Tuesday, November 18, 2014

With already dismal approval ratings, this has been the most difficult month for President Barack Obama yet. After voters from coast to coast soundly rejected Obama-supporting Democrats on Election Day, video was leaked of left-wing economist Jonathan Gruber - the chief architect of Obamacare - admitting that the sweeping health care bill became law because Americans are "stupid."

As if that wasn't embarrassing enough, a source leaked to Fox News copies of Obama's unconstitutional 10-point plan to grant amnesty to 4.5 million illegal immigrants through executive order, which is supposed to be announced this week. After reading just what he has in mind, it's clear Gruber isn't the only one who thinks we're stupid.

In the plan, Obama is prepared use executive orders to stop the deportation of illegals through what's known as "deferred action." This plan would prevent illegal immigrants who came to America as children - along with their children born in America - from ever facing deportation. In addition, Obama is expected to end the Secure Communities program, which helps facilities information sharing between federal immigration agents and local police when trying to identify illegal immigrants.

Most Americans don't approve of Obama's immigration policies and his" the President-is-King"approach. They, particularly middle class voters, are deeply concern about the impact of his policies on jobs and stagnant wages.

Now, it appears that conservative Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives have a unique opportunity to stop Obama's amnesty agenda dead in it's tracks. Because Congress is going to need the passage of a short-term spending bill soon to fund government through the next fiscal year, an embolden Republican majority is ready use Congress' power of the purse to defund Obama's amnesty orders, including any renewal funding for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

This movement in the House is lead by conservative Rep. Matt Salmon (R-AZ), who now has 63-signatures on his letter which would block all funding for Obama's executive amnesty orders. The letter was forwarded to House Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-KY) and ranking member Nita Lowey (D-NY), which requests that such anti-funding language be included in "all appropriations legislation prohibiting the use of funds by the administration for the implementation of current or future executive actions that would create additional work permits and green cards outside the scope prescribed by Congress."

Salmon, who said this effort is gaining an astonishingly large amount of traction thanks to the 2014 election results, is confident House conservatives can be successful. As he explained in a recent interview, this defunding effort "will stop him dead in his tracks if our conference decides to put on the spending bill that the president has to have by the end of the year that no money in that spending bill can go for these purposes, for this executive amnesty. If he does that, he's in direct violation of the law."

Unfortunately, Obama doesn't seem to understand just how bad the elections were for his radical agenda. Instead of waiting for the new Congress to start and making his arguments, he is gearing up to impose his pro-amnesty agenda on the American people in ways that would shock our Founding Fathers. With only two years left in his term, he is ready to appease his left-wing base and politically tear the country apart, while forcing local communities to deal with the extreme costs and safety risks of illegal immigration.

It is time to urge the Republican leadership to understand just why 74 percent of Americans want Obama to work with Congress on immigration instead of going around them. Republicans must stop Obama's lawless amnesty agenda now.

Obama, Gruber were on the same page from the beginning

obamacare shell game
Although President Obama and other top Democrats are enthusiastically distancing themselves from the revealing remarks of Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber, the history of the healthcare law suggests that the Obama administration very well knew that millions of Americans would not be able to keep their healthcare plans once the law took effect.

Gruber, under a $400,000 contract with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), created economic models to explain how Obamacare would sustain itself financially, infamously observing that a degree of legerdemain would be both necessary and achievable, thanks to the “stupidity” of the American voter.

His model, of course, relied on Obamacare’s legal requirement that all Americans buy government-approved health insurance or pay a penalty — the so-called individual mandate, a cornerstone of the Affordable Care Act. He defended the mandate in a 2009 analysis (H/T: Pj Tattler):
I have developed the Gruber microsimulation model to estimate how health reforms would affect insurance markets; this is a very similar model to the one the Congressional Budget Office used to score the PPACA, and my model derives very similar to CBO. I can use this model to consider what would happen if Congress removed the mandate while keeping all other aspects of the law intact. I find that:
▪ Total insurance coverage would rise by fewer than 10 million persons rather than the 32 million persons estimated by CBO. The number of uninsured would be reduced by less than 20 percent rather than by about two-thirds.
▪ Employer-sponsored insurance, which is projected to erode by about 5 million persons under reform, would instead erode by over 20 million persons.
“Erode,” of course, means “lose your health coverage as it currently exists” — a direct contradiction to the president’s false boast that anyone who liked their healthcare plan would be able, under Obamacare, to keep it. Period.

“[N]ot only did he [Obama] seemingly forget that he has already admitted to a provision of the health care law having not been ‘extensively debated’ and ‘fully transparent,'” PJ Tattler’s David Steinberg wrote Monday, “it was Jonathan Gruber himself who originally advised the administration that Obamacare would cause millions of Americans to lose their plans.”

Democrats have been grappling with buyer’s remorse, where Gruber is concerned, ever since the first of several incendiary Gruber statements ahead of the Obamacare rollout went viral. Not only do Gruber’s pre-rollout remarks reveal Obamacare’s sales job to have been a willful obfuscation of the truth, they also belie — at best — a profound lack of ethical judgment.

“[I]n January 2010, Gruber was penning op-ed pieces in the Washington Post and New York Times advocating for Obamacare, without having disclosed to his editors that he received nearly $400,000 from the [Obama] administration to produce an ‘objective analysis,’ that would be used in promoting the legislation,” Watchdog noted Sunday.

Islamic State Threatens Slaughter on Western Streets
Pamela Geller / Atlas Shrugs

If and when American blood is running down American streets, like Colleen Hufford’s, rest assured that Obama will vigorously protect Islamic jihad doctrine.

That’s what he does. Every time there is an Islamic attack, Obama exploits the horror to proselytize for Islam. When savages attack, Obama dawahs.

There were British, French, etc. Muslims in today’s mass beheading video. Previously moderate Muslims ….. until they became devout.

Islamic State Threatens Slaughter on Western Streets,”by Oliver Lane, 17 Nov 2014
Islamic State murderer and propagandist ‘Jihadi John’ has issued a graphic warning of coming slaughter on the streets of the West in the new YouTube video that features the...

/ Jihad Watch
Least of all.” So apparently it is far more likely that the beheading of Abdul-Rahman Kassig represented the Buddhist faith, or the Baptist faith, or the Jain faith, or the Methodist faith, than that it represented the Muslim faith. This is despite the fact that the man who actually beheaded Kassig stood over his severed head and explained what he had done solely and wholly in Islamic terms.

Obama’s use of the acronym “ISIL” cannot obscure the fact that the first word of the beheading group’s name is “Islamic.” This sentence in the Bloomberg article unwittingly points up the cognitive dissonance: “‘ISIL’s actions represent no faith, least of all the Muslim faith which Abdul-Rahman adopted as his own,’ the president said, using another name for Islamic State.”

Will Obama ever explain how it came to be that a group that calls itself “the Islamic State” and says that everything it does is based on the Qur’an and Sunnah actually has nothing to do with Islam? No, he never will, and the mainstream media will never call upon him to do so.

“Obama Confirms Kassig Beheaded By Islamic State,” by Greg Giroux, Bloomberg, November 16, 2014 (thanks to Darcy):
The president offers condolences to the family of a U.S. aid worker beheaded by Islamic State and condemns the “act of pure evil” by the terrorists.
President Barack Obama has confirmed the execution of U.S. aid worker Peter Kassig by Islamic State terrorists.
Kassig, who had converted to Islam and changed his name to Abdul-Rahman Kassig, “was taken from us in an act of pure evil by a terrorist group that the world rightly associates with inhumanity,” Obama said in a statement.
Islamic State had posted a video online showing the severed head of Kassig, who’s the sixth foreign captive executed by the militants since they took control of parts of Iraq and Syria earlier this year. It was similar to videos that showed the executions of U.S. journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff.
“ISIL’s actions represent no faith, least of all the Muslim faith which Abdul-Rahman adopted as his own,” the president said, using another name for Islamic State.
“Today we grieve together, yet we also recall that the indomitable spirit of goodness and perseverance that burned so brightly in Abdul-Rahman Kassig, and which binds humanity together, ultimately is the light that will prevail over the darkness of ISIL,” Obama said….
Do President Obama's adamant denials that he misled the American public on various important aspects of Obamacare stand up to scrutiny? No, and it's not even a close call.

In the past several weeks, there's been a major uproar in the alternative media -- the liberal media doing their usual best to cover up stories damaging to this administration and the cause of progressivism -- over recordings that have surfaced of MIT economist Jonathan Gruber. Gruber essentially admitted that the administration duped the American people, whom he called "stupid," on certain issues and the Congressional Budget Office as to the cost of the legislation.

For a while, the administration and its media lapdogs just ignored the recordings and their damning implications, but that changed Sunday, when "Meet the Press" host Chuck Todd challenged Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell on the matter and Obama broke his silence to issue an insulting denial of Gruber's claims.

Todd told Burwell: "He's playing into every fear that many conservatives had about this bill -- that it's not transparent, that there are things in it that people don't know. This certainly can't help a credibility gap."

Burwell adamantly insisted that she "fundamentally" disagrees with Gruber's "comments about the bill and about the American people." She couldn't deny that Gruber made his comments, of course, because they were recorded for all to see.

But Obama, during a news conference at the G-20 summit in Australia, did the next best thing, from the administration's standpoint. He told Fox News' Ed Henry, "I just heard about this."