Hat tip to Allahpundit that who says:

A constitution is as good as the political culture that surrounds it. Ginsburg would have been better off reminding Egyptian TV of that.

Please! This is one of the main reasons that you need to vote against Obama when it is time. I don’t want him to have the chance to appoint another justice as liberal as this one! Perhaps she should recuse herself from any rulings based on Constitutional grounds since she isn’t so fond of our Constitution. Or maybe she should move to South Africa!

Others: Jeff Goldstein

Skip ahead on the video to 9:28.

(Politico) The number of officers killed in the line of duty jumped 13 percent in 2011 compared with the year before — and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder condemned the increase as “a devastating and unacceptable trend” that he blamed on illegal firearms.

The number of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty rose to 173 this year, from 153 in 2010, the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund announced Wednesday. This year’s figure is 23 percent higher than 122 killed in the line of duty in 2009.

So, the guns themselves are illegal? Er, no

Holder said “too many guns have fallen into the hands of those who are not legally permitted to possess them,” in explaining the increase.

So, what does Holder propose to do?

“This is a devastating and unacceptable trend. Each of these deaths is a tragic reminder of the threats that law enforcement officers face each day,” Holder in a statement. “I want to assure the family members and loved ones who have mourned the loss of these heroes that we are responding to this year’s increased violence with renewed vigilance and will do everything within our power — and use every tool at our disposal — to keep our police officers safe.”

You know what else is a devastating and unacceptable trend? Hundreds of Mexicans being killed by guns allowed to walk into Mexico illegally, thanks to operations under the Department of Justice. Also, an AG that lies about it.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

(The Politico) Barack Obama offered a spirited defense of his presidency in an interview that aired Sunday on “60 Minutes,” framing the 2012 election as a “contrast in visions.”

Stressing that the views that got him elected in 2008 still drive him, even as many supporters voice dissatisfaction, Obama said he is still determined to change Washington and to make ordinary Americans’ lives better.

“I didn’t overpromise. And I didn’t underestimate how tough this was going to be,” Obama said in the sitdown with CBS News’s Steve Kroft that was conducted on two days this week, in Washington and also in Osawatomie, Kan., where the president on Tuesday delivered a speech calling this a “make-or-break moment” for working and middle class Americans.

Really? He promised to completely change Washington. He promised to “fundamentally transform America.” His administration promised that the Stimulus would work. He promised to “restore America’s standing in the world (which Democrats had already torn down)”. He promised to have all troops out of Iraq within 16 months. That he would close Guantanamo Bay detention facility. He promised quite a lot of things, and most Obama promises have expiration dates.

The vision he offered in 2008 was something he “always believed … was a long-term project,” Obama told Kroft. “Reversing a culture here in Washington, dominated by special interests, it was going to take more than a year, it was going to take more than two years. It was going to take more than one term.”

The vision was “hope and change”. The policy was reversing a culture that he was part of as a sitting US Senator, and made even worse when he took office. The Stimulus and health care bills, among others, were all about special interests. Special interests show up at the White House on a constant basis. He panders to special interests all the time. What he can’t do is lead.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Like nearly every conservative in America today I am unimpressed by the current crop of GOP nominees for president and feel they all have major flaws — especially the two frontrunners Newt and Romney, both of whom have major deficits as far as staunch conservatives are concerned. But at this point I’ve come to realize that I don’t think I care which one of them is nominated. In fact, I think the White House is not where we should be focusing our intensity in 2012.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I am not saying we shouldn’t vote for whichever GOP nominee wins the game show plaudits. We should absolutely pick one of them and then we all, conservatives and Republicans alike, should vote for him (or her).

So, what am I saying? I am saying that the White House is less important than people are saying it is. Instead, we need a two-point focus for 2012 that doesn’t include the White House. We don’t need 999 points. Just two. 1). Gaining control of Congress and 2). turning Obama out. The identity and purity of our presidential nominee is the last thing we should be worried about at this point. It is a bit late for that anyway.

Let me assure you that I don’t have a favorite in this GOP race. And I have three real dislikes: Romney, Huntsman, and Ron Paul. This article is no stealth shilling for any particular candidate. I really do have big problems with all of them. But, again, I don’t think it matters which of them we pick if we focus on the two points I note above.

First of all, any of the GOP candidates (yes even the cranky uncle of the GOP, Ron Paul) would be better than Obama. But that goes without saying because I am a conservative that votes Republican. No surprise there, really.

But there are reasons besides blind partisanship that any of the GOP nominees is better than Obama. In fact, it can really be boiled down to but one issue that makes getting rid of Obama imperative: the courts. He has been thoroughly destructive to this country with his judicial picks.

Aside from the courts, of course, Obama has been a very destructive president in many ways — another reason to be rid of him. He’s presided over the continued destruction of our business sector and our economy, we all understand. But there’s more.

Obama has already turned his power to regulate into a tool of Big Labor and United Nations-styled socialism. He’s unleashed his extremist appointees and given them the freedom to push every anti-business, anti-worker, anti-American idea they can possibly get through.

There’s more.

Obama has also created all sorts of extra-constitutional czars and “advisory” committees, the President has issued a slew of dangerous executive orders, and he’s made all sorts of horrible moves in foreign policy. But all this can be quickly negated by a new president — quickly in terms relative to how Washington works, anyway. An active new president could make headway to reverse these Obamanations almost immediately. None of these changes, as bad as they are, have the misfortune of being irrevocably permanent.

But there is great danger that another four years of Obama will create, one that cannot be easily reversed. Obama has been steadily placing radical judges on benches throughout this land. His nominees tend to be abortion activists (not just abortion supporters, but out-and-out activists), Big Labor dupes, anti-Second Amendment activists, and the like. Many are so radical that even Democrats haven’t been able to convince themselves to vote them in.

Let’s just take his latest nominee for the DC Court of Appeals for example. Caitlin Halligan, a close associate of the disgraced Eliot Spitzer in New York, is an extremist anti-Second Amendment activist. If she gets on the bench she will take every opportunity she can to damage the Constitution.

A past example is his attempt to put a radical racemongering ACLU member on the bench in California. Obama’s attempt to place Edward Chen on the bench succeeded, unfortunately.

Let us not forget that the Supreme Court of the United States is already in a delicate balance tipped only barely in favor of conservatives. It is easy to see that with the ages of the current oldest members of the court, the next presidential term will see perhaps as many as three chances to replace retiring justices.

As conservatives we must put our desire for a pure conservative president in second place to the pursuit for the next nominees for the US Supreme Court. The fact is, if Obama gets a chance to put more judges on the bench, especially on the SCOTUS, he will be able to damage this country for decades to come.

I can hear just what you are saying at this point. But Warner, you are saying, if we don’t get a pure conservative president we will still get bad judicial picks, won’t we? If we get an abortion lover like Romney (Or is he? Do you believe his miraculous conversion? I don’t) we’ll still get squishes as judges, won’t we?

I’m hearin’ ya, friends, I’m hearin’ ya.

That is why we desperately need to focus on point two: taking the entire Congress under GOP control. And not just GOP control but conservative GOP control. We have the House now, certainly, but we need to make that control stronger. But more importantly we need to take control of the Senate. Both houses of Congress need to be under GOP control and we need to put conservatives in there to do the controlling.

This is the thing, folks. We need to have the most conservative Congress that we can get. A conservative Congress, you see, will drag the squishy Romney, the unpredictable Newt, the isolationist Paul, or any of the others along behind them whether those folks want to go or not. You see, if we have a more conservative Senate, a president will understand that soft, moderate or leans-left judicial nominees will not be acceptable. A conservative Congress — if we as voters force them to toe the line and get active — will force a president to be more conservative despite his inclinations.

As far as judicial nominees go, even if we do get soft nominees that lean conservative only 70% of the time we will have justices that at least act like Americans! If Obama gets another four years he’ll continue to put people on the bench that despise this country. And these people serve for life, don’t forget, so they will be there to continue destroying this country for decades.

This is something we must work hard to prevent. It is imperative that we deny Obama and his extremist, under-the-table agenda from continuing.

It isn’t a happy predicament to be forced to settle for a less conservative president, to be sure. But that is where we are whether we like it or not. Better than we start to realize where the important matters are located and it ain’t in the presidential election as far as GOP nominees is concerned.

A funny thing is happening on the road to riches for Barack Obama and Al Gore, the weather is changing. Global scientists now warn of a Mini-Ice Age that will bring frigid temperatures that will further expose the fraud of the worldwide carbon-credit-man-made-global-warming scheme.

· Some scientists predict that the Sun is heading for a long slump in solar activity known as a Grand Solar Minimum. If this happens, it is possible that Britain could return to conditions similar to those 350 years ago when sunspots vanished during “the Little Ice Age”, when ice fairs were often held on the frozen Thames in London. – Paul Simons, The Times, 10 October 2011

Seems Obama, Gore, the United Nations and their co-collaborators can fool some of the public, but not nature. Nor can they coerce honest scientists from making chilling predictions.

· Britain should brace itself for another freezing winter with the return of La Niña, a climate phenomenon known to disrupt global weather… The warning coincides with research from the Met Office suggesting Europe could be facing a return of the “little ice age” that gripped Britain 300 years ago, causing bitter winters. The prediction, to be published in Nature, is based on observations showing a slight fall in the sun’s emissions of ultraviolet radiation, which over a long period may trigger mini ice ages in Europe. – Jonathan Leake, The Sunday Times, 9 October 2011

Last year, U.S. forecasters predicted the return of La Niña off the Pacific waters. Faced with meteorological science predicting a cooling trend and with potential billions at stake, Obama went before the U.N. recently to actively push his “green” global-warming agenda demanding that, “To preserve our planet, we must not put off the action that climate change demands.” America’s enemies would like nothing better than for America’s economy and future growth to be hamstrung by fraud-based global warming regulations. The real motivation for globalist pushing all things “green” is money. The green-scam itself is, in great part, American made.

Money to set up the global-warming, carbon-credit trading scheme, known as the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), was reportedly to be funneled through a Chicago Bank that once donated to then Senator Barack Obama’s campaign. Obama cronies from Goldman Sachs were reportedly set to run the CCX with an estimated 10 trillion dollars a year to be traded on the exchange. Reportedly, Obama and his associates such as Van Jones and Al Gore, along with bank owners, were slated to make millions from commissions alone. Former Chairman of mortgage giant Fannie Mae, Democrat and Obama supporter Franklin Raines was also reportedly involved in the structuring mechanism of the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX). It was Raines who reportedly pocketed $100 million in commissions at tax payer expense as CEO of Fannie Mae, was reportedly fined $20 million for serious accounting irregularities, leaving him some $80 million after reportedly being forced out with accusations of his staff “cooking the books.” With Obama’s jobs killing, economy crushing Cap-and-Trade bill sidelined and the CCX in a holding pattern, new measures to bank and funnel money had to be devised.

Enter Obama’s Jobs Plan and his demands for an Infrastructure Bank through which billions would be channeled to aid Labor Unions and benefit handpicked companies loyal to Obama and Democrats. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) declares that Obama’s proposed Infrastructure Bank: “Is just Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac number two.” Exposed by Republicans as another tax payer money pit, the Obama administration has been forced to make a fast pivot to stash cash.

With the Infrastructure Bank facing stiff opposition in Congress, a last minute rush was made by Obama’s Energy Secretary Steven Chu to hurry through some $4.7 billion is guaranteed loans to favored solar companies as part of Obama’s “green” agenda. This on the heels of and despite the dismal failing and bankruptcy of Obama’s premiere “green” solar panel manufacturer Solyndra that flushed $535 million of tax payers’ money. Chu’s actions are being investigated.

With unsettled and conflicting science, nations worldwide are starting to follow the money trail behind the man-made-global-warming-carbon-credit scheme. Though all want a cleaner environment, the rush job that Obama, Gore and the United Nations demand puts not only validity in doubt, but questions if “green” is less environmental and signifies more of a goal to line pockets and fill bank accounts of wealthy, global elites at America’s expense.

· Are we absolutely certain that the main cause of global warming is carbon and has nothing to do with the output of the Sun, or any of the other theories? With the credibility of some of the data of those dealing with climate change at least open to question, are we absolutely certain that we can afford all these precautions that may not even turn out to be necessary? It would be unfortunate if history recalled that we solved a problem that in the end did not require a solution by tipping the economy into depression. — Lord Young, The Times, 12 October 2011

Research question: Which Presidential candidates believe in man-made-global warming and support the Obama-Gore carbon-credit scheme?

Phil Kerpen has a warning for you, America. He wants to alert you to the fact that Barack Obama is using his powers to create regulations to undermine Congress, ignore voters, and “radically transform America.” But Kerpen also has some good news. There’s a way to stop this left-wing assault on our country. You can find out what that something is in his new book, Democracy Denied: How Obama is Ignoring You and Bypassing Congress to Radically Transform America — and How to Stop Him.

For this book — his first if I am not mistaken — Kerpen, the Vice President for Policy at Americans for Prosperity, has decided no less than to save the Republic. Of course, it’s an uphill battle to beat back the war that has been launched against America for sure.

Why is it an uphill battle? Because the way our country is being torn down is happening in the most subtle way possible. Worse, it is all being done with such ersatz legality, a legitimacy so seemingly ironclad, that most Americans are completely unaware of what is happening. And when they are aware of it they imagine there is nothing wrong with it all.

That and the way this destruction is happening is not the sort of glamorous outrage that makes for exciting news coverage. In fact, it’s quite dull. After all, the way the country is being undermined is through long-winded, legalese-filled, opaque regulatory changes. Red tape. Underhanded, jargon-heavy rules, quietly implemented without fanfare or the light of day revealing them for that matter.

Like I said, Kerpen has an uphill battle not only to alert Americans to what is happening right under their very noses, but to excite them enough to do something about it.

Through the bulk of his book Kerpen outlines the way that our Americanness is being smothered in paper with the thousands of pages of new regulations that Obama is weekly churning out from his administration.

Kerpen details the way the Obama administration, guided by a hardcore, left-wing ideology, is attempting to take control of the Internet, is trying to eliminate private property rights, is destroying the business sector in favor of big labor unionization, is using the outsized fear of global warming to ramp up a socialist-styled enlargement of government control on all fronts from the EPA to our energy sector, and more. In each case, Kerpen notes that this regulatory overreach is directly contrary to our American character and our core ideals.

Kerpen also notes that this bacchanalia of regulations and the subsequent growth of the power of the president was even something that the left was exercised about during the eight years of the George W. Bush era. Unfortunately for the veracity of the left, all their concerns of an un-American growth of executive power have been wholly forgotten merely because they like the direction of the obscene overreach implemented by Obama. No end of hypocrisy there, eh?

Kerpen also points out something I’ve been saying for years. Yes, it is true that presidents have for decades been slowly stealing power from the other branches of government. But our elected representatives and senators are equally at fault for not zealously protecting their privileges. They’ve stepped aside and allowed this all to happen. Why have they done this? In my opinion, because it is the easier road traveled. After all, if they abdicate power to the president then they have less need to make tough decisions and stand for delineated positions and that makes their re-election easier!

Anyway, the final chapter gives us a roadmap to pruning these obscene powers stolen from the Congress and the people by this most leftist president in American history. But, it too has a warning. Just “doing the right thing” and voting is not enough. We must not only vote for representatives that will endeavor to take back their power to legislate from an out of control executive branch, we must follow up and force these elected officials to follow through on the charge we’ve handed them.

Seems like a good idea to me.

If you are interested in the way the left — and even some on the far right — have used the presidency to steal power from we the people and our elected representatives, get this book and read it. Then go forth and make a change we really can believe in.

Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich vows that his first action, were he elected president, would be to sign executive orders eliminating Barack Obama’s vast cadre of unelected Czars. With the stroke of a pen, Gingrich would strike down Obama’s politburo consisting of 39 power-laden czars that make up the president’s shadow-government that threatens America’s prosperity, freedoms and sovereignty. Gingrich’s fixation on Obama’s Czars reveals the depth of understanding of the danger they pose to America and the personal freedoms of Americans. A review of Obama’s vast array of Czars and advisers reveals a handpicked collection of self-admitted Socialists, Marxists, Environmentalists and Globalists.

Reports are that Obama’s premier Czar, Cass Sunstein, is a Regulatory Czar on steroids. Ostensibly, the 2nd most powerful man to Obama, Sunstein’s directive is to regulate every facet of American life. Whether its home, work, energy use, food consumption, education, mortgages, banking, gun control, etc. — a deluge of regulations, not already in play, are in a holding pattern to be released if Barack Obama is re-elected. The job Sunstein was hired to do was to oversee the creation and implementation of a massive web of regulations aimed at ensnaring and then controlling both the U.S. economy and its citizens. As an insight into his psyche of control, in his 2008 book, “Nudge,” Sunstein reportedly puts forth the idea of removing organs from terminally ill patients without permission. This is the man who also suggests that animals should be permitted to sue humans in court, while calling embryos “a handful of cells.”

In regard to international affairs and world governance, Obama relies on Harold Koh, Legal Advisor to the State Department, whom many view as a threat to America’s sovereignty. Koh represents the U.S. in international treaties and legal matters. Strongest criticism of Koh is regarding supplanting the U.S. Constitution with international law, that American courts should bow to international law in adjudication of some U.S. cases and that the U.S. military could be tried in global courts for war crimes. As Obama’s Socialist advocate in world matters, Koh says he is deeply committed to the “American Society of International Law.” Detractors of the left-wing, former Yale professor are called ideologues. Supporters want him to be the next Supreme Court nominee.

In an insidious form of population control to limit human impact on the environment and abort “those who contribute to social deterioration,” Obama’s handpicked Science Czar, John Holdren, wrote how government could add steralants to drinking water, preventing pregnancies. Nature-before-man environmentalists, today demand control of human populations. Holdren says he was influenced by his educational mentor, eugenicist and abortionist, Harrison Brown, who lamented, “Is there anything that can be done to prevent the long-range degeneration of human stock” for the good of society? As Obama’s hand-picked Science Czar, Holdren is the face of Obama’s abortion advocacy and the “devaluing of human life” of all Americans of all ages.

Van Jones, a reported admitted Marxist and former Green Jobs adviser who was handpicked by President Obama, was preaching race and class warfare long before he entered Obama’s inner circle of Czars. As current president of Rebuild the Dream, Van Jones is amping up his hate speech warning that: “The Progressive Fight Back is coming in October” and that “everyone should be holding onto their seats.” Could this be the beginning of the “Socialist-Progressive Spring” in America? If so, like Obama, Jones has a problem. He is the enemy within his own rhetoric. As a self-described Marxist and signatory to a letter inferring U.S. involvement in 9/11, Jones is a tough sell as a newly, self-proclaimed defender of the American middle class.

Still a confidante of White House insiders, Jones is mum when it comes to his de facto replacement, General Electric green-global-capitalist Jeffrey Immelt, who is an Obama crony and current Job’s Czar. Immelt recently shipped a division of GE’s business to China and has reportedly created more jobs overseas than in America. Did Jones or multi-millionaire-Democrats Nancy Pelosi (est. $124 mil), Harry Reid ($10 mil), John Kerry (est. $295 mil), Dianne Feinstein (est. $108 mil), Jane Harmon (est. $425 mil), Herb Kohl (est. $231 mil), Mark Warner (est. $283 mil), Hilary Clinton (est. $51 mil), among many others, including the multi-millionaire-in-chief Obama, speak out against Immelt’s actions? Wealthy Progressive-Democrat run corporations appear to get a no-comment pass as they abandon American workers to evade taxes and make their fortunes overseas. Jones appears to monitor everyone else’s backyards — but Obama’s and Obama’s millionaire Democrat cronies. Noted in the press as a player, along with Immelt, Al Gore and Barack Obama in the reported “great-green-global-energy-carbon-credit money scam,” Jones has a lot of answering to do to the community he claims to defend.

There are 39 Obama Czars working daily to implement as much of Obama’s agenda as possible. They are the ones behind the scenes who will be regulating Obamacare, housing, banking, Medicare, Social Security, energy, immigration, transportation, national security, farming and water supply among a myriad of other government services and agencies. The question to be asked at the next presidential debate is: Do Obama’s Czars keep all of the presidential candidates — and not just Gingrich — awake at night?

See companion article: Obama’s “Kill Box” Strategy –

(Fox News) After suing Arizona and Alabama over their strict immigration laws, the Obama administration is seriously weighing whether to legally challenge similar measures in four other states.

“To the extent we find state laws that interfere with the federal government’s enforcement of immigration law, we are prepared to bring suit,” said Justice Department spokeswoman Xochitl Hinojosa. “The department is currently reviewing immigration-related laws that were passed in Utah, Indiana, Georgia and South Carolina.”

“In reviewing these, the department is proceeding consistently with the process followed and the legal principles established in United States v. Arizona,” she said. “Based on that review and applying those principles, the United States will decide whether and when to bring suit challenging particular state laws.”

Wonderful. People are sick and tired of the federal government failing to enforce the laws of the land in respect to illegal aliens, which includes those who have overstayed their visas, not just sneaking into the country from nations all over the world, yet, Team Obama plans to bring more suits. This may play well with his unhinged base (which doesn’t realize that the illegals are taking their jobs), but their is not data showing that this increases the likelyhood that US citizens of Hispanic descent will vote Democrat

Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees federal immigration policy, criticized the administration’s move.

“The administration should be working with states, not against them, to enforce our immigration laws,” he said. “This latest attempt to challenge a state’s efforts to enforce the rule of law, while turning a blind eye to cities and states that knowingly harbor illegal immigrants through sanctuary policies, is undermining the very same rule of law that our country was built on.”

Yeah, but in Democrat World, the Law is politics, and can be ignored for potential votes.

A tactical maneuver was in place as Barack Obama took office. It was the political version of Fast and Furious without guns, but yet a clear and present danger. Obama’s strategy, along with the Progressive-Democrat Party, was to unleash a blitzkrieg of legislation on the U.S. economy and its citizens before the opposition could grasp who and what had been voted into office. Much like a military “kill box area,” congressional authority and government agencies were sectioned off, targeted and undermined with a deluge of legislation and executive orders. The goal: Obama’s “transformation of America.” The free-enterprise economy was flooded with a strangle-hold of regulations that took over health care, corporations, housing, insurance and banking. Obama unleashed his “change” with such a fury that opponents experienced a political version of “shock and awe.” With the system overwhelmed, moderate and conservative members of Congress were blind-sided and ineffective to stop the “transformation” being thrust upon the American people.

For two years, Barack Obama had free reign as he appointed over three dozen, unelected Czars to advise him and oversee government policy and agencies. Among the Czars were admitted Socialists, Marxists and radical environmentalists seeking to “transform America” to meet Obama’s Liberal-Progressive agenda. In 2010, the American voter became wise to the destructive governmental changes that usurped their Constitutional freedoms and ravaged their pocketbooks. The conservative base of American voters abruptly woke up the GOP by voting compromising enablers out of office followed by warnings to clean house even further.

Warning number two is now in play for the GOP. With the Progressive-Democrat’s game plan unveiled and its raw corruption exposed, Congress is again on notice as the nation faces elections in 2012. Republicans must now take the offensive and formulate a blitzkrieg of policies and investigations of their own. Every GOP member of the House and Senate, in parity with their committees, must be assigned direct oversight of Obama’s Czars and department heads. Every move, every piece of legislation, every regulation and every request for funding must be tracked and brought out of the shadows and into the light. Obama’s shadow-government of Czars is embedding itself and is being paid by taxpayer dollars to sit in government offices while deconstructing America’s founding policies and principles. The Czars primary targets are free-market capitalism, Constitutional freedoms and U.S. sovereignty. The call to action and accountability by members of Congress has never been greater. Pick a czar or department head, expose their agenda and defund their fiefdoms. If Obama and a Progressive-Democrat majority are elected in 2012, expect the full fury of Obama’s Czars to be unleashed on America in 2013.

American voters need to understand that whether Obama is re-elected or replaced by Hillary Clinton, Progressive-Democrat goals are the same. Both Obama and Clinton are advocates of radical Socialist/Marxist Saul Alinsky whose goal was to radicalize then socialize America and its government. Clinton’s college thesis praised her socialist professor, Saul Alinsky. One of Alinsky’s guiding principles, to all his disciples, was that in order to gain real power and overthrow capitalism it is necessary to crush the middleclass. As a Chicago street activist, Alinsky taught that class and race warfare are the most effective ways to bring about “change.” As the race-and-class-warfare-in-chief, Obama demonstrates he learned Alinsky’s lessons well.

PS – Partial plan of action for the GOP: 1.) Block Obama’s so-called “infrastructure labor union bank” that is a replacement for Obama’s planned money-funneling, climate-change bank in Chicago that was put on-hold by the man-made global warming scandal. 2.) Rein in the unelected National Labor Relations Board that is wielding unauthorized fascist authority. 3.) Assign additional oversight teams to prevent potential election fraud and vote tampering in 2012. Fecklessly investigating voter fraud after the fact does no good. Al Franken, anyone?

Washington (CNSNews.com) — Cecilia Munoz, the White House director of intergovernmental affairs, compared the federal crime of being in the country illegally to jaywalking.

“If you were running the police department of any urban area in this country, you would spend more resources going after serious criminals than after jaywalkers. DHS (the Department of Homeland Security) is doing the immigration equivalent of the same thing,” Munoz told the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute (CHCI) conference on Monday.

Munoz was referring to the administration’s new policy of “prosecutorial discretion,” outlined in a June memo from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency, which falls under DHS.

Under the new policy, immigration officials will prioritize deportation orders, acting only on those involving people convicted of serious crimes or those who pose a national security or public safety threat.

The memo also directs ICE agents to consider how long an individual has been in the U.S., whether that person has a spouse or children who are U.S. citizens, and whether that person has a serious criminal record. Crimes victims, witnesses to crimes, or people who are charged with minor traffic violations, would avoid deportation under the ICE guidance.

Interestingly, the Obama administration had been, quietly, doing a pretty good job in deporting illegals (as well as going after the companies that hire them, which is the best way to stop illegals. No jobs, they won’t come). But, there is a tough election coming up, and Obama is losing support, including among Hispanics, so, he and his team decided that they would pander by ignoring a large section of people who have broken America’s laws, and are taking American jobs, using American services that they didn’t pay for, and causing problems for Americans. They’re all lawbreakers, and, shockingly, jaywalking is actually a crime which people can be ticketed for. A minor crime, but, still a crime. Is using a fake ID a minor crime? Sure. Until real American’s have their lives ruined because an illegal is running around pretending to be that American.

Sure, sure, they aren’t all bad people. There are surely lots more like Antonio Diaz Chacon, who saved a 6 year old girl from a would be kidnapper. But, that’s not the point. If they want to be in the United States, they need to do it legally. Oh, and stop demanding that the US change in order to accommodate them.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.