Obama will likely delay amnesty until after midterm elections

160557980_obama_laraza_550x394_xlargePerhaps Obama does realize that executive amnesty is an unpopular idea. In order to help out the Democrats any way he can, he hinted Thursday that he’ll likely delay ramming through amnesty until after the November midterms:

“Our immigration system is broken and need to be fixed, and my preference continues to be that Congress act,” he said, echoing a familiar claim by advocates of greater immigration.

But he next suggested that Congress might act after the November mid-term elections. “Hope springs eternal that after the midterm elections, they may act,” he said.

And then he suggested he would wait until after the elections before deciding the scope of his planned unilateral amnesty.

“In the meantime [before the election], what I’ve asked [homeland security secretary] Jeh Johnson to do, is to look at what kind of executive authorities we have in order to make the system work better,” he stated.

Obama’s use of the phrase “in the meantime,” suggests that he won’t announce his amnesty until after the election.

Obama’s amnesty plans reportedly include granting work permits to some 5 million illegals, and allowing companies to import guest-workers for jobs sought by Americans. No wonder he’s waiting until after the elections.

Questions arise over Mary Landrieu’s residency

3945368_GDoes Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) actually live in Louisiana? According to one of her alleged neighbors, she may not — and that spells big trouble for the vulnerable Democrat going into the midterm elections. From the Washington Post (via Breitbart):

Here in Louisiana, however, the Democrat does not have a home of her own. She is registered to vote at a large bungalow in New Orleans that her parents have lived in for many decades, according to a Washington Post review of Landrieu’s federal financial disclosures and local property and voting records.

On a statement of candidacy Landrieu filed with the Federal Election Commission in January, she listed her Capitol Hill home as her address. But when qualifying for the ballot in Louisiana last week, she listed the family’s raised-basement home here on South Prieur Street.

The New Orleans house, which Landrieu claims as her primary residence, is a new flash point in one of the most closely contested Senate races in the country. Republicans are considering taking legal action to question Landrieu’s residency in the state, arguing that since winning her seat in 1996 she has become a creature of Washington.

This is a serious issue that Democrats will not be able to overlook without coming across as hypocrites (but they’re used to that, right?) If Landrieu loses her re-election bid, she might end up living in her parents’ bungalow after all.

Obama admits he doesn’t ‘have a strategy yet’ for confronting ISIS

Obama Meme (11)Just when we thought Barack Obama couldn’t possibly humiliate himself or his administration any further, he goes and proves us all so, so wrong. Obama admitted in a press conference Thursday that “we don’t have a strategy yet” for further confrontation with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) — and the gaffe was practically gift-wrapped for the GOP:

Rather than the average inartful comment that disappears after a few news cycles, the no-strategy line could help cement charges that Obama lacks the competency to handle multiple crises at once.

A central component of the GOP’s strategy for the midterms is to paint Obama as either overwhelmed by the challenges of his office or simply too detached to care — and make Democrats defend an unpopular second-term president.

“It doesn’t get any better than that,” a senior House GOP leadership aide said gleefully of Obama’s mistake. “He basically just articulated the very thing we’ve been saying for a long time now. Thank you, Mr. President.”

The White House almost immediately jumped into damage-control mode:

First, White House press secretary Josh Earnest took to Twitter to try to undo the damage.

“In his remarks today, POTUS was explicit — as he has been in the past — about the comprehensive strategy we’ll use to confront [ISIS] threat,” Earnest wrote.

That didn’t work. Then Obama’s top spokesman tried again on television, using the s-word as frequently as possible.

“I just want to be clear about what our strategy is,” Earnest said on CNN. “This strategy is one that’s not going to solve this problem overnight. But he’s also clear about the fact that our strategy can’t only be the American military. We have a comprehensive strategy for dealing with [ISIS].”

Oh, dear. Clearly, this gaffe will haunt Obama into the midterms and beyond — and Republicans will make sure of it:

“You better believe it,” said the GOP aide when asked if Republicans would force Obama to relive that moment. “He gave it to us on a silver platter.”

Super PAC demonstrates liberal hypocrisy at its finest

Soros-George-bugeyedmonsterLiberals are so often so delightfully hypocritical. Wednesday, Brad Woodhouse, leader of George Soros-backed Super PAC American Bridge 21st Century, defended accepting Soros-written checks while simultaneously condemning conservatives for benefiting from the donations of the Koch Brothers. Of course, this all went down on Twitter:

Everything started Wednesday when Woodhouse blasted a news story to reporters titled, “GOP Senate Candidates Bow at Koch Throne.” The story, written by the Huffington Post, was about Republican Senate candidates praising the Koch Brothers donor network for its support.

Andrew Kaczynski, a reporter at BuzzFeed, responded to that email on Twitter by stating: “It’s almost pathetic how weak the Democrats ‘run against the Koch brothers’ strategy is.”

Woodhouse, clearly rattled by the criticism, responded to Kaczynski on Twitter that “it’s a shame you have no idea what you are talking about” before taking a cheap shot at BuzzFeed’s content: “Stick to cats.”

Kaczynski replied: “Since you’re outraged by billionaires influencing politics @woodhouseb will American Bridge be refunding largest-donor George Soros?”

“That’s a stupid question,” Woodhouse responded, taking issue with Kaczynski’s assertion that the group’s anti-Koch strategy isn’t working.

Kaczynski then asked: “So that’s a no?”

“Since you don’t understand the difference I don’t think there is any reason to continue this discussion,” Woodhouse said.

“I guess @woodhouseb your billionaires are better than their billionaires,” Kaczynski shot back.

Woodhouse then responded, “well, they’re not looking to screw the middle class to enrich themselves – so yeah – maybe you do get it.”

Kaczynski: “So you dislike big money @woodhouseb only when it isn’t your ideology. I understand now.”

Woodhouse’s final say: “I dislike people who want to stack the deck against the middle class and am irritated by people who don’t get the difference.”

Well then — Woodhouse must be extremely irritated by Obama.

Rand Paul can successfully walk the line of U.S. involvement in the Middle East

draftrandpaulfb1According to recent polls, Americans are in quite the conundrum over how to approach U.S. involvement in the Middle East. While only 36% of voters approve of Barack Obama’s isolationist foreign policies, the vast majority don’t want to jump back into war in the region, either. So what are we — and, more importantly, the lawmakers — supposed to do?

Well, there is a third option to consider; an option which entails the United States only becoming involved if the country’s interests are directly at stake. It is the option that Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) advocates for:

Paul describes himself as “a foreign policy realist like the first George Bush, like Reagan, like Eisenhower.” He elaborates:

“They did intervene on occasion. It was not their first choice—but they did intervene when there were American interests involved, and I think really it’s not one extreme or the other. I often tell people in speeches one extreme goes nowhere all the time and that’s isolationism. The other extreme goes everywhere all the time. Many of the foreign policy sort of establishment in Washington, they’re so used to being everywhere all of the time, that anyone who backs away from everywhere all of the time is considered to be an isolationist.”Paul said that in many cases, “there is no good alternative”—and that much of the time, each foreign policy choice by a president has negative consequences and positive ones. But the best decision, he said, is the one that acts in the best interest of America and her allies like Israel—even if that means a bad dictator remains in power.

“I think one of the biggest threats to our country is radical Islam and these radical Islamist groups—they are a threat,” Paul said.

As for ISIS, the largest threat currently in Iraq, Paul would not act on his own as Obama has done:

Regarding ISIS, the Islamic State terrorist organization that has grown a foothold in Syria and Iraq, Paul said he supports airstrikes. But if he were the president in this situation, unlike Obama, he would have called Congress back from recess to sell both chambers on action—and seek authorization before using America’s armed forces there. Paul said of ISIS:

“We need to do what it takes to make sure they’re not strong enough to attack us. That means sometimes perhaps continuing the alliance with the new Iraqi government. Perhaps it means armaments, or perhaps it means air support, but frankly if I were in President Obama’s shoes at this time, I would have called Congress back, I would have had a joint session of Congress, and I would have said ‘this is why ISIS is a threat to the United States, to the stability of the region, to our embassy, to our diplomats, and this is why I’m asking you today to authorize air attacks.’ I’m betting if he would have done that to a joint session of Congress, he would have gotten approval. When you don’t do it through Congress, and you do it yourself, then you really have not galvanized the will of the nation. As a true leader, what I think we need to do is galvanize the nation when we go to war.”

Rand Paul is the strong, constitutional leader that America deserves. He will always put the best interests of the U.S. first. Click here to Draft Rand Paul for President now!