No 722 “EN MI OPINIóN” JUEVES AGOSTO 7,
2014
“IN
GOD WE TRUS” Lázaro R González Miño, Editor.
A los imbéciles que se les ocurrió lo de invadir a los Estados Unidos
con niños mezclados con miembros de las Maras criminales de Méjico y otras países
centroamericanos criminales lo único que han conseguido es IRRITAR A LA NACION AMERICANA
HASTA EL LIMITE Y DECIDIR NO APOYAR NINGUNA REFORMA INMIGRATORIA Y SACAR LOS
MAS RAPIDO POSIBLE DEPORTANDO A TODOS LOS INMIGRANTES ILEGALES. Han cometido la
estupidez más grande que podían hacer. Han puesto en peligro a centenares de
miles de niños mesclados con la canalla más inmunda, poniéndolos en peligro.
Son unos monstruos asesinos. Les salió el tiro por la culata, quisieron tirarse
un “peo” y se han cagado todo. Van a
tener que salir de USA como el perro que tumbo la lata..
“En Mi Opinión” Lázaro R González Miño Editor
AMENPER”President Barack Obama has taken the concept
of discretion and so distorted it — and has taken the obligation of faithful
enforcement and so rejected it — that his job as chief law enforcer has become
one of incompetent madness or chief lawbreaker" These are not my words, these are the words of
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey.
Napolitano is known as a well versed constitutional scholar.
In this article the former judge
mentions the number of times that this president has broken the rule of law.
"Obama has done these things
with a cool indifference and he has threatened to continue to do so until the
pressure builds on his political opponents to see things his way", says
Napolitano.
I know that an impeachment makes
the U.S.A. look bad internationally, more so if the impeached is the first
black president of the United States. But the constitution is above
all considerations, and the Framers of the
constitution give us a remedy — removal from office. It is the
remaining constitutional means to save the freedoms the Constitution was
intended to guarantee.
I could not agree more with judge
Napolitano, below you will find the whole article.
The only constitutional remedy left: Impeachment
By Andrew P. Napolitano
It has been well established under the Constitution and
throughout our history that the president's job as the chief federal law
enforcement officer permits him to put his ideological stamp on the nature of
the work done by the executive branch. The courts have characterized this stamp
as “discretion.”
Thus, when exercising their discretion, some presidents veer
toward authority, others toward freedom. The president has discretion to adapt
law enforcement to the needs of the times and to his reading of the wishes of
the American people. Yet that discretion has a serious and mandatory guiding
light — namely, that the president will do so faithfully.
The word “faithfully” appears in the oath of office that is
administered to every president. The reason for its use is to assure Americans
that their wishes for government behavior, as manifested in written law, would
be carried out even if the president personally disagrees with the laws he
swore to enforce.
President Barack Obama has taken the concept of discretion
and so distorted it — and has taken the obligation of faithful enforcement and
so rejected it — that his job as chief law enforcer has become one of
incompetent madness or chief lawbreaker.
Time after time, in areas as disparate as civil liberties,
immigration, foreign affairs and health care, the president has demonstrated a
propensity for rejecting his oath and doing damage to our fabric of liberty
that cannot easily be undone by a successor. He has permitted:
• unconstitutional and unbridled spying on all Americans all
the time
• illegal aliens to remain here and continue to break the
law, even instructing them on how to get away with it
• his Department of Veterans Affairs to so neglect patients
in government hospitals that many of them died and it even destroyed records to
hide its misdeeds
• his Internal Revenue Service to enforce the law more
heavily against his political opponents than against his friends and to destroy
government computer records in order to hide its misdeeds
• his friends to be relieved of the burdens of timely
compliance with ObamaCare and burdened his enemies with tortured
interpretations of that law — even interpretations that were rejected by the
very Congress that enacted the law and interpretations that were invalidated by
the Supreme Court.
Obama has done these things with a cool indifference and he
has threatened to continue to do so until the pressure builds on his political
opponents to see things his way.
The Framers could not have intended a president so devoid of
fidelity to the rule of law that it is nearly impossible to distinguish between
incompetence and lawlessness. But the Framers did give us a remedy — removal
from office. It is the remaining constitutional means to save the freedoms the
Constitution was intended to guarantee.
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court
of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel.
Jimmy Carter pushes US to recognize Hamas, slams Israel in op-ed.
Liberals love
them some terrorists.
Former President Jimmy Carter once again is getting way out in front of the U.S. government on the Middle East, co-authoring an op-ed in which he calls for Washington to recognize designated terror group Hamas as a legitimate “political actor” — while blasting Israel for its military campaign in the Gaza Strip. The scathing column on ForeignPolicy.com was written by Carter and Ireland’s former president Mary Robinson.
Former President Jimmy Carter once again is getting way out in front of the U.S. government on the Middle East, co-authoring an op-ed in which he calls for Washington to recognize designated terror group Hamas as a legitimate “political actor” — while blasting Israel for its military campaign in the Gaza Strip. The scathing column on ForeignPolicy.com was written by Carter and Ireland’s former president Mary Robinson.
The article called the current
conflict a “humanitarian catastrophe,” and while acknowledging Hamas’ “indiscriminate
targeting” of Israelis, focused its criticism on Israel.
“There
is no humane or legal justification for the way the Israeli Defense Forces are
conducting this war,” they wrote. “Israeli bombs, missiles, and artillery have
pulverized large parts of Gaza, including thousands of homes, schools, and
hospitals.”
Watch:
MSNBC Just Reported Obama’s Birthplace (And They Didn’t Say Hawaii)
Did she just re-ignite the
birth certificate controversy?
A clip from a recent on-air exchange between MSNBC
correspondents is creating the impression that at least someone at the
left-leaning news network has doubts about the authenticity of Barack Obama’s BIRTH
CERTIFICATE
.
.
Host Joy Reid began the conversation regarding an
ongoing conference in Africa, noting that the “White House is clearly, I would
assume, hoping that this will be part of the president’s legacy, given his
background.”
Chris Jansing took the connection between Obama and
Africa a sizable step further, apparently siding with a large number of
Americans who believe he was born on that continent.
She cited “the fact that he’s from Kenya and the fact
that when he was elected there were expectations on the African continent that
he would do great things for them” as a reason the summit might hold
significance with him.
Later in the PROGRAM,
however, after she was apparently chided off-camera, Jansing walked back her
earlier statement.
,
however, after she was apparently chided off-camera, Jansing walked back her
earlier statement.
“Obviously, to clarify, I misspoke at the top
before,” she said. “It is obviously the president’s father who is from Kenya
and you clarified that.”
She concluded by asserted that Obama “has a real connection
and there has been great expectation that great things can happen with this
president and the African continent.”
While Obama is touted as a veritable expert on
African relations, an address by Joe Biden at the summit this week included the
latest in a series of flubs by the gaffe-prone vice president. Speaking about
the potentially bright economic future available to the continent, he
referenced the nonexistent “nation of Africa.”
Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/msnbc-reporter-just-admit-obama-american-citizen/#Pfdg2TeTXQtZmFx4.99
Amenper: LA CENSURA
"La censura, según el Diccionario de la lengua
española (DRAE) de la Real Academia Española, es la
«intervención que practica el censor en el contenido o en la forma de una obra,
atendiendo a razones ideológicas, morales o políticas». En un sentido
amplio se considera como supresión de material de comunicación que puede ser
considerado ofensivo, dañino, inconveniente o innecesario para el gobierno o
los medios de comunicación según lo determinado por un censor".
La sociedad de hoy no parece lo suficientemente inteligente como para
proteger la libertad de expresión. La nueva corrección
política hace que muchos crean que la libertad de expresión significa que no
puede ofender a nadie ni herir sentimientos de alguien de una raza incluso si
no es intencional.
Entonces el llanto de la izquierda trata de permitir que el gobierno
prohíba el derecho de expresión que sólo ellos pueden decidir..
La gente tiene que darse cuenta de lo que ha ocurrido con el nombre de
liberal cuando se le habla en la política actual. Donde una vez el término se
refería a las personas que protegían la libertad y la constitución,(Todavía es
así en muchos países de Europa) su estado actual se ha tomado para aquellos que quieren imponer
sus puntos de vista y pisotear la libertad de elección, la libertad de
expresión y todo lo demás si no están de acuerdo personalmente con ellos. Todo lo contrario
a libertad.
Los ataques de Obama a Fox News son típico de como este presidente usa
su oficina para tratar de amordazar al único medio de comunicación nacional que
no cubre sus violaciones de la ley. Sus sicarios acusan de
"racista" a cualquiera que toque a Obama con el pétalo de una rosa.
Pero ahora vemos que la ungida para ocupar el trono liberal de Obama,
Hillary Clinton, está enseñando las primicias de lo que pudiera ser su
presidencia.
Leemos en las noticias de hoy que Bill y Hillary Clinton quieren
asegurarse de que usted no lee ningún libro crítico de ellos. Para lograr eso,
ellos están tratando de intimidar a los medios de comunicación para que no
cubran este tipo de libros.
Hablando de los autores de varios nuevos trabajos sobre los Clinton, la
pareja publicó una declaración a los medios de comunicación que incluía esta
frase: "Su comportamiento, además de no permitir ni habilitado, y medios
legítimos que saben con cada fibra de su ser que se trata de crap"
"Crap" según el diccionario de Inglés-español quiere decir mierda.
Dicen los Clinton que los medios de comunicación no debe de ayudarlos a
difundir sus mentiras".
Pero más al punto, dicen los Clinton que las mentiras no debieran de "ser
permitida?"
Esto viene del único presidente que fue sometido a juicio de impugnación
por haber mentido al pueblo americano.
El 24 de marzo de 2009, el gobierno de Obama argumentó ante la Corte
Suprema de Estados Unidos, en el caso Citizens United, que el gobierno debería
tener el poder de bloquear la publicación de libros que participan en la
promoción política expresa.
El gobierno perdió, y Clinton y la mayoría de los demócratas liberales
quieren revocar esa decisión.
El control absoluto de la prensa que es bien conocido por nosotros los
cubanos, mantiene a parte del pueblo ignorante de lo que sucede en la cúpula
del gobierno, y esto parece ser muy importante para los liberales demócratas.
Si Hillary Clinton se convierte en presidente, y los demócratas toman el
Congreso, y mantienen el Senado, habrá un empujón para revocar la libertad de
expresión y suprimir a los periodistas que los ataquen.
Dada la propensión de la Clinton para castigar a los enemigos, ¿necesita
una mejor razón para mantener esta familia fuera del poder?
Entonces,...¿ todo lo crítico de la familia Clinton o de Obama debe de ser
suprimido igual que no se puede hablar de Fidel Castro en Cuba? ¿Entonces la
disidencia tiene que ser censurada con el pretexto de "discurso de
odio".
Si Hillary es presidente entonces se va a mostrar lo que estas personas
realmente son.
Hillary or Elizabeth: Could Anyone be
Worse? by David L. Goetsch
After
Barack Obama, it will be hard for the left to field a presidential candidate who will carry the banner of destructive
progressivism with such ardor—an individual whose views are so at odds with
everything that made America great. With Obama finally out of office in 2016,
who could be worse? Unfortunately, the Democrat Party has a deep WELL of radical leftists to choose from. Two of the
worst possible presidential candidates—meaning two of the Democrats’ favorites—are
Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren. As bad as President Obama has been—and he has been about as bad as
presidents get—either of these potential candidates could give him a run for
his money in tearing down America.
of radical leftists to choose from. Two of the
worst possible presidential candidates—meaning two of the Democrats’ favorites—are
Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren. As bad as President Obama has been—and he has been about as bad as
presidents get—either of these potential candidates could give him a run for
his money in tearing down America.
For a while it looked like the candidate to beat
would be Hillary Clinton, but then it looked that way in 2008 too. Her
leftwing, destructive progressivism credentials are impeccable. After all,
Hillary is an icon of the far left and the reigning poster girl for the
National ORGANIZATION for Women (NOW). But Hillary has a problem, and I
don’t mean Bill—although he is hardly an asset to her. The problem referred to
here is the blood feud between the Clintons and the Obamas. The Obama’s and
Clinton’s have never gotten along very well. In fact, they despise each other,
and the animosity between them developed long before Hillary started distancing
herself from Obama’s mounting failures.
for Women (NOW). But Hillary has a problem, and I
don’t mean Bill—although he is hardly an asset to her. The problem referred to
here is the blood feud between the Clintons and the Obamas. The Obama’s and
Clinton’s have never gotten along very well. In fact, they despise each other,
and the animosity between them developed long before Hillary started distancing
herself from Obama’s mounting failures.
Bill Clinton is out of the presidency, but not gone
from the political scene. In between exploiting his presidency by charging
exorbitant fees for making lame speeches, Bill Clinton is engaged in a death
struggle—politically speaking—for control of the Democrat Party. His foe in
this struggle is none other than Barack Obama. Because of this feud
as WELL as other baggage she carries, Hillary may not be
the anointed candidate of Democrats after all. One of her biggest problems is
that she needs to distance herself from President Obama on such issues as
Benghazi, Syria, the economy, IRS bullying, NAS snooping, Crimea, Ukraine,
Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, the Marine being held in a Mexican jail, children at
the Border, the Obama vs. Putin wimp factor, and a host of other issues. But in
trying to distance herself from all that has made Obama a failed president, she
risks alienating Obama’s loyal base of leftwing radicals who would still vote
for him even if he turned out to be a closet Ayatollah.
as other baggage she carries, Hillary may not be
the anointed candidate of Democrats after all. One of her biggest problems is
that she needs to distance herself from President Obama on such issues as
Benghazi, Syria, the economy, IRS bullying, NAS snooping, Crimea, Ukraine,
Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, the Marine being held in a Mexican jail, children at
the Border, the Obama vs. Putin wimp factor, and a host of other issues. But in
trying to distance herself from all that has made Obama a failed president, she
risks alienating Obama’s loyal base of leftwing radicals who would still vote
for him even if he turned out to be a closet Ayatollah.
While
people who love America understandably fear the impending candidacy of Hillary
Clinton, Barack Obama is working behind the scenes to produce an alternative
candidate—one who is not distancing herself from the Obama administration and one who may be Obama’s equal when it comes to
destructive progressivism. That potential presidential candidate is Elizabeth
Warren. Elizabeth Warren’s destructive progressivism credentials are such that
she could go toe-to-toe with Barack Obama on most liberal issues without giving
much ground. She is an anti-business, anti-military, anti-American
environmental radical who thinks people earning minimum wage should be paid as
much as the owners of the businesses that employ them.
Warren also thinks college students should be able
to go to school free of charge, and does not seem to understand that free of
charge means that you and I will have to pay for their EDUCATION. She also pushes that tired old line about paying
women who work in low-demand jobs as much as men who work in high-demand jobs
(the old secretary vs. truck driver argument), and the law of supply-and-demand
be damned. Of course Warren is pro-abortion, pro-socialism, and
anti-Christianity. In truth, she would make a great president—of
France.
. She also pushes that tired old line about paying
women who work in low-demand jobs as much as men who work in high-demand jobs
(the old secretary vs. truck driver argument), and the law of supply-and-demand
be damned. Of course Warren is pro-abortion, pro-socialism, and
anti-Christianity. In truth, she would make a great president—of
France.
After eight years of Barack Obama, America cannot
take another so-called progressive in the White House whose views are at least
as destructive as Obama’s have been. The America envisioned by the Founders
will not survive with Hillary or Elizabeth as president. I would like to think
Americans have better sense than to elect either of these leftists as president,
but those same Americans elected Barack Obama—not once but twice. God help us.
Read the rest of this Patriot Update article here: http://patriotupdate.com/articles/hillary-elizabeth-anyone-worse/#GkpOvg3LQs0ByGcs.99
Read the rest of this Patriot Update article here: http://patriotupdate.com/articles/hillary-elizabeth-anyone-worse/#GkpOvg3LQs0ByGcs.99
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A Flood of Teenage Immigrants? The DHS’s Solution: ID Card
Compliance
This was posted yesterday on one of my GaryNorth.com
site’s forums.
You seem to have little to say about the illegal
immigration issue unfolding on our southern border. Do you have any information
why this is occurring now? Do you have any thoughts on how it should be dealt
with and why?
First, I invoke Franklin Roosevelt’s law of politics: “In
politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was
planned that way.”
Second, the story has two halves: outside the USA and
inside. We need to consider both in order to make sense of either.
Fourth, the media
are focusing on a small component of this immigration this year: immigration
from Central America. It’s up this year to about 204,000. With three months
to go until the end of fiscal 2014, this might hit 250,000.
There is not a word from the Border Patrol on immigration
from Mexico in FY 2014. There is also not a word on former immigrants from
Mexico who are returning to Mexico. This has increased since 2000. Net
immigration from Mexico has been close to zero for a decade.
Fifth, the lure is the hope of amnesty. If they can get on
this side of the Mexican border, they may be allowed to stay.
My subscriber wants to know “Why now?” I’ll tell you why
now.
1. INSIDE THE USA
I cite the Wikipedia article on The REAL ID Act. It’s the
law. It has been for nine years.
The REAL ID Act of 2005,
Pub.L. 109–13, 119 Stat. 302, enacted May 11, 2005, was an Act of Congress that
modified U.S. federal law pertaining to SECURITY, authentication, and issuance procedures standards for
the state driver’s licenses and identification (ID) cards, as well as various
immigration issues pertaining to terrorism.
, authentication, and issuance procedures standards for
the state driver’s licenses and identification (ID) cards, as well as various
immigration issues pertaining to terrorism.
(For the rest of my article, click the link)
Read more at http://teapartyeconomist.com/2014/08/06/flood-teenage-immigrants-dhs/#aghLWHLhTMhVkm7X.99
AMENPER: CHICAGO
Estoy en Chicago, esta es
mi primera visita a esta ciudad. De las ciudades más grandes de los
Estados Unidos, esta es la única que no había visitado. Muchas veces
planifiqué el venir, pero por alguna razón el viaje nunca se
materializó. Quizás era algo subconsciente que me atemorizaba de Chicago. Hay
que recordar que de esta ciudad salieron personas que han tenido fama mundial,
y no por lo más agradable.
Chicago nos dio a los más famosos gánsteres y hasta
tiene un tour que le dicen el Mob Tour para que conozcamos los lugares que
frecuentaban, Al Capone O´Banion, Moran, Accardio y otros
distinguidos ciudadanos Chicaguense de la crema gansteril. También nos dio
el famoso ladrón Dillinger.
Fuimos a ver el Wrigley Stadium, que es
una reliquia de la historia del Baseball y Comisorki park, que nos recuerda
también que fue la única oportunidad que tuvieron que expulsar del baseball a 8
jugadores por arreglar los juegos con los apostadores.Los notorios medias
negras de Chicago.
En la política la corrupción es notoria. En
las elecciones de Kennedy-Nixon el fraude fue escandaloso con la maquinaria del
alcalde Daley. Fraude que se repitió en las elecciones en el 2008 con la
elección de Obama, que hoy según las encuestas es el presidente más impopular
en la historia de Estados Unidos..
En 1960 se descubrió que la policía se quedaba con el
dinero, drogas y otros artículos que confiscaban a los ladrones, el
escándalo que llamaron the Summerdale Scandals tuvo repercusiones
nacionales. Cómo el peor escandalo policial de todos los tiempos.
No es pues de extrañarse que un descocido trabajador
comunitario de Chicago haya de pronto sido misteriosamente elegido Senador
y luego presidente.
Tampoco hay que extrañarse que el gobernador del
estado Blagojevich, haya tratado de vender el puesto vacante del Senador Obama
al mejor postor y que haya habido en un momento dos ex-gobernadores en la
cárcel por fraude y corrupción. .
No hay duda que esa historia me haya
predispuesto sobre los ciudadanos de Chicago, así que cuando mi
nieto me dijo que había conocido una muchacha en la Universidad de Duke donde
estudiaba, que era de Chicago y comencé a ver un interés en ella, me preocupé,
pensé que pudiera ser hija de una familia de la Mafia.
Ambos de graduaron hace tres años, y hace 6 meses
anunciaron su boda. La boda se celebró en Chicago el sábado, ya
había conocido a la familia y para mi descanso eran personas muy conservadoras
y decentes. Ya no me preocupo de que mis biznietos puedan tener
sangre de Chicago porque he aprendido en la boda que hay muchos conservadores
en Chicago.
Aunque todavía tengo reservas sobre los ciudadanos de
Chicago. Vi que en las tiendas vendían camisas de Chicago para los
turistas con la cara de gánsteres y otros delincuentes. Como
es claro, no compré esas camisas de Chicago con la cara de Al Capone y de
Barack Obama.
Vine a ver
Chicago, lo hice, y algunas cosas me huelen mal.
“En
mi opinión” Lázaro R González Miño
“FREEDOM IS NOT FREE”
No comments:
Post a Comment