went from horse and buggies to automobiles, and from washboards to washing machines.

Like Governor Scott Walker, Coolidge gained notoriety by standing up to the unions, and refusing to back down, while he was governor of Massachusetts.

Coolidge’s limited-government approach fueled innovation and prosperity, just as Walker's policies have accomplished in Wisconsin.  Under Coolidge, economic growth was incredible, and employment opportunities expanded.

In Wisconsin, as a result of Walker's policies, the State has gone from having a seemingly insurmountable deficit to a surplus.  Walker's 2011 labor reforms enabled the State to reduce taxes, reduce spending, and encourage job growth.  Meanwhile, angry that Walker was willing to stand up to the powerful unions, riotous protests emerged, costing Wisconsin $11 million to repair the damage done by union protesters at Wisconsin’s capitol building.  Despite the riotous attacks by the hard left Democrats of his State, and from outside the State, Walker succeeded in making Wisconsin the poster-child for the beneficial nature of conservative policies.

In addition to gaining control of the U.S. Senate, and increasing their majority in the House of Representatives, the Republicans also now have total control of 30 state legislatures, their largest advantage since, you guessed it, when Coolidge resided in the White House.

Walker's policies were an influence on those state level electoral successes.  The electorate watched, and learned, and have realized that conservative policies like Walker's work. . . well, much of the electorate has learned that.  The voters deeply embedded in the teachings of the leftist religion of statism refuse to admit that the success seen in Wisconsin is the result of Governor Walker's policies.

For those that pay attention, Walker ran on conservative principles, won on conservative principles, and then showed the nation that conservative principles, once placed in action, create a more competitive business-tax climate, producing prosperity, and opportunity.

Of the State governors in the nation, Walker's resume is the brightest, with a record that is above and beyond any record of any other governor.

Is Scott Walker the Calvin Coolidge of our generation?  Absolutely.  But, he has to be elected President first.

Walker has shown, after being elected three times in four years in a blue State, and surviving every attack the liberal left had to offer, that winning the White House in 2016, for Scott Walker, is definitely doable.

As for those Democrats ticked off at their own party, but not sure they would want to support a conservative like Walker, Rand Paul's accusations of Obama's war in Iraq being illegal has attracted a few members of the anti-war crowd.  That's good, I think.  I could easily vote for a Scott Walker/Rand Paul ticket in 2016.  Two constitutionalists in the White House?  Wow, we have not seen such a thing since. . . the Harding/Coolidge ticket during the 1920 Election.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

What Makes Wisconsin's Republican Governor Scott Walker a good choice for 2016? - Reuters

I'm a liberal democrat. I'm voting for Rand Paul in 2016.  Here is why. - Huffington Post

Red November: Sarah Palin for Vice President! - Political Pistachio (September 30, 2007)

Sarah Palin - Political Pistachio (July 28, 2007)

Sarah Palin, John McCain's pick for Vice President, a Masterful Stroke That Is No Surprise To This Blog - Political Pistachio (August 29, 2008)

Calvin Coolidge - Political Pistachio

Palestinians Call Synagogue Victims 'Terrorists'

by JASmius

Behold, the Israelis' "partners in peace" (via Newsmax Insider):

Palestinian leaders reacted to Tuesday's killing of five Israelis in a Jerusalem synagogue by calling the murder victims "terrorists" and characterizing the synagogue as a "command center."....

The militant Palestinian group Hamas described the attack as "a quality development in the confrontation with the Israeli occupation," the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported. "The organization welcomes the terror attack, an appropriate and functional response to the crimes of the occupation."  In point of historical fact, God (aka Yahweh, Jehovah, God The Father) gave that land to Israel approximately twenty-six centuries before the false prophet Mohammed was born, and consequently that long before he ever had the chance to dream up "Allah" in a drugged stupor.  It has been "occupied" at various times by Babylon, Media-Persia, Alexandrian Greece and its successor states (~5th-2nd centuries B.C.), and Rome (1st century B.C. until 70 A.D. when, after the Masadan uprising, Titus destroyed Jerusalem and cleansed the Holy Land of its entire Jewish population, going so far as to rename it "Palestine," the Romanized version of "Philistine," as a parting middle finger).

The territory sat, empty and unclaimed, for another six or so centuries until Mohammed and his merry band of theocratic, misogynistic, head-chopping berserkers came along and "claimed" it like a discarded soda can.  And even then, while "officially" an Arab/Muslim possession for another thirteen centuries, it was not particularly valued or coveted, and continued to lie, fallow, devastated, undeveloped, and almost entirely depopulated.

Until after World War I, when, after the collapse of the previous "Islamic Caliphate" (i.e. the Ottoman Empire, the precursor of modern Turkey), the victorious British and French took League of Nations mandates over the Middle East, with the British overseeing "Palestine".  In the literal fulfillment of Ezekiel 36, the Balfour Declaration began the process, culminating in its victorious 1948 War of Independence, of the restoration of Israel to its rightful, God-given homeland.

The fact is, the Balfour Declaration was the original "two-state solution"; all the territory west of the Jordan River was to go to the Jews, and the territory east of the Jordan River - what is now Jordan - was to be set aside for the "Palestinians," and would have been theirs if the Hashemites hadn't been imported to rule over them and rook them out of a true nation of their own.  Because of that swindle, Pals' choices were either to languish under Hashemite rule or try to finish the "Final Solution" Adolph Hitler started.

The rest, you wearisomely know.

Pity the Hamastanis are more interested in cultivating and marinating in their genocidal anti-Semitism than in confronting the actual factual history they are loathe to learn.

Hamas spokesman Sheikh Aal Radhwan called the four murdered rabbis "the greatest terrorists in that racist state. These are no civilians. They are terrorists," according to the Middle East Media Research Institute, which translated the comments of Palestinian leaders.

Radhwan said rabbis "represent the greatest terrorism against our Palestinian people and our holy places. They are terrorists because they are occupiers, because they are extremists, and because they are oppressors."

Hamas Political Bureau member Osama Hamdan said the attack "is the kind of act that defends the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and condemns the Israeli crimes," according to CNS News.

He added: "According to all the international laws the settlers are not civilians. International law defines them as armed militias."

Same old psychopathic projections.

But that was Hamas; they're all demon-spawned jihadist fanatics, so of course they'd spew such blood libelous nonsense.  But Fatah is "moderate," and "reasonable" and "responsible," right? At the very least, they would have enough PR sense to not blurt out such bile, even if they privately subscribe to it, yes?


Sultan Abu Al-Einein, an adviser to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, praised the attack on his Facebook page, calling it a "heroic operation" and posting graphic pictures showing dead Jews wearing prayer shawls. He called the two dead attackers "martyrs."

Fatah spokesman Ahmad Assaf called the attack "the natural result" of Israeli "violations" in Jerusalem.

Tawfiq Tirawi of the Fatah Central Committee, a prominent Palestinian political party, charged that "the responsibility for the Israelis killed lies with [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu, his government, and his settlers. The responsibility also lies with America, which helps Israel."

The same Obamerikastan that has "helped" Israel for six years by relentlessly trying to bulldoze the Jews back behind the nationally suicidal pre-1967 borders, browbeating the Jews into making endless lopsided, nationally suicidal concessions to the Pals and then demonizing the Jews for the endless impasse in the "peace process," publicly slurring Prime Minister Netanyahu as "chickenshit," for his obstinate refusal to commit national suicide (and facilitate his people's genocide), and threatening the Jewish State with turning against them on the UN Security Council.  "With friends like this...." and all that.  It's probably the only way that the Israeli Left and Right could have been welded together into the united front they are today.

Makes you wonder how much attention Mr. Tirawi pays to what goes on over here.  Or maybe he's just really hardcore at playing "hard to get".

Abu Ahmand Fouad, deputy secretary-general of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, said: "That synagogue is a kind of command center for the planning of acts of aggression against our people and our holy places. This is no prayer synagogue."

Why would an already-existing nation-state with its own territory and standing military need to hide its command centers in synagogues, like Hamas does in mosques and schools and hospitals?  Next thing you know, Mr. Fouad will be charging the IDF with building underground tunnels into Gaza.  And if the IDF was concealing a "command center" inside a Jerusalem synagogue, wouldn't you have to conclude that it was piss-poorly defended for such a presumably valuable and important "military installation'?  Where do you think the Jews have their nukes stashed, Ahmand?  The Temple Mount, perhaps?  With the missile silos opening right below Al Aqsa?  You have to admit, that would be insidiously and poetically just.

And Palestinian political scientist Abdul Sattar Kassem said: "This operation was symbolic because it was carried out in a synagogue. For the Palestinian people, synagogues represent Israeli settlements and extremism."

Gentlebeings, if this is the face of "peace," I'd say war is looking pretty damn good.

Jump the Border with Constitution Radio

In mere minutes. . .

Douglas V. Gibbs will address the Immigration Issue on Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs!

2:00 pm Pacific, Saturdays, KCAA Radio,  Call in at 888-909-1050

Join the Email List to get reminders in your email like the one shown here!
Contact us at to request being added.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

First Generation Immigrant, Author of "Neither Here Nor There," Joins Constitution Radio

Hosted by Douglas V. Gibbs

Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs, 2:00 pm Saturdays, KCAA Radio, AM 1050 and FM 106.3 in Southern California's Inland Empire, or listen Online at, or call to listen at 832-999-1050.  Join the conversation by calling into the show live at 888-909-1050.

Guest:  Frans H. Jager, author of "Neither Here Nor There: A First Generation Immigrant in Search of American Exceptionalism."

The book of the week is Mr. Jager's literary offering.

The Constitution Quest Question of the Week is brought to you by Constitution Quest Game: Go to their website to purchase a copy of the game, and if you add "Doug" in the discount box you will receive 20% off the purchase price!

Then, it will be time for a segment sponsored by AllStar Collision, The Kings of Wreck and Roll!

Big Stories of the Week, November 22, 2014

12.  6.8 Magnitude Earthquake Slams Japan

11. Muslim Sharia Law at National Cathedral

10. Obamacare Gruber Fall Out

9. Keystone Pipeline Vote kills Landrieu’s Campaign

8. Lake Effect Snows In America

7. Guns:  A right?  Or a privilege?

6. New Old Rioting in Ferguson, Missouri

5. As the opinion regarding immigration issue leaves democrats. . .

4. Obama’s Message on Immigration (No more Mr. Nice Guy?)

3. The Republican Response to Obama’s Immigration Speech  (SESSIONS: Americans must 'resist this imperial decree'...)

2. And the Media’s Version of the Republican Response

1. And the Conservative Reaction to the GOP’s Hesitation


Did you miss the show?  Go to the Podcast Page to listen after we are done. . .

Amnesty Will Let Criminals Stay

by JASmius

But of course.  They wouldn't make reliable Democrat voters otherwise:

The [Commissariat] of Homeland Security has just released new "Policies for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants." Designed to fill in the details after President Obama's announcement that at least four million currently illegal immigrants will be given work permits, Social Security numbers[, voter registration cards,] and protection from deportation, the DHS guidelines are instructions for the nation's immigration and border security officers as they administer the president's directive.

Who, if they were following their own constitutional oaths, would refuse to do so based on the self-evident fact that the "directive" is, by definition, unlawful.

The new priorities are striking.

Aren't they, though?  My stars and garters!  (Yes, I'm ripping off Kelsey Grammar here, but it was either that, or "My truss and chinstrap!"  Which, If I had garters, they would uncomfortably resemble.)

On the tough side ["Priority One"], the president wants U.S. immigration authorities to go after terrorists, felons, and new illegal border crossers.

Does anybody seriously believe that, coming from a Regime that embraces terrorists (both foreign and domestic), is littered from top to bottom with should-be felons, and hasn't "gone after" illegal border crossers in its six year (and counting) tenure?  Madre Dios, after the Immigration Proclamation, crossing the border cannot, as a practical matter, even be considered illegal anymore.

On the not-so-tough ["Priority Two"] side, the administration views convicted drunk drivers, sex abusers, drug dealers, and gun offenders as second-level enforcement priorities. An illegal immigrant could spend up to a year in prison for a violent crime and still not be a top removal priority for the Obama administration. [emphases added]

Put another way, illegal alien drunk drivers, sex abusers, drug dealers, and violent offenders have now been elevated to a higher level of Obamerikastani society than actual American citizens.  "What a country!," as Yakoff Smirnoff used to say.

As you might have expected, "Priority One" has a loophole big enough through which to drive a locomotive with illegals clinging to the top of it:

The guidelines say Priority One aliens "must be prioritized" for deportation unless they qualify for asylum or unless there are "compelling and exceptional" factors that indicate the alien is not a threat. [emphasis added]

How would a terrorist or felon qualify for asylum here?  Have we ever made a habit of granting asylum to terrorists and felons?  Before now, at least?  Why would we ever want to grant asylum to terrorists and felons?  As for "new illegal border crossers," aren't they just the future beneficiaries of O's next amnesty decree, which is set to become an effective assembly line?

Then we have "compelling and exceptional" factors.  What in the blue hell does that mean?  Answer: Anything King Hussein wants it to mean.  Which, in turn, means whatever benefits him and the Democrat Party politically.  And if you're wondering at this point what could possibly be "compelling and exceptional factors" that would indicate that a terrorist and/or felon isn't a threat, you're sorely lacking in imagination.  How about that they're Muslim?  That seems to excuse a multitude of mass-murders, severed heads, crucifixions, bombings, systematic misogynies and homophobias, among other things, where the Obama Regime is concerned.  And then there's their exceedingly high likelihood of voting Democrat, which covers any sins that being Muslim might possibly miss.

Oh, and here's a devilish little detail about "Priority Two":

Priority Two also includes "aliens convicted of three or more misdemeanor offenses, other than minor traffic offenses or state or local offenses for which an essential element was the alien's immigration status." But there's an important footnote to that. The three offenses must arise out of three separate incidents. If an illegal immigrant committed a single act that resulted in multiple misdemeanor charges, it would count as one charge for DHS counting purposes. [emphases added]

Maybe I've forgotten something here, and please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about this, but aren't sex offenses and drug-dealing felonies?  At least in some or most instances?  And doesn't this provide an effective "get out of jail free card" incentive to illegals to commit the first two such "minor" offenses with impunity, and as many times as they want on each occasion?  You could almost get the impression that the Obama Regime wants to spark a nation-wide crime wave, and with it, perhaps, yet another pretext for declaring martial law.

Incidentally, there is a "Priority Three":

...those who have simply violated the nation's immigration laws seriously enough to have been issued a final order of removal.

Because apparently, violating U.S. immigration laws - which, equivalently speaking, is considered a serious offense in every other (non-failed) country on the planet - is, in the august and regal opinion of his imperial majesty, not worthy of being considered a felony or even a misdemeanor.  Because coming to Obamerikastan to suck off of, vocationally displace, culturally subvert, and criminally prey upon its legal and native-born citizens isn't a crime or an outrage - it is a demigod-given right.

The Proclamación de Inmigración says so, after all.  Which you could read for yourself, unless you don't understand Spanish.  But don't worry, we'll all learn that in the re-education camps.

American Daily Review Radio Jumps the Border

Hosts:  Douglas V. Gibbs and JASmius

American Daily Review Radio

Heck, with all of the benefits and opportunities being given to illegal aliens, it almost makes sense to denounce our American citizenship, leave the country, and then sneak back in as illegal aliens!  We could change the name of the show to American Daily Redo.

Today's American Daily Review Radio show with Douglas V. Gibbs and JASmius, will no doubt be dominated by commentary regarding President Barack Obama's 15 minute speech on his kingly decisions for immigration in the United States.

But border jumpers, and the tyrant in the White House, isn't all we are going to talk about. . . .

At Noon Pacific on American Daily Review Radio, Doug and JASmius will preview Constitution Radio, and tackle the following issues:

Big Stories of the Week, November 22, 2014

12.  6.8 Magnitude Earthquake Slams Japan

11. Muslim Sharia Law at National Cathedral

10. Obamacare Gruber Fall Out

9. Keystone Pipeline Vote kills Landrieu’s Campaign

8. Lake Effect Snows In America

7. Guns:  A right?  Or a privilege?

6. New Old Rioting in Ferguson, Missouri

5. As the opinion regarding immigration issue leaves democrats. . .

4. Obama’s Message on Immigration (No more Mr. Nice Guy?)

3. The Republican Response to Obama’s Immigration Speech  (SESSIONS: Americans must 'resist this imperial decree'...)

2. And the Media’s Version of the Republican Response

1. And the Conservative Reaction to the GOP’s Hesitation

NSA Chief: Enemies On Track To Shut Down U.S. Power Grid

by JASmius

Who needs Skynet?

Hope you've stocked away a large supply of freeze-dried foods and a big pile of sweaters, blankets, and sleeping bags:

The U.S. power grid and other crucial infrastructures have been penetrated by the Chinese and other governments, posing a serious threat to shut down the systems and create chaos through cyberattacks.

Admiral Michael Rogers, head of both the National Security Agency (NSA) and the U.S. Cyber Command, a military arm charged with dealing with cyberwarfare, told the House Intelligence Committee that the U.S. is vulnerable to such attacks, which could shut down utilities, fuel and water delivery, aviation, banking and other computer-based systems, CNN reports.

"It is only a matter of the when, not the if, that we are going to see something traumatic," he told the committee.

What other governments, you ask?:

He noted that there are "probably one or two" other countries with the same capabilities, but declined to name them. However, cybersecurity experts have identified Russia as another threat....

"We're seeing multiple nation-states invest in those kinds of capabilities."....

Joel Brenner, former NSA counsel, told the Washington Post, "Every expert I know believes our electricity grid has been penetrated by Russia and China. Our military correctly assumes these penetrations would enable future attacks and disruptions."

One thing I think we can count on is that the Sino-Russian Axis won't go after our critical infrastructure piecemeal.  When they're ready to take us, it will be part of an overall, coordinated, go-for-broke assault that they are absolutely confident they will win:

Only the people lining the downtown San Diego waterfront saw [the ChiComm cruise missile attacks on two U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups], though local TV camera crews were filming the carnage live. Their stations tried to upload the footage to the network satellites but they could not connect. The satellites were gone, knocked out by Russian ASAT missiles.

The rest of America was oblivious to the catastrophe in San Diego, and the similar disaster in Norfolk.

The TV stations next tried the Internet, but it was as if someone had just flicked it off. There was nothing but electronic silence. A coordinated cyber strike had hacked through America’s electronic defenses and shut down the web. Many of the hacks came not from Chinese and Russian teams across the world but from agents within America, infiltrated into key positions in American government and business, who introduced their malware directly into vital systems with thumb drives.

Simultaneously, outside major metropolises, groups of well-trained commandos, driving SUVs, followed the routes between power transmission stations that they had rehearsed using paper street maps (America’s GPS satellites having been eliminated in the opening minutes). With rifles, they opened fire on the critical transformer equipment, which was guarded only by chain link fences and cameras that no one monitored. When the irreplaceable equipment was shorted out and burning, they drove on to the next site and destroyed it. Between the cyber chaos and physical attacks, cities began to black out.

America ground to a halt, blind and paralyzed.

Sounds like something out of a Tom Clancy novel, doesn't it?  Except Admiral Rogers, who is presumably in a position to know, seems to think it's real, and looming, if not imminent.

I hope he's got his resume updated, because after spilling this, he's likely to have a lot of free time on his hands in the very near future, if he doesn't just "disappear" altogether.

IRS "Finds" 30,000 Lois Lerner Emails

by JASmius

Of course.  This is evidently "enraging" some conservatives, but I realized six years ago that if I were going to be outraged and enraged by everything the Obamunists were going to do over however long a period of time their misrule would span, I'd be dead before I reached....well, now.  Probably long before.  So I learned to pace myself by taking deep refuge in my vast reservoir of natural inherent cynicism.

Consequently, when I saw just the headline, I doubled over in uncontrollable sardonic laughter so quickly that I almost bounced my head off of my desktop like a basketball:

Five months after the Internal Revenue Service deemed that emails sent by former official Lois Lerner had been lost forever, the Treasury Department's inspector general told Congress on Friday that as many as 30,000 might have been found — and conservatives were outraged.

"Nothing they do surprises me," Washington attorney Cleta Mitchell told Newsmax of the latest development in the agency's targeting scandal of tea party groups. "Nothing they fail to do surprises me.

"I have no reason to think that this is everything," she added. "Now, what I would like to see them do is for the IRS to actually respond to all the subpoenas that have been issued to them by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in the last year and a half.

"That would be the best thing they could do: just go ahead and answer all the subpoenas and do what you're supposed to do," Mitchell said.

Never mind the details.  If you want to wade through them, follow the link.  They're probably all horse manure anyway.  Hell, this Treasury Commissariat I-G may be shoveling with both hands.  Which has kinda always been the point of this entire sordid saga: Ceaselessly fusillade so much crap that it would be impossible to discern whatever shards of truth might accidentally get mixed up in it.

If anything, I think Ms. Mitchell is selling the Regime short on the creativity of their mendacities.  It may turn out that these thirty thousand emails aren't from Lois G. Lerner, but Lois "Slow" Lerner, all pertaining to special education issues, kitten photos, and muffin recipes.  Or they may be LGL's emails, but all be redacted.  Or Treasury poobahs may next announce that the thirty thousand Lerner emails may be irretrievably "corrupted," kicking the can down the road even further.

If there's one thing we ought to have learned by now, it's that (1) nobody is better than the Obama Regime at The Fine Art of Delay, and (2) they are playing with us like a cat batting around a mouse, and they always have been.  This isn't an investigation of IRSgate, it's a travesty and mockery of justice perpetrated by a criminal enterprise that has all the power, is in absolutely no danger or jeopardy of losing it, and is simply amusing itself by figuratively pulling off our wings while giggling maniacally.

Regrettably, even now, not many of us have learned that lesson.  Or, at the very least, far too many feel compelled to continue jumping through the Regime's humiliating hoops like trained seals:

Mitchell told Newsmax that the discovery proved that both Koskinen and his predecessor, Douglas Shulman, should be prosecuted for perjury for their congressional testimony.

"These people have filed things under oath with the judicial branch of government — in our lawsuit and other lawsuits," she said. "They have provided statements to Congress. They’re totally dishonest."

Wouldn't that require the Obama Injustice, Revenge & Coverup Commissariat to do the prosecuting, Ms. Mitchell?  You do see where this is going, don't you?

Trust me, Cleta, learn to enjoy a hearty cynical guffaw instead.  You'll live a lot longer.

Exit thought: For those Republicans who think they can rein in Barack Obama's rampaging abuses of power via the federal courts, you might want to ponder this postscript:

The federal lawsuits Mitchell filed against the IRS in the targeting scandal also were dismissed last month.

"The judge dismissed our cases because he was confident that the IRS had stopped the targeting," she said. "It was a completely ridiculous ruling."

One client, True the Vote, will not challenge the decision.

"They just believe it's hopeless," Mitchell said, adding that the group "has been totally discouraged by the courts."

As the late Gorilla Monsoon used to say, "One lies and the other one swears to it".  What else could one expect after The One has had six years to "fundamentally transform" the federal judiciary?

constitution education involvement

by Douglas V. Gibbs

"A well-instructed people alone can be permanently a free people." -- James Madison

How you can be involved: is a tool you can use to educate your patriot group about the United States Constitution.  An educated society is the starting point for resistance.

1.  Connect with Douglas V. Gibbs on social media:
Like our Facebook page.

2.  Follow Douglas V. Gibbs on Twitter.

3.  Visit the page to learn about Doug's services.

4.  Become a regular visitor to

5.  Listen to Doug's radio programs: Constitution Radio, American Daily Review, Constitution Study Radio.

6.  Hire Douglas V. Gibbs as your speaker, or to host a seminar for your group.  Contact him at constitutionspeaker at

7.  Feel free to make a donation to help the cause.  All help is appreciated, and very much so needed.  

(Donations are not tax deductible.)

8.  Buy Doug's books at

9.  After you learn the Constitution, teach it to others.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Difference of Response by Bush versus Obama when America Attacked by Muslims

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs

September 11, 2001 - Radical muslims attack America. President Bush is advised while reading to school children.  He spends 4 additional minutes with the children and walks out calmly so as not to panic the children.  Democrats CRITICIZE Bush for this "inaction" and later claim 9/11 was Bush's fault.

September 11, 2012 - Radical muslims attack America.  President Obama skips 50% of his Daily Intelligence Briefings and FAILED to take action even after receiving notice of the attack 48 hours in advance.  The next day, he skips another Daily Intelligence Briefing and attends a PARTY in Las Vegas.  Three days later, while the flag draped coffins of murdered Americans arrive home, Obama's officials announce he'll attend another PARTY with Beyonce.  More U.S. Embassies come under attack while Obama PARTIES.  Democrats PRAISE Obama for being cool enough to PARTY with Beyonce.

Make Sense?


Democrats rarely do.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Friday, November 21, 2014

Three Steps to Resolve Immigration Issue

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The solution to the immigration problem is simple, but the leftists have the Republican Party in such a political monkey-style crap throwing contest that the reality of the simplicity of the issue evades them.

The steps are easy:

1.  Enforce existing immigration laws on the books.
2.  Secure the border.
3.  Quit giving illegal aliens free stuff.

The liberal left will start screaming about the children, both coming to America, and the one's brought here outside their own choice.  Yeah, yeah.  When I broke my wrist, I didn't ask the doctor to tend to the scrapes on my knuckles, first.

Let's break down my three steps, using the United States Constitution, for those of you that can't seem to understand how the solution could be that simple, or that legal.

1.  Enforce existing immigration laws on the books.

Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution gives Congress the authority to prohibit certain persons from immigrating (migrating) into the United States.  That is the main clause in the Constitution that serves as a basis for our immigration laws (aside from Article I, Section 8 where Congress is given the authority to ensure all naturalization laws are uniform).  Notice that it does not say the Congress can force States to take certain people if they are here illegally.  Sure, once the person goes through the legal process to be a legal resident, Article IV. kicks in, namely "full faith and credit" and where "citizens" of each State "shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."

When Arizona began enforcing immigration law, do you know what happened?  Illegals stopped pouring into the State.

2.  Secure the border.

Article IV., Section 4 of the United States Constitution tasks the federal government with securing the border by enumerating that the "United States shall. . . protect each of them [States] against Invasion."  The obvious takeaway from that is that it is the federal government's duty to secure the national border in order to protect the States from invasion.  Very straight-forward.  Most advanced nations in the world have stricter immigration laws, and border security, than we do.  The southern border of Mexico is strictly enforced, strictly patrolled, and the penalty for being caught illegally entering into Mexico using that southern border is quite severe.

We must be reminded, regarding both enforcing immigration laws, and securing the border, in Article II, the President is also tasked with ensuring that "he take care that the Laws be faithfully executed."  Therefore, refusing to execute the immigration laws that are on the books, as they are written, is an unconstitutional (illegal) action by the President of the United States.  In the days of the framers, that kind of maladministration would be an impeachable offense.

3.  Quit giving illegal aliens free stuff.

Dry up the giveaways, and the drain on the taxpayers, and the flow of illegals, becomes a trickle.  Sure, there are better opportunities here in America, and those that wish to pursue those opportunities are welcome to come to the United States to pursue those things.  Free stuff is not only not the American Dream, but I must ask, "Where in the Constitution does the federal government have the authority to impose its agenda on localities, including with welfare style programs?  There is no authority in the Constitution for the federal government to be giving gifts from the national treasury, especially to non-taxpaying illegal aliens who broke the law to be in this country in the first place.  As for those of you who want to use the General Welfare Clause for your argument - wrong answer.  That is a misrepresentation of the original intent of that clause.  In reality, allowing illegals to come into the United States and disrupt our nation as this issue has is a disruption to the general welfare of the republic, so in truth, illegal immigration violates the General Welfare Clause.

The law-breakers that are crossing the border illegally are attracted to the free stuff.  They are not the people that are the best these countries to our south have to offer.  The border-jumpers are the failures, the criminals, and the people who can't make it in society wherever they came from, so they are coming here for the free stuff.  In other words, we are pulling in the rejects that have been dragging down the other societies, and those countries are glad to off-load them on us.

Remember, also, that the immigration laws in place are there for a reason.  They are not there to be cruel, or racist, but to protect the receiving population.  All people who support legal immigration and desire the flow of illegals to stop are asking is that these people are screened, and those that are carrying infectious disease, have criminal records, or are linked to gangs or terror groups, be denied entry.  That's all.  Folks that stand against amnesty and illegal aliens being given red carpet treatment don't hate illegals, and we aren't angry at them.  We are angry at the federal government, because by refusing to screen these people by using the immigration processes that already exist on the books, the federal government is placing our children, our communities, and our own health, at risk.  The liberal left always scream, "What about the children?"  I am simply asking, "What about our children?"

Enterovirus D68 has been ripping through our children's health in 46 States, emerging after all of these illegal alien kids were welcomed into our country without a screening, no questions asked, and integrated into our school systems.  Is not the health of American children a concern?

Legal immigration equals screenings, which equals protecting the receiving population.  I think that is not a lot to ask.  The solution is simple.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary