HILLARY DO YOU HEAR US NOW – OUR ONLY DEMAND

Republicans will immediately acquiesce to a Hillary Presidency under one condition and one condition only,  that she immediately evoke an executive order requiring HER DEMOCRAT CONSTITUENCY open their houses/apartments to the homeless, including those on probation, drug dealers, illegal immigrants, welfare recipients, gang members, the sick, the tired, those living in homeless shelters or in cardboard boxes or in train stations. muslim jihadists, Syrian and North African rapists and provide them with three squares a day.  SORRY FOLKS, NOT GONNA HAPPEN!lies

Wishful thinking! Those Democrat hypocrites live in mansions, McMansions with a hundred rooms that have never seen a person of color or illegal immigrant (other than their gardener, cleaning lady or au-pair). But they force the rest of the country to buy houses for them, put them up in extravagant apartments which are always built in the city, not in their backyard(MIMBY). This is the ultimate in hypocrisy. The agency that has targeted middle America goes by the name of HUD. And who do you think ran HUD under Slick Willie, none other that Andrew Cuomo, the governor of New York. 

Democrats Call for New Amnesty

Ian M. Smith, The Hill, January 14, 2016

Last Friday, Congressional Democrats sent out a petition calling on the president to grant mass amnesty to over a million illegal aliens from Central America, citing the region’s high crime rates and the dangers faced by potential deportees. Instead of asking the president to use his purported mass deferred action authority, Democrats are asking he grant the illegal aliens so-called Temporary Protected Status (TPS), a similar, albeit statute-based, program created by Congress in 1990. But similar to his previous blanket amnesties, using TPS in this situation would be unprecedented and legally questionable.

As its name implies, TPS was created to ‘temporarily’ stall the deportation of illegal aliens whose home country is ravaged by war or natural disaster. It initially only applied to then-war-torn El Salvador; however, the program’s since grown to include 11 other countries. And although the relief is supposed to be “temporary,” TPS-grants have been consistently renewed by DHS even when the problems back home have long since subsided.

{snip}

{snip} Under section 244(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the DHS Secretary can exercise grants of TPS on three grounds: situations of ongoing war that pose a serious threat to a potential deportee; situations of natural disaster so disruptive that the foreign state requests it; and under so-called “extraordinary and temporary conditions” with the added caveat that a temporary amnesty not be “contrary to the national interest of the United States.” For the first seven years of the program, all grants were made according to the first ground. Illegal aliens from Rwanda living in the US in 1995, for instance, were granted TPS following that country’s ethnic civil war which killed an estimated one million people. As for natural disaster grounds, Honduras and El Salvador themselves received TPS grants following severe flooding and earthquakes, respectively.

But in each of the dozen grants of TPS since 1990, never has an illegal alien received deportation relief because his or her home country had a high crime-rate. Congressman Luis Gutierrez seemed to recognize this fact when he told a rally outside the White House on Friday, “There is no difference between this and a hurricane–none.” In any case, it isn’t clear how much worse Central America has become in recent years, if at all. According to the Congressional Research Service, the latest crime figures actually show murder rates steady or declining in the region.

{snip}

In their lobbying push, Democrats will no doubt stick to their “don’t punish the families” narrative–a highly cynical exploitation of the American public’s sentimental values. But this sort of emotional blackmail does have its limits, especially in election years. When President Carter extended his “open-arms and open-heart” policy to Cuban illegal aliens during the Mariel boatlift, over 100,000 hit Florida’s shores, causing a huge public backlash and partly costing him, in his own opinion, the 1980 election. Similarly, President Obama is losing control of our borders while lecturing Americans that “We are a better nation than one that deports innocent kids.” But voters might tell his party this election that we’re also a better nation than one that lures them here.

All of these immigrants from Latin America are invited to move into the White House and all houses or apartments owned or rented by Libtards. 

 

Featured News

“WHY OBAMA DISGUSTS ME” TEA PARTY VIEWS

Obama Wants to Defeat America, Not ISIS By Daniel Greenfield November 26, 2015 , 11:00 am Last year at a NATO summit, Obama explicitly disavowed the idea of containing ISIS. “You can’t contain an organization that is running roughshod through that much territory, causing that much havoc, displacing that many people, killing that many innocents, enslaving that many women,” he said.

Instead he argued, “The goal has to be to dismantle them.” Just before the Paris massacre, Obama shifted back to containment. “From the start, our goal has been first to contain them, and we have contained them,” he said. Pay no attention to what he said last year. There’s a new message now. Last year Obama was vowing to destroy ISIS. Now he had settled for containing them.

And he couldn’t even manage that. ISIS has expanded into Libya and Yemen. It struck deep into the heart of Europe as one of its refugee suicide bombers appeared to have targeted the President of France and the Foreign Minister of Germany. That’s the opposite of a terrorist organization that had been successfully contained.

Obama has been playing tactical word games over ISIS all along. He would “degrade and ultimately destroy” ISIS. Or perhaps dismantle the Islamic State. Or maybe just contain it. Containment is closest to the truth. Obama has no plan for defeating ISIS. Nor is he planning to get one any time soon. There will be talk of multilateral coalitions. Drone strikes will take out key figures. And then when this impressive war theater has died down, ISIS will suddenly pull off another attack.

And everyone will be baffled at how the “defeated” terrorist group is still on the march. The White House version of reality says that ISIS attacked Paris because it’s losing. Obama also claimed that Putin’s growing strength in Syria is a sign of weakness. Never mind that Putin has all but succeeded in getting countries that were determined to overthrow Assad to agree to let him stay.

Weakness is strength. Strength is weakness. Obama’s failed wars occupy a space of unreality that most Americans associate with Baghdad Bob bellowing that there are no American soldiers in Iraq. (There are, according to the White House, still no American ground forces in Iraq. Only American forces in firefights on the ground in Iraq.)

There’s nothing new about any of this. Obama doesn’t win wars. He lies about them. The botched campaign against ISIS is a replay of the disaster in Afghanistan complete with ridiculous rules of engagement, blatant administration lies and no plan for victory. But there can’t be a plan for victory because when Obama gets past the buzzwords, he begins talking about addressing root causes. And you don’t win wars by addressing root causes. That’s just a euphemism for appeasement. Addressing root causes means blaming Islamic terrorism on everything from colonialism to global warming.

It doesn’t mean defeating it, but finding new ways to blame it on the West. Obama and his political allies believe that crime can’t be fought with cops and wars can’t be won with soldiers. The only answer lies in addressing the root causes which, after all the prattling about climate change and colonialism, really come down to the Marxist explanation of inequality.

When reporters ask Obama how he plans to win the war, he smirks tiredly at them and launches into another condescending explanation about how the situation is far too complicated for anything as simple as bombs to work. Underneath that explanation is the belief that wars are unwinnable. Obama knows that Americans won’t accept “war just doesn’t work” as an answer to Islamic terrorism. So he demonstrates to them that wars don’t work by fighting wars that are meant to fail.

In Afghanistan, he bled American soldiers as hard as possible with vicious rules of engagement that favored the Taliban to destroy support for a war that most of the country had formerly backed. By blowing the war, Obama was not only sabotaging the specific implementation of a policy he opposed, but the general idea behind it. His failed wars are meant to teach Americans that war doesn’t work.

image: https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/wp-content/uploads/useful_banner_manager_banners/222-

The unspoken idea that informs his strategy is that American power is the root cause of the problems in the region. Destroying ISIS would solve nothing. Containing American power is the real answer. Obama does not have a strategy for defeating ISIS. He has a strategy for defeating America.

Whatever rhetoric he tosses out, his actual strategy is to respond to public pressure by doing the least he can possibly do. He will carry out drone strikes, not because they’re effective, but because they inflict the fewest casualties on the enemy. He may try to contain the enemy, not because he cares about ISIS, but because he wants to prevent Americans from “overreacting” and demanding harsher measures against the Islamic State.

Instead of fighting to win wars, he seeks to deescalate them. If public pressure forces him to go beyond drones, he will authorize the fewest air strikes possible. If he is forced to send in ground troops, he will see to it that they have the least protection and the greatest vulnerability to ISIS attacks. Just like in Afghanistan. Obama would like ISIS to go away. Not because they engage in the ethnic cleansing, mass murder and mass rape of non-Muslims, but because they wake the sleeping giant of the United States.

And so his idea of war is fighting an informational conflict against Americans. When Muslim terrorists commit an atrocity so horrifying that public pressure forces him to respond, he lies to Americans. Each time his Baghdad Bob act is shattered by another Islamic terrorist attack, he piles on even more lies. Any strategy that Obama offers against ISIS will consist of more of the same lies and word games.

His apologists will now debate the meaning of “containment” and whether he succeeded in defining it so narrowly on his own terms that he can claim to have accomplished it. But it really doesn’t matter what his meaning of “containment” or “is” is. Failure by any other name smells just as terrible. Obama responded to ISIS by denying it’s a threat. Once that stopped being a viable strategy, he began to stall for time. And he’s still stalling for time, not to beat ISIS, but to wait until ISIS falls out of the headlines.

That has been his approach to all his scandals from ObamaCare to the IRS to the VA. Lie like crazy and wait for people to forget about it and turn their attention to something else.

This is a containment strategy, but not for ISIS. It’s a containment strategy for America. Obama isn’t trying to bottle up ISIS except as a means of bottling up America. He doesn’t see the Caliph of the Islamic State as the real threat, but the average American who watches the latest beheading on the news and wonders why his government doesn’t do something about it.

To the left it isn’t the Caliph of ISIS who starts the wars we ought to worry about, but Joe in Tennessee, Bill in California or Pete in Minnesota. That is why Obama sounds bored when talking about beating ISIS, but heats up when the conversation turns to fighting Republicans.

It’s why Hillary Clinton named Republicans, not ISIS, as her enemy. The left is not interested in making war on ISIS. It is too busy making war on America.

Read more at https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/54745/obama-wants-to-defeat-america-not-isis-opinion/#KwAhFlc3zpsec4cF.99

Tony Passaro
843-520-6110
apassarorr@gmail.com
Bel Air Tea Party Patriots
Alliance of Americands Patriots
Campaign For Liberty
American for Prosperity
Maryland Fair Tax

THE LIBERAL BASTION BALTIMORE SUN SHINES A LIGHT ON THE SUBJECT

“The Baltimore Sun” is definitely not known as a Conservative newspaper, s this very well written assessment
 of the situation in USA comes as something of a surprise..
Some great thoughts about other races that have come to the USA and successfully integrated into our society.
This will obviously be called racist, and will upset the liberals, but they should really think about the message and
but think about the message and this interesting point of view.
The Black Dilemma
 
“For almost 150 years the United States has been conducting an interesting experiment. The subjects of the experiment: black people and working-class whites.
 
The hypothesis to be tested: Can a people taken from the jungles of Africa and forced into slavery be fully integrated as citizens in a majority white population?
 
The whites were descendants of Europeans who had created a majestic civilization. The former slaves had been tribal peoples with no written language and virtually no intellectual achievements. Acting on a policy that was not fair to either group, the government released newly freed black people into a white society that saw them as inferiors. America has struggled with racial discord ever since.
Decade after decade the problems persisted but the experimenters never gave up. They insisted that if they could find the right formula the experiment would work, and concocted program after program to get the result they wanted. They created the Freedmans Bureau, passed civil rights laws, tried to build the Great Society, declared War on Poverty, ordered race preferences, built housing projects, and tried midnight basketball.
 
Their new laws intruded into peoples lives in ways that would have been otherwise unthinkable. They called in National Guard troops to enforce school integration. They outlawed freedom of association. Over the protests of parents, they put white children on buses and sent them to black schools and vice-versa. They tried with money, special programs, relaxed standards, and endless hand wringing to close the achievement gap. To keep white backlash in check they began punishing public and even private statements on race. They hung up Orwellian public banners that commanded whites to Celebrate Diversity! and Say No to Racism. Nothing was off limits if it might salvage the experiment.
 
Some thought that what W.E.B. DuBois called the Talented Tenth would lead the way for black people. A group of elite, educated blacks would knock down doors of opportunity and show the world what blacks were capable of.
There is a Talented Tenth. They are the black Americans who have become entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors and scientists. But ten percent is not enough. For the experiment to work, the ten percent has to be followed by a critical mass of people who can hold middle-class jobs and promote social stability. That is what is missing.
 
Through the years, too many black people continue to show an inability to function and prosper in a culture unsuited to them. Detroit is bankrupt, the south side of Chicago is a war zone, and the vast majority of black cities all over America are beset by degeneracy and violence. And blacks never take responsibility for their failures. Instead, they lash out in anger and resentment.
 
Across the generations and across the country, as we have seen in Detroit, Watts, Newark, Los Angeles, Cincinnati, and now Ferguson, rioting and looting are just one racial incident away. The white elite would tell us that this doesn’t mean the experiment has failed. We just have to try harder. We need more money, more time, more understanding, more programs, and more opportunities.
 
But nothing changes no matter how much money is spent, no matter how many laws are passed, no matter how many black geniuses are portrayed on TV, and no matter who is president. Some argue its a problem of culture, as if culture creates peoples behavior instead of the other way around. Others blame white privilege.
 
But since 1965, when the elites opened Americas doors to the Third World, immigrants from Asia and India people who are not white, not rich, and not connected have quietly succeeded. While the children of these people are winning spelling bees and getting top scores on the SAT, black youths are committing half the country’s violent crime, which includes viciously punching random white people on the street for the thrill of it that has nothing to do with poverty.
 
The experiment has failed. Not because of white culture, or white privilege, or white racism. The fundamental problem is that American black culture has evolved into an un-fixable and crime ridden mess. *They do not want to change their culture or society, and expect others to tolerate their violence and amoral behavior. They have become socially incompatible with other races by their own design, not because of the racism of others – but by their own hatred of non-blacks.*
 
Our leaders don’t seem to understand just how tired their white subjects are with this experiment. *They don’t understand that white people aren’t out to get black people; they are just exhausted with them. They are exhausted by the social pathologies, the violence, the endless complaints, and the blind racial solidarity, the bottomless pit of grievances, the excuses, and the reflexive animosity.*
The elites explain everything with racism, and refuse to believe that white frustration could soon reach the boiling point.”—
 
“You can’t legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government can’t give to anybody anything that the government doesn’t first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they don’t have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation.
You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”
Ian Duncan
The Baltimore Sun, May 30, 2015

OBAMA’S 40% – WHO ARE THEY?

President Obama’s ratings have sunk to 40% and are heading south faster than an imploding Russian satellite. Keep in mind that the President was highly recommended by the American people, once in 2008 and again in 2012. However, on his way to transforming America he found many road blocks on the proverbial path to messiahville. Of course this has been the case with all presidents, but Obama became discouraged; not in his DNA to compromise Obama has resorted to executive edict, dictating by fiat punctuated by a multitude of lies while trying to make hay with out a bailer.

His point man, Harry Reid, no more a road block than his lackey counter part Nancy Pelosi are the water boys and girls of Obama’s transformation team. Compromise is not in fashion, but obstructionism is; Harry Reid has failed to allow bipartisan legislation to be advanced.  Over the past, almost six years, nothing of any magnitude has been accomplished. In fact a law suit brought by the Republicans question Obama’s disobeying the laws as written; “faithfully execute” as Obama promised. From immigration, IRS, Benghazi, Obamacare, the tabloids and lame stream media have spilled gallons of ink covering Obama’s many transgressions.

With all of that being said we question how POTUS still has a 40% (doing a good job) rating. Looking behind the scenes though gives us a clear picture of who the 40% are. And we are not shocked by this. Click here for the poll results. As illustrated below – 40% are of the Democrat ideology, this is what we expected all along.

Strong Democrat ………………………………………… 20
Not very strong Democrat ……………………………. 11
Independent/lean Democrat…………………………. 9
Strictly Independent ……………………………………. 16
Independent/lean Republican ………………………. 15
Not very strong Republican ………………………….. 10
Strong Republican ……………………………………… 12
Other (VOL) ………………………………………………. 4
Not sure ………………………………………………….. 3