Obama Slams Supreme Court Decision Upholding Lower Court Immigration Ruling – Plays Race Card

barack-obama-13Posted by Tina

The Supreme Court’s 4-4 decision on an immigration case today deferred back to a lower court ruling in a case brought by several states. The ruling blocks the imposition of Obama’s program allowing undocumented parents of children born in the US to remain in the United States for three years and to apply for work permits. The decision prevents the administration from implementing and expanding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

The President is speaking on the ruling now and he’s really making me angry. It isn’t the decision or its ramifications that have me fuming. The decision is what it is an our immigration issues have yet to be resolved by Congress. I’m just sick and tired of Obama’s racist shtick. He’s framing his opinion as an issue of bigotry AS HE ALWAYS DOES! He’s deceitfully playing to the ignorant voter who will believe his political divisive tripe! Obama is a shameless partisan bigot and a liar!

The states in this lawsuit were not motivated to keep “people who don’t look like we do” or “don’t pray like we do” from coming into our country as the President is saying! They were motivated by federal policies that put the states under financial and legal stresses and burdens. They were expressing a strong need to control our borders and to manage immigration wisely. They were expressing frustration that the President, who bypassed the Congress, has no concern about the negative unintended consequences his executive order brings to local governments, schools, hospitals and safety net programs. The states were expressing their dismay that the President of the United States of America does not respect our laws, our constitutional process, or the citizens of this nation. The states were using the courts to address what they believe was an illegal act taken by our President. He should respect that!

The President is wrong in his ugly assertions of bigotry, racism and hatred. America has always been a melting pot and always will be, but we are also a nation of laws and we have survived, thrived, and remained free in part because of the peoples’ embrace and support of the rule of law. We have remained stable and free because we have not been STUPID about immigration and our borders. The action taken by President Obama, who as a “Constitutional scholar” knows better, reflects his preference for a flexible constitution, a constitution that allows the smooth moves of dictators and tyrants to run roughshod on the people. The presidents open arms policy is not only stupid, it insults the American people…it is irresponsible and unpatriotic!.

We are talking about a man who facilitates the systematic erosion and destruction of our immigration laws and policy. We are talking about a party that is complicit in this through federal and local policies that invite people to enter our country illegally. It isn’t just policy either, it is a general attitude! It is attitude that creates an atmosphere of lawlessness and lawbreaking with impunity. Liberals encourage people to come and remain without fear of deportation.

I do not blame those who break our laws to come here for this problem. I blame the politicians who do not respect or even try to uphold our immigration laws, who encourage illegal entry and award lawbreakers by giving them free healthcare, welfare, housing, food stamps, K-12 education, college, drivers licenses and voting privilege. I blame local politicians that create safe zones in their cities.

The next president will likely have an opportunity to appoint Supreme Court judges. Our votes in November will be the difference between restoring control of immigration policy and controlling our borders or continuing in the politics to throw our borders open not only to “families” and good people “looking for a better life,” but to terrorists, drug cartels, human traffickers, rapists, murderers, and common criminals. Our votes will determine whether we open our doors to people who come here legally with a strong desire to become Americans and/or work here respecting our laws and values or whether we let anyone flood in to overrun our country, abuse our services, commit crimes, hide, and flaunt our laws. Rats too “hide in the shadows!”

The president’s divisive, race baiting remarks tell me the only person worthy of our votes in November is Donald Trump. He’s the only candidate who is willing to talk about this issue honestly and to address the sentiment, if not the policies, that concerned Americans are feeling and desire. Hillary doesn’t speak honestly to this issue. She called this decision “heartbreaking.” Heartbreaking for whom, Hillary? Where is your heart for people in states overburdened by the irresponsible and political actions of self interested politicians? Where is her heart for families whose loved ones are raped or slaughtered by criminal illegals the courts turned loose on our streets under Obama’s watch? Where is her heart for the people whose kids’ lives are destroyed by heroin brought in through the open borders policies that afford easy access to the cartels? And lest you think I’m only interested in the lives of white kids, where are Hillary’s and Obama’s hearts for the kids in Chicago? Many of those are black kids who are experiencing double digit unemployment. Kids whose opportunities are being blunted by the influx of illegal immigrants taking available jobs AND irresponsible minimum wage demands. Kids impacted by crowded schools and upper pressure on available services.

Tell me…do…when do our leaders start thinking about how the policies they champion for votes impact the citizens they purport to serve? Tell me when do our leaders remember their vow to uphold our Constitution and laws? Tell me, when do our politicians get off their partisan butts, clear their minds, and begin to focus on what is best for the nation as a whole. The people are not served by special interest legislation and policy targeted for political self-interest. The people will are best served when policy serves us all.

Donald Trump clearly cares about America and the American people…every one of us! He cares about getting control of the border and fixing our immigration policy. Whether he can get Congress to work with him remains to be seen, however, at least we know his “heart” is in the right place and he cares about the law. It’s time to be rid of the most divisive president this nation has ever seen and it’s time to begin to throw the damn race baiting, vote buying, division building, self-serving bums out of Congress who make decisions based mostly on a race agenda and and self-interests. It’s time to turn the chaotic tide to calm seas with reasoned solutions. It’s time to elect Donald Trump or lose our nation to lawlessness and chaos…Venezuela anyone?

This entry was posted in Constitution and Law. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Obama Slams Supreme Court Decision Upholding Lower Court Immigration Ruling – Plays Race Card

  1. J. Soden says:

    Obumble is the lamest of lame ducks.

  2. Harold says:

    Dear Post Scripts , would you publish this a a stand alone article about the photo op sit in of no real purpose but look at me doing something useless,

    I read this article in a conservative publication (I know shame shame from the hand wringing liberal gun grabbers).

    In case you somehow were not yet aware, Democrats in the House of Representatives began throwing a temper tantrum, er, I mean, staging a “sit-in” on the House floor Wednesday.

    Their main issue of protest? That the House GOP refused to vote on one of the gun control bills that had been rejected by the Senate the day before. To wit, they wanted a vote on a blanket ban on firearms sales to any individual on the terror watch lists, with no due process or recourse for those individuals wrongly placed on the lists.

    So, taking a page out of the playbooks of their useful idiots in the Black Lives Matter and Occupy movements, a contingent of House Dems disrupted business as usual, violated the rules and decorum of the lower chamber, shouted down any and all who opposed their temper tantrum, and refused to leave until they got what they wanted.

    While the liberal media was eating up this publicity stunt, not everyone was amused or impressed, including Republican South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy, who took to his Facebook page to make a salient point and pose a particularly pertinent question —

    How will what they are demanding make us safer?

    “Democrat members are certainly free to stage a sit-in and shut down House floor activities as they have done,” Gowdy wrote. “What would be infinitely more productive would be asking this administration and the Department of Justice in particular why prosecutions of current gun law violations has decreased under their watch.” (Now there’s a good question, but will they answer it?)

    “There are already broad categories of persons prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition and those lists go largely without prosecution,” he reminded his colleagues from across the aisle.

    “Now House Democrats are asking for yet another list of persons — this time without any due process rights — so this administration can fail to enforce that list of laws too,” he concluded. “How does that make us safer?”

    Trey Gowdy is absolutely correct, both in that there are already a significant number of gun control laws on the books that go largely unenforced and that what Democrats are demanding would do nothing to keep us safer.

    In truth, this lame stunt by the House Dems is nothing more than a bunch of 60s hippy holdovers attempting to relive their glory years while waving bloody shirts and banging the drum of gun control in a crass effort to mobilize their largely disenfranchised base.

    It is also a blatant and gross exploitation of a terrible tragedy to raise funds off of spilled blood while demanding new laws that won’t prevent blood from being spilled again.

    They should be ashamed, if they had any shame.

    :end of article

    • Tina says:

      Harold I apologize for missing your request. In future when you want something posted to the front page please put: ATTN JACK AND TINA, at the top of your comment. It will help to grab my attention.

  3. Pie Guevara says:

    Tina nails it down nicely. Rats have no shame.

  4. Chris says:

    Trump’s speech yesterday contained at least eleven false claims. When challenged on two of them in particular by Lester Holt, Trump’s attitude was basically this: The truth doesn’t matter.

    HOLT: You made some very bold claims about her that didn’t stand up when we put it —

    TRUMP: Well, you don’t know if they stand up. What claim are you talking about?

    HOLT: Well, let’s talk about your claim she was asleep during the Benghazi attack.

    TRUMP: He was left helpless to die as Hillary Clinton soundly slept in her bed.

    TRUMP: Were you there? Were you there? Were you with her?

    HOLT: She has testified before the committee that she wasn’t asleep, it happened during the daytime. There’s no evidence.

    TRUMP: It happened all during the day and the story was going on for a long period of time —

    HOLT: I guess what I’m asking, what are you — what do you base that on?

    TRUMP: Excuse me, wait, it went on for a long period of time and she was asleep at the wheel, whether she was sleeping or not, who knows if she was sleeping —

    HOLT: You said she was sleeping.

    TRUMP: She might have been sleeping. What? Because she put out a tweet, somebody said she put out a tweet, therefore she wasn’t sleeping? Nobody else could put out a tweet?

    HOLT: So you stand by what you said?

    TRUMP: I can tell you this, whether she was sleeping or not and she might have been sleeping, it was a disaster. It was a horrific disaster and it was on her watch.

    HOLT: You also made the claim that her e-mail, personal e-mail server had been hacked.

    TRUMP: Her server was easily hacked by foreign governments.

    HOLT: Suggesting that as president —

    TRUMP: You don’t know that it hasn’t been —

    HOLT: Wait a minute. Suggesting that she would be compromised as president. What evidence do you have?

    TRUMP: First of all, she shouldn’t have had a personal server, okay? She shouldn’t have had it, it’s illegal. What she did is illegal. Now she might not be judged that way because we have a rigged system, but what she did is illegal. She shouldn’t have had a personal server.

    HOLT: But is there any evidence it was hacked other than routine phishing?

    TRUMP: I think I read that, and I heard it, and somebody also gave me that information.

    HOLT: Where?

    TRUMP: I will report back to you. I will give it to you.

    HOLT: You said it with such certainty yesterday.

    TRUMP: I don’t know if certainty. Probably she was hacked. You know what, you can be hacked and not know but it she probably was hacked. The fact is she should not have had a personal server.

    Hillary Clinton has a reputation as lacking in honesty. Some of that is merited. Her private server was absolutely a breach of the rules of her position, if not illegal. But why hasn’t Trump gained the same reputation when he constantly speaks like someone with absolutely no regard for the truth?

    Notice the way his tactics evolve: First he repeats the false claim, with no indication that he’s uncertain of it. Then he dodges questions. Then he says his false claim “might” be true, “probably.” When asked where he got his information from, he doesn’t know. Then he all but admits it doesn’t matter if what he said was true or not.

    This is a guy with no plan and no clue.

    • Chris says:

      Link to the video and full transcript (unedited) here:


      Forgot a step in Trump’s process: Tell the questioner he can’t prove his claims aren’t true, so it doesn’t matter if he makes up claims out of thin air!

    • Tina says:

      When will the media grill Hillary in like fashion on substance rather than tossing her softball questions and nodding their heads in agreement with her wooden scripted responses?

      Step back…its a circus and the media performers are doing their usual partisan act.

      “But why hasn’t Trump gained the same reputation when he constantly speaks like someone with absolutely no regard for the truth?”

      No regard for the truth. Clinton’s server was hacked:

      TownHall, “Defense Intelligence Analyst: ‘No Doubt’ Hillary’s Emails Hacked by Foreign Governments”

      The point is how incredibly irresponsible she was. Politico, “Clinton server faced hacking from China, South Korea and Germany”

      Daily Caller, “Clinton Insider Says He ‘Wouldn’t Be Surprised’ If Hillary’s Server Was Hacked”

      Huffington Post, “Six Ways Hillary Clinton’s Email Could Have Been Hacked”


      Certain media will do anything to put her and Bill back in the WH. And there is no reason to accuse Trump of lying when what he is saying is what has been in the news and what others, even Hillary “insider” Lani Davis, have said.

      These are gotcha questions.

      You know one of these days it might begin to dawn on you why alternative media has grown like spreading wildfire…you might even eventually come to realize that Rush Limbaugh started this awakening to the lies, manipulation, and promotion of progressive causes and policy that has been passing for journalism in America.

      • Chris says:

        Tina: “Clinton’s server was hacked:”

        ..she said, before linking to articles containing nothing but people guessing it *might* have been hacked.

        Do you really see no difference between “might have been” and “was?”

        ” And there is no reason to accuse Trump of lying when what he is saying is what has been in the news and what others, even Hillary “insider” Lani Davis, have said.”

        Ridiculous. Again, he said Clinton’s server *was* hacked, when in reality, there is only evidence that it *could have* been hacked. That is a lie. It doesn’t become less of a lie just because you repeat it; that just means you are participating in spreading a lie.

        “These are gotcha questions.”

        No, it is completely appropriate to ask a candidate why they lied.

        “Rush Limbaugh”

        Rush Limbaugh is a liar.

        • Tina says:

          REPEAT: “Defense Intelligence Analyst: ‘No Doubt’ Hillary’s Emails Hacked by Foreign Governments”

          “No, it is completely appropriate to ask a candidate why they lied.”

          Then why are they not asking Hillary about her many, many, many, many, many, lies?

          Even when they do she gives them a phony response and they accept it…they don’t follow up…they don’t follow up even after she’s discovered in the lie.

          NY Post: “Hillary Clinton’s five email lies”

          1. “I thought it would be easier to carry one device for my work.”

          Truth: This was Clinton’s excuse on March 10 for why she used a personal e-mail address for official business as secretary of state — so that all her e-mails came to one device. “Looking back, it would have been probably, you know, smarter to have used two devices,” she said.

          A couple weeks later, a freedom of information request by the AP discovered that Clinton used multiple electronic devices, including an iPad and a BlackBerry, to send e-mail.

          2. “The server contains personal communications from my husband and me.”

          Truth: If that’s true, it will come as a surprise to Bill Clinton. “The former president, who does regularly use Twitter, has sent a grand total of two e-mails during his life, both as president,” said his spokesman, Matt McKenna, in an interview published around the same time.

          3. “I’ve never had a subpoena…Let’s take a deep breath here.”

          Truth: Confronted by CNN’s Brianna Keilar on July 8 about why she had deleted 33,000 e-mails while under investigation, Clinton said it was common practice.

          Keilar pressed: Even if you’re under subpeona?

          Clinton was under subpoena when the question was asked. After requesting Clinton’s e-mails in December 2014, Trey Gowdy (R-SC) got nowhere, so he sent her a subpoena in March. A Clinton lawyer, David Kendall, responded to the subpoena later that month, saying that Hillary Clinton was waiting for approval from the State Department before releasing the e-mails.

          Clinton’s people argued she deleted the e-mails before she was under subpoena, so her answer was correct. Except they were deleted in December, when she already knew Congress was interested in them. Before the hard drive was erased, e-mails were handed over to the State Department — but only the ones Clinton’s staff deemed relevant. Since all the rest were deleted, no one else could check their work.
          Like so many Clinton statements, while the line may be technically correct, it ignores the spirit of the complaint.

          4. “I did not e-mail any classified material to anyone on my e-mail. I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”

          Truth: Another claim made during that March 10 press conference that has fallen apart. After taking a random sample of 40 of Clinton’s e-mails, the inspector general for 17 spy agencies told Congress that two contained information deemed “Top Secret.”

          Clinton’s camp put out a long technical defense saying that the information wasn’t classified when she received it and that different agencies disagreed over what should be classified. But it begged the question: Why take the risk at all?

          After months of resisting, Clinton agreed to hand over her home server to the FBI, though it’s been wiped clean. Experts will try to recover what they can — and if even more surprises await.

          5. “Everything I did was permitted. There was no law. There was no regulation. There was nothing that did not give me the full authority to decide how I was going to communicate.”

          Truth: As The Washington Post points out, “In 2009, just eight months after Clinton became secretary of state, the US Code of federal regulations on handling electronic records was updated:

          ‘Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic-mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency record-keeping system.’ The responsibility for making and preserving the records is assigned to ‘the head of each federal agency.’”

          “On top of that, when Clinton was secretary, a cable went out under her signature warning employees to ‘avoid conducting official department business from your personal e-mail accounts.’ ”

          The State Department requires employees to preserve records, even saying explicitly that on the rare occasion a personal e-mail address is used, those e-mails should be forwarded to the work address for archiving. Clinton never did this.

          The Washington Post concludes: “She appears to be arguing her case on narrow, technical grounds, but that’s not the same as actually complying with existing rules as virtually everyone else understood them.”

          Hillary Clinton is a pathological liar and should never be president of the united States.

          And Chris as you have shown consistently, your own ability to make good value judgements is questionable at best….you defend this woman.

  5. Dewster says:

    Trump has pulled the same game his whole life. What is true is republicans and Blue Dog Dems just follow branding like Sheeple.

    Trump Blasts the Brexit than goes to Scotland and praises it! Bottom line he is just a Liar like HRC

  6. Tina says:

    Still waiting for your great ideas and solutions Dewey.

    Still waiting for your ideal candidate, someone that can win.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.