Schumer showing the way for Democrats

Politicians have learned that ObamaCare is extremely unpopular.  It may be the most unpopular piece of legislation in recent memory.  Go to a political cemetery and count the tombstones of Democrats who voted for ObamaCare and are out of office.  The losses are historic!

So what do Democrats do about ObamaCare?  How do they remove this burden from their backs?

Enter Senator Schumer of New York:

Speaking at the National Press Club, the influential Senate leader identified the decline of middle-class incomes as the defining challenge of the age. Democrats can only win elections, Mr. Schumer said, as “the pro-government party” – and ObamaCare is undermining that larger political project.  
The Senator called the law a distraction from the “middle-class-oriented programs” his party should have pursued after 2008: “Unfortunately, Democrats blew the opportunity the American people gave them. We took their mandate and put all of our focus on the wrong problem: health-care reform.”  
Mr. Schumer said he still supported the entitlement’s goals, but “it wasn’t the change we were hired to make. Americans were crying out for the end to the recession, for better wages and more jobs.” 

 Senator Schumer is opening a door so that Democrats can jump ship and vote, at least, for amendments or even a repeal.  He is letting Democrats know that allegiance to ObamaCare is no longer a must to call yourself a Democrat.

Yes, do not be shocked if there are enough votes in the U.S. Senate and Congress to override a presidential veto and repeal ObamaCare.

This is what happens when:

1) you lose as badly as the Democrats did in 2014;

2) your leading candidate for president is looking for a way to detach herself from the Obama administration, and

3) every ObamaCare promise was broken by reality. 

Who would have believed this a year ago?  Or when Justice Roberts made ObamaCare a reality in June 2012?

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/11/schumer_showing_the_way_for_democrats.html#ixzz3KO6NHVz6
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

 

SHOCK REPORT: ST. LOUIS BOMB PLOT FAILS BECAUSE OF MAXED OUT EBT CARD

Only days before a grand jury released its decision on whether there would be a trial for the August shooting in Ferguson, Missouri, the FBI arrested two men who were allegedly looking to buy supplies to make a pipe bomb. 

Sources say the men planned to kill St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch, and Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson, and also planned to bomb the famed Gateway Arch in downtown St. Louis. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports the men bought what they believed to be a pipe bomb from undercover police but could not afford more bombs "until one suspect’s girlfriend’s Electronic Benefit Transfer card was replenished."

The two men were arrested on November 21 and accused of attempting to purchase explosives that they planned to use during the Ferguson protests. They were also brought up on gun charges.

But this week, we are learning a bit more about what these men were allegedly planning to do with the explosives.

Sources close to the ongoing investigation have revealed that the men, Brandon Orlando "Muhammad" Baldwin, age unreported, and Olajuwon Ali Davis, 22, were nabbed in an undercover gun sting.

The pair were initially arrested after misrepresenting who the firearms were being purchased for, authorities say.

Sources also say that the pair intended to kill the St. Louis prosecutor as well as Ferguson's police chief and also wanted to place their pipe bombs on the upper deck of the St. Louis Gateway Arch.

Both pleaded not guilty at their Tuesday hearing. The two also waived their rights to a bail hearing and are being held pending further proceedings.

Olajuwon Ali Davis was a recent speaker at a meeting of the New Black Panther Party held at the Greater St. Mark Family Church in Ferguson in October and has been identified as the Panthers' "minister of law."

Authorities would make no further on-the-record statements about the case.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/11/26/St-Louis-Men-Planned-to-Kill-Prosecutor-McCulloch-Chief-Jackson-Bomb-the-Gateway-Arch

Businesses to receive incentive for hiring illegal immigrants, report says

Oh this is great for America! Wow What an anti American Idiot! Just Looking for other votes in 2016?  They are also Eligible for SSI. Trying to crash the system? Sounds like one of the steps  from Cloward-Piven Strategy!

Businesses reportedly will have a $3,000-per-employee incentive to hire illegal immigrants over native-born workers under President Obama’s sweeping action on illegal immigration.

Because of a kink in ObamaCare, businesses will not face a penalty for not providing illegal immigrants health care, The Washington Times reports. Illegal immigrants are ineligible for public benefits such as buying insurance on ObamaCare’s health exchanges.

Congressional aides condemned the loophole saying it puts illegal immigrants ahead of Americans in the job hunt.

“If it is true that the president’s actions give employers a $3,000 incentive to hire those who came here illegally, he has added insult to injury,” Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican told The Washington Times. “The president’s actions would have just moved those who came here illegally to the front of the line, ahead of unemployed and underemployed Americans.”

Fighting hecklers in Chicago Tuesday, Obama praised the contributions to the U.S. by a broad patchwork of immigrants, saying it is imperative that the U.S. act now to change its broken immigration policy. He cited studies showing that immigrants open one-fourth of all new U.S. businesses and that 40 percent of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or their children.

"Being a nation of immigrants gives us this huge entrepreneurial advantage over other nations," he said.

Obama’s executive action could make nearly 5 million immigrants eligible to avoid deportation.

At issue is the extent of Obama's executive actions. The measures would apply to parents of U.S. citizens or of legal permanent residents. The parents would have to have lived in the U.S. for at least five years. Obama also expanded a program designed to extend deportation protections to immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally as children.

But in a blow to some immigrant activists, Obama did not provide protections for parents of such young immigrants who are known as Dreamers.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/LeahBarkoukis/2014/11/27/report-businesses-to-receive-incentive-for-hiring-illegal-immigrants-n1924265

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/27/businesses-to-receive-incentive-to-hire-illegal-immigrants-report-says/?intcmp=latestnews

http://floppingaces.net/2011/07/30/the-cloward-piven-strategy-saul-alinsky-and-their-influence-on-obama-reader-post/

SURVEILLANCE Footage Shows Looters Targeting Ferguson Market

Any Liberal Idiot that says the Riots are Good try to defend this stupidity! These People again are like Cockroaches when you see them acting like this! This has no relevance to what happened.






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnJTx382Xqw

Schumer: In Retrospect, We Should Have Focused on the Economy, Not Obamacare

This SCUMBAG if you will  was demonizing Ted Cruz and the Evil Republicans for the So Called "Shutdown"! The main stumbling blocks were the mandates for both person and employer. Its funny how they are delayed  after the "evel GOP wanted a delay. This Clown Schumer now comes out and says they think they should have focused on the economy first before Obamacare. Wow this guy was clueless or had his head way up his A**!  The first part is from him then the other videos shows how much of a Blundering Idiot he was, or maybe he was just kissing up to Obama and party lines and not what was good for the country!



This from Senate Democrats' top strategist, whose budget-shirking, tough vote-blocking, rules-changing course of action -- carried out by Harry Reid -- still wasn't enough to salvage his party's upper chamber majority, which stood at a robust 20 seats as recently as early 2010.  He's right, of course, and now it can finally be spoken (all videos in this post via the Washington Free Beacon):


"Democrats should have continued to propose middle class-oriented programs, and built on the partial success of the stimulus. But unfortunately, Democrats blew the opportunity that the American people gave them. We took their mandate and put all of our focus on the wrong problem: Healthcare reform…it wasn't the change we were hired to make."
Several interesting bits in that clip -- from the qualified assessment of the wasteful, ineffectual stimulus program (which failed on its own terms), to the the frank admission of misplaced priorities, to the acknowledgement that the general public didn't want Obamacare (despite all of the overwrought promises and lies), to the almost jaw-droppingly candid political calculus about uninsured Americans as a voting bloc.  Also implicit in Schumer's analysis is a concession that Obamacare is not, and never was, the "jobs bill" Democrats spent so much time and effort arguing it was.  Empirical evidence has borne out that fact for years now, but it's rather striking hearing it straight from a ranking Democrat's mouth.  Schumer is obviously grappling with the political facts on the ground, as they actually exist.  President Obama was re-elected despite his signature "accomplishment" (a slim plurality of the electorate that granted him four more years favored repealing the law), and in the two election cycles that sandwiched 2012, Obamacare was a front-and-center issue.  The results horrific for Democrats. 
In fact, since the infamous Christmas Eve 2009 Senate vote on the bill that would become Obamacare, 29 of the 60 Democratic Senators who lent decisive 'aye' votes will have left office by the time the new Congress convenes in January.  If I'm reading Philip Klein's rundown properly, Mary Landrieu's likely loss would make it a clean 30.  Fully half of Senate Democrats who passed Obamacare will be gone within five years of casting that vote.  It's true that a fair number of these departures had nothing to do with the law.  A few died, while others were from blue states and were replaced by fellow Democrats.  But roughly half of those who have left or are on their way out were defeated by, or replaced by, Republicans.  Democrats fought the 2010 and 2014 elections with Obamacare serving as a heavy albatross, and they were severely punished by voters who don't buy the feeble  "it's working" propaganda.  I'll leave you with two more excerpts from Schumer's speech at the National Press Club.  The first is his, er,  'solution' to Democrats' woes moving forward: Embracing big government even more.  Yes, really.  The second features his snide dismissal of the Keystone pipeline as a project that would 'only' create thousands of jobs, mostly in red states.  Cynical, cold-blooded calculation, thy name is Charles Schumer:







http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/11/26/schumer-in-retrospect-we-should-have-focused-on-the-economy-not-obamacare-n1923848

American Pride ads. I am posting these as to what they stand for.

Obama on amnesty: 'I just took an action to change the law'

President Obama went off teleprompter yesterday in Chicago, responding to a heckler, and admitted exactly what conservative critics have charged: that he unilaterally changed law, acting on immigration amnesty.  Eric Bradner of CNN reports:

Obama was in Chicago on Tuesday night to tout an executive order halting deportations for the undocumented parents of children born in the United States. But -- as has been the pattern in recent months -- he couldn't get through the speech without being heckled by protesters who want bolder action.
About 20 minutes into the speech, three women -- one standing four rows behind Obama, holding a sign reading "Stop Deportations Now," and the other two in the crowd -- shouted a series of complaints.
One called Obama's claim that his immigration policies are focused on deporting felons, not families, "a lie." Another said it's "not just Republicans" who have called undocumented immigrants felons.
Obama told the protesters it "doesn't make sense to yell at me right now," given his immigration action last week.
"What you're not paying attention to is, I just took an action to change the law," he said as the crowd applauded.

See for yourself (complete speech here):

As Professor Charles Lipson noted, "what happens when you respond to hecklers; you can step in a deep hole."  He continues:

Here's the problem: the President just admitted his political (and legal) adversaries are correct when they say he overstepped his legal authority. They say, and their law suits will claim, that he has no power to "change the law." His job--and his oath of office--is to faithfully execute the law.
There is a legitimate debate about how far his prosecutorial discretion reaches. Until this recent action, he had said over two dozen times that it does not extend as far as he has now taken it. He has not provided any formal legal analysis from the DOJ for his actions. Nor has he explained any limiting principle for "prosecutorial discretion." He told an interviewer that it wouldn't include a future president's decision to waive tax collections, for example, but he didn't explain the principled reason why his action was legal but a refusal to collect, say, capital-gains taxes would not be.
But no one--NO ONE--says the President can unilaterally "change the law." Yet that is just what Pres. Obama said he has done. I'm sure he will hear that admission very soon in a federal court near you.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/11/obama_on_amnesty_i_just_took_an_action_to_change_the_law.html#ixzz3KE6jeoiQ
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook