In a recent interview at MSNBC, Obama made it clear that his policy per immigration takes priority over the law.

Understand that,  as of this past February,  Obama's immigration order,  was put on hold,  because he lied to a federal judge.  And, thus,  we have the question from a fellow anarchist at MSNBC.  

Obama makes it clear that his policy is far more important than the law.  And,  in making this proclamation, he conflates military orders with his orders to Border Patrol.  

If course,  to the liberal mind,  without the ability to think critically about what is being said  (as long as it sounds good), they forget that  a military commander is not allowed to issue orders that are in violation of the law and its Constitutional principles.  Border policy is already written.  It is Obama who has determined that he does not like those legislative decisions,  and has decided to act on his own.  His orders to Border Patrol are documented to be in violation of established law,  a fact about 40% of our population accepts as sound leadership.   

In this video discussion,  Obama charges that policy is more important than law when that policy,  counters the law.  

The point of this post?  Just a reminder of what so many already know:  that Obama is an anarchist, and is using the principles outlined in the reformer's bible,  Rules for Radicals.  You can probably order this book from Amazon,  for pennies.  You should own this book because it is the guide for Progressive community organizers such as H Obama, and to a lesser extent,  Mrs. Clinton.

Obama's biggest problem, today, is Obama. The immigration crisis is absolute proof.

WASHINGTON — As Republicans blame President Barack Obama’s executive actions for the crisis along the border, the president assured members of his own party Wednesday that he won’t back down from his plans to ease deportations.

Editor’s notes:  Understand that he has already committed to this slowdown.  In 2008,  8,000 minors were caught crossing the border with 4,000 working through the legal system and sent back. 

In 2013,  20,000 minors came into this country with only 1600 making their way through the system and being sent back. 

In other words,  this should not be “news,”  and it certainly is not news to Obama.  There is simply no way he is this out of touch with reality,  at least,  as relates to the evolving crisis.  “Flooding the system” in the face of a system/legal weakness,  is a trick often used by community organizers and domestic social revolutionaries.  THAT is what is going on. 

Where he fails in this tactic,  however,  is his choice to ignore two important rules for radicals,  as defined by Saul Alinsky.  

The first is rule # 6 which reads:  “A good tactic is one that your people enjoy. If your people are not having a ball doing it,  there is something very wrong with the tactic”  (p. 128 Rules for Radicals – 1989 printing).  Obama simply cannot sustain his radical reform without the will of the people,  especially in a society free to vote he and his Red Loving minions out of office.  In polls take over the past three days,  his approval rating for his handling of this border crisis is down to 28% in one poll and 33% in another  -  both network polling results. 

A second problem as defined by Alinsky is found at rule #12:  “You cannot risk being trapped by the enemy  (that would be conservatives and reasonable Democrats) in his sudden agreement with your demand and saying,  ‘You’re right – we don’t know what to do about this issue.  Now tell us”  (p. 130 , Rules for Radicals)

And the fact of this matter is clear:  Obama has no clue as to how to solve this problem.  Understand that the current migration is not the problem.  Rather,  the unsustainable issue is the notion of “open borders,”  itself. 

Obama's pledge to stand his ground is nothing short of a declaration of domestic suicide.  Already,  communities are having to move budgeted funds away from local,  domestic needs like education,  fire and police protection and the care of their indigent populations,  and redirecting those funds to the care of unwanted populations being forced up them by Obama.  

Sadly,  conservatives can thank Obama for his rank stupidity in this.  Obviously,  he is not the student of Alinsky,  many of us thought him to be.    Rather,  his arrogant dismissal as to “proven” revolutionary tactics may well prove to be his final demise. 

Thank gawd he is not an intelligent organizer.   

Don't buy into the claim that Ryan is a radical conservative. Reality's light destroy's this opinion.

<<<< Obama and the Leftist Cabal worships this book but wants you to believe that a man who wants to honor the Constitution,  wants to balance the budget,  wants to save Medicare and Social Security, is the true radical.

In a recent article (yesterday),  Nate Silver of  FiveThirtyEight polling infamy,  wrote this about Paul Ryan:

. . . . .  Mr. Ryan is the most conservative Republican member of Congress to be picked for the vice-presidential slot since at least 1900. He is also more conservative than any Democratic nominee was liberal, meaning that he is the furthest from the center. . . . . 

This statement is at the heart of why some liberal publications and all conservative venues ignore the polling results of Nate Siler and FiveThirtyEight. 

As we compare Silver's conclusion to reality,  we make the claim that  Joe Biden could not be further removed from the ideological heart of America.  Think about this:  during the 2008 Democrat primaries,  36 million Democrats voted for either Hillary or Obama.  64,000 voted for Biden.  If you divide 64,000 by 36 million and round down the resulting percentage,  you would come up with “Zero.”  Conclusion?   Nate Siler’s assertion that Ryan is more conservative than any VP liberal,  is just plain silly. 

Secondly,  in making the statement, above,  Silver is attempting to sound reasonable while being profoundly ridiculous.  Understand that Silver’s polling concern,  FiveThirtyEight,”  is actually a regular feature of the far,  far Left, New York Times – emphasis on “regular feature.”   Understand that his polling methodologies allow him to weight his polls in favor of Leftist results with impunity (at least,  from the Left).   If Rasmussen or Gallup show a 2 point lead for a conservative,  Silver’s methodology will allow him to “prove” a 4 point lead for the opposing Liberal pundit.  This is why most readers on both sides of the aisle have never heard of “FiveThirtyEight.”  That fact,  in and of itself,  demonstrates Silver’s out of touch ideology. 

A third consideration has to do with the demonstrable inaccuracy of Silver’s opinion with regard to Paul Ryan.  To brand Ryan as an out of touch conservative (that is the point of his polemic as he parrot's the Obama team talking points) is to ignore the fact that Ryan has been elected to his seventh term as a House Representative in a district that is a solid “blue” district as to national politics.  Seven terms,  I say.  So how out of touch is this man?  A reasonable person knows the answer.  

Fourth,  by definition,  it is the Left which stands in "radical" shoes.  The mere fact that on other occasions,  the Left happily claims the title of "radical" is proof of our claim.  Speaking of fact,   it is a fact that their "bible" for societal revolution is  Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals."  It is a fact that Obama taught the principles of societal change out of this very book while teaching "summer school" at Columbia,  and,  Hillary Clinton was an intern for Alinsky in her college days (her B.A. thesis was an expose' and tribute to Alinsky).  Understand that this book was originally written in 1971 and, is in print to this day.  Why?  Obviously,  because it continues to be in demand and "in demand" by the Leftists who have over-run the once patriotic  Democrat Party. 

A final consideration involves Gallup's 40 year poll that proves this nation to be a "center right" country.  Year in and year out,  when asked,  "Are you 'conservative' or 'liberal' without identifying with a political party,"  the conclusion runs a nominal 38 percent to 19 percent in favor of a "conservative" result.  On any occasion,  when the phrase "we are a 'center Right nation,"  the reference is drawing from this Gallup survey.  

Obama has pronounced Paul Ryan as a "radical."  Silver is simply doing his Leftist duty in support of his president.  By Gallup's standards,  it is the Left and Barack Obama that is removed from the ideological center of this nation,  not Paul Ryan and,  by implication,  Mitt Romney.  

Point of post:  this coming election is,  indeed,  an election of choice:  the proven radical,  B Obama and the populace representative,  Mitt Romney.