The Democrats didn't misread anything in 2008

Can we please dispense of the notion that Democrats "misread the electoral results of 2008?"

The Democrats didn't misread anything. They lied to the American people, hid their ideological leftism to amass supermajorities, and decided to go for broke while they could.

The Democrats' strategic failure was in going for broke, which, unsurprising to students of Newton's law of action and reaction, prompted the rise of the TEA Parties. Democrats could've had it all if they hadn't ripped their mask off right after the elections. Sadly for them, instead of fashioning a bipartisan stimulus bill that would've provided them future cover for their Marxist shenanigans they decided to ram through the first of many overtly socialist pieces of "legislation" cobbled together through bribery and extortion.

Despite all of that, the Democrat majority's ideological predisposition was known to anyone who can open their eyes and see. Obama spent his entire life around Marxist and communist radicals. Pelosi represents San Francisco, bastion of lawlessness and left-wing lunacy. Harry Reid is, well, Harry Reid: scumbag.

We're forced to endure historical revisionism by the left on virtually everything: the Constitution; the Founders; our Judeo-Christian philosophical foundation; the "separation of church and state". And so on. Let's not add to the abuse of truth by suggesting the Democrats misread anything. They knew exactly what the voters wanted.

And they stuck their collective middle finger up at all of us.

James van Riemsdyk's Night

We interrupt our regularly scheduled relentless assault on all things Obama to bring you news from the ice. The Flyers made history last night, reaching once more into their seemingly endless bag of tricks and found the magic one more time. Game 7: Flyers 4, Bruins 3. Series: Flyers 4, Bruins 3. Fourth team in the history of professional sports to overcome a 3-0 series deficit. Simply amazing.

Typically the Flyers didn't make it easy. Midway through the first period the Flyers found their heroic and historic comeback being trashed by a Bruins team that came in filled with emotion and desire for a quick kill. The Flyers weren't bad during the first 10 minutes, but the Bruins were overwhelming. Bang, bang, bang, three quick goals.

Now down 3-0 and with their season on the brink, Flyers coach Peter Laviolette called timeout. It was anybody's guess who, if anyone, would respond and stop the bleeding. Who would step up and carry the team to victory on this offensively gifted but brazenly undisciplined Flyers team? Would it be big ticket free agent and playoff assassin Danny Briere? Longtime Flyer Simon Gagne? The captain Mike Richards? The old, grizzled warrior Chris Pronger? Maybe Scott Hartnell, whose game was coming to life?

Nope. It was the youngest Flyer, 21-year old rookie James van Riemsdyk. The "consolation prize."

In the afterglow of making history it's easy to forget that JVR was considered the consolation prize of the 2007 NHL Draft. The Broad Street Bullies were dead last in the NHL in 2006 and figured they had a lock on the top pick and with it Patrick Kane, the franchise-changing player billed as "the next Crosby." But after losing all those games in a miserably long season the Flyers somehow, improbably, lost the draft lottery too. Figured. Perfectly shitty end to a perfectly shitty season.

So Chicago swooped in and nabbed the top pick, took the franchise changer Kane, and the Flyers were shocked and stunned and "left with" van Riemsdyk. But James van Riemsdyk was never a slouch. He might not be Patrick Kane (who is) but JVR is a highly credentialed prospect. He had a nice rookie season with 35 points. But he wore down over the course of a long season, and thus far JVR had been silent and lost on the ice all spring, struggling to find his place on the world's biggest stage with the world's finest players.

Then came Lavs' timeout with the season on the line, and suddenly and seemingly without any warning, young James van Riemsdyk responded. He found his game. He started skating and hitting, crashing the net, creating chances for his teammates, and led (yes led) his veteran team to victory. Gagne got the delicious game-winner on a goal-scorers goal, but it was JVR's not-so-pretty first career playoff goal that stopped the bleeding, and his energy that got the team going and kept it moving. It was something special to watch.

And now Kane and van Riemsdyk, two gifted players who could've easily been on opposite teams but for a disastrous draft lottery, both find themselves four wins from meeting for the finest prize of the finest tournament in professional sports. The NHL is a second rate league now (thanks Gary Bettman!), but the tournament and the Cup are still rightfully revered.

The Flyers are a very dangerous team with a confident James van Riemsdyk. If JVR can build on last night's game and keep it going, the Flyers are the favorite in the Eastern Conference Finals.

But let's not get too far ahead of ourselves. Let's take a moment to celebrate and remember.

James van Riemsdyk did something really special last night. With the Flyers' season on the line, it was kid who led the team to victory. I don't know JVR so I don't know if he'll let himself smile because of what he did tonight, or if he's too intense to enjoy the success. But I say give yourself a smile, James, and enjoy it. This was your night, the first of many.

Not bad for a consolation prize.

Obama to the Jews: STFU!!!!!!!

Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court is pathetic. She's not even remotely qualified to sit on the Supreme Court, but she seems to have lockstep support by the Democrats. I know, shocking!!! These are the same people who opposed Chief Justice John Roberts, one of the finest choices for the Supreme Court in American history.

But there's more than just Kagan's lack of judicial scholarship and ability. It's her faith. She's a Jew, picked by a man who sat in a black liberation theology "church" for 20 years. A man whose national security adviser cracks anti-Semitic "greedy Jew" jokes. A man who has repeatedly humiliated Benjamin Netanyahu. So the Kagan pick must mean he doesn't hate Jews, right?

Wrong.

What Obama giveth, Obama taketh away. The "president" has a pretty obvious strategy of distracting with one hand while causing great harm with the other. On the heels of Obama's nomination of a token Jew to the Court, he was busy signing the US up for the blantantly anti-Semitic Alliance of Civilizations. It also blames the US for everything wrong in the world.

Who cares though! He picked one of us for the Court! He really loves us!

Yeah right.

Sit down and shut the f**k up, Jews. Elena Kagan is going to sit on the Supreme Court.

Rejecting the Declaration of Independence

The response to Arizona's immigration law is simply astounding and shines the light of truth on the depth of the cracks in the foundation of our union.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."

Those are the striking words of our Declaration of Independence and they still bring a lump in my throat when I read them. I count my blessings every day that we live in a nation formed by the first and only group of human beings to understand and articulate the proper role of government, and from where our unalienable rights come. Everyone else that has organized civil government on any other principle, no matter how noble or well-intentioned, is wrong. These "self-evident truths" form the core of American greatness. And those truths, all of them, are rejected by those hostile to SB 1070, Arizona's immigration law.

Let's be clear about what the law does: it empowers local law enforcement to uphold federal immigration law; and it specifically bans racial profiling. During the course of a legitimate stop for reasonable suspicion of the commission of a crime, Arizona law enforcement is empowered to check for immigration documents and initiate deportation proceedings by detaining illegal aliens and turning them over to the federal government. It has been federal law since the days of leftist hero FDR for lawful aliens to carry their immigration paperwork. SB 1070 really isn't so controversial once one understands the truth amidst the lies of the left.

I'm quite sure we can all agree the federal government has abdicated their responsibility to secure our borders. Border integrity is the heart of national sovereignty and the first line of defense on matters of national security. A government that does not secure its borders is unserious and potentially dangerous, intentionally creating a situation destructive to the unalienable rights of the people. The situation facing the sovereign citizens of the sovereign republic of Arizona is untenable: people are being murdered on their own land by illegal aliens; the drug cartels have rendered the Arizona border a war zone of lawlessness. How long must the people sit by while their federal government violates and destroys their unalienable rights of life and liberty (amongst others)?

Those of us who understand and embrace the proper role of government, the self-evident truths articulated by our Founders, understand and accept that when government forfeits its legitimacy on any matter it is up to the people to take matters into their own hands.

Our confederate republic is not just a nation called the United States of America. It is also a voluntary pact between 50 sovereign republics who, like Arizona, have a solemn obligation to their citizens to "secure these rights" and "self-evident truths" articulated in the Declaration of Independence. And, if worse comes to worst, this: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

The federal government of the American people is not immune to the self-evident truth that government destructive to "these ends" must be altered or abolished, and that "when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

SB 1070, Arizona's law to uphold federal immigration law, is meant to provide for the future security of the sovereign citizens of the republic of Arizona. It is the alteration of civil government to secure the unalienable rights of the people. Not only is it perfectly reasonable, SB 1070 has its roots in the righteous soil of its state constitution, the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, that beloved document which still to this day stands as the sole and eternal beacon of truth on the legitimate purposes and principles of lawful civil government.

Rejecting SB 1070 means rejecting the Declaration of Independence.

Such is the depth of division in these united States of America.

No, Seth, we all cannot agree.

Comedian Seth Myers said the following, with respect to the Arizona law directing local law enforcement to uphold federal immigration law (that's all it does): “Could we all agree that there’s nothing more Nazi than saying ‘Show me your papers?’”

No, Seth, we all cannot agree. There is something more Nazi than saying "show me your papers." It's called genocide, specifically genocide of the Jewish people. Which is what Ahmadinejad is promising upon acquiring nuclear weapons for himself and his fellow Islamist terrorists.

The lack of seriousness and moral clarity on the left is frightening.

The Supremacy Clause

ObamaCare proponents will make their anti-Tenth Amendment argument in part at least on the Supremacy Clause, which is supposed to mean that on legal matters involving the enumerated powers listed in the Constitution federal law would trump state law. What it most certainly does not mean is what the left will argue: on ALL matters the Supremacy Clause reigns supreme.

This is a dangerous interpretation of our Constitution and it must be exposed immediately for the fraud that it is.

Our Constitution is a Constitution meant to be interpreted according to the Framers' intent. How do we know? Because it was a Constitution based upon a fixed philosophy: the laws of nature and of nature's God. It is indeed a self-evident truth that the only legitimate form of government is one that secures the unalienable rights of all of the American people, including their posterity.

Any other form of government, no matter where we find it, is illegitimate. Period.

That is the miracle achieved in Philadelphia in 1776. It was a singular moment in a movement inspired by God (our Creator), the one who reigns Supreme over all. Look it up.

The Founders didn't put together a government meant to exercise absolute supremacy over the American people, so it is inconceivable that they meant that the Supremacy clause made any proclamation by the federal government the "supreme" authority over the American people.

I think not.

The American people are accountable to God, the Constitution, ourselves and each other. The Supremacy Clause cannot change that which is unalienable. To do so would be a fundamental transformation of the United States of America.

Hmmmm. I seem to recall hearing that somewhere before.

A King for President?

I'm intrigued by the leadership being exhibited by Representative Steve King, R-IA. Representative King did what liberals claim to love: he spoke the unvarnished truth to power. What did he say? Read my last post titled "Really, Congressman?"

The context is important. Grijalva is railing against a perfectly legitimate, constitutional law that commands the state law enforcement to enforce federal immigration law. The feds have abdicated this responsibility and people in Arizona are dying. The state government has an obligation to secure the unalienable right to life of its citizens.

As if all that wasn't bad enough, Grijalva is demanding a boycott of his own state because of this new immigration law. That's right, an American congressman is demanding a boycott of the people he represents, and their their businesses, their families, everything. Safe to say he's not acting in any of their best interests. So in whose interests is he acting? I hope it's obvious: lawbreaking illegal aliens, himself and the government of Mexico. It's the only logical conclusion. Grijalva just demanded economic sanctions against the people of Arizona for passing a law that will curtail illegal immigration. San Francisco has responded affirmatively. Need I say that we must pay very close attention to who else responds positively to Grijalva's demands? Our president likes to say "let's be clear" so let's. Mr. Grijalva needs to be expelled from office immediately. And perhaps Rep. King has gotten the ball rolling.

In an extraordinary display of moral clarity, Steve King said the following about Raul Grijalva: "He's trying to scare the businesses out of Arizona, or he's trying to get the businesses to change their position and press the legislature to reverse the law that was just signed by the governor the other day. I'm wondering if we look at the map of Congressman Grijalva's congressional district, if we haven't already ceded that component of Arizona to Mexico, judging by the voice that comes out of him. He's advocating for Mexico rather than the United States and against the rule of law, which is one of the central pillars of American exceptionalism."

I cannot recall the last time we had a politician speak with such devastating truthfulness. It's generally all spin and empty soundbites. But here comes Steve King, launching a withering assault against a traitor to the American people in the face of equal or greater hostility from the illegal alien lobby and the leftist establishment media. Surely a man with the conviction to speak with such moral clarity should be on anyone's short list for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012. Perhaps he is the darkhorse who will emerge from a somewhat uninspiring group of "front-runners." His conservative principles are unimpeachable. He has a lifetime rating of 97.14 from the American Conservative Union. He is an agribusinessman, like our Founding Fathers. I don't care to deify the man but why on earth isn't he leading the pack? I like Sarah Palin but with all due respect to the governor, she's no Steve King.

Let's elect a King for President in 2012.