Traitor-In-Chief Tattles On Arizona

Conservatism,Federalism,Glenn Beck,IMMIGRATION,Nationhood,Republicans,States' Rights,UN


Another turn of the screw for Arizona comes courtesy of the traitor-in-chief and his administration. A “Report of the United States of America Submitted to the U.N. High Commissioner,” issued by the State Department, states the following, on page 23, under the heading “Values and Immigration”:

“A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world. The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined.”

Why would the traitor class’s actions surprise anyone? Abe Lincoln, whom Glenn Beck, tellingly, and thousands of Americans honored on the week-end, sicced American brothers on one another in order to sunder states’ rights and bring the sovereign states under his totalitarian thumb. (Yes, “TAKING AMERICA BACK MEANS TAKING LINCOLN DOWN.”) What’s a bit of tittle-tattle to the despotic Unites Nations by BHO’s administration, in comparison?

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer is furious; she tends to foam incoherently instead of asking Kris Kobach to speak for her.

Brewer’s right and obligation to protect her citizens was, alas, defended on Fox News by Michael Reagan, with reference to the dangerous concept (in the hands of his ilk) of American exceptionalism. Apparently property rights and state sovereignty are not enough; American presidents must go forth and tout the the American State as a force for good in the world.

Hey, Michael and the Messiah have a lot in common. The first heading in the just-mentioned report the US is mandated to hand over to the global government reads:

“A more perfect union, a more perfect world.” Out of Honest Abe’s mouth (Which corner? That fork tongue spoke out of both).

4 thoughts on “Traitor-In-Chief Tattles On Arizona

  1. Robert Glisson

    If the law and moral argument are not on your side, attack your opponent. The Constitution states that only the Supreme Court has the authority to hear a case between the Fed and a state. The case against SB1070 was filed in Superior court, because they know that even though loaded with Obama’s two new judges, there’s a chance of losing the case. They don’t have case law on their side. So the present administration and their lackeys have to smear, it’s their only weapon. From what I’ve seen, this is the most vindictive administration, I have ever seen.

  2. james huggins

    I don’t know beans about constitutional or any other kind of law, except for the law of the jungle. But one thing I do know and always have known is that low lifes like Obama and his minions [and Bush and his] will sell the country down the river, lie, cheat, steal and peek up a little old lady’s skirt if it helps their cause. No honor, no honesty no manhood. In this case the left is selling us down the river to get all those millions of Democrat votes on the books as soon as possible as well as sucking up to the UN in preparation for the one world government to come. Make no mistake, Obama is not looking forward to being a good soldier in the UN ranks. He plans to be the one calling the shots.

  3. George Pal

    The only thing missing from the US cri de cœur to the UN is a request for a powder blue helmets brigade of international peacekeepers/rapists to ensure chaos isn’t trampled under by order.

    If the report doesn’t incite a loud public outcry then the silence would be the perfect moment to sound Taps.


    (1) It is completely asinine for the US to report on itself to the UN High Commissioner. As if Libya, Burma, et al have some moral authority over us. If that is what Michael Reagan is talking about, I have no problem with that part.

    (2) Finding out whether a criminal suspect lawfully under arrest or investigation when there is probable cause or reasonable suspicion is wanted for violations of the laws of other states or the federal government is NOT a human rights violation. So what is the Department of State or the Federal government talking about?

    (3) Of course, Arizona cannot SET immigration policy (such as forbidding adults shorter than 6 foot 2 from immigrating to the US) but how is this relevant to the Arizona law at all?

    (4) Deliberate failure on the part of the executive to enforce the (immigration) laws of the United States makes him subject to removal.
    See Article 2 Section 1: “inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office”.

    (5) Sadly, leftist judges and a hypocritical pandering Congress will side with Obama on this issue – thus, we have arbitrary rule instead of the rule of law.

Comments are closed.