Here’s How Conservatives Aim to Stop Obama’s Action on Illegal Immigrants

I rest my case lol.

…while noting that apparently conservatives in Congress read NeoNeocon for ideas. 😁

Farming–the planning, prudence, discipline, and the hard, unrelenting, often brutal, close to nature and its realities, 24/7 work involved, the farmer’s quite frequent isolation and necessary self-reliance, and his dependence on very chancy weather, requiring the closest attention to the minutest detail in order to adapt to it–breeds a certain type of mindset, list of priorities, and way of life, a mind-set, list of priorities, and way of life almost entirely alien and antithetical to today’s huge, inter-connected, urban-focused population.

The men of 1776–and they were men, and educated, experienced, consequential, almost exclusively Christian, property owning men at that–who founded our country were representing the aspirations of a huge, an essentially wild country, lightly settled by just under three million people clustered along our East coast–our biggest cities in the 1770s New York with an estimated 25,000 inhabitants, Boston with 15, 000, Charleston with 12,000, and Newport with a population of 11,000 (total U.S. population in the 1770s roughly equaling, in their entirety, the number of people who now comprise our Federal bureaucracy).

We were largely a rural, agrarian society of survivors, students from a hard school, survivors of a winnowing that saw, for instance, things like a death rate of around 90% per year for the first few years of colonists at Jamestown. These people had “grit.” Moreover, they had just managed to wrest their freedom from England; it was a very close thing, and most knew it.

Reading history, my impression is that back then the average, at least nominally educated citizen–reading the broadsheet of news posted on a board in the town square and discussing the events of the day at the local tavern–was, beside trying to survive, focused on what their newly formed government was doing, and were very possessive of, and very vigilant about keeping their new, hard-won freedoms.

For them Patriotism was an unassailable, a bedrock principle, and our new class of American citizen-politicians, while naturally looking after their own interests in the process, were very focused on doing what was best for our country, and in trying for “the long view,” trying to at least give some thought to what the consequences down the road might be for any actions they might take or any legislation they might pass.

Need I lay out just how radically everything mentioned about us above has changed in these last 235 or so years?

Do we today, do our leaders today, have the necessary vision, grit, knowledge, patriotic fervor and belief, the courage, and the tenacity to fight and win the coming Constitutional crisis?

I have my doubts.

I am puzzled by your remark.

It seems to me that just about everyone here thinks Obama will call their bluff and/or refuse to concede anything. He’s actually already done that, and said that if they do nothing in the next seven weeks (or some amount of time like that) he will absolutely have to do something about immigration on his own. And if they pass something he doesn’t “like” he’ll veto it and then issue the proclamation.

The real question is whether they are bluffing. The real question is how far they are prepared to go. Because he is prepared to go as far as it takes.

I think we all agree as to the MSM’s influence and propaganda value to the left. We all know they’re not going to change, given that they are ideologues.

Re: “I believe that had the MSM not constantly amplified Reeds mantra about the “obstructionist” Republicans but had, instead, made the fact widely known that over three hundred House passed bills were blocked by Reed from even being debated, much less voted on”

Why must the GOP continue to vainly rely upon the MSM to make known the actual situation?

Why not run constant political ads on the major networks informing Americans of the fact that ‘over three hundred House passed bills were blocked by Senate Majority leader Reid from even being debated, much less voted on’ and that, now that the American people have revoked Reid and the democrat’s control of the Senate, the GOP will be sending those bills to Obama.

Why can’t the GOP run ads informing the public every time Obama vetoes a bill?

Short, pithy ads that make emotional accusations would be best. Time to fight fire with fire.

An excellent summation of the situation.

Even though the GOP cannot stop Obama’s lawlessness, it can use that lawlessness to lessen support for congressional democrats by exposing it both through legislative opposition and political ads that place responsibility for the failure to reign in Obama’s lawlessness upon the democrats.

Obama’s incompetence and unpopular policies resulted in congressional democrats getting beaten badly in 2014, there’s no reason why the GOP can’t use Obama’s lawlessness and democrat support for that lawlessness as political ammo in the 2016 election.

The GOP has to offer an alternative or they will be seen as ineffective and ‘the party of no’ and in 2016 we will see a reversal of majority status and another democrat President.

As an example, while I have certainly heard it said that Harry Reed had “bottled House bills up in the Senate,” allowing only a very few to be voted on, it was only in the last day or two, and then just in passing as part of the commentary on FOX, that the gigantic scale of what Reed has been doing–Reed having kept over three hundred such bills sent over to the Senate from the House from ever being debated or voted on by the Senate–was actually described.

I believe that had the MSM not constantly amplified Reeds mantra about the “obstructionist” Republicans but had, instead, made the fact widely known that over three hundred House passed bills were blocked by Reed from even being debated, much less voted on, and, moreover,the MSM discussed the implications of such deliberate blockage for our government, Reed would not have been able to get away with using this tactic.

The assumption is that our leaders–people who we just assume understand and love our country, its history, traditions, and form of government–will generally obey both the spirit and the letter of our Constitution, our laws, and our traditions, and have the vision and guts to implement them, no matter what.

Congress has only two Constitutional mechanisms available to block Obama; Impeachment, and defunding.

In this political atmosphere Impeachment–a la Clinton’s Impeachment–would just be a circus, one you can be sure will be spun by the Leftist MSM in the most damaging way for Republicans and Obama, and the Left can–I’m pretty certain–put a lot of angry Obamaphone recipients on the streets if they want to. Moreover, there are still enough Democrats in the Senate to make a conviction very unlikely.

Obama is forcing the first such Constitutional crisis in our history, and Obama is gambling that Congress does not have the stomach for another Impeachment effort, and although Obama certainly deserves to be Impeached–tried and convicted and removed from office–I think that his gamble will pay off, and despite deserving it, Obama will not be impeached.

As for defunding, does anyone think that a lawless President, intent on carrying out his agenda, wouldn’t be able to find ways around attempts to defund that agenda?

If, say, Obama calls up a member of his Administration and orders him to “reprogram” hundreds of millions or billions of dollars set aside for one purpose and to divert them to another, do you think that person will have enough guts to refuse Obama, or to blow the whistle on him?

I don’t think so.

as to amassing power in socialism… its a group effort. and of course, he was to be a puppet. VJ pulls his strings, which is why he plays golf so much, and even more than tiger woods does. ie. there is nothing for him to actually think about.

See: boys from brazil

the boys in the movie/novel had a cadre of adults who were smarter, more well organized, and who were raising them – copying past conditions to repeat outcomes like in a science experiment (which is what i said the left does), for an end purpose.

pinnochio was groomed, and has not the common sense to play his part well, so they are stuck with their simalcrum.

all one has to do is experience the grandeur of a gothic cathedral to understand that groups of men can plan and create edifices of any type that span several liftimes to construct, making the idea of part of one lifetime spent doing so, something vastly easier.

notre dam was started in 1160, and it ended in 1345

the lifetime of obama is a short period compared to that, and all one has to do is understand that there ARE such people who would do that in the world. if you dont believe that, the idea becomes ridiculous – more so to people who cant organize a 3 year house budget.

if the facts do not support the argument, then what point is the argument? entertainment? self aggrandizing pap?

being empirical is harder than just spouting belief, but i find that over time, its worst side effect if people read is that they are more educated and have expanded their horizons, even if i am wrong. thats not a bad downside if you think about it.

the other thing is that i respect my fellow humans too much to piss crap into their skulls even if they are entertained. As far as i am concerned, God did not put me here to be the entertainment of others, or else i would charge for tickets and be on stage (And would not complain about the moribound position i am in with my wife as to work).

thanks!!!!!