Just to start this off, lets begin with full disclosure on my thoughts on abortion – Straight forward and without any reservations, you can call me the ultimate Constitutionalist when it comes to this subject.

The Declaration of Independence
IN CONGRESS, July 4 1776.

 Jefferson’s “original Rough draught”, on exhibit in the Library of Congress that reads:

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; …

  among which are the preservation of life…

That’s my position. Any questions?

This is the source and root of my belief system as an American and as a Christian, Period. If you want to debate it, I would love to engage anyone in a constructive and fact based discussion.

The Videos which began this Discussion.

Video 1: Planned Parenthood Uses Partial-Birth Abortions to Sell Baby Parts

If that wasn’t enough for you, here is a link to the entire video : FULL FOOTAGE: Planned Parenthood Uses Partial-Birth Abortions to Sell Baby Parts

Video 2: Senior Executive Haggles Over Baby Parts Prices, Changes Abortion Methods

If that wasn’t enough for you, here is a link to the entire video : FULL FOOTAGE: Second Planned Parenthood Senior Executive Haggles Over Baby Parts Prices

Video 3: Planned Parenthood VP Says Fetuses May Come Out Intact, Agrees Payments…

If that wasn’t enough for you, here is a link to the entire video : FULL FOOTAGE: Planned Parenthood VP Says Fetuses May Come Out Intact, Agrees Payments…

Video 4: Intact Fetuses “Just a Matter of Line Items” for Planned Parenthood TX Mega-Center

Video 5: Intact Fetuses “Just a Matter of Line Items” for Planned Parenthood TX Mega-Center

Democratic response:

washingtontimes
The White House dismissed the need for a federal investigation of Planned Parenthood … are raising questions about the authenticity of a pro-life group’s undercover videos on the sale of fetal tissue.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest also suggested that the pro-life group, the Center for Medical Progress, is an “extremist” organization. And he said for the first time that President Obama would veto any effort by Congress to defund Planned Parenthood.

JUSTICE TO PROBE CENTER FOR MEDICAL PROGRESS — While congressional committees investigate Planned Parenthood’s practices, the Justice Department agreed to look into whether the group that released the sting videos obtained the footage legally. In response to a request by House Democrats, Attorney General Loretta Lynch said Wednesday afternoon that Justice would “review all of the information and determine what the appropriate steps moving forward would be.” Planned Parenthood has staunchly defended its practices and claims that the Center for Medical Progress illegally obtained its footage, then excessively edited it to misrepresent what the organization does.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi told The Daily Caller that there had,

“been a kind of misrepresentation of the conversation that took place in the transcript in the conversation in the video.”

“I don’t know why they need an investigation,”

…she added.

“I have seen pictures from them and obviously find them disturbing,”

she told the New Hampshire Union Leader
A video of the doctor who oversees medical practices at all Planned Parenthood affiliates discussing organ harvesting has…

“got a Benghazi feel to it, for me,”

Rep. Scott Peters, D-CA, told The Hill.

Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) and Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.)

asked U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch and California Attorney General Kamala Harris on Tuesday to review whether the anti-abortion group Center for Medical Progress broke state and federal laws when it created a fake human tissue procurement company in order to gain access to and secretly film Planned Parenthood staffers.
–http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

Planned Parenthood: Judge bars pro-life group from airing StemExpress footage
www.washingtontimes.com

The pro-life group behind a series of undercover Planned Parenthood videos accused the bioservice firm StemExpress late Wednesday of trying to “cover up this illegal baby parts trade” after the company obtained a court order blocking the release of footage.

The Los Angeles Superior Court issued a temporary restraining order Tuesday stopping the Center for Medical Progress from releasing any video showing three officials from StemExpress, a company that transfers fetal tissue from abortions performed at Planned Parenthood and other clinics to medical researchers.

A company spokesman told the Associated Press that StemExpress is “grateful its rights have been vindicated in a court of law,” but the center said in a statement that the court threw out most of the company’s request.

StemExpress is “attempting to use meritless litigation to cover-up this illegal baby parts trade, suppress free speech, and silence the citizen press reporting on issues of burning concern to the American public,” said the CMP statement.

“They are not succeeding — their initial petition was rejected by the court, and their second petition was eviscerated to a narrow and contingent order about an alleged recording pending CMP’s opportunity to respond,” the group said.

The court agreed to block the release of footage of StemExpress officials filmed secretly at a lunch in May until an Aug. 19 court hearing.

I honestly don’t want to hear from anyone that has not seen these videos (Warning: they are graphic), or those who have not read the statements above – note referenced links. I do not wish to discuss this topic with those who will not directly address the content of the videos. There are tons of other places where you can express your views on tax payer funding, women’s healthcare, right-wing conspiracies, the war on women, or any other so called related issue if you wish to join the Liberal / Democrat / Executive and Judicial branches of the present government, in ignoring what these videos actually contain.  Please do not do it here. I find it quite dishonest, and morally corrupt.

I understand this is a powerful and emotional subject, reaching into many beliefs, be it religious, political or whatever it may be for you personally. But, unlike the most of the media/blogs/internet, I will address only the post that actually talk to the contents (business, persons, actions, results) contained within the videos (CLIPS / FULL VERSIONS). I see no reason to go into conjecture. I will let the people in the videos speak for themselves. They all seemed eager at the time of the recording.

I will do my job in response to all post and speak for myself.

This is an on-going post. I have only started  here, facts first. My comments will also be added. Your questions, opinions and thoughts are always welcome. Let the debate begin.

Source: Fox News: Greg Gutfeld

Blunt… but TRUE.

Emperor Obama’s Political Reality:

Pre-Obama American Founding Father’s Political Reality:

 
Just imagine if he cared as much about the unemployed, taxpaying citizen of this nation who cannot get health care as he cares about those who are not citizens. The irony is amazing.  Obama is claiming that our immigration system is “broken.” This from the guy who refused to enforce the immigration laws for six years. In fact, he even sued the state of Arizona for attempting to, essentially, create their own replica of federal immigration law for the purposes of protecting their own state borders.
 

 
DAVID BROOKS:

The substance was not the issue. Most people agree with him on the substance. The issue is why he’s doing it and how he’s doing it, the unilateral way he’s doing it — and, I think, probably the unconstitutional way he’s doing it. He’s ratcheting up the use of executive authority with this unilateral action. The one line in this speech about process is, “If you don’t like this, pass a bill.” Well, suppose a future Republican president says, “If you don’t like my decision not to enforce Obamacare or the Civil Rights Act, pass a bill that I like.” That is not how the system works. We have compromise; we have alternate voices; we have a legislative process. We do not have unilateral action by the White House.

 
All the lies Obama told are being chronicled in the Media today. Just a few. out of the many, I found outrageous…
 
OBAMA:

Now here is the thing. We expect people who live in this country to play by the rules.

But, of course… rules do not apply to the new Emperor…

OBAMA:

And to those members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill. I want to work with both parties to pass a more permanent legislative solution. And the day I sign that bill into law, the actions I take will no longer be necessary.

Someone, anyone… please explain to this Constitutional Professor / Community Organizer that this is NOT how our Government works!!

OBAMA:

Are we a nation that educates the world’s best and brightest in our universities only to send them home to create businesses in countries that compete against us, or are we a nation that encourages them to stay and create jobs here, create businesses here, create industries right here in America?

Have to respond to that with another OBAMA quote: “You didn’t build that!” So now ILLEGAL ALIENS build business, but Americans DON’T??

OBAMA:

Now tomorrow I’ll travel to Las Vegas…

He did, and the crowds cheered him enthusiastically in SPANISH…

President Barack Obama tried to rewrite history by claiming that his position had not changed regarding legal authority for executive orders on immigration that he is now considering.

During a press conference in Brisbane, Australia, Obama was asked what had changed since he made comments in 2013 that he was “not king” and “not the emperor” in response to questions about stopping deportations and providing temporary legal status to undocumented workers — much as he is now contemplating.

Obama replied that his “position hasn’t changed” and that the questions then were about him unilaterally enacting comprehensive immigration changes similar to the Senate bill that passed in 2013, but stalled in the House. But those questions in early 2013 weren’t about a comprehensive immigration overhaul, they were about Obama taking the kinds of executive actions he is now mulling.

Here’s how the question was raised in Australia on Nov. 16:

Jim Avila of ABC News, Nov. 16: Following up on immigration — in 2010, when asked by immigration reform advocates to stop deportations and act alone on providing legal status for the undocumented, you said, “I’m President, I’m not king. I can’t do these things just by myself.” In 2013, you said, “I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed.” Mr. President, what has changed since then? And since you’ve now had a chance to talk since July with your legal advisors, what do you now believe are your limits so that you can continue to act as president and not as emperor or king?

Obama: Well, actually, my position hasn’t changed. When I was talking to the advocates, their interest was in me, through executive action, duplicating the legislation that was stalled in Congress. And getting a comprehensive deal of the sort that is in the Senate legislation, for example, does extend beyond my legal authorities. There are certain things I cannot do. There are certain limits to what falls within the realm of prosecutorial discretion in terms of how we apply existing immigration laws.

But the questions posed to Obama earlier were very specific. They asked the president whether he had the authority to do the very kinds of things he is considering now. For weeks, Obama has been saying that if Congress fails to act on immigration, he will “do everything I can lawfully with my executive authority to make sure that we don’t keep on making the system worse.” According to the New York Times, Obama plans to lift the threat of deportation from as many as 5 million immigrants in the country illegally — mainly the relatives of people already in the country legally — and to offer many of them work permits.
Obama’s action would not permanently change a person’s immigration status and would not provide a pathway to citizenship, as was proposed in the Senate immigration bill that stalled. Obama is correct that that kind of lasting, comprehensive immigration overhaul has to come through Congress. But that’s not what was asked of him in the interviews back in early 2013.

The “I’m not a king” comment came during an interview of Obama on Univision on Jan. 30, 2013.

Maria Elena Salinas of Univision: Now I know that you have reduced, this is another concern on Twitter, the number of deportations of non-criminals. However, in 2012 more than 184,000 non-criminals were deported. In the spirit of your push for immigration reform, would you consider a moratorium on deportations of non-criminals? Remember, these are your words: “This is not about policy. It’s about people.”

Obama: Well, I think it is important to remind everybody that, as I said I think previously, and I’m not a king. I am the head of the executive branch of government. I’m required to follow the law. And that’s what we’ve done. But what I’ve also said is, let’s make sure that we’re applying the law in a way that takes into account people’s humanity. That’s the reason that we moved forward on deferred action. Within the confines of the law we said, we have some discretion in terms of how we apply this law. The same is true with respect to the kinds of the length of time that people have to spend outside of the country when their spouses are already here for example.

The “I’m not the emperor of the United States” comment came during a Google Hangout interview two weeks later, on Feb. 14, 2013, (starting at the 18:42 mark).

Jacky Guerrero of California: Your administration has deported a record high number of 1.5 million undocumented immigrants, more than your predecessor. And I know your administration took some steps last year to protect unintended undocumented immigrants from being deported. However many people say that those efforts weren’t enough. What I’d like to know is what you’re going to do now until the time immigration reform is passed, to insure that more people aren’t being deported and families aren’t being broken apart.

Obama: Well, look Jacky, this is something that I’ve struggled with throughout my presidency. The problem is that, you know, I’m the president of the United States. I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute laws that are passed, and Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system.

And what that means is is that we have certain obligations to enforce the laws that are in place, even if we think that in many cases the results may be tragic. And what we have been able to do is to make sure that we’re focusing our enforcement resources on criminals, as opposed to somebody who’s here just trying to work and look after their families.

What we have tried to do is administratively reduce the burdens and hardships on families being separated. And what we’ve done is, obviously, pass the deferred action which made sure that the DREAMers, young people who were brought here and think of themselves as Americans, are American except for their papers, that they’re not deported.

Having said all that, we’ve kind of stretched our administrative flexibility as much as we can. And that’s why making sure we get comprehensive immigration reform done is so important.

In both cases, the president was asked about executive actions to remove the threat of deportations from a much larger group, to prevent the breakup of families — the very thing Obama is proposing to do now. Then, Obama said, “[W]e’ve kind of stretched our administrative flexibility as much as we can.” Now, he believes he has the legal authority to do it.
In a similar analysis of Obama’s claim that his “position hasn’t changed,” Washington Post Fact Checker Glenn Kessler noted two other instances in which Obama previously claimed he lacked the authority to extend a freeze of deportations to a larger class of immigrants in the country illegally, or to grant temporary status.
The first came in a Univision town hall meeting on March 28, 2011, in which Obama was asked if he could “grant temporary protective status, TPS, to undocumented students.” Obama said that he could not.

Obama, 2011: With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed — and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know that we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws.

There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.

The other example cited by Kessler was an interview with Noticias Telemundo on Sept. 17, 2013, during which Obama was specifically asked if he would “at least consider unilaterally freezing the deportations for parents of deferred-action kids.” Again, Obama said he could not.

Obama, Sept. 17, 2013: My job in the executive branch is supposed to be to carry out the laws that are passed. Congress has said, here’s the law when it comes to those who are undocumented, and they allocate a whole bunch of money for enforcement.

Obama continued to say that he had made the legal argument that the government did not have the resources to deport so-called DREAMers — people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as young children. But he didn’t think it was legally possible to extend that policy beyond DREAMers.

“But if we start broadening that, then essentially I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally,” Obama said. “So that’s not an option. I do get a little worried that advocates of immigration reform start losing heart and immediately thinking, well, somehow there’s an out here — if Congress doesn’t act, we will just have the president sign something and that will take care of it, and we won’t have to worry about it. What I have said is that there is a path to get this done and that is through Congress.”

According to the New York Times, White House officials insist the evolution of Obama’s comments reflects a change in emphasis, rather than a change in opinion, and that at the time Obama was focused on convincing Congress to pass comprehensive immigration legislation.
We take no position on whether Obama has the legal authority to enact the kinds of immigration changes he is considering via executive authority. Ultimately, that may have to be decided in federal courts (as Republicans have threatened a legal challenge). But then, Obama said he lacked the legal authority to suspend deportation of family members. Now, he says he has just such legal authority.

Source: factcheck.org – Robert Farley