The case for Obama’s impeachment: The Constitution’s remedy for a lawless, imperial president

( Bailey) Do you believe that if he was a republican president he would have been impeached a long time ago. But my question is how do you go about impeaching a King?

The next time you hear politicians denounce Barack Obama as a lawless, imperial president with a scandal-riddled administration, ask them what they’re going to do about it. Their gnashing of teeth over Obama’s self-granted omnipotence is repetitive.
Let’s agree with our ninth president, William Henry Harrison, who said there is nothing more corrupting, nothing more destructive than the exercise of unlimited power. We understand the problem. The only way for politicians to fix it is with a little less talk and a lot more action.
The Constitution provides the remedy for a president who commits “high crimes and misdemeanors.” It’s impeachment.

The only thing necessary to transform America into something unrecognizable is for good men to do nothing!

To be clear, “high crimes and misdemeanors” are not necessarily ordinary criminal offenses. Our Framers used the term to signify a dereliction of duty, and the first duty of the president is to enforce our laws and preserve, protect, and defend our Constitution.
Alexander Hamilton described impeachable offenses as those “which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.” He explained that they are “political” offenses “as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
No serious person who is paying attention can deny that Obama and his administration have abused and violated the public trust and disregarded the Constitution. Let me count the ways.
Without notifying Congress as required by law, he set free terrorist prisoners at a time of war when they can return to the battlefield to kill our troops.
In violation of our Constitution, he regularly ignores court orders, changes laws by executive fiat, and refuses to enforce laws he doesn’t like, including our immigration laws.
When Congress declined to pass amnesty for illegal immigrants’ offspring, he unilaterally enacted his own version of it, which created the current crisis on our border as illegal youth pour into our country to receive what he illegally promised them.
He committed fraud on the American people when he promised that if we liked our health care plan we could keep it.
He got us into a war in Libya without Congressional approval. When our ambassador begged for security at the consulate in Benghazi, he was ignored and then murdered when the consulate was attacked as predicted. Americans were left behind to die, as the president did nothing to rescue our people there. Afterwards, he helped spread the lie that a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video was to blame for this highly organized, premeditated terrorist attack.
Obama’s IRS targeted his political opponents for harassment. Then the agency lied to and stonewalled Congress and likely destroyed subpoenaed evidence, while Obama falsely declared there’s no corruption there, not even a smidgen.
From the VA scandal to his unconstitutional recess appointments, to his DOJ wiretapping reporters and giving guns to Mexican drug cartels, to violating religious freedom exercised by businesses and ignoring in-house illegal fundraising, the list of abuse goes on and on.
Barack Obama’s administration is proving itself a festering boil of scandal. The Constitution is rock solid in holding the president responsible for the executive branch. He can’t just vote “present” while shrugging and feigning ignorance about all these abuses of the public trust, any more than a mob boss can claim innocence because he didn’t personally do the hit. The buck stops with the guy at the top.
Impeachment is the ultimate check on an out-of-control executive branch. It is serious, not to be used for petty partisan purposes; and it is imperative that it becomes a matter of legitimate discussion before the American people lose all trust in our federal government.
Impeachment requires moral courage to advance what is right, and it requires political will. A complacent or disheartened electorate may silently endure these abuses from the administration, the permanent political class is only too happy to maintain the status quo, and the mainstream media is not a fair watchdog. So, the nation’s last line of defense is for We the People to rise up and say, “enough is enough.”
Obama’s lawless encouragement of illegal immigration should be the tipping point for that political will because it impacts all Americans – native-born and legal immigrants of all backgrounds who followed the rules and now watch rewards go to rule breakers while they’re forced to compete for limited jobs and resources. It’s the tipping point because the forgotten working class is hurt most by this lawlessness; and these good Americans deserve the strongest, most effective tool to defend the livelihoods they’ve so honorably built!
Some are arguing for cautious inaction and dismiss even a discussion of impeachment. With Obama’s poll numbers in the tank and his liberal policies exposed as failures, why rock the boat? But that argument misses the point.
The president is radically changing the way the executive branch does business. He is setting a dangerous precedent that will fundamentally change us. With his “pen and phone,” he’s abrogating Congressional authority in violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers. He’s making himself a ruler, not a president. We had a revolution back in 1776 because we don’t like kings.
Some argue we should wait for midterm elections and hope a big victory by Republicans in both Houses of Congress will rein in Obama.
Been there, done that in 2010. If Congress refuses to use the power the Constitution gives it, Barack Obama will continue to rule however he wants.
Some argue that at best the House might vote for articles of impeachment, but the Senate is unlikely to convict. But that is no argument against holding a president accountable and sending the people’s message to all successors.
Obama can keep laughing and say, “so sue me” to the House’s tepid lawsuit threat. Let’s hear him laugh off impeachment. At the very least, despite his mocking the Constitution, this Constitutional process will put him on notice.
The only thing necessary to transform America into something unrecognizable is for good men to do nothing! If not these violations and the president’s promise to continue to “go it alone” in ignoring the separation of powers and rule of law, what will it take for you to take a stand? How bad does it have to get?
We live in an America where the NSA spies on our communications, the IRS targets us because of our political beliefs, the border is overrun by foreign nationals, terrorist leaders are released to the battlefield, our health care is taken from us and we’re forced to buy a plan we don’t want and can’t afford, Catholic nuns are targeted by the government simply because they adhere to their Catholic faith, the Justice Department arms Mexican drug lords, and the president keeps a “kill list” of people he’s authorized to be executed on sight.
If you’re comfortable with all that, then by all means sit back and hope for the best. Those concerned about America want change. That comes with healing the injuries done to society by an unchecked president; that starts with impeachment.  
Sarah Palin first made history on December 4, 2006, when she was sworn in as the first female and youngest governor of Alaska. In August 2008, Senator John McCain tapped Palin to serve as his vice-presidential running mate in his presidential campaign, making her the first woman to run on the Republican Party's presidential ticket. She is a contributor for Fox News where she offers her political commentary and analysis across all Fox News platforms.

Obama Cartoon

Texas Gov. Perry: Illegal immigrant surge a 'humanitarian crisis' Obama can stop

Texas Gov. Rick Perry said Wednesday on “Hannity” that President Obama needs to act now to stop the surge in illegal immigrants flooding across his state’s border, calling it “a humanitarian crisis that he has the ability to stop.”
The Republican governor spoke out after meeting with Obama in Texas Wednesday afternoon. Both sides called the meeting “constructive” and said they agreed philosophically. However, Perry said he is concerned that Obama did not indicate he will take the immediate action he requested: to use his power as commander-in-chief to send the National Guard to secure the border.
“You know, I was like, Mr. President, you can deal with this. You can unilaterally direct the Department of Defense to put those troops on the border…” he said, later adding, “The president needs to understand that the single most important thing that he can do is put the National Guard on the border to coordinate with local law enforcement, with state law enforcement, with the border patrol…”
Obama said Wednesday that he is open to the National Guard suggestion, but that he believed it would only be a temporary fix. 
Perry also criticized the fact that Obama is not visiting the border on his trip to Texas so he can witness the crisis first-hand. Obama said in a press conference Wednesday that doing so would be engaging in political “theater” and not productive.
“I said Mr. President, I really want you to come and see this,” Perry said. “I said this is important for you to absorb as a father, but more importantly as the president of the United States to see the humanitarian crisis.”
Perry said Obama’s refusal to do so is no different than the criticism President George W. Bush received when he chose to fly over New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina instead of visiting the city on the ground. He said Obama sending Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson is not enough.
"I'm pretty sure that if George Bush had said 'well I sent my FEMA director multiple times' he still would have been criticized greatly," Perry said. "Because you need to go. That's what governors do, that's what presidents do. When there are natural disasters, when there are crises like these, a president needs to be there to show the American people number one that he understands."
In the press conference, Obama called on Congress to approve the more than $3 billion in emergency funds he requested to help with the crisis, but Perry claimed less than $100 million of those funds would be going toward border security.
“It’s the same president that said Al-Qaeda’s on the run and I don’t know whether he’s inept, or there’s something else going on, as I’ve said before,” he said. “But the fact is, the border is not secure.”
Perry said that if the National Guard was made available to help secure the border, it would send a powerful message to Central America.
“That’s the most humane thing we can do,” he said.

EPA claims it has the power to garnish wages without court approval

Government out of Control

The Environmental Protection Agency has quietly claimed that it has the authority to unilaterally garnish the wages of individuals who have been accused of violating its rules. 
According to The Washington Times, the agency announced the plan to enhance its purview last week in a notice in the Federal Register. The notice claimed that federal law allows the EPA to "garnish non-Federal wages to collect delinquent non-tax debts owed the United States without first obtaining a court order." 
The notice went on to say that the EPA had fast-tracked the new rule, enabling it to take effect September 2 unless the agency receives enough adverse public comments by August 1. The EPA said the rule was not subject to review because it was not a "significant regulatory action."
The EPA has claimed this new authority by citing the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, which gives all federal agencies the power to conduct administrative wage garnishment, provided that the agency allows for hearings at which debtors to challenge the amount or the terms of repayment schedule. 
The plan has drawn protests from conservatives, including Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., who told The Washington Times, "The EPA has a history of overreaching its authority. It seems like once again the EPA is trying to take power it doesn’t have away from American citizens.”
The conservative Heritage Foundation claimed that the rule gives the EPA "unbridled discretion" over the process of challenging fines.  David Addington, group vice president for research at Heritage, told the Times that the rule not only puts the burden of proof on the debtor, rather than the agency, but also allows the EPA to decide whether a debtor even gets a chance to present a defense before picking whomever it chooses to serve as a hearing officer.
The amount of money the EPA has collected in fines has increased steadily since President Barack Obama took office. In 2012, the agency took in $252 million in fines, up from just $96 million in 2009.

Concerns raised over strains on US military bases housing more than 2,700 unaccompanied minors

More than 2,700 unaccompanied minors who came across the southern U.S. border illegally are now being housed and cared for at military bases in California, Texas and Oklahoma, raising concerns about overburdening the facilities.
On Tuesday, the Pentagon – which provided the 2,700 figure -- confirmed it was in discussions with the Department of Health and Human Services to take on additional unaccompanied minors. But neither agency would reveal how many children were being discussed or what military facilities could be impacted.
"We're proud to be able to support them in this regard, but it is a temporary mission," Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby said.
Kirby said the Pentagon has reached a mutual agreement with HHS to care for the children for 120 days, but there already is some dispute about that timeframe. 
Rep. Jim Bridenstine, R-Okla., said, "There are rumors ... that they've already had requests from HHS to have, you know, a new 120-day period beyond the first 120-day period."
Bridenstine, a Navy pilot, said he's growing more concerned that the situation is actually beginning to impact the military's first priority: readiness.
"We have barracks that troops need to use to train, and it certainly doesn't help when our military bases are being used as refugee camps," he said.
Bridenstine added that he was turned away when he tried to get a firsthand look at the situation at Fort Sill in Oklahoma and was told to make an appointment for three weeks later, despite his objections.
He has criticized plans to hold a "media tour" for journalists on Thursday.  Restrictions include bans on recording devices, asking questions and talking with staff. 
"When the government tells you, 'You can tell a story, but you have to tell the story that the officials in the United States government will tell you that you can tell,' that is not within the keeping of the Constitution," he said.
The administration has said there are critical reasons for the restrictions.
According to the Administration for Children and Families at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: "In order to protect the safety and privacy of the children, it has long been HHS's standard policy to not allow recording devices in Office of Refugee Resettlement shelters for minors. Children in these shelters are especially vulnerable.  ...  They may have been trafficked or smuggled."
In addition to the burden on military facilities, Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., a physician, has raised health concerns. 
In a letter to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Gingrey cited concerns about swine flu, Ebola virus and tuberculosis and asked the agency to "take immediate action to assess the public risk posed by the influx of unaccompanied children..."

Cartoon

Seattle business group clears hurdle in push to repeal $15 minimum wage

A coalition of Seattle businesses has cleared a major hurdle in its effort to repeal the city’s newly enacted $15-an-hour minimum wage, gathering enough petition signatures to put the issue to voters on the November ballot if the signatures hold up. 
Forward Seattle -- which represents restaurants, merchants and other businesses -- submitted roughly 19,500 signatures last Wednesday to City Hall.
The group needed 16,510 signatures. City officials could complete a preliminary count by as early as Monday, then send the signatures to the King County election office for final verification.
However, the effort also faces allegations of fraud that appear backed by well-funded groups intent on preserving the wage increase, Forward Seattle Co-Chair Angela Cough said.
She also told FoxNews.com the group’s grassroots effort is under-funded in large part because members are being intimidated by opponents, who she said are compiling online boycott lists and going on members’ Facebook pages and websites like Yelp to post negative comments.
“This is a principle-based fight for me,” Cough said. “But others are simply too scared.”
She also argued her group is not opposed to minimum wage increases. Rather, she said they are objecting to the process in Seattle that led to passage of the measure, to which members offered alternatives.
Democratic lawmakers have tried in recent months to raise the minimum wage across the country, in their effort to close the so-called income-inequality gap. But none has come close to Seattle raising its rate by 60 percent -- from $9.25 an hour.
The Democrat-controlled City Council in June unanimously approved the increase, which was then signed into law by Democratic Mayor Ed Murray.
While Democrats have pushed for the increases, critics say such hikes will burden businesses, forcing them to perhaps move, slow their growth or even close.
The Seattle increase is scheduled to be phased in over several years, depending on the size of the business.
Those with fewer than 500 workers must comply with the increase in the next seven years, while larger ones must do it within three years, or four if they offer health insurance, according to Reuters.
If the signatures on the Forward Seattle petition are validated, voters would be asked in November whether they want to repeal the increase.
Forward Seattle critics, though, say paid signature-gathers told potential signers the referendum would increase the minimum wage or that the measure had yet to be made law.
Cough acknowledges the validated signature count will be close, considering the typical margin of error could eliminate as many as 3,000 names.
“We’ll keep a list of every challenged signature and fight,” she said. “It’s going to be very, very close.”

Lines drawn at California town in immigration fight

Protesters and illegal immigrant supporters have drawn battle lines once again in Murrieta, the California city where angry residents last week turned back busloads of border crossers.
The small city about 60 miles north of San Diego has been in the national spotlight since last Tuesday when a group of protestors stopped three federal buses filled with mostly women and children from central America. The buses eventually turned around and left.
On Friday, six protestors were arrested but that hasn’t stopped even more from showing up again on Monday. Many say they’re worried about the immigrants being released in their community after they’re processed. 
“We’re out here to say, 'No more,'" said Kender Macgowan. "We’re drawing a line in the sand, well, not even the sand. We’re drawing a line in the blood of the patriots that have died for this country.”
One protester holding an American flag exchanged insults with several illegal immigrant supporters covering their faces with bandanas.
“I don’t think that mobbing a bus of terrified children is the way to go about it," said Cassandra Rules. "I think if you want to protest this take it to your politician's doorstep, take it to the White House. Don’t terrorize little kids who are already scared.”
The mayor of Murrieta said he has received little information from federal authorities. He said a planeload of immigrants arrived in San Diego Monday morning and that he is waiting to see if buses will arrive to Murrieta later in the day.
“We’re trying to get information out to both sides of the protest line but when we don’t have answers people get very very frustrated,” Mayor Alan Long said.
Long said the current process of shipping illegal immigrants to small city processing centers is a Band-aid on a bigger problem. He said the world has arrived on the door-step of his community over the last week.

DHS Secretary Johnson gives no clear answers on whether illegal immigrant children will be deported

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson dodged pointed questions Sunday about whether the tens of thousands of Central American children who have recently entered the U.S. illegally will be deported or allowed to stay.
His responses on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and those of other Obama administration officials about what exactly they will do about the estimated 50,000 children who have entered the U.S. illegally in recent months are being characterized as ambiguous, as officials try to secure the U.S.-Mexico border.
Johnson said everybody who crossed the border faces a “pending” deportation proceeding but also repeated recent administration talking points about looking at ways to “create additional options.”
“There’s deportation proceeding pending against everybody coming illegally across the border,” he said, while also repeating the administration’s argument about dealing with a 2008 law that gives some protection to illegal immigrants from non-bordering countries.
Johnson also dismissed questions about not having enough resources at the border and expressed optimism the U.S. will stop the flow of illegals into the country, estimated in the hundreds of thousands since spring.
“Our border is not open for illegal immigration,” he told NBC. “And we will stem the tide.”
He also suggested that America’s first obligation is to the incoming children, over sovereignty.
“We have to do right by the children,” Johnson said.
His remarks were sharply criticized by Idaho GOP Rep. Raul Labrador, who called the administration’s public response to the crisis “shameful.”
“The administration needs to deport these families and children,” said Labrador, who appeared on the show after Johnson. “I know it sounds harsh and difficult, but it's better for the children. Send these children back in a humanitarian way. We can do it safely and efficiently.”
He also dismissed the narrative that the children are being sent unaccompanied to the U.S. border as a result of violence in their own countries.  
“The violence has existed for a long time,” Labrador said. “It's over the last two years that you've seen an increase in the children.”
While some of the children are living with relatives in this country, others remain in the custody of the U.S. Border Patrol and the Department of Health and Human Services.
Johnson declined to say whether Obama will visit the border while in Texas this week.
"The president can't be every place he'd like to be or should be," he said. Johnson also said he didn’t think the protests in Murrieta, Calif., about illegal immigrants being bussed from Texas to be housed in their city was representative of how fellow residents and the rest of America feel.
On Thursday, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest was asked by a reporter whether he could say “without ambiguity” if the children will be deported.
“What I can say without ambiguity is that the law will be applied and there is going to be a due process that they’ll all be subjected to,” Earnest replied. “So I wouldn’t stand here and say how those claims will be processed; it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to do so. But the law will be rigorously applied.”
He also said the administration is seeking “additional authority” from Congress.

US increases security at foreign airports, focus on cellphone, other electronic devices

Passengers taking international flights into the United States now must have their cell phones and other electronic devices pass additional inspection before boarding planes, as part of the Transportation Security Administration’s most recent strategy to protect against the threat of a new type of terror attack.
The TSA said Sunday it is requiring only some overseas airports to conduct the additional inspections. The agency also said devices that fail to power up won't be allowed on planes and that their owners might have to undergo extra screening before boarding.
“As the traveling public knows, all electronic devices are (already) screened by security officers,” the agency said in a release.
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson on Wednesday ordered the TSA to put extra security measures in place at some international airports with direct flights to the U.S., based on intelligence that suggests new Al Qaeda efforts to produce a bomb that would go undetected through airport security.
Some experts have suggested such a device would be planted in a laptop or other such electronic devices.
“Our job is to try to anticipate the next attack, not simply react to the last one,” Johnson said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “So we continually evaluate the world situation. And we know that there remains a terrorist threat to the United States. And aviation security is a large part of that.”
Johnson said he and others in the Obama administration would continue to evaluate whether the increased security will be applied to U.S. domestic flights.
The beefed up security is almost certainly a response to recent intelligence reports suggesting that Al Qaeda-linked terrorists in Syria are working with members of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula to blow up a commercial aircraft headed to the U.S. or Europe, as reported first by ABC News.
Americans and others from the West have traveled to Syria over the past year to join Al Nusra Front's fight against the Syrian government.
One fear is fighters with a U.S. or Western passport -- and therefore subject to less stringent security screening -- could carry such a bomb onto an American plane.
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has long been fixated on bringing down airplanes with hidden explosives. It was behind failed and thwarted plots involving suicide bombers with explosives designed to hide inside underwear and explosives hidden inside printer cartridges shipped on cargo planes.
An American Airlines spokesman said last week that the company has been in contact with U.S. officials about the new requirements but declined to comment further.
The United Kingdom also said it is increasing security measures “in conjunction with international partners and the aviation industry.” Officials also said they don’t anticipate significant disruptions for passengers and that they will not raise the terror-threat level.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Nonprofits' contraceptive cases next for justices

WASHINGTON (AP) — How much distance from an immoral act is enough?
That's the difficult question behind the next legal dispute over religion, birth control and the health law that is likely to be resolved by the Supreme Court.
The issue in more than four dozen lawsuits from faith-affiliated charities, colleges and hospitals that oppose some or all contraception as immoral is how far the Obama administration must go to accommodate them.
The justices on June 30 relieved businesses with religious objections of their obligation to pay for women's contraceptives among a range of preventive services the new law calls for in their health plans.
Religious-oriented nonprofit groups already could opt out of covering the contraceptives. But the organizations say the accommodation provided by the administration does not go far enough because, though they are not on the hook financially, they remain complicit in the provision of government-approved contraceptives to women covered by their plans.
"Anything that forces unwilling religious believers to be part of the system is not going to pass the test," said Mark Rienzi, senior counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents many of the faith-affiliated nonprofits. Hobby Lobby Inc., winner of its Supreme Court case last month, also is a Becket Fund client.
The high court will be asked to take on the issue in its term that begins in October. A challenge from the University of Notre Dame in South Bend, Indiana, probably will be the first case to reach the court.
The Obama administration argues that the accommodation creates a generous moral and financial buffer between religious objectors and funding birth control. The nonprofit groups just have to raise their hands and say that paying for any or all of the 20 devices and methods approved by government regulators would violate their religious beliefs.
To do so, they must fill out a government document known as Form 700 that enables their insurers or third-party administrators to take on the responsibility of paying for the birth control. The employer does not have to arrange the coverage or pay for it. Insurers get reimbursed by the government through credits against fees owed under other parts of the health law.
Houses of worship and other religious institutions whose primary purpose is to spread the faith are exempt from the requirement to offer birth control.
The objections by religious nonprofits are rooted in teachings against facilitating sin.
Roman Catholic bishops and other religious plaintiffs argue that filling out the government form that registers opposition to contraceptives, then sending the document to the insurer or third-party administrator, is akin to signing a permission slip to engage in evil.
In the Hobby Lobby case, the justices rejected the government argument that there was no violation of conscience because the link between birth control coverage and the outcome the employer considers morally wrong was slight.
Just hours after the Hobby Lobby decision, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta granted a temporary reprieve to the Alabama-based Eternal Word Television Network. Judge William H. Pryor Jr. said in a separate opinion in that case that the administration "turns a blind eye to the undisputed evidence that delivering Form 700 would violate the Network's religious beliefs."
But the Supreme Court could draw a distinction between subsidizing birth control and signing a document to deputize a third-party to do so, said Robin Fretwell Wilson, a family law specialist at the University of Illinois College of Law.
"Think about how thinned down that objection is," Fretwell Wilson said. "The court might say that is a bridge too far."
Judge Karen Nelson Moore of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati said the document is a reasonable way for objecting organizations to inform the insurer, but that the obligation to cover contraception is in the health law, not the form.
"Self-certification allows the eligible organization to tell the insurance issuer and third-party administrator, 'We're excused from the new federal obligation relating to contraception,' and in turn, the government tells those insurance companies, 'But you're not,'" the judge wrote.
People on both sides of this argument are looking to the Hobby Lobby case for clues about how the justices might come out in this next round.
In a Supreme Court filing, the Justice Department said the outcome strongly suggested that the court would rule in its favor when considering the nonprofits' challenge.
"The decision in Hobby Lobby rested on the premise that these accommodations 'achieve all of the Government's aims' underlying the preventive-health services coverage requirement 'while providing greater respect for religious liberty,'" the Justice Department wrote, quoting from Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion. The legal filing was in opposition to an emergency plea from Wheaton College in Wheaton, Illinois, to avoid having to fill out Form 700. Wheaton is one of only a few nonprofits not to have won temporary relief in its court fight.
Rienzi, who also represents Wheaton, wrote in reply that the government is wrong to assume that the Hobby Lobby decision "blessed the accommodation." He noted that Alito specifically said the court was not deciding whether the administration's workaround for nonprofits adequately addressed their concerns.
On Thursday, the court, with three justices dissenting, allowed Wheaton to avoid using the form while its case remains on appeal. Instead, the college can send written notice of its objections directly to the Health and Human Services Department rather than the insurer or the third-party administrator. At the same time, the government can take steps to ensure that women covered by Wheaton's health plan can get emergency contraception the college won't pay for.
Several legal experts said that perhaps a simple revision to the government document at the center of the dispute could resolve matters.
"I think the question will come down to does the government really need them to tell the insurance companies or can you reword the form," said Marc Stern, a religious liberty specialist and general counsel for the American Jewish Committee. The faith-affiliated charities "might win a redrafting of the form. I don't think they can win an argument that says we can do absolutely nothing," Stern said.
___
Zoll reported from New York.

President Obama's pity party

Say this for President Obama: He’s got an uncanny ability to block out distractions and keep his eye on the ball.
Facing a horrific expansion of terrorism in the Mideast, a meltdown of public support at home and major rebukes by the Supreme Court, the president remains fixated on No. 1.

President Obama is right about one thing. His presidency and the country are at a crossroads. The problem is that his response — woe is me — means things almost certainly will get worse before they get better.

“I’m finding lately I just want to say what’s on my mind,” he told a Minneapolis audience Friday, and then ticked off a series of complaints about — surprise — Republicans.
“They don’t do anything, except block me and call me names,” he said. “If they were more interested in growing the economy for you and the issues that you are talking about instead of trying to mess with me, we would be doing a lot better.”
He wasn’t finished: “The critics, the cynics in Washington, they’ve written me off more times than I can count. But cynicism doesn’t invent the Internet. Cynicism doesn’t give women the right to vote.”
There you have it: the presidential mind in Year 6. Don’t cry for Argentina — cry for me!

Nevada sheriff says Cliven Bundy must be held accountable for standoff

A Nevada sheriff has said that rancher Cliven Bundy must bear responsibility for actions that led to a standoff between federal agents and militia members earlier this year, but added that the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) must reconsider some of its methods used prior to the confrontation.
Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie told the Las Vegas Review-Journal editorial board Thursday that he had warned Bundy prior to the April standoff that any protests over the BLM's attempt to round up more than 500 of the rancher's cattle must be peaceful. 
The BLM says that Bundy owes over $1 million in fees and penalties for trespassing on federal property without a permit over 20 years. Bundy, whose ancestors settled in the area in the late 1800s, refuses to acknowledge federal authority on public lands.
A federal judge in Las Vegas first ordered Bundy in 1998 to remove "trespass cattle" from land the bureau declared a refuge for the endangered desert tortoise. Bureau officials obtained court orders last year allowing the roundup.
Milita members descended upon the ranch after a video showing one of Bundy's sons being stunned by a Taser was circulated widely. Gillespie said that Bundy crossed the line by allowing his supporters onto his property to aim guns at law enforcement. 
"If you step over that line, there are consequences to those actions," Gillespie said. "And I believe they stepped over that line. No doubt about it. They need to be held accountable for it."
Gillespie blamed the BLM for escalating the conflict and ignoring his advice to delay the roundup after he had a confrontational meeting with Bundy's children a few weeks before it began.
"I came back from that saying, `This is not the time to do this,' " the sheriff told the Review-Journal. "They said, `We do this all the time. We know what we're doing. We hear what you're saying, but we're moving forward."'
Gillespie also claimed that the BLM lied to him by saying that they had a place to move Bundy's cattle after the roundup. The sheriff said he later discovered that was not the case.
The bureau backed down during the showdown with Bundy and his armed supporters, citing safety concerns, and released some 380 Bundy cattle collected during a weeklong operation from a vast arid range half the size of the state of Delaware.
A statement made to the Associated Press by the BLM Saturday said the agency continues to pursue the matter "aggressively through the legal system."
BLM spokeswoman Celia Boddington also criticized Gillespie for claiming that the agency mishandled the operation and claimed that the bureau acted in "full coordination" with the sheriff's office. 
 "It is unfortunate that the sheriff is now attempting to rewrite the details of what occurred, including his claims that the BLM did not share accurate information," she said. "The sheriff encouraged the operation and promised to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with us as we enforced two recent federal court orders."
"Sadly, he backed out of his commitment shortly before the operation - and after months of joint planning - leaving the BLM and the National Park Service to handle the crowd control that the sheriff previously committed to handling," she added.

The Statue of Dependence

Calif. town becomes flashpoint for national immigration debate

America Lost?

The Southern California town of Murrieta that gained national prominence when a crowd of protesters blocked buses carrying illegal immigrants being flown in from overwhelmed Texas facilities has become a flashpoint in what has become an intense national debate over immigration.
Earlier this week, approximately 200 protesters blocked buses carrying 140 illegal immigrants sent from a Texas to a US Border Patrol station, where they were to be processed before being moved to await deportation or asylum.
Days later, residents packed into a fiery town hall meeting, expressing their objections to the government sending any more illegal immigrants to Murrieta.
Rumors had swirled among anti-immigration activists near a U.S. Border Patrol station in Southern California that the agency would try again to bus in some of the immigrants who have flooded across the U.S.-Mexico border.
Instead, by late Friday afternoon, they got dueling anti- and pro-immigration rallies.
The crowd of 200 outside the station in Murrieta waved signs and sometimes shouted at each other. One banner read: "Proud LEGAL American. It doesn't work any other way." Another countered: "Against illegal immigration? Great! Go back to Europe!"
Law enforcement officers separated the two sides, leaving enough space for a bus to drive into the station.
Because of security concerns, federal authorities have said, they will not publicize immigrant transfers among border patrol facilities.
"This is a way of making our voices heard," said Steve Prime, a resident of nearby Lake Elsinore. "The government's main job is to secure our borders and protect us -- and they're doing neither."
Immigration supporters said the immigrants need to be treated as humans and that migrating to survive is not a crime.
"We're celebrating the 4th of July and what a melting pot America is," said Raquel Alvarado, a high school history teacher and Murrieta resident who chalked up the fear of migrants in the city of roughly 106,000 to discrimination.
"They don't want to have their kids share the same classroom," she said.
"What we're saying is right now [illegal] immigration needs to stop," Patrice Lynes, a retired nurse from neighboring Temecula who has organized the protests, told The Wall Street Journal.
"This is not just a Murrieta situation. This is a national situation," she said.
In recent months, thousands of children and families have fled violence, murders and extortion from criminal gangs in Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras. Since October, more than 52,000 unaccompanied children have been detained.
The crunch on the border in Texas' Rio Grande Valley prompted U.S. authorities to fly immigrant families to other Texas cities and to Southern California for processing.
Burke Hinman, who has lived in the city for over 22 years, told The Wall Street Journal he wants to protect his community from being a "dumping ground" for migrants. As vehicles drove past the station, and Mr. Hinman raised his fist or shouted "U.S.A."
Protester Melinda Ward says Murrieta's processing station isn't equipped to handle such a large group of people, and worries that costs of housing and medical care will eat away at tax revenue.
"It all comes down to the tax dollars. We're paying for it," she said. "The government has dropped it on us and now we have to pay for it."
The crunch on the border in Texas' Rio Grande Valley prompted U.S. authorities to fly immigrant families to other Texas cities and to Southern California for processing.
The Border Patrol is coping with excess capacity across the Southwest, and cities' responses to the arriving immigrants have ranged from welcoming to indifferent.
In the border town of El Centro, California, a flight arrived Wednesday without protest.
In Nogales, Arizona, the mayor has said he welcomes the hundreds of children who are being dropped off daily at a large Border Patrol warehouse. Residents have donated clothing and other items for them.
In New Mexico, however, residents have been less enthusiastic.
At a town hall meeting this week, residents in Artesia spoke out against a detention center that recently started housing immigrants. They said they were afraid the immigrants would take jobs and resources from U.S. citizens.
Click for more from The Wall Street Journal

Biz executives pay fines for Florida vet facing eviction over flower pot flag

In an act of patriotism this Fourth of July, a pair of business executives has paid the fines for a Florida veteran who faced foreclosure for displaying a small American flag in a flower pot on his front stoop.
The two senior executives for Los Angeles-based Lear Capital had read the story of 73-year-old Larry Murphree, of Jacksonville, whose homeowners association at Tides Condominium at Sweetwater began hitting him with fines of $100 a day last year for violating his homeowners association’s flag display rules, and have offered to pay the bill which has climbed into the thousands.
“When we read his story  it offended our sensibilities,” Scott Carter, CEO of Lear Capital said to FoxNews.com. “The thought of him losing his home, we felt it was wrong. We wanted to help.”
Along with Lear Capital founder Kevin DeMerritt, the executives paid the $8,000 plus another $2,500 for tax adjustments.
“They [homeowner’s association were using the strongarm of money to get him to get rid of the flag,” Carter said. “They were skimming the money from his [paid] dues to pay the fines which created a lien on his house.”
“What was a small contribution from a company was a significant gesture in his eyes,” Carter added.
Instead of paying the fines for violating the association’s rules, Murphree let them pile up -- and kept his flag on display owing thousands.
FULL COVERAGE: PROUD AMERICANS
“The flag is worth fighting for,” Murphree, who served six years as an Air Force air traffic controller during the Vietnam War, said to FoxNews.com in June.
“If they want to foreclose, bring it on. I’m getting calls from all over the county to stand up. That’s what I'm going to do.”
The flag battle between Muphree and the association started back in 2011 and landed in court a year later where the two sides reached a settlement. Murphree had agreed to display his flag in compliance with association rules. But two weeks later, the board changed the rules, saying flags could only be displayed and that flower pots were only for flowers.
Murphree ignored the new rules and, in 2013, he started getting fined. He took the board to court again, this time to federal court where he claimed he had a right to fly his flag under the 2005 Freedom to Display the American Flag Act. A judge dismissed the case last March on technical grounds.
The board claimed Murphree owed $8,000 and had attached a foreclosure lien for nonpayment. 
An attorney for the condo board, Michelle Haines told FoxNews.com last month under Florida law the homeowner's association can fine a condo owner $100 a day, but the maximum amount is $1,000. She said the board is foreclosing on Murphree for being delinquent on his monthly assessment.

Ellis Island Immigrants to America

Jack E. Kemp
This Independence Day, my thoughts return to a tourist visit I made over decades ago to Ellis Island, the place where new immigrants were examined and processed roughly twenty million immigrants from the late Nineteenth to the early Twentieth Century in New York Harbor.

The most startling thing seen on that visit was the peeling paint of the main building, a problem not based on years of  age but on more recent neglect of the plumbing system. The old pipes had broken and flooded the building before anyone could realize what happened. The Ellis Island museum was then asking American citizens for - and they did receive - voluntary funds to fix the pipes and other structures as well as repaint the water damaged walls.

Ellis Island is, of course, a National Park Museum and if you go to the website http://www.nps.gov/elis/historyculture/people.htm ; you can read about inspectors, doctors, nurses who did a quick check of potential immigrant's paperwork to enter the U.S. and their health condition. Some were quarantined on the Island and would later enter into the United States. Others were sent back to their home country, failing to gain entry to the U.S. because of their poor health for such conditions as tuberculosis. The left keeps screaming about "white privilege" but if you contrast Ellis Island to the Central American illegal immigrants now flooding over the U.S. Southern Border, it is these Central Americans who are being allowed entry and the ability to move around the U.S. in a privileged state, with neither legal paperwork (as was required on Ellis Island) nor being required to pass any health inspection requirement of not having communicable diseases. The Central Americans should now be given the same "privileges" as the European and British Isle immigrants who came to Ellis Island around a century ago.

In the tour, our guide told us a funny story of an Eastern European Jew who was flustered by his meeting with stern looking uniformed immigration inspector. When asked his name, he said in Yiddish, "Shoen Fargessen" which means "(I) already forgot." The immigration inspector, wrote down what he heard - "Sean Ferguson" - and that was the new immigrant's legal name in his new country!

The large Ellis Island complex of inspection stations and employee housing and quarantine hospital facilities was not placed on Governor's Island, which was an actual nearby New York Harbor military base and Civil War prison in the Nineteenth and - in the Twentieth Century, it was a Coast Guard base. There was ample housing space on Governor's Island, but in those days the government felt they should keep immigrants, some of them quite ill, far away from the military base and its housing.

So if someone tells you that you are "old fashioned" to want the sanitary and legal safeguards of the Nineteenth Century, ask them if they think disease conditions, such as those that cause tuberculosis, are operating in an "enlightened, modern" way today or whether they operate very much like they did in earlier times - and would operate in that "outdated" fashion when the children carrying those diseases are given "temporary" asylum and placed in public schools and walk in the shopping malls where their own children congregate. Although some people will make an angry face and walk away, others will listen. Over a decade ago, there was a news story in New York City about a school bus company working for some fancy private schools had hired the lowest cost immigrant drivers, some of whom had tuberculosis. And the children who rode those buses had to be tested for the disease because apparently the disease did not have any regard for the family wealth or political convictions (be it liberal or conservative) of the children involved.

There is a similar immigration center on Angel Island in San Francisco Bay, now a museum, a place ofter referred to informally as "The Ellis Island of the West Coast." The immigrants arriving there between 1910 and 1940 were largely from Asia (mostly China). And they  were processed in the same manner as those on Ellis Island in a center with its own hospital. You can read about it at http://aiisf.org/

So on this Independence Day, it is worth taking a moment to consider what it took, in the last steps of their journey, for many of our ancestors to be officially allowed to enter the United States. Last week Lower Manhattan in New York City was full of tourists standing in line in Battery Park to get on the tourist boat going to both the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island, all to retrace the steps of perhaps their own ancestors who first saw the Lady in the Harbor and then had to pass her agents' inspections on Ellis Island before being allowed into the United States. No society can care for the health and well being of its citizens - and their children - by relying solely on the sentiments of Emma Lazarus' poetry written on a plaque at the Statue of Liberty's base.Would Lazarus write the same poem if new immigrants with tuberculosis were walking around her neighborhood coughing on Emma and her family?

Uncle Sam Cartoon

Tahmooressi's mother makes Fourth of July appeal to US ambassador to Mexico

On the eve of Independence Day, the mother of a Marine jailed in Mexico for three months appealed to America's top diplomat south of the border, asking for help winning the freedom of her 25-year-old son, Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi.
Jill Tahmooressi, of Weston, Fla., sent a letter June 30  to E. Anthony Wayne, the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico, requesting his help in getting a Mexican federal judge to give an expedited review to her son's case, after his representation had been botched by two previous attorneys who failed to submit any evidence for the court to review.

"If any consideration can be made to expedite the reviews before the federal judge so that he will be closer to probable freedom, those actions would be much appreciated," Jill Tahmooressi wrote Wayne.
Her son has been held in Mexico since March 31, when he was arrested after accidentally crossing into Mexico with three legally-purchased guns in his pickup truck. Fox News has highlighted how poor signage, as well as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Tahmooressi got from serving two tours in Afghanistan, could have contributed to his mistake.

Tahmooressi hopes to have her son's case fast-tracked, but according to attorney Fernando Benitez, the Mexican judicial system will have to run its course, regardless of efforts made by the Marine's supporters.

But given a recent incident along the U.S.-Arizona border where a Mexican military helicopter allegedly fired upon U.S. Border Patrol agent mistaking them for drug smugglers, mistakes and apologies take on a different meaning.
Tahmooiressi was in San Diego receiving treatment for PTSD when he drove into Mexico. His apologies and explanation for the wrong turn into Mexico fell on deaf ears, resulting in his imprisonment.

FoxNews.com attempted to contact Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto. A spokesman said he had received the media request and would provide a statement, but has not.
In her letter to Wayne, the worried mother appealed to sentiment of the Fourth of July.

"This Independence Day will be a bitter one for Andrew, his family and supporters as his freedom is bound by his felony arrest," Tahmooressi wrote.  "Freedom he valiantly fought for others to have, willing to die to combat the evil of oppression and violence, Andrew is experiencing captivity for the first time, in a foreign country as a result of one wrong turn."

Iran opposition compares its struggle to the American Revolution

The leader of the Iranian opposition likens its goal to overthrow the regime in Tehran to the war for American independence from Britain, the struggle to abolish slavery in the U.S. and the birth of the civil rights movement in the 1960's.
"I am confident that the Iranian resistance, which seeks the proven values of advanced societies, will reach its goal of a free, prosperous, democratic, just and non-nuclear Iran," declared Maryam Rajavi, the head of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, in an exclusive Fox News interview.
"The experience is out there, including in the history of the United States, such as George Washington and the people of America who decided to stand up to colonialism to gain independence, such as Abraham Lincoln and the price he paid and the war he waged to abolish slavery and the price the people of America paid during the time of Dr. Martin Luther King for civil rights and the struggle of the people of America for the freedom of women," she says.
"These are all historical experiences and I am, therefore, confident. My experience and that of the Iranian people tell us that when a people, a nation, decides to fight and pay the price for the rights it deserves, such as democracy, freedom and equality, when it decides to fight for these and pay the price, for values which shine in history of all human societies and in the progress of human society, it will certainly achieve it."
Rajavi, based outside of Paris, is the leader of the largest Iranian resistance group that opposes the current Tehran regime. She is calling for regime change, free, democratic elections, and a non-nuclear Iran. The group held a massive hours-long rally last week, in which a variety of speakers, including many prominent former U.S. government officials, also called for a democratic Iran and tougher restrictions on Tehran in advance of the looming July 20 nuclear agreement deadline.
It was Rajavi's group that first exposed the extent of Tehran's clandestine nuclear program back in 2002.
"If it weren't for the revelation of the Iranian resistance, the mullahs would have gotten the bomb right now," says Rajavi. She also says Iran should not be given the right of uranium enrichment, which is expected to be part of the agreement, despite six United Nations Security Council resolutions specifically prohibiting that.
"I believe any possibility left at the hands of the mullahs paves the way for them to quickly obtain what they want (nuclear weapons) at a time they so choose."
The Iranian government has branded the Council as a" terrorist group," a "cult," and has claimed that its allegations regarding its nuclear program have been fabricated.
In the aftermath of the Council’s rally in Villepinte, France, the spokesman for the French Foreign Ministry was quoted by the Associated Press as criticizing the group for "its violent and non-democratic inspirations," ''cult nature" and "intense campaign of influence and disinformation."
Rajavi reportedly called the comments, "a gift to the mullahs." Former French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, who attended the rally, told the AP that he was “ashamed” by the government’s statement.
In her Fox News interview, Rajavi rejected the Iranian government's criticism of her group, calling it "ludicrous."
"My call to the Iranian people has always been not to surrender to the religious dictatorship," she declares.
"We have an expression in Farsi that says, 'a viper never gives birth to a dove.’ No moderate will emerge from the mullahs and the clerical dictatorship. The Iranian resistance has said this repeatedly over the past 25 years, and it has been proven correct every time."
Follow Eric Shawn on Twitter: @EricShawnonFox

Supreme Court ruling revives ObamaCare backlash

Any time ObamaCare is in the headlines -- especially when its various mandates are concerned -- it reminds opponents why they don't like the law. 
This week's Supreme Court decision limiting the law's requirement on employers to provide free contraceptive coverage was no different. 
"I think it's a reminder of how many things ObamaCare regulates it would never have occurred to you a federal law should regulate in the first place," said Avik Roy, of the Manhattan Institute. 
The 5-4 decision ruled that certain "closely held" for-profit businesses can opt out of the mandate by citing religious objections. 
Two years ago, the court upheld the law's so-called "individual mandate" -- the requirement on individuals to buy health insurance. But together with a prior decision reining in the law's Medicaid expansion, the decision in the case brought by arts-and-crafts chain Hobby Lobby and other businesses marked a blow for the law and a reminder for critics of its reach. (Hobby Lobby provides coverage for 16 of 20 forms of contraception, but objected to those it claims can work after conception.) 
Joe Antos, of the American Enterprise Institute, said it "touches on issues related to what is the power of the president versus the power of the Congress to decide how we run our lives." 
Kellyanne Conway, who polls on issues affecting women, noted the health care law has struggled to win public approval. 
"The majority of the Americans in everyone's polling rejects the Affordable Care Act as way too intrusive and invasive and also way too expensive for them," she said. 
Several polls have uncovered deep skepticism about the law. A Fox News poll from late June found a 56 percent majority disapprove of President Obama's handling of health care while only 41 percent approve. 
A poll from early June found 55 percent wish the law had never passed, compared with 38 who said the opposite. 
In the same poll, 44-29 percent said the country will be worse off under the law, while 24 percent say it'll make no difference. 
The court case once again raises the issue ahead of looming midterm elections. Democrats are using the ruling to highlight the impact on women, and defend the law's intent of providing contraceptive coverage to female employees. 
But Republicans are likely to highlight the rebuke to the law itself. 
"The election isn't for another few months," Antos said, "and I think there will be other issues that will come up that will remind people that this is not the law that they would have hoped for." 
Roy added that "this whole case was really about showing that ObamaCare's ability to regulate every aspect of the way the private sector and private economy works was not appropriate." 
In mid-week, a poll by Bankrate.com found 68 percent of Americans say ObamaCare will play a role in deciding how they vote this fall. Thirty-two percent said they're more likely to vote Republican, while 26 percent said they're more likely to vote Democrat. 
And 52 percent, according to the poll, would like to see the new Congress make changes in the law, while only 12 percent of Americans want to keep it exactly as it is.

The Real Meaning of the Fourth of July.

It's the Fourth of July weekend. We’re supposed to be celebrating Independence Day. 

But what makes this day special?

What gives the Fourth of July its significance is that our Declaration of Independence was adopted by the Continental Congress in 1776. 

It was in Philadelphia, and the signers of that document, composed by Thomas Jefferson, knew that this declaration of independence from the dictatorial rule of Great Britain might also be — literally — their death sentence.

They knew full well that the wrath and might of the British army would be sailing across the Atlantic to descend on the relatively defenseless colonies. They knew their scattered “states” didn’t have the numbers or arms or training to stand against the British, much less defeat them militarily. Yet they put their signatures, and their lives, their families, their destiny, on that parchment.

And so, against all odds, and even against reason, that Declaration told the world that “these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states.” 

The only importance of the 4th day of July, then, is that it marks the birth of the United States of America.

 The very words should send awe-filled shivers up your spine, as they do mine. 

Most of the people living in those colonies had simply had enough of British domination, of working and virtually existing at the pleasure of a king they didn’t know and who obviously considered them his indentured servants. 

They wanted to be free, to make their own decisions, to govern themselves and breathe the sweet air of liberty. 

The first celebration of American Independence took place four days later in Philadelphia, where the Continental Congress was still meeting. 

The ceremony began with a public reading of the Declaration of Independence. Then, from the tower of the State House, now called Independence Hall, the Liberty Bell rang out.

The coat of arms of the king of England was taken down. And there was a parade. And cannons boomed. The people, though aware of what lay ahead, cheered! A new nation sprang to life.

That’s what this day is meant to be about.

John Adams, himself a signer of the Declaration, thought that Americans should henceforth celebrate a “great anniversary festival.” In a letter to his wife Abigail he wrote, “It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forevermore.”

So it began. A more elaborate celebration was held there in 1788, after the new Constitution had been ratified. Then there was a much larger parade, speeches and a dinner. 

But between those two celebrations, in 1776 and 1788, there was much horrible fighting, rivers of bloodshed, the deaths and bankruptcies of many of the signers of the Declaration, families torn apart and businesses and farms destroyed. The freedoms declared by the Declaration — and ushered into fact by the Constitution — were secured at a terrible cost.

Soon, across the growing nation, at sunrise on July 4, salutes were fired and bells were rung. Flags were flown from buildings, from homes, and along the streets. Shop windows were decorated with red, white, and blue. Churches held special services.

What’s Independence Day like today? Do most people you know actually make time to purposely celebrate our independence in meaningful ways?

Even while we’re again locked in a deadly combat on foreign soil  — still involving hundreds of thousands of our finest young men and women?

What are they fighting for now? Is it anything like what motivated our Revolutionary Army? 

Is it “freedom from religion,” the necessity to take “under God” out of our pledge, or even to do away with it altogether? Is it the “right” to end the lives of unwanted babies, or the “right” for two men or two women to “marry”? 

Or is it still the impossible dream of a nation under God, with unalienable rights endowed equally to all — among these life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

Surely this weekend is a time for all of us who really cherish that original dream, the one for which so many have died, to individually and collectively re-declare our independence from tyranny, despotism, taxation without representation, and debts that no free society should ever bear. 

And allegiance to the blood-bought foundation of government of, by, and for the people . . . people who are determined to live free.


© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Obama Cartoon

'Wrong side of the Constitution'? Obama likely to delay deportations, say experts

Bailey: "Our problems with immigration is caused by the Mexican Government!"

One of President Obama’s first moves toward trying to “fix” the U.S. immigration system without Congress will almost certainly be to expand on his 2012 executive order postponing deportation for potentially millions of young illegal immigrants, say experts on both sides of the debate.
Obama will likely sidestep Congress on immigration reform by expanding on his so-called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals memorandum, which essentially allows young illegal immigrants to remain in the United States if they were brought into the country illegally by their parents and have not been convicted of a major crime, Federation for American Immigration Reform spokesman Ira Mehlman predicted.
“I expect him to continue to ignore U.S. immigration law,” Mehlman said. “This can all be traced back to the DACA program … under the guise of not splitting up families.”
Although many Republicans believe President Obama is overreaching on the issue by advancing his immigration agenda without the support of Congress, there is broad support among Latinos, labor groups and other Democrat constituencies for him to act unilaterally. 
The idea of extending delayed deportation to parents of young illegal immigrants also appears popular among Hispanic voters and will likely be recommended to the president by pro-immigration-reform groups with whom he has reportedly met in recent weeks.
A poll of registered Hispanic voters for the Center for American Progress Action Fund found strong support for renewing DACA as well as delaying deportation for the parents of young illegals protected under the program, people married to U.S. citizens and those living illegally in the United States for more than 10 years.
The respondents were “super excited” about such actions if they included the option of a work permit for illegals, said Gary Sugura of Latino Decisions, the opinion research group that conducted the poll. He also pointed out that Democratic candidates running in 2014 and beyond would benefit significantly from such changes.
The respondents were less supportive of so-called prosecutorial discretion, which essentially gives immigration officials say over which cases to pursue and prosecute.
As a sign of just how important the work permit issue is to pro-immigration advocates, particularly big business and organized labor, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and Janet Murguia, head of the National Council of La Raza, a Latino advocacy group, on Tuesday called on Obama to provide work permits to everyone who would have been eligible for citizenship under the bipartisan immigration bill passed last year by the Senate.
Obama has already taken the first step in directing Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Attorney General Eric Holder to shift resources from the U.S. interior to the Mexico border. And he has asked both for recommendations by the end of summer on the types of executive actions he could take.
“And I intend to adopt those recommendations without further delay,” Obama said in his Rose Garden remarks Monday.
In addition, the Center for American Progress, the liberal-leaning think tank influential in shaping Obama administration policy, released a 42-page study, which Marshall Fitz, the group’s director of immigration policy, calls “a roadmap for executive action on immigration.”
The study claims Obama has authority to use enforcement reforms and affirmative relief to implement his immigration agenda in spite of opposition in the House.
Reform involves prioritizing how and whether enforcement is conducted when someone comes into contact with the authorities. And the relief focuses on identifying illegal immigrants considered low priority for deportation, then creating a procedure for them to seek temporary protection from being removed from the country, according to the report.
Sugura and Center for American Progress officials acknowledge that Obama cannot stop all deportations, that any executive action is temporary and only Capitol Hill legislation can provide a permanent solution, which they say should include a path to legal status and eventual citizenship for the roughly 11.7 million illegal immigrants living in the country. 
Obama argues he has been compelled to act in large part because of the recent surge in unaccompanied Central American children showing up by the thousands at the U.S.-Mexico border and the GOP-controlled House’s unwillingness to vote on the issue until at least after the November elections.
"American cannot wait forever ... ," Obama said Monday. "That is why, today, I am beginning a new effort to fix as much of our immigration system as I can on my own, without Congress."
House Speaker John Boehner and other members of the House Republican Caucus argue the recent border problem is the result of executive actions that have enticed people to try to enter the U.S. illegally. And they plan to sue Obama over his use of such actions, serving notice that more moves by the president on immigration would only stiffen their opposition.
"If the president insists on enacting amnesty by executive order, he will undoubtedly face a lawsuit and will find himself, once again, on the wrong side of the Constitution and the law," said Texas GOP Rep. Lamar Smith.

U.S. Goalie Tim Howard Delivers World Cup Performance For Ages, Becomes National Hero

“I don’t want to be the hero,” U.S. goalkeeper Tim Howard told the London Times a decade ago when he was playing for Manchester United. “I don’t want to be the goat. Somewhere in the middle’s all right by me.”
But at the World Cup in Brazil over the past two weeks, the unassuming 35-year-old who would rather spend a quite night at home than go out partying, put himself so far over into the “hero” column. The middle may never be an option for him again.
After solid performances against Ghana and Portugal, Howard turned in arguably the finest work of his career in back-to-back matches against Germany—a 1-0 loss for the U.S.—and Tuesday’s 2-1 Round of 16 overtime loss to Belgium that sent the Yanks home.
Against Belgium, Howard kept the ball out of the net with slides, with dives and with leaps.
He just couldn't do it forever.
With the U.S. trying to reach the Cup quarterfinals for the first time since 2002, he saved 12 of Belgium's shots in regulation to keep the game scoreless. Some of them in truly spectacular fashion—with the tip of his foot or leaping to push the ball over the crossbar.
But Kevin De Bruyne finally got the ball past him a couple of minutes into overtime, and Romelu Lukaku did it again in the 105th minute to build a two-goal lead for the Red Devils, who hung on for a 2-1 win.
Howard finished with 16 saves, the most in a World Cup game since FIFA started keeping track in 2002. It was his finest performance in 13 years with the national team.
"I'm just trying to do all the things that have gotten me here and gotten us here," he said. "That's what I signed up to do — stick my face in front of balls. It's nothing startling."
Other people were a little more impressed.
"For my heart, please don't give me too many games like this," Belgium coach Marc Wilmots said. "He was in a state of grace."
U.S. captain Clint Dempsey was equally effusive.
"Tim was awesome for us," Demsey said. "As you would expect from him."
Howard yells a lot during games. More than most goalkeepers.
And his teammates love him for that.
"He's somebody that we rely on so much for his performances on the field but also his leadership and his presence," midfielder Michael Bradley said. "There's not enough good things to say about him as a player, as a man, as a leader."
Howard was born in North Brunswick, N.J., in 1979, and he suffers from Tourette’s—the neurological disorder that is characterized by physical and vocal tics.
“It’s never hindered me in any way,” he told the U.K. paper the Observer in 2004. “I kept quiet about it for 9 years, not telling my family as if I was ashamed But what’s the point in that?... I’ve never dropped a cross because of it. At least not yet.”
In high school, his first love was basketball, but at 6-foot-3 he didn’t have much of a chance of making it to the NBA. As a goalie, however, his height and agility proved a major asset.
“Basketball’s been good for me,” he told the Times. “The principles of defending are similar.”
After stretches with the New York/New Jersey MetroStars (as the Red Bulls were then known), Man U, and Aston Villa in the U.K., Howard has been the starter for Everton in the Premier League since the middle of the 2007-08 season.
He is signed with the team through 2018 and plans to play "as long as my body lets me," although he acknowledges, "That's obviously not a question that I can really answer now."
He also won't commit to continuing to play for the U.S. national team beyond Brazil.
"Those decisions will be made, obviously, when I'm less emotional and things settle down and I have a few important conversations with important people," Howard said.
Brad Guzan, who is Aston Villa's current goalkeeper, is Howard's No. 2 and, at 29, is positioned well for the 2018 World Cup—should Howard decide to retire from the national team, that is.
U.S. Soccer Federation President Sunil Gulati didn't sound as if Howard would be leaving anytime soon.
"I'm not sure Timmy is ready to not look towards Russia," he said. "He's one of the players that matters. And nobody goes into a tournament like this with our team and doesn't expect Timmy to play really well."
Howard was among the final American players to leave the locker room of the stadium in Salvador after the loss to Belgium, suddenly and unhappily facing a few weeks off before having to report to Everton for preseason training.
He carried a small silver-colored case, clearly not part of the gear he had when he arrived at Arena Fonte Nova. Despite the U.S. defeat, he was selected the Man of the Match and was given an award.

King Obama Cartoon