The
pursuit of Constitutionally grounded governance, free markets and individual
liberty
"There is but one straight
course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily." --George Washington
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Obama DOJ: We Don’t Need Clear Evidence To Kill Americans
With Drones by
Tim Brown
“The
condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent
attack against the United States does not require the United States to have
clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take
place in the immediate future,” reads a
confidential Justice Department memo defending
the U.S. government’s ability to order the killing of American citizens if they
believe them to be “senior operational leaders” or “an associated force,” even
if they don’t have any evidence that the person targeted is actually engaged in
or plotting an attack on the U.S.
All of the
controversy stemmed from the September 2011 drone strike in Yemen that killed
alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by
the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes. The “kill list” was affirmed
last year as then Obama’s assassination czar, John Brennan, was appointed. Now
that same Brennan, who was a key architect in the drone campaign, has now been
appointed by Obama as the new head of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA),
following David Petraeus’ resignation. The
memo states that “no clear evidence of a specific attack on persons and
interests” is needed, nor does the “operational leader present an ‘imminent’
threat of violent attack against the United States” in order to be targeted for
assassination by the Federal government.
“This conclusion is
reached with recognition of the extraordinary seriousness of a lethal operation
by the United States against a U.S. citizen, and also of the extraordinary
seriousness of the threat posed by senior operational al Qaeda members and the
loss of life that would result were their operations successful,” the memo
reads. It gets worse. Michael Isikoff points out the following:
As
in Holder’s speech, the confidential memo lays out a three-part test that would
make targeted killings of American lawful: In addition to the suspect being an
imminent threat, capture of the target must be “infeasible, and the strike must
be conducted according to “law of war principles.” But the memo elaborates on some of these factors in ways that go
beyond what the attorney general said publicly. For example, it states that
U.S. officials may consider whether an attempted capture of a suspect would
pose an “undue risk” to U.S. personnel involved in such an operation. If so,
U.S. officials could determine that the capture operation of the targeted
American would not be feasible, making it lawful for the U.S. government to
order a killing instead, the memo concludes.
The undated memo is
entitled “Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen who
is a Senior Operational Leader of Al Qa’ida or An Associated Force.” It was provided
to members of the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees in June by
administration officials on the condition that it be kept confidential and not
discussed publicly. Although not an official legal memo, the white paper was
represented by administration officials as a policy document that closely
mirrors the arguments of classified memos on targeted killings by the Justice
Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, which provides authoritative legal advice
to the president and all executive branch agencies. The administration has refused to turn over to Congress or release
those memos publicly — or even publicly confirm their existence. A source with
access to the white paper, which is not classified, provided a copy to NBC News. Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), in an interview with NBC said the
document was “chilling.”
“Basically, it argues that the government has the right
to carry out the extrajudicial killing of an American citizen. … It recognizes
some limits on the authority it sets out, but the limits are elastic and
vaguely defined, and it’s easy to see how they could be manipulated,” Jaffer
said. Justin Sink recalls, “In November, the New York Times reported that the White House was
working to codify rules to govern the targeted killing of terrorists by
unmanned drones. The codification work was begun during last year’s
presidential election. According to the report, the Obama administration wanted
to provide Mitt Romney with a clear set of procedures and standards for the use
of drone strikes, were he to be elected. The president himself has spoken
publicly about the need to better codify the use of drone strikes,” he writes.
“One of the things we’ve got to do is put a legal architecture in place,” he
continued, “and we need Congressional help in order to do that, to make sure
that not only am I reined in but any president’s reined in terms of some of the
decisions that we’re making,” Obama said during an appearance on “The Daily
Show with Jon Stewart” shortly before the election.”
There is something in place. It’s called
the Constitution, something Barack Obama and members of Congress swore to
support and defend. Specifically it’s called the Sixth Amendment that is being
violated here. I realize that many people will scream about “terrorists” and
all sorts of things, but the issue is that this administration and its thug
partners are already defining those
who believe that the Federal government is “too big for its britches” and are
overstepping their bounds as “domestic terrorists.”
Sadly, many Republicans like Representative Peter King
(R-NY) who serves as the Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee
calls Obama’s kill list “totally right and totally constitutional.” Additionally,
our public education system is beginning the indoctrination of who is and is
not a terrorist. They are doing it by teaching that
those that engaged in the Boston Tea Party were terrorists. Even our own
government training agents that the Founding Fathers were terrorists. In
addition, I would like to point out the
hypocrisy of those making the decisions to murder those who have not engaged in
any acts of terrorism nor have they been proven to actually be plotting attacks
on the United States. These same people within the Obama administration have
supplied aid to the organization they say they are opposed to in Libya and more
than likely in Syria, yet they do not target themselves, do they? No, they hide
behind executive privilege and government charades.
We don’t see them
coming clean on matters where they have put weapons in the hands of Mexican
drug cartels that have resulted in the deaths of untold numbers of Mexicans and
at least two federal agents.
This
is not just chilling, it’s unlawful. It’s unconstitutional. It’s a mockery of
our Constitution and before you say that you would never find yourself on the
presidential “hit list,” perhaps you should consider the open talk of
assassination by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta as he told CBS’ 60 Minutes, “If
someone is a citizen of the United States and is a terrorist (I’ll note, is not
proved to be a terrorist, just claimed to be one by the government) who wants
to attack our people and kill Americans (again that would make a person a
suspect and should be innocent until proven guilty) in ‘my book’ that person is
a terrorist.” I point this out because Panetta openly claims that the Federal
government can bypass the Constitution and just do whatever they want to
American citizens. How long before they start targeting State militia
groups, true patriots, those that believe in the Second Amendment (contrary to
Jesse Jackson’s claims), and even those opposed to the Obamacare mandate? How
long before those “bitter clingers” of religion and guns are targeted as
terrorists? This is your government that is supposed to uphold the constitution
and protect you from external threats. Think about it.
~~~~~~
It’s Not Just a Game: Assassin’s Creed
Assassin’s Creed is
one of the most popular video game series ever released. The series includes
more than 12 different games for Nintendo Wii, Wii U, Nintendo DS, Xbox 360,
Playstation 3, Playstation Vita and mobile platforms. The franchise has sold more than 38 million copies since
the launch of its first game in November 2007. Assassin’s Creed 3, due to be
released on October 30, 2012, is expected to be one of the top selling games of
the year and will be. Are you familiar with the messages preached in the
Assassin’s Creed series of games? Hebrews 2:1 tells us that, “…we must pay
much closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it.”
Reasons for Hope equips and empowers Christians to stand strong in their
faith and encourages them to “Know It! Live It! and Share It!” Read
the cryptic messages here
~~~~~~
Richard Dawkins Loses Debate
The former
Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, defeated prominent
atheist professor, Richard Dawkins, in a debate at the University
of Cambridge in England on Thursday night, as a vote taken at the conclusion of
the debate ruled that religion does have a place in the 21st century. The
debate motion that "religion has no place in the 21st Century" was
well-defeated at the event held in front of an audience of about 800 people,
mostly students, at the Cambridge Union Society's chambers, according to the
U.K.'s Independent newspaper. Dawkins lost the debate by 324 votes to 136, as
he failed to convince the house that religion has no place. "Religion has always been a matter of
community building, a matter of building relations of compassion,
fellow-feeling and, dare I say it, inclusion," Williams, who stepped down
as the leader of the worldwide Anglican Communion on Dec. 31, said in his
address. "The notion that religious commitment can be purely a private
matter is one that runs against the grain of religious history."
~~~~~~
"[W]hen all
government ... shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will
render powerless the checks provided of one government on another."
--Thomas Jefferson
"The
latest Congressional Budget Office calls the lie on President Obama's claim
that the nation's debt crisis can be solved with just a few trims to spending
and a bit more taxes on the rich. Obama lately has acted as though most
of the work has already been done to get the debt problem under control. ...
But the latest CBO report shows that the country is far from out of the woods. In
fact, despite the supposed budget cuts and the $620 billion in tax hikes Obama
brags about, deficits start climbing every year after 2015, reaching back up to
$978 billion by 2023. Debt, too, starts expanding again as a share of GDP,
climbing to 77% by 2023, with no end in sight. Even that grim outlook
is unrealistic. The CBO's forecast
assumes, for example, that Congress
will let scheduled huge cuts in Medicare payments to doctors go through,
even though they haven't done so for years. It assumes ObamaCare's costs don't explode, despite increasing evidence
to the contrary. And it assumes
there's no recession anytime in the next decade and that interest rates remain
reasonably low. The CBO also makes
it abundantly clear that the cause of this crisis is out-of-control spending,
not insufficient tax revenues. ... The report is also clear that entitlements
-- Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and now ObamaCare -- are to blame for
the continued growth in spending. ... The CBO adds that 'unless the laws governing those programs are changed,
debt will rise sharply relative to GDP after 2023.' So what is Obama doing
in the face of this still-looming crisis? Instead of confronting spending and entitlements, he's
focused on meaningless side issues like gun control and scoring short-term
political points against Republicans. Given
the scale of the nation's fiscal crisis, this is hardly the leadership we need
right now. But unless something changes, it's the leadership we're stuck with
for the next four years."
--Investor's
Business Daily
~~~~~~
The Problem is
Taxes are Not High Enough--Media Research
Center's Liz Thatcher
"The income
tax was considered ... one of the most notable achievements of the Democratic
Party. ... Following the 16th Amendment, the Revenue Act of 1913 was passed and
signed into law on Oct. 3, 1913. And so, the income tax was made a permanent
part of American culture. In 1913, the
highest income earners tax rate was 7 percent. That is dramatically
different from today's highest earners, especially after the latest increase in
income taxes. As of Jan. 2013, the top income rate is 39.6 percent, after the recent
spike in income taxes at the beginning of 2013. This is a 465 percent increase
from the original 1913 level of 7 percent. Even
with this huge increase, the Democrats and media alike continue to call for
raising taxes -- specifically on those who make more than $250,000 a
year." Like zombies we simply move along with eyes
glazed not paying attention!
~~~~~~
President Obama’s Deep Contempt For The Rule Of Law
In January, a
unanimous Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit held that the president violated the
Constitution by making “recess appointments” when the Senate was not, in fact,
in recess.
If you think this is just another one of those dry,
lawyerly technicalities, think again. One of the Constitution’s essential
checks and balances is the requirement of Senate “advice and consent” for
presidential appointments. The Recess Appointments Clause of
Article II provides a narrow exception
to that requirement: the president can fill executive branch vacancies that
occur between Congress’s official sessions. Last year, President Obama
became the first president to make “recess appointments” while the Senate was
still in session when he appointed three members of the National Labor
Relations Board. In trying to defend
Obama’s power grab, the administration revealed its deep contempt for the rule
of law. As the DC Circuit’s opinion makes clear, the administration had argued that the president should have the sole,
unfettered discretion to determine when the Senate is in “recess,”
constitutionally speaking. Under this theory, the president could literally
wait until the Senate is on a lunch break, and then quickly appoint Chuck Hagel
to the Pentagon — and nobody could second guess him. This assertion was so brazen that a shocked Court of Appeals flatly
declared: “This will not do.” The president’s interpretation of the Recess
Appointments Clause “would demolish the checks and balances inherent in the
advice-and-consent requirement,” said the Court.
~~~~~
Obama Blames Republicans for Screwing Up His Roaring,
Booming Economy
Rush
Limbaugh
So Obama’s at the
White House saying something. You ever notice that all of his press
appearances, his announcements, his campaign appearances, whatever you call
‘em, they always happen while this program is on. They always do. And it was Obama who said to the New
Republic that Fox News and Rush Limbaugh are just standing in the way of
progress. Now, I didn’t of course hear the whole thing, listened to a
little bit of it during the break, and he just said, the president of the United States, just said, “We can’t just cut our
way to prosperity.” Of course we can’t! Of course we can’t. And of course
there aren’t any cuts apart from DOD. Apart from the defense budget, there
haven’t been any cuts. Obama then said that his policies are resulting
in economic growth, a reduction in the deficit by 2.5 trillion dollars. Why,
he’s painting a picture of absolute utopia that’s taking place in America.
You would never know, if you just landed here from Mars, why, these are the salad days, never had it
better in this country. We’ve never had a more responsible president. We’ve
never had a more responsible budget process. Obama is protecting the people of
this country from these budget cutters who happen to be the Republicans, by the
way. “We can’t just cut our way to prosperity. We need a balanced approach as
we move to prosperity.” And of course that really gets to the nub of it. What
is the source of prosperity? In the
United States, what has always been the source of prosperity? It doesn’t matter
what it has always been, because today
the source of prosperity is the government — Santa Claus. Government is the
source of prosperity and the Republicans are out there trying to cut people’s
prosperity. Now, they’re actually not cutting anything, and the
Republicans haven’t proposed any cuts. Nobody ever does. There are never any real cuts proposed. The federal budget is not
getting smaller. Projected budgets are not getting smaller. And yet every week
we hear about these massive Draconian cuts.
~~~~~~
Obama Blames Poor Economy on Bad Decisions - Don't Blame Me!
In his weekly
address, President Barack Obama blamed the economic problems on “bad
decisions.” “This week, we also received
the first estimate of America’s economic growth over the last few months. And
it reminded us that bad decisions in Washington can get in the way of our
economic progress,” said Obama, presumably referring to the uptick in
unemployment from 7.8 percent to 7.9 percent and the news that the economy
contracted in the final quarter of last year. The president did not name which decisions were “bad,”
and who specifically was to blame for those “bad decisions.” But he did
blame Washington. “2013 can be a year of
solid growth, more jobs, and higher wages. But that will only happen if we put
a stop to self-inflicted wounds in Washington. Everyone in Washington needs to
focus not on politics but on what’s right for the country; on what’s right for
you and your families. That’s how we’ll get our economy growing faster. That’s
how we’ll strengthen our middle class. And that’s how we’ll build a country
that rewards the effort and determination of every single American,” said
Obama. So, I
guess we should stop listening to the politics Obama is espousing on Guns, Same
Sex Marriage, telling the Boy Scouts what to do, etc? Leadership we don't have and desperately
need!!!
~~~~~~
CBO: Entitlements, ObamaCare To Make Up 53% of Federal
Spending By Matt Cover
According to
projections from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), entitlements and
ObamaCare spending will comprise 53 percent of all federal spending over the
coming decade, totaling $24.9 trillion. In its updated Budget and Economic
Outlook report released on Tuesday, the CBO projects that Social Security will
account for $11.149 trillion in spending from 2014 to 2023 while federal health
care entitlements, including Medicare, Medicaid, and ObamaCare, will spend
$13.85 trillion. (That total includes TRICARE, CHIP, and "other"
spending listed by the CBO under healthcare.) ObamaCare’s insurance subsidies, exchange costs, and other spending are
expected to cost the government $949 billion over the next 10 years. Medicare
is expected cost $8.1 trillion while Medicaid is expected to cost $4.4
trillion. Combined, these two
entitlement categories (Social Security and all health care programs) will
comprise 52.9 percent of the projected $47.2 trillion in total federal outlays
from 2014 to 2023.
~~~~~~
No comments:
Post a Comment