Monday, June 18, 2012

The View From Abroad

This is the (midly edited) text of a conversion I just had with a friend in the Philippines.  I put her comments into quotes and left mine without.

"I was reading news while waiting for you to come online."

"Obama immigration plan—enough to energize disaffected Latino voters?"

He does not even have a 'plan'.  He has a refusal to enforce the law to deport certain illegal aliens.  He cannot create a new law or a new permit without the Congress

"USA  president seems abnoy* he wants them to have temporary legal status."

There are certain temporary work visas available, but he cannot control who they go to.  He does not give a damn if they are ever really legal, he just wants deluded latinos to vote for him.

"It is not fair for those who paid thousands for legal documents to get there in usa."

 No, it is not fair in any way.

 "When filipinos to go to in usa for work there are so many documents they needs to present in US embassy.  They paid thousands of dollar for processing fees before they get the visa. ..thousands of pesos to pay the medical.."

Oh, and legal immigrants spend not just money, but years waiting and hoping to come to the USA.  That is why legal immigrants should despise Obama.

"Thats why I said..its  unfair if he grant a temporary legal status for the illegal immigrants."

Obama does not care about fairness
Or the rule of law
Or anything at all except for getting himself re-elected

All he is capable of doing is refusing to deport illegals.  He has no power to give out work permits.  So he is raising hopes among those who do not realize he can really do nothing.  Since it is only an executive order, the next president can negate it with one word.

Besides, what he does not say, is that even if there were 800,000 to 1.2 million illegals who are suddenly allowed to work, WHERE will they get jobs, since he has not done a damn thing to help get the economy up from the floor?

Are they going to then be eligible for unemployment if they do get work and then lose those jobs?

*abnoy is a Visayan slang term for 'abnormal/retarded'


  1. Does anyone in the world who really works for their livelihood have any amount of respect for Obama? All he seems to do is screw the productive and grovel to the parasites.

  2. Obama is using these illegals as pawns. Once he's re-elected (heaven forbid), they'll be under the bus.

    Legal immigrants should be hopping mad. It's a huge process to attain citizenship, and costly too.

    And congress! They should be at the door of the White House with torches and pitchforks! Obama has usurped their constitutional mandate, and is ruling by decree. By sitting on their hands, our elected senators and legislators are appeasing the tyrant, or worse.

    I'd like to kick them all out on their keisters.

    1. Obama and his administration of rule makers have already swept Congress, the Courts, Hispanics and anyone concerned about Fast & Furious, or Security Breaches in in the White House, et al ad infinitum in to the mass of lumpen-proletariat, otherwise known as the refuse of all non socially conscious classes. [Marx]

      Our biggest clue to date should have been Obama's reaction to White House Leak accusations ... he wasn't particularly concerned about the leaks, but he was deeply offended that anyone said they came from the White House. Hello?

      Time to raise some more consciousnesses, y'all, or to the lumpen pile you go.

    2. Say hey, Comrade Proles, how about Mandatory Voting!! Just like being снова в СССР

  3. Folks, the fait accompli putsch may already have concluded. Obama has orchestrated a Congress that no longer really controls the purse strings, nor directs legislative compliance. He has a Justice Department that disobeys subpoenas from Congress, thus it is unlikely to enforce any Act it finds displeasing. The impact of the emasculation of Congress and the co-opting of Justice, effectively makes the Supreme Court spurious and irrelevant.

    What's next? The Coronation?

    1. Let me elaborate on Congressional emasculation...ever hear of the Utility MACT? It is a rule/regulation promulgated by the EPA based upon highly expand "interpretation" of the Clean Air Act. It is a rule with the force of law, although it is redundant to rules already in place under the Clean Air Act. Take a look here for Utility MACT.

      The Senate just voted on a resolution to over turn Utility MACT ... and it failed by 4 votes. Never mind the anyone bothered by the fact that the cart is now in front of the horse? The Senate has to vote to over turn "regulations" rather than pass laws to enable them?

      Anyone living anywhere that coal provides the bulk of their electricity have just been handed doubling or tripling electricity rates in the very near future. Not because Congress says so ...but because the EPA and Obama say so.

      Autocracy: it's what we are today. Too frigging late if you don't like it.

    2. One more time, the EPA now mandates measuring Cow Farts ... by rule, not law. Don't need no damn congress, eh! :-(

    3. After reading your comments, the thought that keeps ringing through my mind is Franklin's response to the woman who asked him what form of government they had devised, and he replied, "A republic - if you can keep it."

      Looks like we lost it somewhere along the years - I hope against hope it's not too late to get it back.

    4. Lyana ... I think we can still recover the Republic, but time is growing short. I find myself sounding like a crazy conspiracy nut more each day....but it's partially, at least, drawn from my time as a "Fed" and knowledge of how the system works in reality.

      A major facet of Franklin's "Republic," our Republic as Constitutionally defined, is that it depends upon the virtue of it's component people and the consent of the governed expressed via elections in both Presidential office and Congressional representation. Virtue is easily despoiled and consent can be manipulated by fraud and deceit. I think that is what Franklin meant ... it is hard to "keep."

      Our three branches of government depends upon it's personnel agreeing to abide by laws, and "enforcement" is more ethical than physical, with relatively rare exception. The beginning of ethical lapse is the concept of using a crisis to gain political advantage, rather than something to be met and solved for the greater good, and subsequently it is susceptible to use in order to obtain physical power, where enforcement is directed by edict, not law.

      In simplest terms .... just who can enforce a Supreme Court finding? Just who can prevent rule making as law without Congressional direction, let alone oversight, in fact such rules as law that require Congress to specifically overturn them by recall acts? Isn't that bass akwards? We've gone nearly 3 years now without a formal Congressional Budget, yet we're spending more and more each day how does that occur? Is anyone aware that under "Continuing Resolutions", whether short term or omnibus for a fiscal year, that previous expenditures (such as TARP, etc.) can and are repeated annually without debate? Who invented the new version of a CR called "Sequester" that made a deal to increase the debt ceiling, and now is claimed to be our "Budget" per se? New debt ceiling debates are required soon, and thus a new "sequester" agreement, where increases and cuts are only generally defined, thus are easily perverted as well as lacking any debate on specifics or even a vestige of accountability.

      In a worst case scenario, who can remove a President if he loses an election and yet refuses to leave office? What stops him/her from claiming elective irregularity and fraud and thereby directing interminable investigation, while retaining office status quo? Can Congressional activity be suspended? Can the Courts be ignored?

      All of this "protection" we assume we have requires cooperation by the universe of the population. Do you see much such cooperation between opposing political parties? I mean beyond such things as the current Farm Bill, normally part of a budget, but now a stand alone appropriation, that has 75 and rising bi-partisan amendments that cover special interests. Does #Occupy's anarchists represent cooperative effort?

      Last gasp? The Department of Justice now can submit affidavits to a Congressional committee that are outright perjury, then "recall" them (a Mulligan like in golf?)months later and admit they were outright wrong? Let's ask Martha Stewart how that worked for her on a much lower level? Then at the last minute, literally, a President steps in and claims Executive Privilege ... at the same time the defenders of DOJ are claiming this began with Bush? (It didn't, a similar idea was tried in 2006 and canceled in 2007, as ineffective and unmanageable, under Bush) See the "idea" began with a Bush failed effort, so it is logical that Obama's administration should repeat a prior failure with even less control in place?

      All of this fandango of course DISTRACTS from real election issues, like employment and the economy, in favor of serious issues like birth control pills for all so college students don't suffer.

  4. Dances ... I need to make one comment on something you said, then I am going away for a bit.

    He has no power to give out work permits.

    What and/or who can stop him from directing Dept of State and Dept of Homeland Security to issue work permits?

    Not that he will do so, as I agree with your assessment that he's conning Hispanic voters, but as Chief Executive he can "order" anything he damn pleases. Getting away with it or not depends upon who can or would stop him. We've now got a Congress that cannot even repeal rule making by the EPA, and an EPA that makes rules as law without Congressional consent or authorization (CO2 as a pollutant anyone?). How would Dept of State and DHS be any different?

  5. Don't go away aridog. I love reading what you think about this mess. You have a perspective that sheds light on areas the rest of us may not see.

    I'm also concerned that Obama will refuse to cede the Presidency if/when he loses. Our courts are broken, and our congress is a gaggle of wimps and nitwits. Who will remove the ass? To what lengths will all of his appointed minions go (including what was once known as the free press) to keep him installed?


  6. A major facet of Franklin's "Republic," our Republic as Constitutionally defined, is that it depends upon the virtue of it's component people and the consent of the governed expressed via elections in both Presidential office and Congressional representation. Virtue is easily despoiled and consent can be manipulated by fraud and deceit. I think that is what Franklin meant ... it is hard to "keep."

    Agreed - and how is that virtue to be re-gained? Adam's statement that "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." almost makes me despair. I don't know that there's anyone who would argue that our current culture is a paragon of morality, extolling the virtues of restraint, truthfulness and diligence. If all branches of government are corrupt, it is indeed a dismal prospect.

  7. Aridog has some of the same questions I have. I think I have asked before, what would happen if it were positively proven that Obama was born in Kenya? Would he resign? I doubt it. If the House impeached him, would the Senate convict him? I would not hold my breath.

    We have a situation where one side (by and large) obeys the rules, the other side says "Rules? What rules?" They do whatever they want and the other side does little to stop them.

    This is how dictatorships are born.

    1. This is how dictatorships are born.


      I always wondered about the governmental dynamics that brought about a military coup... I don't wonder too much anymore, and I don't like that those thoughts lead to what's periodically needed to water the Tree of Liberty.

  8. Lyana, I think that it's a given that all branches of the federal gov't are corrupt at the highest levels. They stink to high heaven! The only way out of THAT is for the states to become more walk away from the money carrot that Washington consistently dangles, and to find their own solutions. Enact term limits at the state level before men and women are sent to Washington, with a signed rejection of all federal government perks. OR, simply refuse to send anyone to Washington, period. Torches and pitchforks. Sacrifice. Honor.

    Yeah, I know. It'll never happen.

    1. I don't like the option of not sending representatives to Washington, because then it becomes a true oligarchy.

      But honor and sacrifice? About this time of year, I like to start reading about the true sacrifices of those who literally put everything on the line to bring about the birth of the USA. Those were some amazing men (and the women who stood by them). "Our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor" were not just words.

      I think you're right about the necessity of states asserting their autonomy and turning down federal money (and control). I'm sick of hearing the Fed suing states for trying to uphold the law - what a waste of time, money and energy! I'm very much in favor of term limits, and see no reason for Congress/Senate to be full-time jobs with retirement packages! I'd also like to see an absolute moratorium on lobbyists.

      A girl can dream, right?

  9. The disparate rules must be part of the playbook Matt, don't you think? We're being suckered and sandbagged by a small minority of self-serving, idiotic morons. Unfortunately, this includes the media. They are so morally and ethically bankrupt that they can't even see how ridiculous they are!

    I'd like to think that a few more people are opening their eyes, but the extremist left shriek like howler monkeys day and night; their din makes it difficult for people to see what's REALLY happening.

  10. Maybe I am being optimistic, but it seems that the shrieking form the left is sounding more and more hollow to the average person.

    That is, of course, why Obama and the UN want to control the internet. They do not want people to know the truth.

    1. An excellent analogy right here.

      When the Dept of Justice is corrupt, who is left to enforce the law?