Back in June of 2012, President Barack Hussein Obama, through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), announced that his administration would be circumventing the Congress, and thereby the U.S. Constitution, by unilaterally implementing elements of the DREAM Act, a legislative proposal dealing with minor aliens which repeatedly failed to become law.  When the memorandum was issued, Obama was campaigning for re-election in November. 

In case we forgot how it works around here, Congress makes laws pursuant to the Constitution, and more specifically, Congress has the sole power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.”  The President oversees the execution of laws made by Congress.

And is it not enough, with the responsibility for carrying laws into effect, for enforcing them, that the executive needs to encroach upon the authority and duties of legislators?  Is it not enough that he has the power to veto legislation presented him by the Congress during his term?  Is it not enough that the President commands the greatest military power on earth when Congress calls it?  Is it not enough that he has, in concurrence with the Senate, the power to make treaties, and to appoint Supreme Court judges, ambassadors, and other officers?  Is it not enough that the President has the power to pardon offenses against the United States? Is all of this power not enough, that he ought to take on the mantle of lawmaker as well?

Apparently not, as Obama’s DHS, calling their actions (or inactions) an “exercise of prosecutorial discretion,” peeled off an estimated 800,000 certain illegal aliens for exemption from current immigration law.  They halted the deportations of these certain illegals, or granted deference to them when encountered, and ordered the establishment of a “clear and efficient process” for determining their eligibility for this newfound legal status and authorize them to work in this country.

“Certain” illegals were defined in the DHS memo, almost verbatim from DREAM Act language, thus: Under age 16 when they came here, and had been here at least five years, and were under age 30, and were in school or were high school grads or equivalent or had served in the military, and weren’t criminals (forgetting of course that they had to have committed fraud to enter the latter institutions).

Incidentally, discretion is a matter of independent judgment, based on extenuating, individual, isolated circumstances.  Obama and the DHS may be making an independent judgment with respect to existing immigration law, but to then ignore the law where it applies to certain hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants is not discretion, it is lawlessness.

Anyway, in August of 2012, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), acting at the discretion and as a subsidiary of Obama’s DHS, began processing applications from certain illegal immigrants to verify their new legality under the newly established “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” (DACA) extralegal program.

After seven plus months running, the latest monthly report on the DACA process is out, courtesy of the USCIS portal, revealed by this recent story from the Washington Times.

99.5%!  That’s the approval ratio of applications processed thru March 31 2013.  Total applications processed: 269,693; Total approvals: 268,361; Total denials: 1,377.

24K gold is barely this pure.

Our government found a mere 0.5% potentiality for fraud or ill intent within a population of 270,000 foreigners here illegally?  Where can you find that level of integrity among any group of humans?

But we are consoled in the above mentioned Times piece that DHS expects the approval ratio to drop, to be fair, and “Indeed, the approval rate already has dropped from 99.8 percent just a month ago.”  Really… that’s what they say.  Furthermore, we are assured in the article by an immigration integrity consultant (retired head of USCIS fraud branch) that advanced analytical predictive technology is being employed to stop any potential fraud, since interviewing all these certain illegals in person is not an option.

This is a “clear and efficient process”, you see, implemented by executive algorithms of multicultural perfection.  And this may serve as a model for future grants of amnesty.

Continuing with the DACA report, it also tallies the applicants’ countries of origin.  The majority are Hispanic countries (Mexican, Central & South American), and within our hemisphere, including Caribbean.

Interestingly, approvals totaling 10,319 originate from the other side of the planet, like South Korea (5,476), the Philippines (2,370), India (1,750), and Pakistan (723).  It makes one wonder how these blocs might be inclined to vote here in the U.S., or if any got the memo that their counterparts were getting a free ride.

The report cleverly lists “Top Countries of Origin”, so as to justify leaving out the nationality of 1,918 approved applicants.  268,361 Cumulative Total Approved, minus 266,443 Approved-to-Date by Country (add them up yourself), equals 1,918 of undisclosed origin.  At least this information is not readily available on the USCIS site.  Wouldn’t you like to know where the 1,918 are from?  Canada, maybe?

Suddenly, inexplicably, thoughts come to mind of certain Chechen immigrants radicalized as Islamic terrorist bombers; 26 yr. old green card holder Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and 19 yr. old “U.S. citizen” Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, naturalized September 11, 2012.

These two barbarians murdered and maimed innocent Americans… and both were here legally, sanctioned by the same system that clearly and efficiently takes all comers, as a matter of political course.  No doubt these monsters would have been welcomed among the aforementioned 99.5%, had they been in that pool.

Who among the pure 270,000 DACA recipients will plant the next bomb, or rape the next child, or beat and rob the next unsuspecting American?

It is beyond reprehensible that the Executive Branch of our government would assume for itself unconstitutional powers for the sake of political expediency and favor, if that is the whole of their motive. And it is unforgivable that they would then execute those usurped powers in a manner now proven to be too perfectly irresponsible to claim incompetence.

I came across the American patriot band Madison Rising (hat tip: jonolan), and refreshed, decided to share them with you here, and encourage you to likewise share. Even as you might be disinclined to the particular harmonic energies, surely there are some, let’s say “less ripened”, among you who would find their appreciation for it.

Rock American.

Madison Rising brings great rock music back to the forefront of popular culture. With songs ranging from the guitar heavy opening track “Right To Bear,” to the hauntingly epic sounds of “Honk If You Want Peace,” to the beautiful violins of “Hallowed Ground,” it is clear that this band is on a mission to not only make great music, but also send a message that American culture is alive and well.

Enjoy… and Please Share:

I’ll get to that, but first, some background.

Mar. 13, 2013: ACLU-NCLF files federal lawsuit (Lund, et al. v. Rowan County) seeking a judgment that the Rowan County Board of Commissioners practice of opening their meetings with Christian prayer violates the US and NC Constitutions, and therefore seeking to ban the practice.

Mar. 19, 2013: Rowan County Board of Commissioners votes unanimously to fight the lawsuit after a public meeting, which of course, opened with a prayer. Nearby Forsyth Co., NC lost a similar court battle that lasted 5 years and cost $280,000, culminating in a decision which prompted nearly two dozen NC communities to stop prayer in government meetings.

Apr. 01, 2013: General Assembly of North Carolina passes House Joint Resolution (H.J.R. 494), proclaiming (introducing) “The Rowan County, NC, Defense of Religion Act of 2013”. The NC General Assembly in this resolution, both generally and with respect to religion, is asserting state sovereignty, “declaring that the State of North Carolina does not recognize the authority of federal judicial opinions arising from the exertion of powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States”.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

All persons have a natural and inalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences, and no human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience.

Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools, libraries, and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

…and then, from charlatans and propagandists at the New York Daily News we get this:

Headline: Let us pray! North Carolina lawmakers propose bill that challenges U.S. Constitution
The ‘Defense of Religion Act’ would allow prayer in public institutions, including schools. Opponents say it would overturn a long line of U.S. Supreme Court rulings.

“Let us Pray!”??? Does this not ring of condescension and ridicule? “Oh look, the stupid little rednecks want to pray.” Demeaning, snobbish, elitist, disgusting.

“Challenges U.S. Constitution”??? This is a flat out LIE. The resolution honors the Constitution, and challenges the authority of the federal government where it dishonors the Constitution.

And don’t you just love it how people, when it suits them, hold up Supreme Court precedent as beyond reproach. The fact is that the Court has gotten it wrong before in their rulings, and will again, and nobody is above criticism or censure in our system.

Washington’s bound copy of the Acts of the First Congress

The Daily News article is adorned with an image of George Washington’s beautifully bound copy of the “Acts of the First Congress” encased in glass. Beneath the image reads the caption: “The U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights proclaims a separation between church and state. The new bill would specifically allow the County Commission of Rowan County, about an hour north of Charlotte, to continue opening its meetings with Christian prayers.”

“The U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights” implies theses are divided entities, which is misleading, and to what end I don’t know. But what follows is another blatant falsehood, the assertion that the Constitution “proclaims a separation between church and state”. Read the 1st Amendment above, and find that proclamation.

The United States Congress may not “establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience.” was James Madison’s interpretation of this clause when discussed in the House of Representatives Aug. 15, 1789. In other words, the 1st Amendment is about protection from federal religious coercion.

Speaking of the U.S. House, it has opened its proceedings with prayer since the beginning, and still does to this day. To suddenly allege this practice is and always was unconstitutional is absolute drivel.

The story concludes with the following quotes:

From the ACLU: (the bill’s sponsors) “fundamentally misunderstand constitutional law and the principle of the separation of powers that dates back to the founding of this country.”

From a “legal scholar”: “They basically want to ensure that a long line of U.S. Supreme Court rulings have no validity either here in Rowan County or here in the entire state. They’re basing it on — to put it mildly — discredited legal theory that the states can deny the power of the federal government within their jurisdiction.”

No Constitutional provision forbids prayer in public institutions, and any federal laws or rulings to that effect are invalid and unconstitutional inventions. States are among the separate powers that date back to founding of this country, so far back in fact that they predate and even created the powers of the federal government. And where states deny specific power to a federal government adrift of its Constitutional bounds, it’s not “legal theory”, it’s duty.

Finally, and since the NY Daily News saw fit to display with prominence President Washington’s book because hey, it looks cool and official and says “President” on it and people would never doubt a story with that picture, I leave with this:

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

Tell us again, you who seek to bastardize our principled founding and rip out the heart of our Christian heritage, how it is that your mythical separation of church and state ought to be considered as a valid “interpretation” of Constitutional protections of liberty; tell us again how there is no place amidst government for religion and morality; tell us again that hayseed states have no right to defend themselves against an overbearing, increasingly tyrannical and centralized federal government; tell us, so we at least know that dishonor has a name.

~tdv

Related:

• James Madison Rebukes Nullification Deniers ~Publius Huldah
• Once we were States. Once we would say “NO” ~subconch
• The Lie of “Separation of Church and State” & the U.S. Supreme Court’s Usurpations of Power ~Publius Huldah

Image credit

Via protein wisdom:

If you take anti-anxiety drugs your pistol permit can be revoked. Just as I predicted would happen.

[...]

And just so we’re clear on the implications here: if a state can revoke your pistol permit because you are on anxiety medication — which, incidentally, is a treatment, which would seem to suggest that the anxiety has been controlled — it can revoke your permit for any number of “medical” or “mental health” issues, all of which they’ll be privy to as a function of ObamaCare.

The linked story is about a legal gun owner in NY who received a notice from the state ordering him to surrender his weapons to the local police (who knew about him, and were readied to pay him a visit had he not shown up at the station), and that his gun permit was being suspended. Why? He had a short-term health issue requiring meds, a private issue that his doctor didn’t disclose to any authority. No criminal record. No violent acts. No problem with the law. Just a medical record… CRIMINAL!

Are you okay with the state rifling through your private medical records, without a warrant, in search of a reason to deprive you of your property, or for that matter, any reason whatever? Do you know what country you live in? Have you ever heard of the Constitution?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Back in January, I too had a bad feeling about all that “mental health” talk, purporting in tandem with or in lieu of stricter gun control, to be a preferred primary objective of governmental introspection for many post-Newtown reactionary hysterics.

Guns… mental health… Equally outside the scope of the federal govt. They’ve NO business in our holsters, OR in our heads. #tcot #tlot—
  (@subconch) January 10, 2013

Again, careful this "mental health" talk. Who gets to DEFINE "sane enough" to own a firearm, or have rights ftm? HHS? #backdoor #guncontrol—
  (@subconch) January 15, 2013

… and from Mental Health, and the Consequence of the National Crazy Registry:

Then, amongst the barrage of gun-hysteria-linked-”mental health”-hysteria, Obama puts out his 23 Executive Actions to Address Gun Violence, 01.16.13 (which is translated here):

[...]

All of this is clearly aimed at growing the list (see NICS below) of those prohibited from buying firearms (the gun-forbidden list), by way of growing the “these people are crazy” list. A neat little trick.

Break down the walls of privacy, encourage doctors to snoop and report, assure them they’ll get paid for the process, start the “dialogue”(code for propaganda), and then ultimately define crazy down. You know, lower the threshold for the honor of placement on the list.

But it’s deeper still. The bad guys don’t submit to background checks. They get their guns. Everybody knows this. So why else compile a national registry of “crazy” people? So that they can be controlled, limited, manipulated, blackmailed, and otherwise deprived of liberty, of course. If you don’t think such a database has the potential to be abused as a tool of oppression, both by government and citizen, then you are a naive child.

Consider as well, the consequence to those who are truly in need of mental health services who, upon learning of this growing national mental defective registry, might not seek help at all, so as to stay off the list. Think of that for a moment…

This.Is.Tyranny

…but hey, the architects have for themselves the appropriate appellation (D), so it must be okay.

~tdv

Related:

• A Translation of the List of President Obama’s 23 Executive Actions to Address Gun Violence
• Who’s REALLY “Ginning Up Fear on the Part of Gun Owners”? Hint: It’s not other gun owners.
• Outed Gun Owners are Victims of Lawless Mobs.
• Crazy is Always Armed
• Reactional Saviors

So it’s

Astronomical increases in the activities of man that were supposed to wreak havoc on the climate of Earth on an apocalyptic scale… did nothing to Earth’s climate.

Couple the new data with the previously unearthed “Climategate” emails, which exposed climate scientists’ manipulation of data and the peer review process, suppression of counter evidence, etc., and it might just spell s.c.a.m.

While we meander our way to the new “consensus” that man-made global warming hysteria is and was a fraud, I wonder if there exists some smart person out there with the capacity to quantify, with some exactitude, the extent to which our economy and the taxpayer has been plundered in the intemperate name of climate “science”.

Furthermore, I wonder if there might be some politician among us with a scrap of honor remaining, who would stand and demand the immediate repeal of every statute, act, regulation, ruling, and treaty foisted upon America that was made possible by this grand hoax.

I wonder if the mass media will retract every story and apologize for their frenzied manipulation of the people under this head. I wonder if the indoctrinal authority called “education” will reprint textbooks, or for that matter make any attempt whatever at reparations for their propagation of this myth.

Since “justice is the end of government”, as Madison said, I wonder if anyone will ever be held responsible for perpetrating such a massive swindle.

I wonder if there will be any ramifications at all that accompany the wholesale realization that climate change panic was always just that… panic, and a pushed panic, at that. Or will we quietly be led to the next manufactured crisis, for the sake of quietly being led?

~tdv

The planet will shake us off like a bad case of fleas.

Besides, it’s not like my wisdom and experience and knowledge and intelligence is expected to go missing when you are eighteen-and-a-day, you know. I mean, you are not going into exile… (are you?)

So rather I’ll use the opportunity of this milestone to say one thing:

Thank You.

For enriching my life beyond measure, for making me a better man, for having the strength to continue so that we might know you, for being you, and for being my daughter, thank you. I am proud to be your Dad.

Happy Eighteenth, Kid! I love you.

Live, and be ready to live.

P.S.  Boys are still bad.

But the variance betwixt Phil and us, his latter metamorphosis being never the ordinance of nature, is the great mystery of his great expansion.  Even that he had the choice to arise, to expand and be known, or to remain in the safe confines of his beloved host surroundings, was entirely unknown.

Put aside the oddity of his path, questions remain as to the force that drove his choice to take that path.  Some speculate that a yearning to mimic his environment led Phil to his transformation.

Many as well note the strangeness that Phil’s evolution happened in reverse of our ordinary, having the call before the growth (if that really is the normal flow of things).

Then there was the scale of Phil’s appearance on the scene, grand that it was.  His outing was imposing, even off-putting to all, except for his oddly accepting host.  Such greatness was Phil’s growth that his immediate banishment became the instant consensus response to him.

A plan was hatched, and after nudging his host that Phil’s expulsion was in her best interest, she reluctantly agreed. On the eve of his exile, she threw for him a most modest party.

It was made so on the morn, the riddance of Phil, was made so.

In his stead lies a permanent mark, and with it, as a matter of style, Phil left behind his party hat.

Tagged: phil, prosetry ]]> http://subconch.com/2013/03/30/the-riddance-of-phil/feed/ 2 subconch Phil4 http://subconch.com/2013/03/15/obamacare-20000-pages-72-more-complex-than-all-u-s-law-compiled-in-first-124-years/ http://subconch.com/2013/03/15/obamacare-20000-pages-72-more-complex-than-all-u-s-law-compiled-in-first-124-years/#comments Fri, 15 Mar 2013 04:39:20 +0000 subconch http://subconch.com/?p=2493 Continue reading »

Here’s the photo that’s been circulating of the (thus far) printed 20,000 pages of ObamaCare regulations, edited to show this behemoth’s scale in reference to the 1913 “Compiled Statutes of the United States“, which totals only 5,700 pages.

One “law”, ObamaCare, so far is 72% more complex than ALL federal law amassed in our country during its first 124 years! Just think about that for a moment. Ask yourself, “How could ObamaCare possibly work?” Then, considering the massive scope of unconstitutional, unchecked, arbitrary powers in the hands of unknown elitist bureaucrats to control our lives, ask yourself “How could America possibly call herself free?”

This.Is.Tyranny

ObamaCare’s 20,000 pages (and growing) compared to 5,700 pages of ALL U.S. law compiled in our first 124 years.

The internal effects of a mutable policy are still more calamitous. It poisons the blessings of liberty itself. It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood: if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes, that no man who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known and less fixed.

~James Madison, Federalist No. 62, par. 16

~
I tweeted this comparison and image edit here on 03.13.
Original image credit below:

#ObamaCare regulations – 828 pages in one day. Overall, there are nearly 20,000 pages – with many more to come. http://t.co/G5szuiSpzJ—
Sen. McConnell Press (@McConnellPress) March 11, 2013

Tagged: 124 years of US law 5700 pages, comparison, complexity, obamacare 20000 pages, tyranny ]]>

We are only allowed to grope in the dark in reference to all that inspires our incomprehensible machine.

~Voltaire, 1764

…but no sooner than we stop our fumbling about, ever the happy better appears with a torch.

~tdv

Such is the case with federal gun control; that in truth it is unconstitutional at its core and thereby unlawful; that no federal power to govern our right to bear arms was ever intended by the founders or authorized by us; and that while some in government stand against the current onslaught against our natural right to self-defense, they also cede other infringements as reasonable, so as to seem reasonable.

But for others still, fundamental truth is entirely reasonable, and arguing for it is as paramount as the truth itself. Our friend of liberty and the Constitution has shared with us just such an argument in a recent speech, with logic and a fortitude that is sorely lacking in our government “representatives”. I hope you will watch and share:
Publius Huldah Shows Federal Gun Control is Unlawful
(on her blog: “Understanding the Constitution”)

~~~

Update: 03.07.2013 ~add video

Found this related video after posting the above and wanted to add it here for the sake of posterity, and as well to show the application of truth in the context of a more official setting.

This is the Feb. 27, 2013 Tennessee Senate Judiciary Committee hearing regarding SB0250, a Bill that expands existing TN law to address unconstitutional federal action in the State with respect to firearms and ammunition, seeking to declare those actions a nullity, or to make them void, invalid, and illegal in the State of TN.

The focus of the hearing includes both the question of the Constitutionality of federal gun laws, and the fundamental question as to who is the final arbiter of the Constitutionality of ANY Federal Act.

At the 25:20 mark begins testimony by Mike Maharrey of the Tenth Amendment Center.
At the 31:00 mark begins statement by Constitutional scholar Publius Huldah, followed by a Q&A session with her that runs from 37:30 to 1:03:00.

It is all wonderfully informative, though unfortunately rushed, and I hope you’ll watch.