1 - 10 Next
In response to:

President "But"...Obama

Ken1984 Wrote: Mar 01, 2015 8:44 AM
I think the non-progs need to have a few "but"s of their own. For example, Mitch McConnell needs to say, I'm going to abandon Harry Reid's Senate rules, BUT, first I'm going to get the country back on its keel by using his rules to get rid of illegal amnesty, I'm going to use his rules to get rid of Obamacare. When you have an unlawful president, it is sometimes necessary to use the opposition's rules for a while to get things back on track. KenC
In response to:

President "But"...Obama

Ken1984 Wrote: Mar 01, 2015 8:40 AM
You say "President But." I say, "President Butt" KenC
Please do not dump on Holder. Obviously he has acute paranoia and because of that dreaded "disease," we should simply look the other way every time he opens his A-ho... I mean, mouth. The man is sick, his boss is sick in the same way and Al Sharpton has convinced both of them that everything, I mean everything, is racist and everyone not a black brother or sister needs constant bennies to allow them to make it in a racist world. In fact, I think they have moved to believe that even some of the black brothers and sisters are against them because of their race. Perhaps that is why they invented the "race to the top" program. KenC
Get serious, this is NOT a tack-on. The fact is that Homeland Security is who enforces or does not enforce immigration law. Republicans control the House and Senate. The only way they can control the executive, an executive that will not follow the law, is to use Congress's power of the purse. That means that the only way to stop illegal amnesty is to cut off funds for it. The court has merely issued an injunction, not ruled against illegal amnesty. That means that a higher court could over-rule the injunction and leave the president free to keep on granting illegal amnesty. The higher court could make its ruling for any reason, including that it doesn't think the varies states against illegal amnesty have "standing." It will take an endless amount of time for a court to rule on the merits. In the meantime, the Republican congress can claim, rightly, that there is no need to fund illegal amnesty until a court determines it is illegal. This is the time, the DHS budget is the place to stop illegal amnesty in its tracks. It is, literally, now or never. KenC
Now let's see. Why do I want to be a Republican? Well, if the press is going to blame Republicans for the DHS shutdown, despite the Democrats refusing to vote to fully fund it. Well, then our Republicans will chicken out and not do what is right by fighting the president's illegal amnesty. Hmmmm. So let me get this straight. The liberal press actually runs the Republican congress. Well, then, I guess I'll just vote for the press or the Democrats. What's the difference? McConnell said he promised not to shut down the government (DHS), so he has to keep that promise. But he also promised to stop the illegal amnesty if Republicans won the Senate. Hmmmm. Keep his promise to the press or keep his promise to conservatives. Well, that's a tough one. KenC
Perhaps Hillary is having a badly needed face life rather than rethinking her rather empty-headed policy platform. KenC
In response to:

McConnell's Gambit Solves Nothing

Ken1984 Wrote: Feb 24, 2015 1:14 PM
Come on McConnell, use the Harry Reid rules and get the DHS funding passed without the illegal amnesty stuff included. You should play the game the way Reid played it until we get back to where we were before Reid wrecked the Senate rules. KenC
In response to:

McConnell's Gambit Solves Nothing

Ken1984 Wrote: Feb 24, 2015 1:12 PM
Yes Republicans will get the blame from the liberal media. But what do they expect? Republicans need to get out and explain what is going on. The fact is that a court has stopped the president's illegal amnesty, so Republicans need to explain that they have funded everything at DHS that can be legally do. So what seems to be the problem? The court says the amnesty can't be done at present, so the DHS budget passed by the House completely funds what can be done. When the courts rule on the illegal amnesty, the House and Senate can come back and revisit the question of funding amnesty. KenC
In response to:

Giuliani Versus Obama

Ken1984 Wrote: Feb 24, 2015 7:49 AM
Let us not put all blacks in that camp, PLEASE. If you saw the Middle Schooler defending what the N.Y. mayor said, you would know you are absolutely wrong on that score. And if you read the above column by a black writer, you would see how stupid that generalization is. KenC
In response to:

Giuliani Versus Obama

Ken1984 Wrote: Feb 24, 2015 7:47 AM
Since Obama's own political henchman has admitted that he lied when he said before being elected that he was opposed to gay marriage, why should anyone believe what he says? Oh, and "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor" and a whole host of other proven lies, I don't think it is out of the question to doubt his word. And lying to the American people is unAmerican. Then there is that whole bit about fundamentally changing America, which no one would want to do if they loved the country. No, the outrage against the N.Y. mayor is simply phony and done by the phony press to diss Republicans. I think EVERYONE knows the guy doesn't love America, doesn't love what it stands for, doesn't love capitalism, which is what America was built on, doesn't love enterprise, also what America was built on, doesn't think anyone created any business, also what America was built on. He wants to turn America into a socialist state, and he hasn't a clue that socialism and its fellow traveller communism have never worked and will never work. No, he doesn't love America! That is simply obvious. KenC
1 - 10 Next