The picture of Rangel, Can you just imagine him in Sheriff Joes Tent City in Arizona with his own pink Tent and with PINK underwear?

Many conservative pundits and others talk about the coming storm in November to remove the Democratic Party's hold on Congress. What concerns me most is the number of folks that simply take this for granted. We already have seen where the Democrats are planning their attack to keep control of the Congress. What is the Republican Party doing. on the surface, I don't see much. It's time to rally the troops and put a plan together. talk is cheap. it's time we act to save our Republic. The Democrats are holding off from any really controversial legislation until after the election. The best defense for the Republican Party is a good offense. Call the demo bluff.

This nation is in trouble. Obama is not the problem. Neither is Pelosi, Reid, Rangel, Frank, Dodd, Waters, Waxman, Gore, Kerry, Clinton, Clinton, or any of the other despicable humans in Washington D.C. The problem is the lack of intelligence and lack of honesty of people like Jim in the reader's comments section. No one can harm this nation if they are not elected to their respective positions.

Last week the Patriot Post recommended a book "That Printer of Udell's" all I can say if you want a great book get it and especially for your children and grand children. I have read the Preface twice and let others read that alone. Just getting into the book and it is so great. I have sent out the web link to others to order.

Also the poor do hire people the pols who promise they will not have to work to become wealthy the pols will just redistribute it from those of us who do work and pay taxes. Jim in readers comments is a person who listens only to the BSM and who only reads the SEIU newsletters or is a College Professor who was a hippie during the Viet Nam era.

Regarding Illegal Immigration.

Do you want to stop this insanity?? Then support E-Verification, impose huge fines on those who hire illegals, cut off all forms of welfare which include medical treatment, free schooling, and don't allow anchor babies, do not allow monies earned illegally to be transferred back to Mexico. If illegals have no access to jobs and entitlements, then they'll go home. It's time to take back America Folks!!! Secure the borders at whatever the cost. If we can spend billions of dollars on pork barrel projects, then we can spend billions to secure our borders. Don't except anymore excuses from our illustrious elitist politicians. They work for us, the legal citizens of this country. Stand up and demand they do their job, or get rid of them.

Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented immigrant" is like calling a drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist "

Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States reads: The United States shall guaranty to every state in this Union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.

Is not the state of Arizona being invaded and are not those illegal invaders rendering domestic violence against the state??? Why can not the Government of the States proceed with a law suit against the executive branch of the federal government for violating the Constitution and ask for a Federal Court order mandating that Obama protect the state and its citizens? The same goes for Ft. Hancock, TX.

What a disgusting person; and those yankees keep electing him. TERM LIMITS........TERM LIMITS!!

Bill Little is right..."What is the Republican Party doing"? Seems difficult to keep voting for the same party that had opportunity as majority under Bush to make a lot of positive changes, yet approved bloated war budgets that line the pockets of private enterprise. Yes, I am very conservative, but have found that the Republicans support the 'political class' just as much a Democrats. We need a Foundational Change in our government in that we need term limits, benefit limits, and opportunity for people to actually serve their country in Congress. Instead we are facing a situation, although not yet as extreme, but much in parallel, with France before its revolution. (Not much taught about that in our fine public schools, so this probably falls on deaf ears for those under the age of 30.)

Time for a revolution?! I'm ready.

Even Democrat Sen. Evan Bayh gets it. Over the weekend he admitted that many Americans in the top income tax bracket "happen to be small business people — they're the people who are making the investment decisions, making the hiring decisions. The last thing we want to do right now is to reduce their confidence and make them fearful of the future."

So to the Jims of the world, maybe their fellow Democrats can convince them that Reaganomics isn't "voodoo economics" - it's the way things work in a free-market economy.

By the way, my previous comment about "bloated war budgets that line the pockets of private enterprise" is in regards to first-hand accounts of people I know who work in the war zone as private contractors. Bloated salaries, extremely high costs for basic needs (i.e. food, supplies, lodging) in a country where people live in abject poverty. Shouldn't it be pretty cheap to supply our troops with necessities in a poverty-stricken country? Their expenses should actually be less than in our country, yet charge 3-4 times as much as here, if not more. And please don't respond that it takes more to deliver the goods. Our military is built to be efficient, yet we hire contractors to do what the military used to do. Last time I checked, this was a war, not an oversized shopping mall. However, a little research will show special interests with regards to the bloated contracts awarded by our fine representatives in Washington DC.

Article 1, section 10 of the Constitution of The United States, in the last sentence, states;

No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.

If a state is being invaded by people from a country on its boarder, and the government refuses to protect that state by enforcing current laws in a timely manner, can the Governor of that state declare war on the offending country? Can they draft an armed citizen army, protect their boarder against all trying to invade, take prisoners of war and fire upon those who attempt to fire upon them?

Thank you for an honest, level headed report. Groupings of words are intended to stimulate thought processes, which usually help an individual formulate a decision and/or chose a path by which to get there. As nature and parts of society would have it, this does not always happen in some people. More specifically, I refer to people whose thought processes are controlled by liberal unions, the government, racially motivated organizations, sometimes by the liberal educational system, etc. The propoganda spread is too much for them to process, so they just absorb what they are able and take the whole package as "truth". Trying to get through to mentalities like this can be compared to chiseling a granite bust with a wax chisle. The mallet is warm, the block is intact and there are chards of wax everywhere. I am sure there are arguements out there against that, but it holds up in reality.

Loved your editorial response to Jim. You answered his Democrat talking points in a factual and elegant manner, which is difficult to do because there is so much out there to refute the talking points of folks like Jim that it's nearly impossible to do so for lack of knowing where to start. You did a great job, as usual, and I plan to keep a copy for future reference.

"If a state is being invaded by people from a country on its boarder, and the government refuses to protect that state by enforcing current laws in a timely manner, can the Governor of that state declare war on the offending country? Can they draft an armed citizen army, protect their boarder against all trying to invade, take prisoners of war and fire upon those who attempt to fire upon them?"

No, the state can't. This is not a military invasion; this is an infiltration, thus a Federal matter of securing the border. The generally insecure borders of the United States exist for a law-abiding people. When the Federal Government is faced with those who ignore our laws why are they so passive? One can only infer an ulterior motive.

But Shawn think. That is what Obama calls "jobs saved or created."

Hey 'Bob': I am an avowed AZ Conservative sitting to the right of Rush, so bear with me here. The judge who quashed parts of the AZ bill was, I believe, appointed by Bush II. Further, she is from AZ and knows the situation here. Personally I think she made the wrong decision, or at least went a bit too far. Give her credit for not axing the whole thing, because she is keeping the conflict alive, and that's what's needed at this time. Another couple of judges I am familiar with would have simply cut it down. I don't know where you're from, but I'm from AZ and know the situation is rotten here and want it resolved FAST. Your remarks won't help--you're just burping party line and your remarks inflame the competition. You gotta go at it reasonably, not reactionarily(?).

In regards to Friday's Digest story on Arizona's immigration law, why doesn't this ruling surprise me with a Clinton Appointed, leftist liberal judge? What ever happen to enforcing the laws, following the constitution, interpreting the law as written? Judges should base decisions on the rule of law, not on their partisan political beliefs and affiliations. Our country is being viciously attacked from within by a severely ruined legal system and because our judges, instead of interpreting the law, interject their own moralities and activist beliefs, good and bad, into legal decisions made. I still say a revolution is needed. Change will obviously never come about through supposed 'democratic' processes." --Bob

"If a state is being invaded by people from a country on its boarder, and the government refuses to protect that state by enforcing current laws in a timely manner, can the Governor of that state declare war on the offending country? Can they draft an armed citizen army, protect their boarder against all trying to invade, take prisoners of war and fire upon those who attempt to fire upon them?"

Perry

Perry, this used to be called "The State Guard", to my understanding, it was different from the National Guard that answered to the President, A "State Guard" answered to the Governor of the State. I called and asked Arizona about the "State Guard", no answer, I think they want the Feds to send the National Guard, but the way it looks, they'd better rely on their "State Guard" under the Governor.

For God & Country

The American

This keeps reminding me of the corruptive and evil souls that are trying to pull this great country down. The GOP and Dems. are all one body that DON'T DO THE RIGHT THING. SARAH PALIN is right -no cajones from the top down! I hope she stays right where she is to pick and peck here and there at the WRONG DOERS! I AM 72 and remember when things were not like this-:(

The absolutely most vile, vicious racist people that I have ever met in my life are supporters of Mubarack Hussein Obama. I wore a shirt to work that said Obama=Socialism. An African-American 2 rows over made the comment that I must "want" to use the "N" word, so that must be what Socialist means now. I didn't respond, because he made the remark not to me, but just loud enough tat I could hear it. I've been muzzled in this (union) office ever since Obama was elected. I'm NOT allowed to tell the truth. My manager warned me that my shirt reading "Deport Obama" offended someone. Who cares? They can wear anything in the world supporting Obama, put banners across their cubicles, but if you're on the 'wrong' side, you're not supposed to express ANYTHING. In other words, keep your mouth shut. My office is a microcosm of this entire country, they feel they MUST muzzle all opposition, like no one can see the truth and the corruption.

"Republicans have proposed a bill to deny funding to any part of the (health insurance) law. But a more likely scenario is to choke off funding for pieces of the legislation that they find particularly troublesome, such as the requirement to buy insurance, changes to Medicare and the one most cited by House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio): the “army of new IRS agents” to implement new requirements for business." Fox News.Com

Finally there are some coherent strategies coming from the Republican Party. Since a repeal of this socialist monstrosity called ObamaCare is highly unlikely, blowing up the pipeline that feeds the Communist and his followers is the next best thing.

And since Socialist liberals are hiding and running fearful of their constituents as a result of their absurd expenditures march, going against this anti-spending initiative would prove career ending.

If they move a little further to the right and become true conservative instead of RINOS, I believe I might soon send a donation to the Republican Party. Finally some common sense!

The day they tell my young adult children will be fined for not buying communist mandated, wealth distributing "health insurance," is the day I revolt along side with my children.

Ann Coulter's Last Word is right on. The wimps with tissue paper gonads should find other work. Commenting that the collectivists are dirtier than we are, or just as dirty is nuts and false. Why are we so stupid as to let them control the semantics!?

I just want to know, if I "mess up" on my taxes, can I cut a deal? No?? I have to live by laws that govern this great country?

To the Constitutionally ignorant morons who believe that eliminating the Electoral College will bring about fairness and unity, I would recommend that they leave their concrete jungles and venture out to the real world where the food and most of the products that are still made in America come from. If they are successful in their attempts, the first thing that will happen will be a call by the states they are attempting to eliminate from the electoral process, to convene a Constitutional convention which will change absolutely everything and they will loose many of the so called gains they have experienced over the years. If that is not successful then states will begin seceding from the union, right and left, and then these economically ignorant brain children can see how much food they can grow in Central Park or the California desert. It is time for a revolution where the Constitution is held in honor and is once again revered. I pray it will be a peaceful one, but I fear it will not. Signed Ray Stone - The Republic of Texas

Having the republicans in control of Congress is not the answer. The republican leadership in most cases are members of the aristocracy just like the democraps. The republicans in most cases are socialists, while the democraps are the communists. Until the republican party starts throwing out RINO's and CFR members they are enemies of the Constitution just as the democraps are, but only to a slightly less degree. Any doubt about this, who brought us no child left behind, the unPatriot Act, expanded socialized medicine (medicare part D), gave us the first bailout, pushed amnesty for illegal aliens, signed McCain-Feingold, banned incandescent light bulbs, refused to get us out of the UN, pushed the new world order, etc, etc, etc.

According to Article III, Section II, Clause II of the US Constitution Judge Bolton had no authority to rule in the Arizona SB1070 case. Only the Supreme Court has jurisdiction when a state is a party named in a law suit brought on by the feds. Check it out! Its right there plain as day. This is the real travesty...that our Constitution is being subverted at every turn by this Marxist idiot. And now he wants to legalize 30 million illegal invaders by executive order?

So he wants to be a dictator, huh? I thinks its time for a Second Amendment smack down!

I am in love with Ann Coulter. ;)

Comments by "Chuck De" (posted herein, August 2, 2010 at 1:08:42 PM) are as exemplary and logical as they are pragmatic. They speak well of the best adherents to conservative sensibilities (and are yet another reason to adore readers of The Patriot Post).

In stark contrast, however, the infantile, low-culture portion of a mindset which chooses to include such an unflattering picture of a sitting congressman at the outset of the article reminds me of those often ignoble cretins who whine, malign, and opine almost "tetherlessly" from the hard, left-most edges of the anti-conservative movements as if it is admirable for us to bully each other as if on the elementary school playground by any method we can get away with.

Ironically, I had just two weeks ago replaced The Drudge Report as my long-time home page with The Patriot Post in order to escape such uncivilized, puerile portrayals, not to mention Drudge's inexplicable abundance of misleading (time wasting) yellow journalistic "sensationalisms."

I guess it really IS too much to ask in the 21st century that our pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness sometimes uplift us above our own puerile proclivities. (What's next then, fist fights in Congress? Footage to be repeated ad infinitum on YouTube?)

Or can we at least count on Mr. Alexander's unparalleled cadre of pundits at TPP to consistently take the high road which focuses the best of our well-reasoned attacks on the ideas, views, and values of our opponents, not on their least flattering photos?

[Hat tip: The venerable Peggy Noonan for her inspiring us, or at least ME, to rail against the metastasizing paucity of dignity in the 21st century USA.]

Command & Control fans constantly carp about "trickle-down" supply-side Reaganomics, but it is the regime of __resident Obama that proves that "trickle down" confiscate-and-spend, ruling-class "stimulus" originates from them, while Mr Obama hosts his White House soirees and lavish vacations, allowing very little to trickle down to us lowly peons. Free enterprise Reaganomics is the "bubble-up" economics 101 of prosperity.

This is interesting stuff. I hope something good comes of it.

ONLY THE SCOTUS HAS CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT AZ TRIAL

Case Against Arizona & Governor Brewer

ONLY the US Supreme Court has Constitutional Authority to Conduct the Trial

By Publius Huldah Thursday, July 29, 2010

Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.

Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says:

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction…

“Original” jurisdiction means the power to conduct the “trial” of the case (as opposed to hearing an appeal from the judgment of a lower court). You all know quite well what a “trial” is - you see them all the time on TV shows: Perry Mason, Boston Legal, The Good Wife, etc. Witnesses testify and are cross-examined, etc.

The style of the Arizona case shows quite clearly that the named defendants are:

State of Arizona; and Janice K. Brewer,

Governor of the State of Arizona, in her

Official Capacity, Defendants.

Judge Susan R. Bolton has no more authority to preside over this case than do you

See where it says, “State of Arizona”? And “Janice K. Brewer, Governor of the State of Arizona, in her official Capacity”? THAT (plus Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2) is what gives the US Supreme Court “original Jurisdiction”, i.e., jurisdiction to conduct the trial of this case. THAT is what strips the federal district court of any jurisdiction whatsoever to hear this case. Judge Susan R. Bolton has no more authority to preside over this case than do you (unless you are a US Supreme Court justice).

In Federalist No. 81 (13th para), Alexander Hamilton commented on this exact provision of Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2:

...Let us now examine in what manner the judicial authority is to be distributed between the supreme and the inferior courts of the Union. The Supreme Court is to be invested with original jurisdiction, only “in cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls, and those in which A STATE shall be a party.” Public ministers of every class are the immediate representatives of their sovereigns. All questions in which they are concerned are so directly connected with the public peace, that, as well for the preservation of this, as out of respect to the sovereignties they represent, it is both expedient and proper that such questions should be submitted in the first instance to the highest judicatory of the nation. Though consuls have not in strictness a diplomatic character, yet as they are the public agents of the nations to which they belong, the same observation is in a great measure applicable to them. In cases in which a State might happen to be a party, it would ill suit its dignity to be turned over to an inferior tribunal….[boldface added, caps in original]

Yet Attorney General Eric Holder filed the case in a court which is specifically stripped of jurisdiction to hear it!

So! Counsel for the State of Arizona should consider:

1. File a Petition for Removal before federal district court Judge Susan R. Bolton demanding that the case be removed to the Supreme Court on the ground that under Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2, US Constitution, only the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to conduct the trial of this case.

2. If Judge Bolton denies the Petition for Removal, file a Petition for Writ of Mandamus in the Supreme Court asking that court to order Judge Bolton to transfer the case to the Supreme Court.

A Petition for Writ of Mandamus is an old common-law “extraordinary writ”: It asks a court to ORDER a lower court or other public official to something which it is its duty to do. In Kerr v. US District Court for Northern District of California (1976), the Supreme Court said, respecting the propriety of issuing writs of mandamus:

....the fact still remains that “only exceptional circumstances amounting to a judicial ‘usurpation of power’ will justify the invocation of this extraordinary remedy.”...(para 13)

When a federal district court judge presides over a case which the Constitution specifically prohibits her from hearing, and even issues a ruling enjoining the enforcement of a State Law, then that federal district court judge usurps power. She is specifically stripped - by Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2 - of jurisdiction to preside over the case against the STATE of Arizona and against THE GOVERNOR of the STATE of Arizona.

For procedures for filing the Petition for Writ of Mandamus, see Supreme Court Rule 20.

Article IV, Sec. 4, requires the federal government to protect each of the States against invasion.Not only is the Obama regime refusing to perform this specific Constitutional duty - it seeks to prohibit the Sovereign STATE of Arizona from defending itself! This lawlessness on the part of the Obama regime is unmatched in the history of Our Country.

OK, counselors - Go for it!

I remember in my American history classes all of the discussions and debate that surrounded theearly American republic. There was much ado about making certain that all of the states had equal rights when it came to electing those that were supposed to govern. Take for instance, the United

States Senate which has 2 Senators from eacxh and every state. This gives small states like Rhode Island equality with larger ones like New York and that carries through to each and every state. The actual eolection of the President was set up to be accomplished by the Electoral College made up of representatives from every state according to its population. To eliminate the Electoral College would be tantamount to turning the election over to New York city, Philadephia, Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta and a few other large cities. The rest of the country would have little to no say in who got elected. The elimination of the electoral college is nothing more than another power grab by the people who believe that they have the right to govern this country however they see fit. This would push the US farther down the road to Marxism or Islamic control. Please don't make the mistake of listening to those who would eliminate the Electoral College. It is the Obamaomics of the Muslim world talking. Don't be fooled. Keep the rights that we have, and fight for more becaquse Obama and his cohorts are fighting to take all of our rights and we don't have any to give.

I surely do hope that the piece above written by one Richard Abell is on the mark.

For if it is, we ( AZ ) save a lot of legal bills; restore immediately the AZ SB 1070 for enforcement; and we may have a Conservative candidate-nominee for the SCOTUS next time we a have a Conservative President ( me thinks after the Nov 2012 elections ).

Is anyone really surprised that 90 plus thousand pages of sensitive documents are leaked and threaten our young men in service?

Has anyone noticed that Obama and his appointed cohorts are avowed Marxists and have publicly stated that fact in their own words?

With so many of that ilk running from the White House do you really think there are any secret documents that have not been tampered with after a year and a half?

Axelrod calls Rahm Emanuel a "pile driver" as he daily plugs into our traditional policies and laws of our "free" nation and is highly instrumental in transforming our way of life.

These Chicago thugs are anti American and are in the process of a coup! Why are our Conservative leaders so quiet?

God save America as our "leaders" are either "disrupting, dismantling and destroying" it or they are ignoring that this takeover is going on.

B

G Dub, you don't have to hope that Richard Abell is on the mark, he's dead center in the bullseye; second paragraph of Section 2 is exactly as Richard states and it couldn't be any plainer. Methinks that Jan Brewer has one heck of a case for a Writ of Mandamus. I've see it used and it is a powerful writ when the case is with merit.

Jim's response to TAXES DO NOT CREATE JOBS is typically short of common sense but very competent at mindlessly mimicking thought with DNC talking points. Tax cuts can only go to those who pay taxes; welfare handouts go to those who don't pay taxes. Forced redistributing wealth is theft, whether or not it has the sanction of a government. If Jim is so upset at taxpayers, why doesn't he just go and take all the money he wants from those who have more than he does. Others can do the same to him. Why does he need to hide behind a government tax collector? As for refusing to enforce law, does Jim demand the Constitution be enforced as written? Does Jim believe there is a Constitutional Right to be illegal? Looking at the present Administration's choices, does Jim believe the Constitution should only be selectively enforced? Shroud's recent case represents a clear example of self-admitted government by preferential choice? The Great Depression and the convenient economic troubles leading into the 2008 elections do have parallels. The exaggerated parallels, however, magnified by DNC talking points, were only meant to dupe those who only know history edited, amended, transformed and fixed by "PC" con artists. Does Jim excuse his party's complicity in setting up the root causes of the economic downfall of 2008? Does Jim selectively condemn evil "bankers" while giving a pass to politicians he likes, those who made economic insanity law? I blame all who allowed it. What actions (or lack virtue) does he condemn that are not the stock and trade of the very politicians he adores? Jim's comprehension of "trickle down" economics also shows the clear hand of DNC "PC" manipulators molding his thinking in spite of reality. With the overwhelming proof that Reagan's economic policies were correct, and that PBO's are insane, just what sort of "Voodoo" prevents Jim from seeing his own reflection in the mirror? One last point. Balancing a budget begins with income but is sustained by limiting spending to the income. Requiring future generations to pay the bill for Jim's and Jim's idols free spending today is vile. What decent person would sell their progeny into debt-slavery? What decent person wouldn't stop it and reverse the debt-burden on future generations? What decent person would lie and spend today, utterly disregarding common sense, and do what Jim's idolized leaders ARE doing? The only people who do that with a clear conscience are bloated, plutocratic aristocrats who set themselves up to be the rulers of the people -- does Modern American Liberal not come to mind when studying the politics and policies of the "ORP'ites" now ruling America? Liberal/progressive/socialist ideology is not limited to a party; there are both Democrats and Republicans who embrace modern American liberalism, absolutely to their discredit. I am no fan of "GW," but to propagandistically blame him for DNC control of government since 2007 (and previous villany) is childish. "GW" never was a conservative, a Reagan, but considering the alternative choices in 2000, 2004, 2006, 2008, and now 2010, he was the lesser of evils - unquestionably better than the any of the "ORP'ites" criticizing and blaming him for the socialist utopian hell they have been and are trying to create.

Re Mr. Rangel and the other bums like him.

Vote everyone OUT of office. Vote no one into office. The country, by virtue of default, will be better off. If some kind of life form must occupy those offices of greed, corruption, bitterness, arrogance etc, fill them with pidgeons! Four years of pidgeon crap cannot smell any worse than what we have now.,,and have had for the past 15+ years

Gregg

I disagree with many points you make, but you always come through with some excellent ones. In this this Brief it was the one you passed on about the electoral college. I am from New York and am not ashamed to vote Democratic, but killing off the electoral college would be a debacle.

Less wonderful was your claim that "...after the collapse of the USSR... again, thanks to Ronald Reagan." Reagan may have led the final sprint during which communism pulled up lame, but to give him full credit -- even in passing -- is beyond simplistic. It was a lapse in your usually perfect record of giving credit to Soldiers and the dynamism of Democratic Capitalism.

Ok, here goes.

1. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with having the Electoral college vote match the popular vote, provided each states' College gives the votes to THAT STATE's po;ular vote winner. When you think about it, you have candidates that do not win the vote of the people, in other words, were not the people's choice, yet still win the Electoral votes of that state. That's not much different from what we're talking about here, but it has to be a state-by-state basis, not just handing the election to whomever wins the popular vote at the national level.

2. The Supreme Court is the ONLY court with jurisdiction in the AZ case. The ONLY court. This whole thing is an end-run around our constitution by Holder's DOJ on orders from BO. The only benefit I see for them is the massive influx of Democrat voters, should an(other) amnesty take place. Funny thing is, most legal immigrants, those that went through the process instead of sneaking in and being granted amnesty, are more conservative. And for the Catholic Church to be against the AZ law because most Mexicans are Catholic, would seem to me to be a violation of that liberal mantra "seperation of church and state". Funny how the liberals don't mind the church meddling in politics as long as the church agrees with their agenda. Hypocrites, one and all. Of course, some of the biggest hypocrites I've ever met in my lifetime profess to be "religious".

3. Tax breaks are good for the economy, and everyone knows it. Everyone. It's just a question of who's willing to admit it.

4. It was Reagan's National Defense Policy of keeping America strong and packing our arsenal with every available weapon that led to the fall of the USSR. They simply did not have the resources (due to their policy of the government owning everything in sight) to keep up with us. Now we have a CIC who bows before world leaders, and who would have us prostrate ourselves before our Muslim conquerors. You want eliminate terrorism? You go after them with everything you have and you don't quit til the last one lays down arms.

Re: Bush tax cuts expiring--I just don't think I can stand one more yahoo talking about how Bush's tax cuts all went to the "rich." Wait until the breaks for tuition, small business creation, capital gains, and other things disappear. Wait until the death tax comes back. As usual, it won't be the "rich" that pay. The Soroses and Gateses of the world have plenty of places to shelter their money. Just don't you get uppity and think you should ever have a chance at making even a FRACTION of what they have!

My wife and I both make pretty modest salaries, and I got tax breaks through most of the early 2000s. We're not rich! But we could deduct tuition and the costs of buying a home. And every time we got a little back from our "benevolent" government, we spent it on something we needed.

Now the latest charge by the current regime is that we're not spending enough, but saving too much. Well, knowing we're going to get nailed in the not-too-distant future makes us want to hang onto what we have. If Obummer REALLY cared about jump starting this economy, he'd eliminate the uncertainty and let me spend on what I want to spend on. But I don't know how bad it's going to be when the new taxes kick in, so I hold off on purchases and don't buy ANYTHING on credit. That we're still here in the dumps over a year later makes me think he DOESN'T want us to recover. After all, their motto is "never let a good crisis go to waste."

Peggy Noonan is an inspiration and a panderer to the left.

No but the North Vietnam government used Yellow Rain on the Hymong Tribe killing most of the tribe to include women and children.

I agree that with the Republican opportunity looming that we need to start hearing a tough talk plan on what they intend to do. And undo!

Laws repealing what the democrats have spawned will get an Obama veto. They hold the purse strings. Starve the beast! A great motto?

The beast=Government, Starve =no hard earned tax payer dollars!

But alas!, What is Mr. Steele doing?.....hello?....anybody there?......??

Go, Ann Coulter!! I have long hated the fact that conservative commentators have routinely indicated the possibility of conservative bad behavior. Based on my 2 appearances at Tea Party events here in the Tidewater area of Virginia, I can state with certainty that there was absolutely NO racist remarks made by any of the speakers and I did not hear any from the crowd either. As to comments about our America-hating President, there were plenty but I do believe his actions reflect that stance. And, again, no sign or person indicated it had anything at all to do with his race - just his actions.

Right on Ann!!! Sadly there is a lack of Cojones even in the Conservative ranks. Even my man Glen Beck was unusually wishy-washy when covering this with the TEA Partiers the other night. This is no time to waffle, it is time to emphasize the vast differences between "us" and "them" and call out every self respecting, and country respecting American to become an activist for a sacred but seriously wounded cause.

I disagree with your suggestion that Nancy Pelosi channeled Yoda. Yoda would have drained the swamp since he was a Jedi Master. Since Nancy Pelosi didn't drain the swamp, it would have been better for you to have had her channel Darth Sidious or Darth Maul.

I must take issue with some of Mr. Reagan's comments.

While I agree the release of the material, if proven, is an act of treason, and I do agree with the expected treatment of US sympathizers, it seems his primary argument against the material is that it is a year old. If what is presented is, in fact, true, does Mr. Reagan believe that the national sentiment described has completely turned around? I think not. Moreover, the most serious leak of our plans has already occurred. President Obama has said we are leaving in one year. What could be more helpful to our opponents than that?

"political Correctness" is killing this country.

Now a race card is being played by Maxine Waters,

Who,like Rangel,has been proven crooked.

WHAAAHH! Meanwhile,the Guy in SC was hung out to dry for cheating on his wife,John Edwards is STILL being harangued,clinton is most famous for Lewinsky,

etc.The list goes on and on,but just You dare call out a black congressman or senator,and You are automatically branded a racist.

America's race card has expired.Crooked politicos,

regardless of color,must be brought to justice

under the same laws that You and I must follow.

And that goes for the illegals,too.What part of

"ILLEGAL" do they not understand?

Outraged in Florida

I often read where commentors make reference to decisions made by Judges. Judges are only required to determine the CONSTITUTIONALITY of laws. Another thing, where is the SCOTUS on all of "the Messiah's" appointments to office? Are they not Constitutionally responsible for challenging the other branches on their unconstitutional behaviors?

In your "Readers Comments", and your response to "Jim", you nailed it when pointing out the truth.

Being in residential construction, and witnessing the positive response to the Bush tax cuts after 9/11, I was one of many who did not have enough time in the day to get my work completed.

We had more people, (with sound financial backing to build a house), of ALL levels of income, building their homes. I couldn't find enough help, considering that anyone and everyone that could swing a hammer was working.

It was great!

2006 rolled around, and that is when everyone started to reel back on spending money to build a house.

The liberal Democrats would not listen to those who were sounding the alarm on the Freddy and Fannie situation. And that is when things started to get rough. (Understand, there were many outside forces leading to this downfall. Include them in this reading.)

It has been in a downward spiral since, and we have basically come to a stop.

Thank you for putting "Jim" in his place. Hopefully he will pull his head out of the clouds, and see things for how they really are.

This liberal Democrat administration and congress has failed. They are backwards in their attempts to stabilize our economy. It is only going to get worse in the next coming months, with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, and the implementation of the "ObamaCare" tax increases.

We haven't seen nothing yet. Get ready for more.