What new law is ‘urgent’, when existing laws go unenforced?

Some argue against the logic of predicating legislation with an O-B-A-M-A act.

They say that laws protecting the weak or vulnerable should not be held hostage to any legislation which attempts to force the Lawbreaker-in-Chief to ‘faithfully execute’ law.

We would respond that there are a plentitude of laws doing just that now…but remind those who evince concern that even those laws are subject to Obama’s whim.

Besides, it doesn’t mean writing good law would come to a standstill.

House GOP could be creative, crafting legislation for any issue the Democrats throw at them with an O-B-A-M-A clause…which negates that law if Obama renegs on his oath.

Bottom line though…if existing laws are spurned, what good will new GOP laws be?

Remember, this is an election year, and Democrats still control the Senate. Issues that are thrown at the GOP this year have nothing to do with ‘fixing’ broken laws.

Democrats don’t care about immigration, minorities, the poor, or young voters…

…except as a hammer for bashing Republicans.

If they cared, they would have done something when they controlled all of Congress…

…in 2007…



…and 2010.

We reiterate…Obama won’t ‘faithfully execute’ any laws he dislikes, Democrats control the Senate, and any Democrat issue will be used to bludgeon Republicans pre-election.

The only way to safely craft effective new legislation this year, under those conditions, is to preface any proposed laws with the O-B-A-M-A act previously suggested.

Such a preface forces the Democrat-controlled Senate to demonstrably support a need for honoring the Rule of Law and the Constitution, and gives the GOP a chance to offer responsible, thoughtful consideration to voter blocs held hostage by Democrats now.

Obama’s lawlessness, and his promises for more of the same in the future, gives the Republicans the justification they need to preface every bill with the O-B-A-M-A clause.

Without it, in this election year, any new House legislation is worse than useless…

…it would be self-destructive.

The first House legislation in 2014 should be the O-B-A-M-A Act

By his extra-legal acts, Barack Obama has given House Republicans the perfect tool to preface every piece of legislation that’s up for consideration this year.

After all, what good is new law, when he refuses to enforce – or ignores – existing law?

The first House legislation this year should be the “Oath Being A Main Action” act, laying out details of every law he has delayed, exempted, or refuses to enforce…

…and mandating that Obama honor his oath and re-instate those laws…

before any new law can be brought up for consideration on the House floor.

If they don’t have the stomach for Impeachment of those who violate their oath…

…Republicans should (at the very least) be willing to stand up for the Rule of Law.

The office of President “…shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed…”

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution is very clear. Obama took an oath to “…preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution…” and must “faithfully execute” laws.

If he refuses to do so, or continues unchecked…what good are any new laws?

No legislation is worth the paper it’s printed on, until he honors the O-B-A-M-A Act.

Msg to Republicans…apply Joshua’s ‘tic-tac-toe’ lesson to immigration reform

If news stories are correct, that GOP leadership is considering immigration reform for this upcoming legislative year, they must have slept through Obama’s speech.

Within minutes of opening remarks, he promised more acts to bypass Congress.

So even if dire warnings that bringing up such a bill on the House floor could cause big trouble for the GOP in this election year, doesn’t Obama’s promise give them pause?

He’s already demonstrated he’ll ignore or bypass any law he doesn’t like or which goes against his agenda…even when it comes to his own health care law.

Even a good faith effort by the GOP would be ignored, because the Senate gate-keeper (Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid) would never let it get to the Senate floor.

And Mike Huckabee can tell you the media has no problem misleading the American public with lies about issues when it comes to a chance to demonize Republicans.

(A week ago, he said Democrats portray women as not able to control their libido. In a nano-second, the media claimed Huckabee said women couldn’t control themselves.)

Obviously, any move the GOP makes on immigration reform spells trouble…except 1.

House Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor would do well to learn what ‘Joshua’, the WOPR super-computer in the movie War Games, finally realized

…”the only winning move…is NOT TO PLAY.”

WHO in America wants ‘more’ Washington, DC focus on their lives…?

Looking for the scary part of last night’s lie-fest?

Within minutes of the beginning in Obama’s State of the Regime address, he said:

“…what most Americans want – for all of us in this chamber to focus on their lives…”

Yeah…that’s what we want…more Washington DC focus on citizens’ private lives.

But, reading through the balance of his address, it’s obvious his focus is on…himself.

If anybody participated in an SOTU drinking game that required they take a shot every time the Preener-in-Chief said ‘I’, ‘me’, or ‘my’…they would have been hospitalized…

…or, sent to the morgue in a body bag. (74 times, by our count, Obama used his favorite personal pronouns – that’s over 2 liters worth of shots!)



The brazen lie that media CAN’T hide in the SOTU

Obama’s “you can keep your health-care plan” lie has just been replaced.

“As Commander-in-Chief, I have used force when needed to protect the American people, and I will never hesitate to do so as long as I hold this office.”

Tell that to Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods.

Obama and his cohort turned their back on those Americans, and they paid the price.

No matter how the media spins this Obama lie…

…the bodies of those 4 fatalities are in American cemeteries and can’t be hidden.

So, if Benghazi had been in Somalia, air strikes against terrorists were possible?

Our military conducted an airstrike against an unidentified target in Somalia on Sunday.

Rest assured Somalia didn’t okay it, and the target had ‘suspected’ al-Qaeda ties.

Yet Obama and his yellowbacks err…Democrats…claim during the fatal Benghazi terror attack that 1) they couldn’t send in air support without Libyan permission, and 2) they can’t bring attackers to justice now, even though the groups had al-Qaeda ties.

Trusting in our military, BCP hopes they hit the target they wanted in Somalia.

But we can’t help wondering WHY Stevens, Smith, Doherty, and Woods weren’t given the benefit of air support from our same military during that night in 2012?

And after this Somalian strike, the Democrats’ reasoning is revealed, again…as LIES.