Political Pistachio

Blog Home of the Writer and AM and FM Radio Host, Douglas V. Gibbs.
- = - = - = - = - = - = -

Sunday, July 27, 2014

Israel's Choice

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The headline reads, "Israel has only two choices: Eliminate the Palestinians or make peace."

The statement is based on the premise that the conflict in the Middle East is the fault of the small Jewish State.  The statement is based on the premise that the violence in the region won't end until Israel decides to stop their part of the fighting.

However, the reality of the situation says otherwise.

Current Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, once said, "If the Arabs lay down their arms there will be no more war, but if Israel lays down its weapons, there would be no more Israel."

Islam refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist.  ISIS, as it rips through Iraq, and is turning its crosshairs towards Jordan, has been slaughtering Christians, and will have no remorse if they get a chance to slaughter Jews.

A friend of mine, my good friend Tim "Loki" Kerlin, God rest his soul, once said to me that the only way to stop Islam from destroying civilization, from slaughtering every Jew and Christian, and in the end, every non-Muslim, on this Earth, is to kill them all, first.  I was appalled by his statement.  As much as I recognize the danger of Islam, the genocidal nature of the ideology, I also recognize in the end that the people are not the root of the problem.  The people are irrelevant, just like the Germans were under the onslaught of Nazism, and they are tools that have been deceived to act in a manner that is a danger to civilized society.  Muslims, in the end, are only people that have been deceived, that believe the ravings of a false prophet, and the violent ways of a political system rooted in tyranny, barbarism, and totalitarianism. . . presented in the guise of a religion.

My friend is not the first to come to such a frightening conclusion. Israeli lawmaker Moshe Feiglin has said something similar, and his words are being presented gleefully by the leftist media - because the Left wants you to believe the Israelis are the homicidal, genocidal war mongering ones in this fight.

As a moral people, we are appalled by such statements.  If we feel we must stand against Islam because of the genocidal nature of the ideology, is it reasonable for us to demand violence against them and be genocidal in return?

The good person inside of us immediately says, "No."  We are sickened by such thinking.  The Good Lord tells us to love our enemies. . . but to love them is not to submit to their ideology, to no longer fight the good fight, run the long race, or keep the Faith.  What if a great war is necessary?  What if it is indeed a "kill them before they kill us" scenario?

In the fighting in Gaza, Israel has only targeted military targets, while Hamas has targeted civilian targets.  Israel has sent warnings by radio, television, and pamphlets to ensure women and children have a chance to escape any attacks, while the Muslims are using children, churches, and ambulances as shields for their barbaric attacks.  Islam has repeatedly voiced that their aim is the complete destruction of Israel, the death of all Jews and Christians, and then the death or conversion of all other non-Muslims.

The Religion of Peace.  Islam believes there will be peace one day, when all of their opposition is dead.

Yet, the media blames Israel, and though Islam has proclaimed that every Jew must die, any defensive measures by the Jewish State is labeled as aggressive, and the blame for the violence is being placed on Israel.

Gaza is a part of Israel.  The Jewish Nation gave up the land in the hope for peace, and in return they received more war.  

Israeli lawmaker Moshe Feiglin says the way to stop the fighting is to annihilate the Palestinians.  He believes that they will never stop, will never temper their attacks against Israel, and that the only way for Israel to survive is to completely stop the enemy.  He echoes the words of many Israelis - a feeling that is understandable when you consider the constant barrage of missiles and terrorist attacks Israel receives from her neighbors.

According to "The Week," The last time Israel's military undertook to bomb Gaza into submission, in November 2012, the son of former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon wrote in The Jerusalem Post, "The residents of Gaza are not innocent, they elected Hamas. The Gazans aren't hostages; they chose this freely... We need to flatten entire neighborhoods in Gaza. Flatten all of Gaza." More recently, Amos Regev, the editor of Israel's most widely distributed daily (the Sheldon Adelson–funded Israel Hayom) called for the destruction of Hamas' fighting capacity until all that's left "would be stones." Parliamentarian and fellow coalition member Ayelet Shaked quoted another writer favorably: "[The Palestinians] are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads... This also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons."

The reality is that Palestinians won't stop until they are eliminated, or Israel is eliminated.  This fantasy the liberal left holds to that Muslims simply want a Palestinian State to coexist with Israel is untrue, and unrealistic.  When the Israeli land was under control of the Ottoman Empire prior to World War I, the Muslims did not want the land.  Muslims did not settle the land.  They only want it now because a Jewish State exists.  Israel's only hope may be, in the end, to rid itself of the enemy.

The current battle over Gaza is one of many skirmishes with the Muslims Israel has had to endure in order to stop Hamas from killing innocent people in Israel with repeated Missile attacks, and terror attacks.  Both Gaza and the West Bank have been a constant battle, not because Israel has occupied the land they rightfully won in wars with the surrounding countries, but because the surrounding countries want Israel to cease existing.  The war will never stop.  The violence will be never-ending.  Islam will never stop assaulting Israel, and Israel will never be able to stop defending themselves.  If ever they do, they will cease to exist.

In "The Week," the writer states that the violence will stop if Israel was to embark on a mission of eliminating the Palestinian threat.  But that is where the writer misses it.  This is not about Palestine.  The Palestinian name didn't even exist before the creation of the current State of Israel in 1948.  Even if Israel was to eventually rid itself of any Palestinian threat, the violence would not end.  "Palestinian self-rule" has never been the issue, or the goal.  The issue is the elimination of Israel, and ultimately worldwide domination by Islam.

Negotiations will never work with the Islamic countries.  Sanctions will never be effective.  Violence is all they know, and the destruction of Israel is their primary aim. . . period.

Israel's choice is clear.  Fight to continue to exist, or lay down their arms and be destroyed.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Lessons for the Living Wage

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Seattle is having a few problems with their massive minimum wage increase.  The liberal left, in an attempt to appeal to the poorly informed, are willing to destroy the free market in the name of a "living wage."  As boycotts and fleeing business infects Seattle's economy as a result of the liberal left pushed minimum wage increase, we are also seeing around the country liberal left minions running around demanding fast food workers make $15 an hour.  Many of those very same liberal left ideologues have also been critical of WalMart because of their average wage being $8.81 per hour.

What would happen if these businesses were forced to increase their minimum wage?

In short, they would go out of business. . . or move out of the country to avoid the idiotic regulations.

That is something that has always amazed me.  The left has always accused the GOP of chasing businesses overseas, yet it is liberal regulations, liberal tax increases, and liberal tactics like minimum wage hikes that actually chase industry giants out of the country. . . while putting out of business the smaller competitors.  Minimum wage increases mandated by government causes massive unemployment, inflation, and economic instability.

Wages, taxes and regulations are simply a cost of doing business, and when the cost of doing business increases, those increases are passed on to the consumer, or alleviated by trying to reduce costs in other areas - such as reducing the work force through layoffs.  Raising the minimum wage does not give people a living wage, it ultimately increases the cost of goods so that all of the unaffected wages become less manageable to survive on while putting many of those that were making the lower wages out of work.

Government increases of wages does not increase the ability for people to live, but makes it more difficult to live.  In other words, it does not raise up the poor, but brings down those that are not, and creates an environment that encourages more dependency upon government programs.

Wage increases by the government are a sure way to increase poverty, eliminate the middle class, and move the United States into a socialist tyranny.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Battle over Seattle's $15 Minimum Wage turns to boycotts - MyNorthwest

From the image above: Wal-Mart has 2,000,000 employees.  Average Employee makes $8.81 per hour.  Paying $15 per hour would give a raise of $6.19 per hour.  That would cost Wal-Mart an additional $12.4 million per hour, which would cost Wal-Mart an extra $99 million per 8 hour day, which would cost Wal-Mart an extra $36.15 billion per year.  Wal-Mart profited $16.8 billion last year.  This raise would cause Wal-Mart to lose $19.35 billion.  A minimum wage raise inflicted on Wal-Mart, without a massive series of layoffs, would put Wal-Mart out of business.

What Happened at the Murrieta Border Patrol Appreciation Day

By Douglas V. Gibbs

On Thursday, the citizens of Murrieta, most of which participated in Illegal Immigration Protests that used civil disobedience to turn around bus loads full of illegal, diseased illegal aliens hosted a lunch in appreciation for the work, and more accurately, the thankless job, that our Border Patrol Agents perform.  We fed an outgoing shift, and incoming shift, and applauded whenever new Border Patrol personnel got in line to make a plate.  The response was phenomenal, and we were told a number of times how much it meant to the personnel that the citizens of Murrieta wanted to show so much love for them.

We were not allowed to take pictures, interview the personnel, or ask them political questions.  We were fine with that.  The purpose of the event was simply to say, "thank you."

Near the end, Diana Serafin and myself were invited into the facility to make a presentation.  Diana presented two framed "Thank you" gifts, one being a basic framed thank you put together by another local advocate.  The other was a framed American Flag and copy of the Constitution, with a metal plate saying "thank you, from We the People of Murrieta."  My gift was a box of pocket Constitutions, accompanied with a few words about how appreciative we are that the Border Patrol has defended the rule of law, and protected the Constitution.

It was simply a way for us to say, "Thank you."

When one considers an accident in front of Temecula Valley High School back in 1992, where a chase by the Border Patrol of a van full of illegals resulted in the death of children and a parent in front of the school, and the blame many residents pointed at the Border Patrol, for those personnel that remembers those days, this appreciation day event had a special meaning for them. . . one of them telling me so, with a tear in his eye.

That makes what we do all the more important.  Our message must be clear.  We support the Border Patrol, and thank them for their service.  It is the illegal immigration flood, and the federal government's refusal to secure the border and protect the American Population from the threats that accompany illegal immigration (like contagious disease and the potential national security threat) that we are against.  It is the refusal of the federal government to follow the rule of law while trying to force their will on our communities regarding this issue that has us up in arms.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Constitution Study Radio: First Amendment

I'm broadcasting live on the air! Listen in now at http://tobtr.com/s/6701691

Saturday, July 26, 2014

Constitution Association Executive Meeting

Constitution Association members . 5pm at Boston Billies in Menifee.   See you there for a second meeting regarding building the structure of our organization.

U.S. Evacuates Embassy In Libya

by JASmius

Otherwise known as "the new State Commissariat travel warning to prevent a repeat of the Benghazi massacre that officially never happened":

The State Department has shuttered the U.S. embassy in Libya and evacuated American staffers there as the security situation in the capital Tripoli deteriorates amid worsening clashes between rival militias.

The department said in a statement that American embassy staff left Tripoli on Saturday and traveled overland to neighboring Tunisia. Embassy operations in Tripoli will be suspended until the security situation improves, it said. Tripoli has been embroiled for weeks in inter-militia violence that has killed and wounded dozens on all sides. The fighting has been particularly intense at the city's airport.

Secretary of State John Kerry said "free-wheeling militia violence" prompted the move.

This is as opposed to the "pin-wheeling militia violence" in Gaza and the "average, ordinary, everyday, humdrum militia violence" in Iraq, and the "boring, tedious, coma-inducing, like-watching-paint-dry militia violence" in Afghanistan.  Because if there's one thing that bloodthirsty jihadists value, it's violent diversity.

You'll be happy to know that the retreating embassy personnel - who are SO much safer in Tunis (aka the birthplace of the "Arab Spring"), natch - were accompanied by several squadrons of F-16 fighters and Osprey aircraft, or a big enough air armada to conquer several small African countries if they'd felt the urge.  Although not any of the "free-wheeling" ones.

It's almost like the Obama Regime has learned a lesson that was officially never taught.

Maybe it's a time-travel paradox or something.

Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs: Evan Sayet, Conservative Comedian

Today's Guest: Evan Sayet.  All I need to say is he is funny as heck, and he is "Brilliant." ... Hmmmm, seems I am not the only person saying that.

President Barack Obama doesn't have time for all of the madness going on in his own country and around the world.  He has a tee time to make, and a fundraiser event to attend.  Perhaps a quick television appearance after that with Letterman or Oprah.  He can't be bothered with world events.

My message to Barack Obama?  Listen to Constitution Radio on KCAA AM1050 at 2:00 pm Pacific.  During the one hour show you will be completely caught up on all of the recent world events, as well as receive a constitutional explanation regarding many of them.  Plus, today we have Evan Sayet, conservative comedian extraordinaire.  Every listener will laugh, and learn something, at the same time, with this guy on the air.  You've got to hear him to believe it.

Are you listening Mr. President?

Ouch, he's in the rough.  Better pull out a wedge for that one.

Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs at 2:00 pm Pacific, KCAA AM1050, www.KCAAradio.com, call to listen: 832-999-1050, or call in to join the conversation at 888-909-1050.

Book of the Week by Andrew Breitbart.

Constitution Quest Question of the Week by Constitution Quest Board Game.

5 Big Stories of the Week, July 26, 2014 brought to you by AllStar Collision:

Honorable Mention: Border Patrol Appreciation Day in Murrieta

Honorable Mention: Sacrificing Innocent Blood to Darkness (or as Americans call it: Abortion)


5.  Federal Government Takes Steps to Increase Control

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/sjres19-113/text (Limit political contributions - goes against Citizens United case, and our Freedom of Speech)



4.  Immigration Issue’s Health Concerns, National Security Concerns, Rule of Law Concerns. . .








3.  Texas Governor Perry to Deploy Forces to Border




2.  Russia Increases Military Pressure on Ukraine




1.  Hamas, no wait, ISIS, no wait, Syria, no wait, al Qaeda, no wait, the Taliban, no wait, Hezbollah, no wait. . . Well, I guess right now, according to the Media it reads: Israel Ignites War in the Middle East

http://theweek.com/article/index/265043/israel-has-only-two-choices-eliminate-the-palestinians-or-make-peace (Really?  It is amazing how backwards the media is)








Did you miss the show?  The podcast is available at kcaaradio.celestrion.net/kcaa-podcasts/gibbs/

Doug and JASmius: American Daily Review and Constitution Radio

At noon time Pacific listen to
American Daily Review
The pre-game show for Constitution Radio!

JASmius and I will go over news of the week, and give you a little news regarding our efforts to turn this country around, and set it back on the tracks built by the United States Constitution.

Then, after the show, we continue to discuss the issues through the lens of the U.S. Constitution on Constitution Radio on KCAA AM1050 (KCAAradio.com) at 2:00 pm Pacific.

Looking forward to having you aboard.

Oh, and don't forget to buy my book: 25 Myths of the United States Constitution

House GOP Billion-Dollar Border Plan "Cover-Your-Butt Legislation"

by JASmius

Why is it only John Fleming seems to understand the political dynamics of this situation?:

A proposal by House Republicans to slash President Barack Obama's emergency aid request to address the illegal immigrant crisis is nothing more than "cover-your-butt legislation," Representative John Fleming told Newsmax.

"It appears to me that it is an attempt to tell our constituents that we did the best we could," the Louisiana-4 Republican said Friday "The problem is that we leave an opening for the Senate to add some really bad things to it and then send it right back to us."

Precisely.  By even putting up a legislative ante, no matter what the details of what's in it, you're conceding, as a propaganda matter, the White House's position and thereby letting Barack Obama off the hook.  This "border crisis" is his creation, in conspiracy with Central American and Mexican leaders, to forcibly impose the results of the "comprehensive immigration reform" that House Republicans wouldn't give him.  Congress had not a "smidgeon" to do with it, much less congressional Pachyderms.  Responding to O's call for almost four billion smackers to subsidize his illegal amnesty at all is to belatedly endorse it and the way he brought it about.

And that's before Harry (G)Reid guts the House version and replaces it with the wildly different, and more expensive, Senate version.  Surely House 'Pubbies should, after almost four years, recognize the dynamic of "controversial" legislation when facing a Donk Senate and White House by now.  The House version will be DOA in the upper chamber, and may expire in the Capitol Rotunda.  The House GOP will be expected to use the $2.7 billion Senate version as their "compromise" starting point, and what would come out the other end of the conference committee alimentary tract would be a bill in the $2.3-2.5 billion range with most, if not all, of the White House's priorities and maybe a token, empty gesture related to easing the deportation process that O will never carry out.  House Tea Partiers will balk and either the "compromise" bill will be voted down - creating the desired media frame-up of "extreme, racist Republican obstructionists" who "want to let these children all die," thus creating back-door justification and public sympathy for O's illegal, unconstitutional border-erasing actions - or Speaker Boehner will pass it with Democrat and RINO votes, triggering precisely the grassroots rebellion that he averted by killing Schumer-Rubio in the first place.

Have I left anything out?  Well, it's not like Pete Sessions would know:

Texas-32 Representative Pete Sessions, chairman of the House Rules Committee, described the proposal as Republicans "putting together our ideas on moving forward to address this issue. Not to solve the problem, but to address the issue.

"What the Republican Conference is putting together is a group of action items — legislation and including appropriations — that will allow this conference to work with the president, with the Senate, to solve the problem at hand."

No, Mr. Chairman, what the Republican Conference is putting together is a group of action items that will, you believe, enable your conference to look like and be seen as "working with the president, with the Senate, to solve the problem at hand."  A visual you seem to think will benefit your conference, despite the fact that the American people are against the Regime/Democrat position on this crisis by a 4.5 to 1 margin.  Maybe that big a polling disparity doesn't hold under the "it's for the children" BS fusillade and fades back to the recent historical public opposition to illegal immigration of 2 to 1.  That's still....2 to 1.  A blowout by any remotely reasonable measure.

And then there's the little matter of Obama and Reid and his minions not seeing any "problem" other than waiting for the public's notoriously short attention span to quickly forget about the border crisis like it has every other Obama scandal.  Astonishing as it is to have to point this out yet again, point it out I must: They don't want to genuinely solve the problem at hand.  And now they have what they've wanted all along: amnesty and an open border as a fait accompli.  Or, to put it even more bluntly, they've won.  The only way to make King Hussein and Dirty Harry and the rest of that Democrat filth pay a political price for it is to not "work with them" but instead stand with the 82% of the American people that have been standing with your conference.

Representative Fleming gets the last word:

Fleming said he will not support any funding request — despite the amount.

"While it's exclusively Obama's problem — created by him, a man-made disaster — we're now going to join hands and accept responsibility for it," he said, referring to the crisis. "We're throwing him a lifeline.

"We're doing it at a time when the American people are very upset with the president for causing this and not really engaging on solving it."

Regardless of what the Republicans approve, neither Obama nor the Senate would support it, the three-term congressman said.

"The president is not going to sign this into law, because it actually does just the reverse of what he's actively doing now. The only value of this law is messaging purposes.

"Call it 'feel-good legislation.' Call it 'messaging legislation.' Call it 'cover-your-butt legislation,' " he said. "Although it has some things in it that are attractive, we all know that it's counter to what the president has done and wants to do.

"He can unilaterally undo what he has done — and we wouldn't have to pass anything."

Friday, July 25, 2014

Hard Starboard Radio: Gaza On The Pacific

Hamas continues to succeed in libeling Israel and stirring anti-Semitism globally - but is the truth finally starting to trickle out?  Is Netanyahu winning?  His strategy to divide Hamas and Fatah, and strengthen the latter, seems to be working; And he may have pre-empted a Hamas "mega-attack"; Why does Israel battle Hamas? Visualize San Diego in the hands of Mexican revanchists - which, these days, doesn't take all that much visualization; Obama enjoys another eighteen holes after setting the world aflame; and Thomas The Tank Engine got a what stuck where?

Probing the caboose on Open Thighs Friday at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific.  And I don't want to know why the channel changes every time you have "the big O".

Russia Moving Troops, Heavy Artillery To Ukraine Border

by JASmius

Alternate headline: "Doubts grow about Vladimir Putin's concerns about his international isolation as White House insists 'We've got him with the borscht sanctions!'":

Russia has now amassed around 15,000 troops along the border with Ukraine, the U.S. ambassador to NATO said on Friday, and the [Obam]agon warned that movement of Russian heavy caliber artillery systems across the border into Ukraine is "imminent."

The Pentagon went further, suggesting Russia is escalating the military action there. U.S. Ambassador to NATO Douglas Lute offered the troop estimate during a security forum in Colorado, saying there were "now up again over about 15,000 Russian troops amassed along the border with Ukraine."

Colonel Steve Warren, a[n Obam]agon spokesman, said the U.S. has seen the powerful rocket systems moving closer to the Ukraine border and they could be put into the hands of Russian-backed separatists as soon as Friday. He says he doesn't have an exact timeline.

U.S. officials warned this week that they had new evidence that Russia intended to deliver heavier and more powerful multiple rocket launchers to the separatist forces in Ukraine. Warren told reporters Friday that the delivery could happen at any time, adding "it's that close" to the border.

Warren also said that Russia continues to fire artillery across the border into Ukraine.

"For the last several days Russian forces using Russian artillery from Russian soil have conducted attacks against Ukrainian military positions in Ukraine," said Warren. "This is unquestionably an escalation from a military perspective."

Meanwhile, in the tension-filled depths of the White House Situation Room....

Oh, wait....

Incidentally, do any of you happen to recall the last time anybody on the Left used the term "smart power"?  Would that be round about the last time any of them employed the phrase "reset button"?

"FORE!," on the other hand.....

Send The Illegals Invasion To Beverly Hills & Georgetown

by JASmius

The massive illegal immigrant invasion of our southern border is more than just a national crisis. It's part of the greatest conspiracy in world history—a purposeful attempt to create catastrophe, overwhelm the system, and force the American people to make a dreadfully wrong decision under duress.

Mr. Root is right - his idea is a Saturday Night Live skit.  Pity we lack the power to implement it, just as we lack the power - not the legal authority, but the raw power - to send this invading horde back where it came from.

By the way, Wayne, why do you only defend the "middle class"?  O is "murdering" the entire country; are the poor and the rich acceptable collateral damage in your estimation?

CNN/ORC Poll: 65% Don't Want Obama Impeached

by JASmius

Aaaaaaaaand that's why House Republicans won't impeach him - at least not until after the midterm elections:

One in every three Americans agree with former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s call for President Barack Obama to be impeached, a new survey shows.

The CNN/ORC International poll released Friday also reveals that close to one in two Americans think Obama has excessively expanded the powers of the presidency, CNN reported.

However, Americans [by 57% to 41%] say that Republicans, led by House Speaker John Boehner, should not sue the president for changing an ObamaCare mandate without going to Congress first....

In the poll, 33% of Americans say Obama should be impeached and removed from office while 65% said that he should not face impeachment.
And yet Americans are split down the middle (48%-48%, with the other four percent in tequila comas) on whether The One has penned & phoned himself into a raging tyranny that has rolled up the U.S. Constitution and handed it to Moochelle for tampon usage.  I'm not sure if there's any direct or proportional relationship between these respective numbers, largely because I don't think there's enough collective mental acuity in the respondents to power a bi-valve interior combustion twice-exhausted bi-axle nitrocycle.  But I do know that John Boehner isn't going to allow an impeachment inquiry when the poll numbers against it are that lopsided.  At least not for another four months.

And I cannot say that I blame him.

By the way, please don't come back at me with the media bias objection.  Nobody is more aware of media bias and the big, fat thumb they drop on the left side of the polling scale on a regular basis, the election season psych-ops and the rest.  But those factors affect public opinion at the margins.  If the polling split on impeaching O was the same as the split on whether he's "gone too far" and abused his powers, this would be an entirely different post (though the Speaker would probably be just as reticent about pulling the "I" trigger).

Of course, the public opposes Congress suing the King by almost as big a margin, and Boehner is full speed ahead with that gambit.  But there isn't nearly the political risk in a lawsuit that won't be resolved for years that there is with impeachment.  And while "principle" and "backbone" "cajones" and all of that sort of "fire-eater" stuff are fine and good, we must also remember that (1) all of this takes place in the political arena and (2) America is no longer a constitutional federal republic.  Rather, it is in the transition stage from mobish democracy to socialist oligarchy, and most likely a lot closer to the latter.  If House Republicans resolved today to impeach Barack Obama regardless of public opinion and their own insufficient numbers, all of False Messiah's crimes, scandals, and "failures" would be forgotten in a heartbeat, the media-propelled public backlash in O's favor would be huge, the GOP would go from odds-on favorites to regain the Senate by a large margin to prohibitive favorites to lose the House, and we on the Right would be all the way back at square one, if we weren't already on the cattle cars headed for the Alaska gulag.

That isn't "leftwing propaganda," or what the White House "wants us to think".  It is cold, hard reality.

That being said, the same overall conditions would still exist after November 4th.  The difference is that the next election would be almost two years away.  Remember the Polaroid-esque (or "Instagram-esque" if you're under the age of fifty) nature of American pop culture.  The public was even more opposed to Bill Clinton's impeachment than they are O's, but House 'Pubbies went ahead anyway after the '98 midterms, and it had no specific detrimental electoral effects in 2000.

Again, it's all about doing things at the right time.  If Ted Cruz had held off on his defundageddon crusade last fall until after the ObamaCare Killer Asteroid had impacted, the public would have been much more in favor of a government shutdown showdown.  In the same way, waiting to impeach O until after we have the Senate back and the electoral coast is clear is the sane course of action.

Which makes the damn lawsuit so inconvenient, since it's Boehner's anti-impeachment insurance policy.  Maybe a new Speaker will see the practicability of litigatory and "more direct" anti-Regime action moving "forward" on parallel tracks.

UPDATE: Looks like the White House saw the CNN/ORC poll as well:

A top White House adviser said on Friday Republicans might try to impeach President Barack Obama over his go-it-alone immigration strategy, as Obama prepared to talk about the U.S. border crisis with Central American presidents.

Dan Pfeiffer, one of Obama's longest-serving advisers, told reporters that the executive actions Obama will approve at the end of the summer aimed at tackling illegal immigration will likely generate ire from Republicans who have blocked comprehensive immigration legislation.

Still think Barack Obama doesn't crave his own impeachment?

Thursday, July 24, 2014

"Moderate" Muslims? Or Just Silently Approving Ones?

by JASmius

Bill thanks the moderate Muslims for speaking out against Islamic violence.....if there are any.

Temecula Constitution Class: State Prohibitions

Join us at 6:00 pm at Faith Armory, 41669 Winchester Road (just west of Jefferson), in Temecula for our weekly Constitution Study.  We are working our way through the United States Constitution, and we have gotten to the list of prohibitions against the States in Article I, Section 10.

If the States created the federal government, and it was delegates from the States that wrote the Constitution, then why would they place limitations upon the States in Article I, Section 10?

Join us, and find out the answer.


A Substantially Choomed President

by JASmius

That's a different definition of tranquility. Officer Harry (G)Reid is on the case, and so is Deputy Eric (The Red) Holder! Plus: If she's cooking, I'm eating!

Hard Starboard Radio: A Planned Armageddon?

MSNBCCCP pro-Palestinian propagandist Rula Jebreal won’t admit Hamas is winning the anti-Semitically stacked media war; Some (allegedly) American anti-Israel protestors still think George W. Bush is president; Tony Dungy - Super Bowl-winning and devout Christian former NFL coach and current NBC NFL studio analyst - causes homofilic media hysteria in a self-fulfilling prophecy; House conservatives rightly oppose any "border bailout" - Obama's or Boehner's; and is the "Border Crisis" a planned Armageddon?

"Get in the car, Mr. JASmius" at 6PM Pacific/3PM Pacific.  And work on that manicure.

Murrieta: Border Patrol Appreciation Day

Murrieta Border Patrol Appreciation Day at the Border Patrol Station on Madison Avenue.

July 24, Thursday
Setup starts at 2:30
3 to 5 pm (may go on later)
Please bring a main or side dish for 6 to 8
Leftovers will be left for the other shift

Need: Tables – Tarps – Food –
Ice chest w/ Ice – Drinks

This economy has many financially in a grip so a suggestion bring bottle water or a 6 pack of pop, no matter what please come!

Dessert covered already

Rick Perry Slams Critics’ Claims He's "Militarizing" Border

by JASmius

Thank God somebody is:

Texas Governor Rick Perry has fired back at a Democratic congressman who said that Perry was "militarizing" the border by sending 1,000 National Guards troops to south Texas.

The Republican governor sent a scathing letter to Representative Joaquin Castro (D-TX20 and brother to San Antonio Mayor and next Donk Great Brown Hope, Julian Castro), saying that he had misunderstood the role that the troops would play on the border in preventing crimes being committed by illegal immigrants, the Houston Chronicle reported.

"I recently read your remarks in the press regarding my decision to send up to 1,000 members of the Texas National Guard to enhance border security efforts currently underway along the Texas-Mexico border," Perry wrote. "Your comments indicated a basic misunderstanding about the very positive role the Guard will play in tackling the border security crisis."

Don't get defensive, Governor; Castro didn't "misunderstand" anything.  He deliberately mischaracterized it:

"We should be sending the Red Cross to the border not the National Guard to deal with this humanitarian crisis," Castro wrote. "The children fleeing violence in Central America are seeking out Border Patrol agents. They are not trying to evade them. Why send soldiers to confront these kids?"

"Militarizing our border is the wrong response to the arrival of children," Castro said. "I remain hopeful that our state can provide a more helpful response than to send armed soldiers to greet children seeking refuge from violence."

"Children blah blah blah kids blah blah blah children blah blah blah children blah blah blah."  Even though only one-fifth of this six-figure influx of pestilated illegals are "unaccompanied minors".  It's all a huge hand-waving distraction from the reality that the rest of the border that isn't being reinforced by Governor Perry is wide open for the other four-fifths to walk in, unopposed.  Just like Zack Taylor said.

If anything, Governor Susanna Martinez of New Mexico and Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona should be following Rick Perry's example.  After all, why should we all hang separately when we can all hang together?

A Planned Armageddon?

by JASmius

You be the judge.

I resent the idea that I don't have control; that I'm a "deer in the headlights", that I'm supposed to see the small storm become a category 5 hurricane, and just sit and wait for it to destroy me.

This evil Regime is busy like a bad infestation of termites, bent on bringing down the house. All the other things we've been resisting, and now this border crap... as the title suggests, If this retired Border Patrol officer is half right, we’re screwed.

"Are you familiar with what Barack Obama's real power is?  Barack Obama can suspend constitutional government upon declaration of a national emergency.  Think about that.  What is a president with such broad, sweeping power doing cultivating viral outbreaks in southern Texas?...We have no context for what he is doing or any appreciation of the scale in which it will be unleashed in the future.  A plague to end all plagues.  A silent weapon for a quiet war.  The systematic release of indiscriminate organisms for which the man who is bringing them on has no cure....While we've been bickering with Democrats and RINOs, this man has been implementing a planned Armageddon.....The timetable has been set.  It'll happen on a holiday when people are away from their homes.  Barack Obama will declare a state of emergency, at which time all government, all federal agencies, and We, The People, will come under his direct control."

Well, okay, that last sentence is already the case.  And O has pretty much suspended constitutional government already, without overtly saying so.  And I adapted the rest of that, er, "colorful" soliloquy from Alvin Kurtzweil's wild-eyed spiel to Special Agent Fox Mulder in the first X-Files movie.  I've never been much for conspiracism, actually, since (1) conspiracies are the most inefficient way of accomplishing anything and (2) the public isn't nearly collectively or individually intelligent enough to justify such unwieldy levels of paranoid secrecy.  Just look at the past five and a half years.  Plus there's the "unthinkability" factor; most of us still blissfully and ignorantly believe that "that can't happen here," "No American president would ever do something like that," etc.

And yet....what is Barack Obama doing cultivating viral outbreaks in Texas?  And then shipping their illegal carriers around the country and forcibly "re-settling" them in unsuspecting communities without their knowledge or consent?  Why did he set this process in motion - illegally and unconstitutionally, remember - and why is he continuing to openly collaborate with Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and who knows whom else to continue and expand this invasion?  Is it really paranoia to ask legitimate questions - while we still can?

"Recovery Summer V" Fizzling Like All Its Predecessors

by JASmius

If once is a fluke, and twice is a coincidence, and thrice is a trend, what do you call the fifth incarnation?:

While many analysts expect the economy to grow 3% or more for the rest of the year, rebounding from the first quarter's 2.9% contraction, Jeffrey Snider, chief investment strategist at Alhambra Investment Partners, thinks they have it all wrong.

Since the end of the 2007-09 recession, "the expectations of the Recovery Summer have fallen short with what should be more shocking in terms of regularity," he writes on the firm's web site.

The idea that it was just snowstorms holding the economy back in the first quarter is ludicrous, Snider says. 

Meanwhile, the second quarter was to be "the unquestioned springboard to the guaranteed promised land," Snider writes.

"There must be more than a little bitterness to the growing realization that the second quarter has not been all that much better than the first."

And the first, of course, was borderline apocalyptic.  Q2 would have to dramatically improve in order to be "only" godawful.  And if it shows even a "smidgeon" of a contraction - minus-0.000000001% - we have a recession, ladies and gentlemen, we have a recessionAnd Barack Obama would not be "inheriting" this one from anybody.  And it would not be driven by "man-made carbon-emission disruption of the oceanic thermal regulation mechanism" (aka "snowstorms"), but by Obamanomics, ObamaCare, and his Regime's jihad against the American energy sector.  Without a single George W. Bush anywhere in sight.

What do you call the fifth incarnation of an unmistakable downward economic trend?  I call it the Second Great Depression.  Or the Obamapression.  Or a planned economic Armageddon.  Take your pick.  Whatever the label, it's already under way.  And more and more Americans are waking up to it, Neo-like, to behold the horrors to come.

Water Responsible in a Drought? Nah.

By Douglas V. Gibbs

The American West is experiencing, according to some, the worst drought in 500 years.

I don't need to start taking Navy showers because I already do. . . not because I am water conscious, or water responsible, but because I was in the Navy, and it kind of became something of a habit to take my showers like that.

I don't water my lawn real heavy, either.  In fact, when NPR came out to my house to interview me regarding the Murrieta Immigration Protests, the reporter said to me, "Wow, it looks like you are the only water conscious person in your neighborhood during this drought."

My lawn is dead, and is mostly dirt, and an occasional weed here and there we trim down when they get long because there are too many to pull, and my back would never allow me to do such a thing, anyway.

I responded to her, "I am not water responsible.  I'm broke.  We could no longer afford to water the lawn."

My pool is empty, as well.  Not so save water, but it just became too expensive to maintain.

I am not saying I would not be water conscious if I could afford to use a lot of water.  I just found it funny that when a liberal reporter saw my lawn, her first thought was the drought, and being environmentally responsible.

That said, conservatives are just as concerned about environmental issues as liberals.  We just don't believe the federal government should be dictating to us how to handle these issues, or that hysteria should be used regarding environmental issues in order to push a political agenda, as we see with the Democrats time and time again.

In fact, if you look at the world, the governments that could be called the most free in the sense of the level of liberty the citizens experience, the most environmentally conscious nations of the world are the ones that are also the freest.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

US West Faces Worst Drought in 500 Years - NewsMax

Want people to live more prosperous, enriching, environmentally friendly lives? Then you must be for free markets - Against Crony Capitalism

House Conservatives Oppose ANY Border Bailout

by JASmius

Subsidizing amnesty on the cheap would still be subsidizing amnesty - and stupidly at that:

Conservatives slammed House Speaker John Boehner's plan for $1.5 billion to address the illegal immigration crisis on Wednesday, with some charging to Newsmax that Republicans should spend no additional taxpayer money and force President Barack Obama to rescind the 2012 executive order that they say ignited the crisis.

"This is a problem created by the DACA law," said Louisiana-4 Representative John Fleming. "The president did it by himself."

Fleming referred to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which delayed deportations to children who were brought to the U.S. by their parents when they were young and who have remained here illegally.

"It's a huge PR disaster for him — and he can fix it by simply reversing what he did and by telling people that he is not going to give them amnesty," he said.

Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, declared: "No border bailout, period."

Indeed.  The issue here isn't funding levels; it is the policy and the lawless, unconstitutional manner in which it was imposed.

Congress would not give Barack Obama his "DREAM" Act, so he got his pen and his phone and Article I Section 1 and decreed the law himself.  Hundreds of thousands of undocumented Democrats from Central America (and [*AHEM*] "elsewhere") took notice, heeded his flimsily disguised recruitment drive, and flooded northward.  Countless numbers of the exodus perished, countless more were raped, molested, and abused, and still more countless migrants contracted - or were deliberately infected with - virulent communicable diseases.  They invaded our country and now they're here, as Barack Obama's intended fait accompli.

But right now, Congressman Fleming is correct: the public's ire is being directed at Barack Obama.  Not that that means all that much to him, since he'll never face another election, but it puts the GOP in the strongest attainable position from which to attempt to whittle down The One's heretofore impregnable position.  As long as the focus is on the policy and O's illegal usurpation of the legislative power to force it on the country to its evident detriment, that policy is at least theoretically malleable.

That clarity vanishes in a puff of smoke if House Republicans give the dictator one red cent to "deal with the border crisis".  It doesn't matter what the details of any such legislation would be; it could be crammed full of border reinforcement provisions and deportation orders and a Pacific-to-Mexico Gulf fence the size of the Great Wall of China and the point of clarity would still be lost.  It would still be effectively to subsidize Obama's amnesty, because he would simply redirect the funding to "resettlement" operations.  Either that or he'd simply veto it as "attempted genocide" or some other manner of patented demagoguery.  Either way the public's animosity would be transferred to House Republicans and Red Barry would be off scot free.

Actually, there is a third possibility.  I keep forgetting that Democrats still control the Senate until January.  Such being the case, any House bill, no matter how hawkish, would be gutted by Harry (G)Reid and replaced with the Regime's shopping list.  At which point Boehner & Co. would have two options: cave, and incur the blithering rage of their own base mere weeks before a midterm election they looked to win in another historic blowout, or stand firm and bring down White House denunciations of "genocidal obstructionism" on their heads that the electorate will buy scarcely any less.

In essence, this "border crisis" bill is a surrogate for the Schumer-Rubio "comprehensive immigration reform" boondoggle that Speaker Boehner just got through giving a mercy killing, with the additional delightful feature that the stakes are logarithmically higher.  And the logical answer is the same.  In fact, it's almost Hypocratic: "First, do no harm".  In this case, that means, yes, "do nothing".  Let O simmer in his own mess.  Let the hoi palloi see that it is he that did this unspeakable harm.  At least keep this issue maximally visible and on the public's front burner.

House conservatives get it, even if the Speaker doesn't:

Fleming labeled the funding request as nothing more than a back-door way for Obama to get House Republicans to agree to comprehensive immigration reform.

Boehner has vowed to address the issue as a series of individual bills — not like the Gang of Eight's legislation that the Democratic-controlled Senate passed last year.

"Once we send [the Senate] something, they can send something back over that we would be forced to vote on," Fleming said. "If we didn't pass it, we would look like we didn't have a heart for children. If it gets passed, it’s going to open a big gap in amnesty for these illegals.
"The Republicans will end up having to deal with the problem. It'll be our problem, even though it was created by the president."

He told Newsmax that a House resolution was preferred by many conservatives.

It would demand that Obama "basically … did his job: defend our borders, rescind DACA, and deport all minors," Fleming said. "He can do all that with his pen and his phone, and there would be no need for us to pass anything.

"As soon as we begin passing legislation that seeks to address the problem, that takes the pressure off him," the congressman added. "There's no reason for him to do anything that's going to be constructive.

"But just to throw $4 billion at him, or even $1.5 billion, at the problem without any guarantee of solutions — many of us Republicans think that's a very bad idea." [emphases added]

It's very simple, Mr. Speaker: If Barack Obama is going to take America down, Republicans should not help him do it.


Ken Calvert Seeks to Close Illegal Immigration Loophole

By Douglas V. Gibbs

In 2008 a law was passed, and signed by President Bush, that enables children illegally immigrating from non-contiguous countries to not be deported back to their homes.  The provision was passed under the guise of protecting children from human trafficking, but what it did was create the opportunity for the massive onslaught of young people illegally coming to the United States from Central and South America.

Ken Calvert, silent during the early days of the protests in Murrieta, has decided to take action legislatively, by introducing a bill designed to close that loophole that is encouraging illegals from nations that are not contiguous to make the trek to our national border.

I would like to see these people in Washington take steps to secure the border, because plugging the hole is the most important thing we need to do, first, but I am pleased to see Calvert act in a way that supports his constituents, and lets us know that he heard us loud and clear when we were out there protesting in front of Murrieta's border patrol station, and turning around Homeland Security buses full of sick illegal aliens.

Congressman Calvert's bill, H.R. 5079, attracted 18 cosponsors, and is intended to amend the 2008 law so that unaccompanied children from Central America that are detained crossing the border illegally are not simply processed, and then released into American neighborhoods.

“It has become increasingly clear that Congress must take action and close an unintended loophole that is a significant cause of the crisis at our border in Texas,” said Rep. Calvert. “Solving our immigration crisis requires getting at the root of the problem, and if we fail to take steps like closing this loophole the significant challenges we are experiencing now will only continue and grow. The long and dangerous journey from Central America to the Texas border, especially one aided by a smuggler, is something that no one, especially an unaccompanied child, should endure. The humane and responsible step for these children and for our immigration policy is to close this loophole and the incentive it provides. Americans expect the federal government to respond and quickly address the crisis at the border, which is why both Republicans and Democrats have voiced support for taking this step.”

“The President’s unilateral actions have sent a misleading message that resulted in tens of thousands of children making a perilous journey to our country with the belief they would be allowed to stay," said Congressman Darrell Issa (CA-49). "The best resolution to this humanitarian crisis is the safe return of these children to their families and country of origin. By promptly returning them home to their loved ones it sends a clear message that will discourage other children from making this dangerous trip.”

“This bill is one step of many to rectify the situation,” said Rep. Calvert. “I was also pleased by the recent announcement by Customs and Border Protection that they will not be transferring any more illegal immigrant families or children to the San Diego sector, which includes the Murrieta facility in my congressional district. CBP will process them in Texas, which is exactly what should happen. This bill would then enable CBP to process unaccompanied children at the point of entry and immediately repatriate them.”

Calvert's bill will change children not from countries bordering the U.S. to have the same legal proceedings as those from contiguous countries.  With the current rules, with the onslaught of numbers making it impossible to get these people a hearing within 72 hours, they must be released and asked to return later for their hearing.  95-98 percent of these people never check back in.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Fontana's Illegal Immigration Battle

By Douglas V. Gibbs

In Fontana, the illegal immigration issue hit home after the Murrieta protesters rejected the bus loads of illegals, and the federal government decided to force the sick and homeless illegals on Fontana by making a deal with a local Catholic Church.  What followed were protests at the church, and then last Tuesday Night a packed City Council meeting where concerned citizens of Fontana demanded that the illegals not be shipped into their area, using the argument that the church in Fontana is not zoned to allow overnight guests.  20 speakers took the podium during the City Council meeting regarding this issue.

The concern is regarding St. Joseph's Catholic Church, who took in 46 illegals on July 10.  The guests were gone by July 13.  An announcement was made shortly after that buses would be arriving at the church with more migrants every 72 hours.  The citizens of Fontana immediately went into action, and with a number of rallies in front of the church, no buses have arrived since that first dumping.

The picture above on this article is of the main folks involved in fighting the good fight at the City Council meeting in Fontana last Tuesday.  Many of these people I have seen before, and know.  People who are involved with local politics tend to know each other.  In fact, one of the people in the picture attends my Tuesday Night Constitution Class in Corona (6pm, AllStar Collision, 522 Railroad St.).

As I was telling someone on the phone tonight, this is a national effort that was started by the protesters in Murrieta. . . and the first protest in Murrieta was about a dozen people.  Now, people nationwide are demonstrating, standing with Murrieta.  It doesn't take much to start a revolution, folks.  Get involved.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

/SoCal Churches Provide Temporary Shelter, "Spiritual Food" for Immigrants - NBC Los Angeles