Republicans write Obama a blank check



January 1, 2016

By Chuck Baldwin House Speaker Paul Ryan, Montana House member Ryan Zinke, and other phony conservative Republicans have written Barack Obama a blank check for EVERYTHING he wanted in the 2016 Omnibus bill. (Thank you, Montana Senators Steve Daines (R) and Jon Tester (D), for voting against this egregiously evil bill.)Despite all the conservative rhetoric proceeding from the mouths of the Republicans in Congress, the GOP passed a $1.1 trillion spending bill that grants Barack Obama EVERYTHING he requested. Remember, the House of Representatives completely controls the purse strings of the federal government. The White House can spend absolutely NOTHING without the House of Representatives signing the check. And that's exactly what Speaker Ryan, Rep. Ryan Zinke, and the other phony conservatives in Congress did: they wrote Barack Obama a check for EVERYTHING he wanted.In his nationally syndicated radio talk show on December 17, longtime Republican apologist Rush Limbaugh said, "Everything Obama wanted, everything he asked for, he got. You go down the list of things, it's there."And this is causing some people to wonder if they just dreamed all that stuff about Boehner resigning. And then other people are wondering if they even dreamed all that stuff about the Republicans winning the largest number of seats they've had in Congress since the Civil War. We had two midterm elections in 2010 and 2014, which were landslide victories for the Republican Party. The Democrat Party lost over a thousand seats nationwide in just those two elections. People went to the polls in droves wanting exactly what was rubber-stamped last night (or what will be) stopped."And instead they showed up in record numbers and they it turned out and they just defeated Democrats down the ballot. In the process, they elected Republicans to stop this. And now the Republicans have the largest number of seats in the House they've had in Congress since the Civil War. And it hasn't made any difference at all. It is as though Nancy Pelosi is still running the House and Harry Reid is still running the Senate. 'Betrayed' is not even the word here. What has happened here is worse than betrayal. Betrayal is pretty bad, but it's worse than that."This was out-and-out, in-our-face lying, from the campaigns to individual statements made about the philosophical approach Republicans had to all this spending. There is no Republican Party! You know, we don't even need a Republican Party if they're gonna do this. You know, just elect Democrats, disband the Republican Party, and let the Democrats run it, because that's what's happening anyway."See the transcript here:Here is a partial list of what Obama requested and received from this so-called Republican congress:1. Funding for Obama's executive amnesty program2. Funding for "Sanctuary" cities3. Funding for all of Obama's refugee programs4. Funding for all of Obama's immigration programs5. Funding for Obama's illegal alien resettlement programs6. Funding for the release of criminal illegal aliens imprisoned in the United States7. Funding for tax credits for illegal aliens8. Eliminates spending caps9. Funding for Planned Parenthood abortion services10. Funding for ALL of Obama's climate change programs11. Funding for Obamacare12. Funding for INCREASED government spying on U.S. citizens13. Funding for ALL of the U.S. wars around the world14. Funding for the increased militarization of American police agencies and the growing federal Police StateThe list goes on and on.Rush was right: there would have been absolutely NO DIFFERENCE in the Omnibus bill that passed Congress had Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the Democrats been in a majority. No difference at all.The two-party system is a JOKE. No! It's more than a joke: it is a total and absolute SHAM.You know things are bad when longtime Republican disciple Franklin Graham quits the GOP and when the quintessential Republican apologist Rush Limbaugh says the GOP should "disband."Elections have become moot. No matter which party assumes control of Congress and the White House, the Constitution is ignored and trampled and the American people are betrayed and sold out.I'm wondering if the last chance America had at redemption was the candidacy of Ron Paul in 2012. Christian people, especially, vehemently rejected Ron's message of constitutional government, sound economics, and a non-interventionist foreign policy. So-called conservatives nominated big-government neocons the last two presidential elections: John McCain and Mitt Romney. And then they wonder why the liberal Democrat Barack Obama was elected and re-elected. DUH!Rank and file conservatives are MAD! They are sick and tired of being betrayed and sold down the river. They are sick and tired of trading neocons like John Boehner for neocons like Paul Ryan. That, in a nutshell, explains the surging candidacy of Donald Trump.Trump has dared to call out the Republican leadership for the establishment, big-government hacks they are. And he has enough money to run a viable national campaign without groveling before the GOP donor class.While I truly like the anti-establishment character of Trump's campaign, I believe the desperation of conservative voters is being channeled in a dangerous direction. I have heard nothing to suggest that Donald Trump has any inkling of, appreciation for, or fidelity to the U.S. Constitution. In fact, much of his campaign rhetoric – and, unfortunately, much of the rhetoric that has made him so popular – is blatantly unconstitutional.Trump is the owner and CEO of a mega international business conglomerate. As such, he snaps his fingers and subordinates jump. His word is law. That's all well and good for a private business, but that's NOT how a constitutional republic operates.In a desperate attempt to break free from the neocon establishment ensconced atop the Republican Party, conservatives appear willing to embrace anyone who will challenge the insiders – even if that someone runs roughshod over the Constitution.In America, when we elect civil magistrates, there is only ONE criterion we should look for: will he or she faithfully "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." It's as simple as that.Listen to Thomas Jefferson: "In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."Instead, most Americans are consumed with political parties and personalities. They need to be consumed with the Constitution and Bill of Rights.When one wants to identify a phony dollar bill, he doesn't study the counterfeits; he studies the original. The Constitution is the original measurement by which ALL candidates and incumbents should be judged.The reason our politicians from BOTH parties have taken us to the precipice of the abyss is because the citizens of this country have failed to hold them accountable to the Constitution. It shouldn't matter whether the candidate or incumbent has a "R" or "D" behind his or her name, or whether they call themselves "conservative" or "progressive." All that should matter is, will they "preserve, protect, and defend" the U.S. Constitution.Learn the Constitution and Bill of Rights (and Declaration of Independence), and gauge every magistrate or would-be magistrate by that standard. Try it.What you will learn is just how few of our politicians and political candidates have even the remotest idea of what the Constitution says. And neither do they give a rat's hindquarters about what the Constitution says. That's why they never mention it on the campaign trail, don't read it, don't plan to enforce it when elected, and are, thereby, disqualified from public office. They are COUNTERFEITS – no matter how likeable they are or from which side of the political aisle they hail.Right or left, conservative or liberal, Christian or non-believer: forget it. "In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."There is a quick remedy for what ails America: elect constitutionalists to public office. In my view, Rand Paul is the only constitutionalist candidate for President in 2016 from either major party.First, I believe the biggest threats to liberty we face have nothing to do with Islamic terrorism. We have far more to fear from those miscreants in Washington, D.C., and from the international bankers at the Federal Reserve than any radical Muslim. Hence, all of the fearmongering about Muslim jihad and Sharia Law in America only plays into the hands of the globalists who are orchestrating all of this madness.The words of Daniel Webster are especially fitting at this point:"There is no nation [or group of terrorists] on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence. I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants, and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men and become the instruments of their own undoing."Second, I am absolutely convinced that the greatest threats to our liberty are: 1) the neocon wars of aggression around the world – especially in the Middle East, and 2) a burgeoning Police State here at home.I have now had plenty of time to examine the candidates regarding his or her commitment to defeating these two great threats to our liberty, and there is only ONE Republican candidate that sees these threats and would use the power of the Oval Office to defeat them – or at least curtail them: that candidate is RAND PAUL.I know that Rand is not his dad. And I am not nearly as excited about Rand as I was Ron. And there are several issues with which I disagree with Rand. But I firmly believe Rand gets the whole neocon war issue and would put a stop to it if he were President. In this regard, Rand might be the ONLY major party presidential candidate who could potentially avert WWIII. I further believe Rand gets the Zionist issue and would not be a patsy for the Israeli lobby – his trip to Israel and that photo at the Wailing Wall notwithstanding.I also believe Rand truly sees the growing Police State in this country and would rein in these out-of-control federal departments of [In]Justice and Homeland [In]Security. And, yes, Rand voted AGAINST the 2016 Omnibus bill.In my view, none of the other candidates would do anything significant to change America's foreign policy or to rein in the growing Police State in our country.By giving Donald Trump so much negative publicity, the mainstream media is actually propelling his campaign. The candidates that the media truly despise and want to defeat are the ones they ignore – which is EXACTLY what they did (as much as possible) to Ron Paul's campaign – and are doing now to Rand Paul's campaign. That, by itself, speaks volumes.The neocons within the GOP (I'm not talking about Donald Trump here) are no better than liberal Democrats. In fact, in some ways they are much worse. Phony conservatives like House Speaker Paul Ryan and Montana House member Ryan Zinke are as much a threat to our liberties as liberals Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. The blank check these neocons gave to Barack Obama is only the most recent example of this reality.Absent a presidential victory by a constitutionalist such as Ron or Rand Paul, the preservation of liberty is going to eventually come down to free and independent states reclaiming it for themselves, or possible secession and/or a regional breakaway from Washington, D.C., or some kind of direct intervention from Heaven. But what the passage of the 2016 Omnibus bill absolutely proves is that it will NOT come from the national Republican Party.© Chuck Baldwin