Obama: Americans Have No Right To Favor Americans

The only Americans who can legitimately object to immigration are native Indian-Americans, President Barack Obama told his Chicago audience Nov. 24, as he made an impassioned ideological plea for endless immigration, cultural diversity and a big government to manage the resulting multicultural society.

“There have been periods where the folks who were already here suddenly say, ‘Well, I don’t want those folks,’ even though the only people who have the right to say that are some Native Americans,” Obama said, rhetorically dismissing the right of 300 million actual Americans to decide who can live in their homeland.

Americans should not favor other Americans over foreigners, Obama demanded. “Sometimes we get attached to our particular tribe, our particular race, our particular religion, and then we start treating other folks differently… that, sometimes, has been a bottleneck to how we think about immigration,” he said in the face of many polls showing rising opposition to his immigration agenda.

Obama denied any moral or practical distinction between native-born Americans and future migrants. “Whether we cross the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we all shared one thing, and that’s the hope that America would be the place where we could believe as we choose… and that the law would be enforced equally for everybody, regardless of what you look like or what your last name was,” said the president.

read more:


Views: 1040

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Short answer: more blah, blah, blah...talk, talk & more talking....

Or deposited in the new landfill named after him in north Dakota !

Please take his husband mike also!

Yeah...awesome...!! but who gut the balls to do it???

To all you libs defending Moochella's lunch program, do you really not value your freedom? When did you figure out you need help with your kid's lunches. Do you really need moochella in your lunch bags? Next is your panties.

As I always think: the biggest mistake of America was to elect a black POS as US president...!!  Here we have the awful results....

We have immigration laws and they must be enforced.

Judy, that is the job of the Chief Executive of the United States, under the Constitution. That is what he was elected to do and that is his job description in the Constitution.  However, Obama is an outlaw and a rogue MARXIST/ISLAMIST IDEALOGUE, running wild in our White House.  He is useing the prestige, the power of the office of President and the laws of the United States to "fundamentally transform America".  That means to destroy our country and establish a MARXIST, ISLAMIC DICTATORSHIP on these ashes.  And he will succeed, unless the People of the United States awake, become aroused and take down this mortal threat !!!

Hi, and Happy Thanksgiving to you all.  I am moved to make this reply to Mr. Obama and others who believe in what he believes in.  Allowing for his Point of View, here is my View and Experience coming from my bringing up by Immigrant Parents and my Birth here in the United States of America.  First, let me say that Mr. Obama's View does have merit, but he is wrong in his assessment that Americans born here have no right to decide who comes here and what happens here in the Country of their Birth.  I say this because:  My father was born in Sicily and my mother was born in Nova Scotia, Canada, two very different countries with different cultures and ideals.  They both came to the U.S. as young people. Mum when she was 14 and Dad when he was 22.  As Immigrants, new to American culture and the American Ideal and its laws, they had to learn the "American Way" and the English language.  They did this very well, although the english was difficult for my Dad.  Still, he managed to communicate with most people.  And he was well-liked by all who met him.  Mum, too, made friends in school and at work.  Neither one had problems with The Law and both respected the Flag of the United States of America and taught me the same.  BUT, for them, they NEVER forgot the Land of their Birth and Mum often talked to me about "back home".  I recall, whenever there was anything about Canada or the U.K. on TV or a Patriotic Program such as April 19th, Patriots Day here in Massachusetts, Mum would watch with me.  When she saw the U.S. Flag she would clap her hands for what that flag represented.  When she saw the Canadian Maple Leaf Flag, tears would well up in her eyes and she would clap with even more enthusiasm, and the same for the Union Jack Flag of Britain.  Dad also felt the same for the U.S. and his Country, Sicily.  Both expressed a desire to return to the Land of their Birth, to see it once more, before they died.

What do I make of this?  My Parents lived most of their lives here in the U.S. of A.  Both were U.S. Citizens and both were loyal to this country.  However, neither one ever forgot the land of their Birth and the experience God gave them in their early lives and to a child "Home" is where the Heart is.  Of course, they made their home here as well with my sister and me.  BUT, it is not of the same meaning as that of what is in the Heart of a Child.  As far as I am concerned and speaking just for me, That Child's Heart of Love for Home and Country is what gives the Right to decide what goes on in that country and who is allowed to enter it and when.  Americans have always been generous when it comes to Immigrants and have welcomed them and assisted them in their new home and shared the Blessings of the Lord with them.  BUT, these Immigrants who have come to stay, came in the Proper way.  My Dad to Ellis Island in New York.  The Immigrants knew, right then and there, that The Laws of our country MUST BE OBEYED.  They got the first taste, and they knew, too, that many changes to their lives would occur.  If they were not prepared for it then, they "learned the ropes" as they went along.  I always helped an Immigrant to understand "America" and looked at their eager faces and saw their willingness to learn.  I always spoke the truth to them.  I let them know that there would be many opportunities for them, there would be rewards for them and lots of good things, there would also be some bad things.  They would meet both and they would learn.

I have not travelled the World to know other countries as I do my own, however; from my experience and knowledge of the American Ideal, our Constitution and Bill of Rights, I believe that we have the best.  Its worth fighting for.

Mr. Obama needs to rethink the fact that one's Birthplace is very significant to many Americans whose Heart is here and it is that which gives them the Right to this proud and beautiful Land of the Free.

 WTF!!!! Obama is a pure IDIOT!!! Who voted the poor excuse of a President into office....?????


The uninformed idiots of this country voted him in + the informed communists who have been infiltrating this country for decades....which includes communist card carrier Frank Marshall Davis....obama's mentor during the '80's.

This POS in WH may act like an idiot.....but idiot he is not....destruction of this country has been his plan all along...and he has been well trained.   

you know as with any other country (that we didn't agree with) Obama's entrance into the presidential or other top official office, would be known as a political coup d'etat; as it was an illegal takeover of a sovereign nation. 

was he ever even qualified to be a state or US Senator?  don't know.  Maybe Marshall helped him get legal citizenship or he filed for after marriage to Michelle?  Then at least, his state and Fed Senate issues would not be in question.




Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco


Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service