Posted on 03/01/2015 5:46:08 AM PST by Kaslin
If I hadn’t seen it with my own eyes I probably wouldn’t have believed it – the president of the United States said, “We’re a nation of laws, but…” What came next is irrelevant, but for the record it was “we’re also respecting the fact that we’re a nation of immigrants.”
There is no “but.” We’re either a nation of laws or we aren’t. And increasingly we aren’t.
In that immigration quote President Obama gave historians the theme of his two terms in office – “but.”
Barack Obama loves America, but… When the president praises the United States (which is rare), he generally precedes or follows it with criticism. That’s not me talking; that is the New York Times.
After the left-wing pearl-clutching faded over former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s statement that he doesn’t believe the president loves the country, the Times wrote, “In fact, several of Mr. Obama’s most emphatic expressions of patriotism appear in close proximity to his critiques of America, a review of his speeches shows.”
As a senator, Barack Obama was insistent on transparency from government agencies. He even co-sponsored legislation, along with Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., to create a website on which to post every contract the government signs.
But now that he is president, that conviction has gone the way of the Dodo.
In 2007, then-Sen. Obama sent a letter to the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission on a proposed rulemaking change to media ownership the FCC was considering, demanding transparency from the agency.
He wrote then Commissioner Kevin Martin that changes in rules “may pass the muster of a federal court, but Congress and the public have the right to review any specific proposal and decide whether or not it constitutes sound policy.” He also wrote that the FCC “has the responsibility to defend any new proposal in public discourse and debate.”
That was over media ownership, but… When it comes to the government essentially seizing effective control of the Internet through the Orwellian-named “net-neutrality,” Obama sang a different tune. Actually, he didn’t sing, he remained publicly silent while working feverishly behind the scenes with progressive advocacy groups and campaign supporters to ensure their will was enacted without public input or knowledge.
The proposed regulations were written in secret, and even though the FCC is “an independent agency,” the White House was heavily involved in them from the concept stage. The public and Congress were not allowed to see the regulations beforehand, but miraculously Google, a major Obama supporter, and a group ironically calling itself “Free Press,” funded by millions from progressive billionaire George Soros, were able to get last-minute changes to them.
Weird how that works, until you remember the “but…”
The power of the “but” allows for anything, regardless of past statements or even the law. We’re a nation of laws, but…you can’t expect people who came here illegally or overstayed visas to be deported simply because that’s what the law says. We must have transparency in government, but…if that transparency will allow people to express anger about, or even stop, what progressives want, then to Hell with it.
President “But” can change a health care law he refused to allow the American people to alter through two crushing electoral victories. President “But” can refuse to meet with the Israeli prime minister because he doesn’t want to be seen as “influencing” Israel’s upcoming elections, but he can have former campaign staffers in Israel actively working to defeat that prime minister.
There’s little President “But” can’t do, and there’s even less that he won’t do.
When you have media sycophants and fellow party members cheering your overreach, even encouraging the usurpation of the congressional branch’s power, why wouldn’t you?
Obama loves Michell...BUTT....
In my humble experience anything said after “BUT” is bull sheite!.
I noticed this in his 2008 campaign. He makes a popular statement and then complete rebuts in the next part of the sentence. “I believe entrepreneurship is the cornerstone of a growing economy...but those who benefit need to pay back for their success.” (to a dolt voter, this sounds fine, but what he says is that we’re going to tax the bejezus out of anyone that makes a few bucks and eliminate the motivation for investment in the first place.
“America was built on a tradition of hard work....BUT we must be sure everyone is equal.” If government’s role it so ‘make everyone equal’ than the reward for work is out the window.
It’s a clear tactic that has worked to fool the ignorant who can’t think for themselves.
The question Americans need to ask themselves: At what point do we use unconstitutional means to remove an unconstitutional pResident?
Anything said before the but is bs. “I love America but...” means the speaker hates America.
I have said over and over again that America needs a Pinochet. Do People see what I mean now?
I would say that time has passed. Over the past few years, the population has been turned completely into an entitlement grievance society with one goal in mind: what is in it for me. While I am not entirely of the notion that whatever was done in the past by political and business leaders was entirely altruistic, today we have gone so far over the line in the other direction to ensure that charlatans like our immigrant leader are impossible to unhinge from his thrown. The recent best example is the vote about his virtual directed amnesty memo. There was not one person in the party of the grieved to put the matter to a vote, instead, hiding behind a quaint notion of a filibuster regardless of the notion the electorate was more than 60% behind no such amnesty notion. Next up, the FCC action, the stonewalling the disclosure laws, the abdication of military leadership on and on with no comeuppance. The other party relies upon the third branch of government to step in and they clearly do not wish to engage either. I doubt a group of individuals acting in concert would be able to dethrone the leader either so the die is cast for the next 22 months of continued despotism here.
Palpatine: It is with great reluctance that I have agreed to this calling. I love democracy. I love the Republic. Once this crisis has abated, I will lay down the powers you have given me!
Obola vs Palpatine - one is a fictional dictator, the other is a real one.
And if it doesn’t end in 22 months?
It won’t matter.
I remember that too, he can take both sides of any issue in the same breath.
The pResident is a but-head.
Obama second term is almost up ,But
but,
for the Grace of God,,
my own thought.
Like Clinton defining “is”, Zero can’t find his “but”.
That’s a BIG But! :-(
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.