UNREAL… Take a Look At the People Who Think It Is Perfectly OK for Barack Obama to Repeal the Bill of Rights
CLUELESS IN AMERICA …
There is ignorant, and then there is damn ignorant. Those folks in the video below would be the latter. The individuals interviewed actually agreed that it would be okay for Barack Obama to repeal the Bill of Rights as a response to dealing with ISIS and the radical terror threat. Are you serious? Some thought because Republicans and Democrats agreed to do this, it was a good thing as they finally agreed on something. Just how uninformed and stupid have some become in America? I guess the next question that should have been asked was if any of the respondents knew what the Bill of Rights was, or if they could name any of them?
Beachgoers in San Diego blithely agreed that President Barack Obama should be given the power to completely repeal the Bill of Rights in the name of fighting ISIS in another disturbing insight into the unthinking malaise of many Americans.
Told by media analyst and author Mark Dice that Obama had announced he was to repeal the Bill of Rights in order to “help make sure that we can keep everybody safe here in the homeland,” almost all the respondents agreed that eliminating constitutional rights was perfectly reasonable.
Asked, “Is that the right decision – should we get behind Obama to make sure the ISIS threat doesn’t rear its head here in America?,” one man responded, “Yeah I would agree with that,” before adding, “Only time will tell whether it’s the right or wrong decision,” agreeing with Dice that Obama’s political advisors “know what’s best”.
Posted January 27, 2015 by Scared Monkeys
2nd Amendment, 5th Amendment, Barack Obama, Bill of Rights, Bizarre, First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speach, Freedom of the Press, Imperial President, ISIS, Second Amendment, US Constitution, WTF, You Tube - VIDEO | 2 comments
Jonathan Turley Says Barack Obama is the President That Richard Nixon Always Wanted To Be … Constitutional Tipping Point
THE IMPERIAL PRESIDENT …
Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley went on the Hannity Show and said the unthinkable, or should we say the unmentionable when it comes to Barack Obama, he compared him to Richard Nixon. Jonathan Turley, who mostly supports the policies of Obama, stated that we are at a tipping point constitutionally. Turley went on to call the Obama presidency an “imperial presidency, an uber presidency” and one “where the president can act unilaterally.” Folks, this is coming from a liberal. Then came the money line … “Barack Obama is really the president Richard Nixon always wanted to be.”
People don’t seem to understand that the separation of powers is not about the power of these branches, it’s there to protect individual liberty, it’s there to protect us from the concentration of power. That’s what is occurring here. You know, I’ve said it before, Barack Obama is really the president Richard Nixon always wanted to be. You know, he’s been allowed to act unilaterally in a way that we’ve fought for decades.
SEAN HANNITY: We do have co-equal branches of government, separation of powers. You teach this regularly. You agree with the president politically. For you to say we are at a tipping point constitutionally — now, I agree with you. What does that mean considering our constitution is our rule of law and they are ignoring it?
JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, unfortunately our system is changing, and it’s changing without a debate. Or even a discussion about what we’re going to do in the future when we have a three branch system, a tripartite system but one branch is so dominant. What’s emerging is an imperial presidency, an uber presidency as I’ve called it, where the president can act unilaterally. This is only the latest example of that.
What’s troubling is that we have a system that has been stable precisely because these are limited and shared powers. This president has indicated that he’s just not willing to comply with some of those aspects. He told Congress he would go it alone and in our system you’re not allowed to go it alone.
SEAN HANNITY: If I broke the law, why do I think they would be the first people to hand kickoff me, perp walk me and send me off to jail. This is just my belief system. Paranoia or truth?
JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, I think that the biggest problem we have is that the system itself, if we have a dominant branch, simply begins to shut down in terms of the safeguards. People don’t seem to understand that the separation of powers is not about the power of these branches, it’s there to protect individual liberty, it’s there to protect us from the concentration of power. That’s what is occurring here. You know, I’ve said it before, Barack Obama is really the president Richard Nixon always wanted to be. You know, he’s been allowed to act unilaterally in a way that we’ve fought for decades.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz Wins 2016 Presidential Straw Poll at a Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans, Louisiana
If Ted Cruz is Constitutionally allowed to run for President … He will be a real threat to Democrats and establishment Republicans …
Texas Senator Ted Cruz won the 2016 Presidential straw poll at a Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans, Louisiana. Cruz finished first with 30.33%, Dr. Ben Carson second with 29.38% and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul finished third with 10.43%. They were followed by former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and Texas Governor Rick Perry rounded out the top five, at 5.06% and 4.90%, respectively. Moderate RINO’s Florida’s former Governor Jeb Bush came in 7th with 4.42% and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie came in dead last with 1.11%. During his speech Cruz said that Republicans would take back the Senate, they will retire Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and remove Harry Reid as Majority Leader.
Cruz finished in first place in the annual conference’s presidential straw poll at 30.33%. Dr. Ben Carson, a Fox News commentator and conservative activist, finished in second with 29.38% while Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, was third with 10.43%.
Fox News host and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Texas Governor Rick Perry rounded out the top five, at 5.06% and 4.90%, respectively.
Neither Carson nor Paul spoke at the conference, but their support was a show of confidence by the traditionally more conservative crowd. The annual meeting of activists features of who’s who of big-name Republican politicians. It is an important appearance for potential presidential candidates to make.
More moderate Republicans also skipped the conference, but many fared much worse in the straw poll. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie came in dead last with 1.11% while Florida’s former Gov. Jeb Bush and current Sen. Marco Rubio and came in seventh and eighth at 4.42% and 3.32 %, respectively.
Nobody Cares what any politicians in Washington says. Power in politics, sovereignty in America is with We the People!
MUST WATCH VIDEO
Ted Cruz, an ardent defender of The Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment said during his speech, “In Texas, we define gun control real simple. That’s hittin’ what you aim at.” Cruz Also went on to say, “that following the tragic shooting in Newtown, CT the president didn’t do what she should have done. What he should have done is he should have stood up and said we are going to go after violent criminals and we are going to come down on violent criminals like a ton of bricks. instead he used it as an excuse to come after the rights of law abiding citizens.”
Cruz consistently pointed out that Democrats and establishment gray-beard Republicans both says that things can’t get done. Yet time after time in examples of drone strikes against Americans, Second Amendment gun control, foreign affairs and provisions in the International monetary fund. All won by conservatives.
Too often the establishment GOP says it can’t be done because they are afraid to take a position. In order for there to be change, not only must Democrats go, so must the establishment Republicans who have long forgot what they were sent to Washington, DC to do.
THE CONSERVATIVE BATTLE AGAINST OBAMACARE: HOW DO YOU WIN ELECTIONS … YOU DON’T WIN IT BY STANDING FOR NOTHING …
Cruz went on to blast the establishment same old-same old way of doing things within the GOP of trying to win elections. There is a cluster of political consultants who keep running losing campaigns, making the same mistakes and keep coming back to donors to make the same failed mistakes that did not win the previous times. He stressed that the way you win elections is you stand for principle and you empower the people.
Rasmussen Poll Shows Many Americans Have No Concept of Free Speech … 55% Favor Government Oversight of Political Ads & Candidates’ Comments
ARE YOU INSANE … DID ANYONE TAKING THIS POLL UNDERSTAND WHAT FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS? DO YOU WANT TYRANNY?
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.
An alarming 55% if likely voters in a recent Rasmussen poll stated, “they believe the government should be allowed to review political ads and candidates’ campaign comments for their accuracy.” It gets better, they also wanted to punish those that it decides are making false statements about other candidates. OK FOLKS … HAVE YOU COMPLETELY LOST YOUR MINDS!!! You do realize that “Freedom of Speech” is intended to prevent a tyrannical government from trampling the speech, opinions and comments of ab individuals right? I could care less what party was in power, I would never want a government to control campaign speech. It is up to the voter to inform yourself as to whether some one is fabricating the truth. If that is too difficult, don’t vote.
So 55% of clueless voters would want whatever political party was in power to review and determine whether a political ad was truthful or not? Who could see anything going wrong with that because of course political parties are not partisan of course. The American Spectator has an idea, just create more government bureaucracy and a new agency, call it the Ministry of Political Truth, to oversee this brave new government power. Oh wait, you don’t want the government agency to do it, how about the media?
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments this week in a case aimed at overturning an Ohio law that makes it a crime to make false statements in a political campaign. But most voters favor government policing of the truthfulness of campaign ads and statements.
Fifty-five percent (55%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe the government should be allowed to review political ads and candidates’ campaign comments for their accuracy and punish those that it decides are making false statements about other candidates. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 31% oppose such government oversight. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Presently we have a president in Barack Obama who thumbs his nose at the US Constitution, you would actually give him the power to control political speech for campaign speech, REALLY? WAKE UP AMERICA, many brave souls fought and died to bring freedoms and independence to the colonies and form a United States. Act like it!
Victory for Nevada Cattle Rancher Cliven Bundy … BLM Blinks in Confrontation Over the Removal of Rancher’s Cattle From Federal Land, Government Claimed They were Grazing Illegally
The Bureau of land Management is pulling out, victory for Nevada cattle rancher Cliven Bundy.
The Feds and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have blinked in their Gestapo tactics of governmental overreach in the confrontation with Nevada cattle rancher Clive Bundy. No matter what side of the argument you fall on with regards to this situation, one thing is for certain, this was a complete over-reaction on the part of the Obama administration in creating this type of hostile, overreach and volatile situation. After a week-long standoff between the Feds and the cattle rancher and his supporters, the BLM has done a 180 most likely because there has been too much media reporting of the Fed’s tyrannical nad police state actions. BLM Director Neil Kornze stated, “based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public.” More like, the memo came from on high, the Obama presidency cannot withstand a WACO.
However, the Bureau of Land Management vowed Saturday that it would continue its legal fight to remove illegal cattle from a rural Nevada range. This is code for the Fed’s in Washington DC will pull every stunt, behind the scenes, to make this man’s life miserable and put him out of business as he dared make them look bad in public.
ABC News: Nevada Cattle Rancher Wins ‘Range War’ With Feds.
A Nevada cattle rancher appears to have won his week-long battle with the federal government over a controversial cattle roundup that had led to the arrest of several protesters.
Cliven Bundy went head to head with the Bureau of Land Management over the removal of hundreds of his cattle from federal land, where the government said they were grazing illegally.
Bundy claims his herd of roughly 900 cattle have grazed on the land along the riverbed near Bunkerville, 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas, since 1870 and threatened a “range war” against the BLM on the Bundy Ranch website after one of his sons was arrested while protesting the removal of the cattle.
“I have no contract with the United States government,” Bundy said. “I was paying grazing fees for management and that’s what BLM was supposed to be, land managers and they were managing my ranch out of business, so I refused to pay.”
The federal government had countered that Bundy “owes the American people in excess of $1 million ” in unpaid grazing fees and “refuses to abide by the law of land, despite many opportunities over the last 20 years to do so.”
However, today the BLM said it would not enforce a court order to remove the cattle and was pulling out of the area.
“Based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public,” BLM Director Neil Kornze said.
“We ask that all parties in the area remain peaceful and law-abiding as the Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service work to end the operation in an orderly manner,” he said.
Take a good look America at to how the Federal government is treating legal Americans. Attack dogs and tasering Americans, UNREAL. Remember when this used to be the United States of America, not a tyrannical police state? The Obama government does not do this to illegal aliens who come into America illegally, but they had no problem treating legal Americans this way.
Ranch Riot!! Bundy Ranch Protesters Tasered by Federal Agents
UPDATE I: BLM return cattle back to Bundy’s. Iin the end, this was all for nothing.
A deal has been reached between Bundy family leaders and the Bureau of Land Management, but not without some very tense moments.
Armed Bundy family leaders met with BLM officers Saturday afternoon in Mesquite to discuss the fate of the Bundy’s cattle that the feds removed from BLM land, over the past week.
Under the deal the cattle were released from a holding area near Mesquite, back onto the federal lands they were removed from.
However, according to the BLM, the deal does not absolve Bundy from any of the fees he owes for having the animals there in the first place.
Rancher Cliven Bundy is not describing it as a deal, but as the American citizens taking back the cattle.
“There is no deal here. The citizens of America and Clark County went and took their cattle. There was no negotiations. They took these cattle. They are in possession of these cattle and I expect them to come home soon,” Bundy said.
From Per Eugene Volokh at the Washinton Post …
So holds today’s Peruta v. County of San Diego (9th Cir. Feb. 13, 2014) (2-1 vote).
The court concludes that California’s broad limits on both open and concealed carry of loaded guns — with no “shall-issue” licensing regime that assures law-abiding adults of a right to get licenses, but only a “good cause” regime under which no license need be given — “impermissibly infringe on the Second Amendment right to bear arms in lawful self-defense.”
This comes as quite a welcome surprise as the 9th Circuit Court is hardly considered conservative leaning in its rulings.
As the NRO opines, in other words the decision states that, one has the right to carry a gun. The state can elect to recognize this by permitting either “shall-issue” concealed-carry or “shall-issue” open carry, but it cannot restrict or prohibit both.
The FULL opinion can be read HERE.
U.S. District Judge Edmond E. Chang has struck down Chicago’s law prohibiting the sale of guns within the city limits and declared in unconstitutional. In his ruling Judge Change said, “the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment must also include the right to acquire a firearm.”
Chicago law prohibiting the sale of guns within the third-most populous U.S. city was struck down as unconstitutional by a federal judge.
“Chicago’s ordinance goes too far in outright banning legal buyers and legal dealers from engaging in lawful acquisitions and lawful sales of firearms,” U.S. District Judge Edmond E. Chang wrote in a decision today.
The judge said he was delaying the effect of his ruling to allow the city time to seek a stay during an appeal or, if it elects to forgo an appeal, to consider and enact sales restrictions “short of a complete ban.”
Chicago Sun Times: Federal judge rules city ban on handgun sales unconstitutional.
City Hall attorneys had argued that the gun sale ban makes it harder for criminals to get their hands on weapons.
Chang agreed the city had a “fundamental duty” to protect its citizens and acknowledged that “the stark reality facing the City each year is thousands of shooting victims and hundreds of murders committed with a gun.”
But he wrote that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense “must also include the right to acquire a firearm.”
“If all cities and municipalities can prohibit gun sales and transfers within their own borders, then all gun sales and transfers may be banned across a wide swath of the country if this principle is carried forward to its natural conclusion,” he added.
Ted Nugent Says, ‘Trayvon Got Justice,’ as Anti-American Libs Try to Stop Free Speech … Calls Petitioners “Idiots” and “Subhuman Numbnuts” & Calls Out Barack Obama and Eric Holder
Whether you love him or hate him, Ted Nugent, the Motor City Madman rocker is allowed his “free speech” as afforded by the United States Constitution.
During an interview with Maine radio station WGAN, Nugent defended his recent comments regarding Trayvon Martin, blacks and crime and those that think that he should not play rock and roll in Connecticut were “idiots”. Those that have an issue with the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution have started a petition to prevent Nugent from performing at Toad’s Place in New Haven, CT. Really folks, this is how you direct your energies? Nugent called a group of petitioners who want his August gig at the nightclub Toad’s Place in New Haven canceled “subhuman numbnuts.” I guess it is safe to say that none of the “numbnuts” will be attending his concert. These same “idiots” are the ones who are claiming that “Justice for Trayvon” and wanting to get Attorney General Eric Holder and the DOJ to file a Civil Rights case against George Zimmerman. Oh the irony, as at the same time the collective “idiots” are trying to take away Ted Nugent’s freedom of speech. What a shock that there is a liberal double standard.
Ted Nugent stated that “Trayvon Martin got justice”. Personally, I think this is a poor choice of words because of how individuals define justice. What Trayvon Martin got was his day in court. Initially that is what Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Barack Obama, Martin’s parents and the liberal MSM wanted when they made this story a race issue and forced Florida to try the death of Trayvon after prosecutors in Sanford. FL had decided not to. But that is not what they really wanted, they wanted their pound of flesh from George Zimmerman. They were only after a guilty verdict no matter what the evidence showed. They could not accept a jury’s “not guilty” verdict in the case and now are seeking other avenues of going after Zimmerman. As if this case has not been exploited enough.
Ted Nugent expresses his views as only the ‘Motor City Madman’ can …
When asked about the “idiots” in Connecticut who think he “shouldn’t play rock and roll,” Nugent told the conservative host: “You and I stand on the line of reason” and must not be silenced.
“People who hate Ted Nugent hate freedom,” he said, and promised to continue to speak what he sees as the truth.
Nugent also had some choice things to say about liberals, racial activists and Trayvon Martin during the interview.
Defending his previous comments about blacks and crime, Nugent insisted the statistics bear him out.
Of the Trayvon Martin case, Nugent said, “Trayvon got justice.” He went on to say that Martin was a “gangsta wannabe” who had a “bloodthirst,” as evidenced by the fact that he was supposedly eager to “get into fights with people.” He said Martin showed racism in calling George Zimmerman a “cracka.”
Ted Nugent went on to say …
Nugent said Zimmerman got only a “sliver of justice.” Although Zimmerman was found not guilty, powerful people from President Barack Obama to Attorney General Eric Holder have targeted him, as have “Holder’s best friends,” the New Black Panthers. Nugent implied the president and Holder are trying to subvert the legitimate verdict in the case.
“It pains me deeply” to have to acknowledge that the president and some others in the administration are “just bad people,” Nugent said. He said he had hoped to be able to speak better of the country’s top officials.
Rasmussen Poll: 26% Of Obama’s Supporters View Tea Party As Nation’s Top Terror Threat … Liberalism Really is a Disease
The AMA does not need to made obesity a disease … they need to make Liberalism one.
According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 26% of those who approve of President Barack Obama’s job performance think that the Tea Party is a greater threat to America than radical Muslim. They don’t call these folks “moonbats” for nothing. As for those who actually have a functioning brain and who disapprove of Obama’s performance, 75% consider radical Muslims to be the bigger terrorist threat and just 1% are influenced by the MSM and name the Tea Party. It is rather remarkable that those who are for the US Constitution, limited government and balanced budgets is some how considered worse than those who would kill Americans. So sorry if the Tea Party believes in freedom and liberty. However, this is what happens when a Presidents makes more of an effort to have a war on its own citizens who express their First Amendment rights of Free Speech and a lapdog liberal MSM acts as a presidents propaganda arm to smear his political enemies rather than report the truth. UNREAL.
Must watch VIDEO … Yea, because these folks look and act like terrorists, unreal! (Tennessee Tea Party 4/15/09)
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 51% of Likely U.S. Voters consider radical Muslims to be the bigger threat to the United States today. Thirteen percent (13%) view the Tea Party that way, and another 13% consider other political and religious extremists to be the larger danger. Six percent (6%) point to local militia groups. Two percent (2%) see the Occupy Wall Street movement as the bigger terrorist threat. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
However, among those who approve of the president’s job performance, just 29% see radical Muslims as the bigger threat. Twenty-six percent (26%) say it’s the Tea Party that concerns them most. Among those who Strongly Approve of the president, more fear the Tea Party than radical Muslims.
This is actually quite something. The far LEFT is truly deranged. Sorry, but I strongly oppose Barack Obama, his agenda and pretty much 99.9% of what he believes in, but I do not think the radical LEFT is a greater threat to America than Al-Qaeda. However, after this poll … maybe the radical, far LEFT is more dangerous.
The Daily Caller reminds us that the Tea Party has never committed an act of terror. Too bad the Leftist Occupy movement can’t say the same.
Like we did not think this already …
From the Drudge Report comes the following regarding the NSA, SECRET NSA POWERS WIDER THAN THOUGHT.
From the Guardian comes the news that the NSA powers are much more wider and intrusive that previously thought. Why is this not a shock? The Guardian is reporting that the top secret rules that allow NSA to use US data without a warrant. Huh, weren’t we told they always needed a warrant? It would appear Obama lied to us once again. Is it any wonder why many were so upset that Snowden blew the whistle on the NSA … Just how much of what they do is really known and is it Constitutional?
Top secret documents submitted to the court that oversees surveillance by US intelligence agencies show the judges have signed off on broad orders which allow the NSA to make use of information “inadvertently” collected from domestic US communications without a warrant.
The Guardian is publishing in full two documents submitted to the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (known as the Fisa court), signed by Attorney General Eric Holder and stamped 29 July 2009. They detail the procedures the NSA is required to follow to target “non-US persons” under its foreign intelligence powers and what the agency does to minimize data collected on US citizens and residents in the course of that surveillance.
The documents show that even under authorities governing the collection of foreign intelligence from foreign targets, US communications can still be collected, retained and used.
More from Mediaite: The Guardian: Info ‘Inadvertently Acquired’ By NSA ‘Can Be Retained, If It Is Useful’.
Much More at Drudge:
Spy agency can snoop without warrant…
… Keep data collected ‘inadvertently’
Lawyers eye for evidence in murder, divorce cases…
CLAIM: Top judges, generals, politicians wiretapped…
Judge’s one-paragraph order governs mass collection…
REPORT: SKYPE helped gov’t access customer data…
McConnell: Attack on free speech…
Govt to map your ‘every move’…