Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Thanksgiving perspective: Before illegals and refugees, how about our homeless veterans first?

With Thanksgiving just a few days away, as we gather with family and friends to give thanks to the Almighty for all the blessings bestowed, perhaps during the inevitable discussions around the table, we can begin to put a few things into perspective concerning the happenings in the world around us. And here's one of them...
“We are going to remain relentless … in our fight to end homelessness among our veterans. We have to have zero tolerance for homelessness among our veterans.” ~ President Barack Obama
Our doors are flung wide open for questionable 'refugees' and illegal aliens while thousands of our nation's finest remain homeless. What sense does any of this make? None whatsoever...

In 2010, President Obama promised the country that his administration would end veteran homelessness by the end of 2015. Well, we're nearly a month away from that deadline with the cold chill of winter upon us and thousands of our veterans remain on the streets, doing what they can, doing all they can to find a way out of homelessness and make a better life for themselves.

Related links: Homeless in the Country They Served: Obama’s empty promise to end veteran homelessness falling short
Obama Promised No Homeless Vets By 2015.. How He’s Doing? What a Joke!
“After helping at the local food bank, we need to set priorities after taking care of our own needy. There are over 50,000 homeless veterans and our shelters are already overcrowded. We already know that we are safe with our veterans and probably the homeless. I understand there is a need for the refugees, but we need to help ourselves before we come to help others. Where are the priorities?” ~ Dennis Catalano, Bethel
And the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association are thinking along the same lines as Dennis...
WashingtonExaminer: A group representing federal law enforcement officers is urging President Obama to kill his plan to settle Syrian refugees in America and instead work with allies to create a safe zone in Syria for them to live.

Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association President Nathan Catura said that there is no way to check the backgrounds of incoming Syrians for terrorist activities, and that American war veterans are more deserving of the potential billions of dollars that would be used for the refugee program.

"How would our government distinguish men and women of military age from true refugees with those intending harm to the American public? The hard, cold truth is there is no way to do it," he said in a statement.

"Federal law enforcement resources are already stretched to the limit, investigating hundreds of suspected terrorists or sympathizers in every state in the union. Is the White House prepared to dispense tens of millions of dollars to federal law enforcement agencies to help offset the cost of vetting and investigating the thousands of refugees that are set to enter our homeland? Most likely not," he added.

Catura, whose group represents some 25,000 federal police officers from 65 agencies, said the spending priority should be focused on helping American veterans first.

"All one needs to do is look at how our military veterans have been treated since returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan to know the truth. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, there are about 48,000 homeless American veterans living on the streets of America today. How does our country, in good faith, over-extend our limited resources to take in any refugees when our veterans are in dire need of shelter, food, clothing and mental health care? Additionally, there are currently over 2 million homeless children in America. The sad truth is that taking care of Americans first has been lost in this debate," he wrote, adding:

"Our compassion is first for Americans, in particular our homeless veterans who risked their lives to protect our freedoms. We respectfully ask the White House to reconsider its position and not betray the unwavering priority of Americans first."
This year and into the next, let's not only demand that our government take care of those who've given the most to its service first and foremost, but let's also encourage one another in the spirit of brotherly love to do the same for our bravest who should never find themselves in such situations.
O GOD, Almighty and merciful, who healest those that are broken in heart, and turnest the sadness of the sorrowful to joy; Let thy fatherly goodness be upon all that thou hast made. Remember in pity such as are this day destitute, homeless, or forgotten of their fellow-men. Bless the congregation of thy poor. Uplift those who are cast down. Mightily befriend innocent sufferers, and sanctify to them the endurance of their wrongs. Cheer with hope all discouraged and unhappy people, and by thy heavenly grace preserve from falling those whose penury tempteth them to sin; though they be troubled on every side, suffer them not to be distressed; though they be perplexed, save them from despair. Grant this, O Lord, for the love of him, who for our sakes became poor, thy Son, our Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen.

ADDENDUM: Also as an aside, what about all those 'one in five' child hunger ads that have run non-stop over the past several years? You've heard'em. Although grossly exaggerated and designed to tug at the heartstrings (i.e., a LIE), since Big Ag has pushed the propaganda, let's consider them viable in this rationale for just a moment: If government subsidies and entitlements have failed at feeding 'one in five' of the citizens' own kids, how does the same government expect to feed tens of millions of illegals and refugees dumped on our shores?! Compound that with the issue of all our homeless Americans, including veterans, as well as a struggling economy & unemployment, and this only exacerbates the problems of food and work exponentially.

Monday, November 23, 2015

Obama's ISIS non-strategy demonstrates that loyalties lie not with America

Over the weekend, it looks like Obama's strategy against ISIS is much worse than we thought. For one, it appears that the Intel was cooked...(shocker, right?)
TRS: Over the weekend, possibly the most alarming news you’ll hear about the war against ISIS brewed up again in the wake of the President’s latest attempt to minimize the risks people face and prop up his own worldview and policy desires.

The Pentagon is expanding their “inquiry” into whether Centcom doctored intelligence to make it seem as if the war against ISIS were going better than it was, and also to make ISIS appear to be weaker and less of a threat than it actually is. In other words, whether intelligence was altered to shore up President JV’s assessment of the enemy and his continuing objections that everything is fine.

It was the morning of the terror attack in Paris when President Obama claimed ISIS was contained. Even this weekend the President said they were just killers with “good social media.” France, England, Russia, and tens of thousands of refugees seem to disagree.
Related links: President of Council on Foreign Relations on Damning Report About Obama Admin’s Islamic State Intel: ‘I Hope It’s Not True’
Pentagon Expands Inquiry Into Intelligence on ISIS Surge

But the bad intel is merely indicative of Obama's bad strategy...and as Rush divulged this morning, it's a strategy alright...one that purposefully does nothing...
"Now, the American people might think that he doesn't have a strategy because they don't see any action. No action is the strategy. May I remind you, may I repeat, and I mentioned this in the Fox News Sunday interview yesterday. Walid Phares says that Obama has sided with Iran and Syria when it comes to ISIS because of the sectarian violence going on in all these Middle Eastern countries. Obama is telling everybody that until these countries unify themselves, there's no point in him helping them, because getting rid of ISIS, Obama says, we don't know what would surface to replace them. It might be worse.

It's an excuse for not doing anything because Iran doesn't want anything done. ISIS is doing Iran's bidding. Now, for whatever reason, Obama has signed on with Iran. We have unfrozen $150 billion of Iranian assets. They've got now $150 billion to spend on whatever they want that they didn't have. And as everybody knows, we are facilitating the Iranian nuclear weapons program by permitting it to proceed.

So Obama does have a strategy. It is for Iran to eventually be the power in that region. And if ISIS is an agent of Iran, and if ISIS is an agent of Bashar Assad or if Assad's an agent of Iran, that's where Obama's loyalties lie. So the strategy is not to do anything."

All of this convolution to curry global favor and manipulate public opinion to support an abysmal imperial President. One thing's for certain: It couldn't be more apparent that Obama's loyalties lie not in America's best interest or that of her people, but of something foreign and worldly towards our detriment.

U.S. pilots CONFIRM that Obama blocks 75 PERCENT of Islamic State strikes

30K: ISIS Imports TWICE Number Of Fighters Who Joined Devastating Soviet–Afghan War In The 80s

EVEN SYRIAN AMERICANS don’t want these refugees flooding America!

When EVEN SYRIAN AMERICANS don't want these 'refugees' in America from the war-torn, terrorist-riddled MidEast, perhaps those lobbing "racist" and "xenophobe" insults at concerned citizens might curb their attitudes long enough to consider the dire implications...
AP: A few days ago, a pastor asked Syrian-born restaurant owner Marie Jarrah to donate food to a welcoming event for recently arrived Syrian refugees. Jarrah, who said she regularly helps people in need, declined.

Like many of Allentown's establishment Syrians, she doesn't think it's a good idea to bring refugees to the city. She clung to that view even before last week's terrorist attacks in Paris. "Problems are going to happen," said Jarrah, co-owner of Damascus Restaurant in a heavily Syrian enclave.

As debate intensifies nationally over the federal government's plan to accept an additional 10,000 refugees from war-ravaged Syria, a similar argument is taking place in Allentown — one with a sectarian twist.

Pennsylvania's third-largest city is home to one of the nation's largest populations of Syrians. They are mostly Christian and, in no small number, support Syrian President Bashar al-Assad — a dynamic that's prompting some of them to oppose the resettlement of refugees, who are Muslim and say they fled violence perpetrated by the Assad regime.

Aziz Wehbey, an Allentown auto dealer and president of the American Amarian Syrian Charity Society, worries some Syrian refugees might have taken part in the fighting in Syria's civil war and have "blood on their hands."

"We need to know who we are welcoming in our society," said Wehbey, who immigrated to the United States a quarter-century ago and became a citizen.
Valid concerns all around. Ones that we've been expressing over the past week, as our so-called president scoffs at us. But just as the article emphasizes, many Syrian Americans have been concerned with this for a while.

Now, watch libs say those immigrants aren't real Syrians because they did everything on the up and up! Meanwhile, these are somehow legit?

Related links: So, what of the 'refugee' majority of 'able-bodied muslim men of prime fighting age'?
Americans OPPOSE Obama's Syrian Muslim refugee resettlement, ask why not MidEast Christians?
Jihadist Infiltration in Name of “Refugees” Biggest Betrayal in History – Charities in the Thick of It

Judge Jeanine tells Obama to STOP!

Judge Jeanine RIPS Obama a new one over all his ISIS indifference, feigned compassion for Syrian refugees, and overall defining of what Islam is and is not...ENOUGH! What about America, Americans and our Judeo-Christian values that have held our civil society together?

It is definitely odd how Obama is so damn certain that our extremist enemies are not Muslim. He prattles on about “universal values” that we all share, but it’s very clear that those are values inculcated in the Christian West and NOT the Muslim East.
Related links: Obama’s INCOMPETENT ISIS plan SLAMMED on Sunday news shows

Friday, November 20, 2015

Cruz SURGES back to 2nd and beyond! (UPDATES)

It's hard to say how much we can rely on polls these days, but if this latest is an accurate indication, then slow and steady wins the race!
TRS: NBC News has a new nationwide surveymonkey poll out today, with a very large sample size of over 2400 that are Republican or who lean Republican, that shows Ted Cruz surging 8 points to second place into a tie with Ben Carson with 18%. Trump is of course still in first place with 28%.

The interesting thing about this poll is that we can see the history all the way back to April of this year, and in this new polling Cruz is higher than he’s ever been, especially as of late:

And because we're in the age of demographic politics (don't know if party politics will ever escape it), here's the rundown of those numbers:

Interesting that left out were blacks, latinos and other minority groups, but not surprising for NBS, as Democratic media naturally believe they own those group of Americans.

Nonetheless, it's refreshing to see this conservative statesman acknowledged by more Americans. And really, how could you miss Ted as of late as he DISMANTLES the current unAmerican occupier for his overseas tirades against the very nation he swore an oath to?!


Related links: Cruz's immigration plan: Timely remedy for amnesty and Syrian refugee crisis
Congressman Steve King Endorses Ted Cruz for President
Ted Cruz wins first ever conservative caucus in New Hampshire

UPDATES: A new CBS poll has Cruz surging to the top of the race in Iowa!
Ted Cruz SURGES TO SECOND place in Iowa poll, Carson COLLAPSES 8%!!
Hey, take it from the Maha Rushie, who tells it like it is when it comes to describing Ted Cruz...
"Brilliant. Just absolutely brilliant and conservative through and through. Trustworthy, strong, confident leader in whom you can totally depend."

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Passage in the House: Assessing the good, the bad, the ugly of the American SAFE Act

Well, the headlines certainly sounded in our favor this evening for a change. Despite Obama's veto threat, the House passed a bill purported to curb Syrian refugee resettlement in the U.S. with a BIPARTISAN VETO-PROOF MAJORITY!
Townhall: The House just passed a bill aimed to curb the flow of Syrian and Iraqi refugees entering the country unless they pass a vigorous screening process. The bill was brought up in the aftermath of the horrific terrorist attack that carried out by the Islamic State in Paris last Friday, which left over 120 people dead. Yesterday French Police killed the mastermind of the attack, Abdelhamid Abaaoud, in a raid.

The legislation was threatened with a veto from President Obama, but passed with a veto-proof majority. No one wants to look like they're soft on national security entering an election year. (via AP):
In a stinging rebuke to President Barack Obama by Republicans as well as members of his own party, the House ignored a veto threat Thursday and overwhelmingly approved Republican legislation erecting fresh hurdles for Syrian and Iraqi refugees trying to enter the United States.

Dozens of Democrats joined Republicans as the House passed the measure 289-137. That margin exceeded the two-thirds majority required to override a veto, and it came despite a rushed, early morning visit to the Capitol by top administration officials in a futile attempt to limit Democratic defections for the measure.

Thursday's vote came six days after a burst of bombings and shootings in Paris killed 129 people, wounded many more and revived post-9/11 jitters in the U.S. and Europe. The attacks have turned the question of admitting people fleeing war-torn Syria and Iraq into a high-stakes political issue in both the United States and Europe, and many congressional Democrats were willing to vote against their party's lame duck president for fear of angering voters nervous about security at home.
Related link: House Passes Bill to Halt, Overhaul Syrian Refugee Process

So now it's off to the Senate...hold on, though. Isn't this the same bill that we discussed earlier, which simply requires one new step for Syrian and Iraqi refugee admittance and resettlement from people who work for President Obama at his pleasure? Yep, the same one. So, let's back up for a moment.

Although the particular testimony I'm about to refer to occurred a month ago, it's become especially relevant over the past week, and has likely been played various times throughout each day since. So allow me to set up a contrast/comparison this time around...

If our FBI Director ADMITS that the U.S. cannot adequately vet all Syrian refugees for terror ties...
"We can only query against that which we have collected. And, so if someone has never made a ripple in the pond in Syria in a way that would get their identity or their interest reflected in our database, we can query our database until the cows come home, but...there'll be nothing to show up, because we have no record on that person."

...then how can our new Speaker acknowledge that fact, yet still pursue any appended measure after this epiphany (@ 3:06):
"Here's the problem: There really isn't a Syria to talk to corroborate the veracity of a person's claims..."
STOP right there. If there's no way to verify who these foreign individuals are, that's a major impediment towards the progress of any refugee program, particularly concerning one under a president who wants to fast-track everything.

Yes, Ryan muscled through passage of the House legislation this afternoon, which only slightly tightens up the vetting process. Bravo. But this program doesn't just need to be paused, it needs to be halted completely based solely on what our FBI Director has already informed the Speaker (and the world for that matter, as it was broadcasted as part of a congressional hearing). Even one slip up can risk a lot of American citizens' lives.

Mark Levin was discouraged tonight as well with the misdirection of the conversation, hammering away at Ryan for pushing what some conservatives see as a rather weak bill...
TRS: Mark Levin doesn’t like the bill that passed the House today because it doesn’t do what Republicans are claiming it does.

He played Paul Ryan’s interview from last night on Hannity and took his arguments completely apart, pointing out that all a high level official in the Obama administration has to do is sign something saying the these refugees are ok.

Levin says the bill won’t work because it’s trying to hold a lawless administration to account who refuses to be held to account.

Rep. Steve King of Iowa was one of only two Republicans who voted against the Act, citing:
“I voted against the American SAFE Act because it fails to restore Congress’ Article 1 authority over admissions of migrants to the United States,” King said in a statement provided to TheBlaze.

“How can we trust this Obama Administration who will not utter the words ‘radical Islamic jihad’ to accurately screen Syrian and Iraqi refugees as required in this bill?” King continued. “For that reason, I submitted an amendment to Rules, which was ultimately not adopted, that would create international safe zones for refugees in their homeland. The safety and security of the American people is paramount. I respect the House trying to find a solution, but I do not believe this was the right or strong enough one.”
Here's how much of an ideologue Obama is, though. Even with this singular provision being discussed in the mainstream press as some draconian play by Republicans, when in fact it's extremely minimal, Obama has still promised to veto the measure, because, well, Republicans came up with it, and he hates them more than ISIS. Go figure.

Related links: Ryan: Don’t Want to Nix Syrian, Iraqi Refugee Programs, but ‘Standards’ Not Where They Should Be
Paul Ryan Tells Sean Hannity He Will Not Support Any Cuts To Muslim Immigration: ‘That’s Not Who We Are’

Ryan, House GOP leaders set the stage to CAVE to Obama's Syrian refugee resettlement chaos

ADDENDUM: Via Thursday’s Mark Levin Show:
Instead of debating about the security of America, we’re talking about how racist Republicans are and how America should allow Syrian refugees in. The debate we need to have is why won’t President Obama secure this county and unleash hell on ISIS; let’s debate how to win this war! Instead of talking about the refugees, Obama should just deal with ISIS by sending conventional warheads to their capital. Its what FDR and Truman would have done, but he will never do that. Also, Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell have been meeting behind closed doors to cut a deal with Obama. They are behind legislation to increase vetting by requiring senior U.S. officials to sign off on each immigrant personally. This measure is ineffective and will not help in identifying terrorists inserted among the refugees.

RUSH: 'ISIS came to be PRECISELY because of Obama policies'

On Monday, Rush made the abbreviated case as to why Obama is the one responsible for ISIS...

Consider his hodge-podge of foreign policies since taking office in January of '09...and then consider that there was no ISIS until Obama! By Thursday, El Rushbo presented the unabbreviated version...
"We have a terrorist group that has formed basically during Obama’s presidency. There wasn’t any ISIS before Obama.

There wasn’t an ISIS with George W. Bush in the White House. ISIS came to be precisely because of the policies of Barack Hussein O. Barack Hussein O, for whatever reason, got us out of the Middle East after a successful — eventually successful — campaign. He left a vacuum, and it has been filled by ISIS. And they’re off and running now, and they are terrorizing all of Europe. And they, like other Islamists, are telegraphing their intentions. They intend to do the same thing here.

They’re being very open about it. They’re cutting and releasing videos and promising to do so.

It would be silly to not take them at their word. It would be silly to assume that we’re untouchable. So when we have current leadership that doesn’t seem concerned and doesn’t seem halfway interested in stopping any of this — and, furthermore, doesn’t even want to establish that they recognize this same threat that we see. That’s the reason for the opposition to this. This administration is losing the trust of the American people more and more each day and for legitimate reasons. Those of you who have a desire to protect and defend this country, it’s for all of the right reasons.

A, it’s instinctive for a patriotic American to want to protect and defend his homeland. There are other reasons. The future for your children and grandchildren. You know of the greatness of this country and, furthermore, of its potential — and its potential is being squandered! We are being led by people who do not believe in American potential, do not believe in American exceptionalism — and, furthermore, believe that our superpower status is illegitimate and undeserved."

"The president of the United States is the number one law enforcer. He is the number one defender and protector of the country, its people, it's Constitution. And we just don't see...

By virtue of behavior and policies implemented, we just don't see he recognizes that. Instead, we see a president who seems to believe he leads a country that has committed sin after sin after sin and must now pay a price for that. And he almost enjoys the bitter clingers (as he calls them) of this country being upset and worried about it. And now has become petulant and childlike when questioned legitimately by sycophantic media about why he has no interest in quote "getting these bastards," unquote.

What are we to think where we hear our own president say he doesn't believe in concepts like leadership and victory and winning? What are we supposed to think? We're not irrational. ...

Well, we don't have a leader who accepts the idea that the purpose of armies is to kill people and break things and to eventually win to the point where the other side surrenders and apologizes for what they did to start the whole thing. Because our president seems to think we're responsible for starting these things, that we're responsible for the existence of all of this anti-American evil out there because of our past transgressions as an unjust and illegitimately founded whatever we are, country. So our president talks about not wanting to lead and not wanting to sloganeer and use terms like "leadership" and "winning" because that misses the point, that's not what we're all about, and we see that combined with other policies the president's implemented, and I'm here to tell you being cared is the only common-sensical reaction. And wanting to do something in opposition to it, stop it and fix it and reverse it is also quite natural.

So the opposition to the illegal immigrants is nothing about Mexicans. The illegal refugees is nothing about bias against Syrians or ethnic bias, racist bias. It's about love of country and a recognition that we are at risk in a dangerous world, and it doesn't seem like we have a leadership too interested in defending us against what we see are not maybe possible threats, but they are real, they are happening, they've even happened on our own soil."
Related links: Why Barack Obama Is Dangerous
Petulant Obama Mocks Republicans for Fearing 3-Year-Old Orphans, While ISIS Trains Children to Become Jihadi Killers
Our President Doesn't Know That a "Religious Test" for Refugees Seeking Asylum Is Required by Federal Law
Obama gets really angry -- at Americans

Cruz's immigration plan: Timely remedy for amnesty and Syrian refugee crisis (ADDENDUM)

2016 can't come soon enough, and implementation of this plan in the following January of 2017 could guarantee America's safety and sovereignty from within and abroad in an increasingly hostile world...
Townhall: It's official! Sen. Ted Cruz's immigration plan trumps Trump's!

I expected that the unveiling of his plan would take a back seat to the Islamic terrorist attack in Paris, France, and rightfully so. However, in lieu of the chaos, presidents will be forced to make many decisions during their tenure that will affect the safety and security of the American people. The Paris attack gave us a chance to see how our candidates would respond if an event like that occured during their administration. In a world with an ever increasing threat of an ISIS attack, immigration is no longer a matter of migration and sovereignty alone - it's a matter of national security.

Cruz's plan doesn't explicitly address the deportation of the estimated 11 million illegal foreigners residing within our nation's borders currently. Nonetheless, it's almost certain that self deportation would be the end result of his plan. Self deportation is a more viable option than Donald Trump's plan to corral illegal foreigners and throw them out, considering the divided and often feckless Congress in Washington, D.C.

Sen. Cruz wisely divided his plan into three categories. All of which are essential in restoring our immigration system, Judeo-Christian heritage, healthy job wages and national sovereignty. The plan entails how he would secure the border, restore the rule of law, and reform legal immigration to protect Americans. Within each category Sen. Cruz offered specific and in depth objectives to implement his plan, along with a "promise" to see it through.
1.) Secure the border
A.) Build a wall that works. After passing legislation in 2006 to complete a 700 mile fence across our southern border and having it signed by then President George W. Bush, Congress managed to build a menial 36 miles worth of fence. Ted Cruz promised to "complete" the remaining 664 miles worth of concrete enforced fencing.

B. Triple the number of border patrol agents. The federal government is obligated to enforce our border laws. Having more man power will help in that effort and let the countries south of our border know we mean business.

C. Increase vital aerial surveillance and other technology along the border. Although I'm skeptical of the effectiveness of this particular aspect of securing our border security, Sen. Cruz argues that "eyes in the sky and other equipment are necessary to find and detain all illegal entrants."

D.) Finish the biometric tracking system at our nation's ports of entry. Approximately 60 percent of illegal foreigners that enter our country legally on temporary visa programs never leave. A tracking system is crucial to curtail that.
2.) Restore the rule of law.
A.) End President Obama's illegal amnesty. Sen. Cruz promises to rescind each of Obama's 20 executive orders that has fomented illegal immigration his first day in office. Having argued before the Supreme Court nine times, I tend to believe he knows what he's doing.

B.) Increase deportations and end catch-and-release. Deportations and returns have to be taken seriously. Ted Cruz has promised to rededicate the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to "fully enforcing the law."

C.) End sanctuary policies. Sanctuary cities are a spit in the face to those who immigrated to our country legally. They undermine any incentive for illegal foreigners to assimilate. This must be stopped! Three hundred-forty jurisdictions in the U.S. refuse to enforce our immigration laws. Cruz has promised to sign "Kate's law, and deport criminal immigrants."

D.) Prohibit illegal immigrants from receiving financial benefits and strengthen E-Verify. People who broke our border laws don't deserve welfare from U.S. citizens. Additionally, American jobs should go to Americans. This policy will help accomplish that objective.
3.) Reform legal immigration to protect Americans.
A.) Suspend the issuance of all H-1B visas for 180 days to complete a comprehensive investigation and audit of pervasive allegations of abuse of the program. Ted Cruz also promised to "initiate an immediate 90-day investigation and audit" of the H-1B visa program to protect American jobs. I would like more details on this.

B.) Halt any increases in immigration so long as American unemployment remains unacceptably high. Until American workers are near full employment it makes no sense to saturate the low skilled labor market and drive down wages.

C.) Enforce the public-charge doctrine. I love this! If you come to this country it is incumbent upon you and no one else to take care of yourself! Let's restore the "American Dream" not the "Great society."

D.) End birthright citizenship. As a black American it is offensive how our 14th Amendment is being used to justify lawless acts by illegal foreigners when it was written to protect freedmen! Sen. Cruz promises to "take steps to pass legislation or a constitutional amendment to end it."
America is the only industrialized nation in the modern world with weak border policy. Other candidates are "campaigning" about what they'd do to secure the border, but knowing what we know about Sen. Cruz, he's just speaking truth.
Here it is, America! Nominate him, elect the man with the plan, and we're certain to get it.

Related link: Ted Cruz Like You’ve Never Seen. Throws Gauntlet on Obama and Refugee Crisis
Obama takes immigration leniency plan to the Supreme Court

ADDENDUM: Sen. Cruz also laid out why the Terrorist Refugee Infiltration Prevention Act of 2015 is necessary...
WT: The self-proclaimed Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, has emerged as the new face of the radical terror that has bedeviled the West in recent decades. As the American people are now painfully aware in the wake of ISIS’s murderous rampage in Paris last Friday, they have apparently now directly threatened both Washington and New York. Their attacks and threats serve as reminders that ISIS can and, given time and opportunity, will strike the West again.

This jihadist organization is intentionally infiltrating the flood of refugees that are currently entering Europe through Turkey, Greece, and points west. Rather than taking the threat seriously, President Obama has doubled down on his dangerous open-borders policies by proposing to welcome thousands of refugees who have potentially been infiltrated by terrorists to the United States. This headlong rush toward a careless policy comes just weeks after FBI Director James Comey told Congress, in no uncertain terms, that our government lacks the tools to properly screen these refugees.

Since the beginning of the Syrian refugee crisis, more than 2,100 refugees from Syria have already been admitted to the United States. President Obama now wants to accept at least 10,000 more this fiscal year. That’s roughly a third of the 34,000 total refugees President Obama proposes to accept from the Near East and South Asia.

This policy makes no sense. Given the existential nature and scope of the threat posed by radical Islamic terrorism, the limitations on our ability to screen the flood of refugees, and the obligations of our government to provide for the safety and security of all Americans, we simply cannot accept refugees from countries that have a significant terrorist presence until the terrorist threat has been eliminated.

As an unapologetic proponent of legal immigration, it brings me no pleasure to advocate for limiting the flow of refugees to America. But the first duty of our government, which President Obama and Hillary Clinton are ignoring, is to protect the American people. And if that means temporarily suspending the admission of high-risk refugees from countries beset by jihadist groups, then so be it.

This is why I have introduced the Terrorist Refugee Infiltration Prevention Act of 2015. This constitutionally sound, common-sense measure would immediately bar any refugee who is from any country that contains territory controlled in substantial part by ISIS, al Qaeda, or any other designated foreign terrorist organization ascribing to the radical, totalitarian Islamism dedicated to the destruction of the United States and our allies, and whose proponents find anyone who does not share their faith—from couples dining in cafes to Jews shopping in a kosher market to satirical cartoonists—equally offensive. The bill specifically names Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as countries from which refugees cannot be accepted, and empowers the State Department to identify and designate additional countries as potential sources of terror.

It is important to note this refugee ban would be temporary. It would sunset after three years, and allow Congress to reevaluate the global situation and make necessary adjustments, or let the law expire. It would in no way prevent the United States from providing assistance to humanitarian disasters in a way that is consistent with our national security.

The bill would also allow a narrow exception to the refugee ban in cases that involve victims of genocide like the Yazidis and certain Christian sects, including Assyrians, who, amazingly, still speak a form of Aramaic that is believed to have been spoken by Jesus Christ. This exception would only be available for the severest cases of persecution, and would require a high bar of proof.

The American people already know the truth President Obama will not utter, which is that the threat we face is radical Islamic terrorism, not random violence. The fact of the matter is that no Christian or Yazidi has systematically executed concert-goers while shouting “Allahu Akbar.” Pretending all the refugees are equally likely or unlikely to commit terrorist acts prevents us from helping those we can while protecting ourselves from a real threat. And the insistence of the Obama Administration that the terrorist threat is “not Islamic” gives no confidence that any screening mechanism they would design would actually identify the radical Islamic terrorists whose stated goal is to murder Americans.

After the horror of Paris, it would be downright reckless not to take basic steps to protect ourselves from the threat of terrorist infiltration. It takes just one jihadist to cause enormous damage and take countless lives. This is a small, first step toward protecting America, and I will never apologize for defending this nation.
...to which the piece o' DemoCRAPS blocked (thanks in part to McConnell's cowardice in managing the rules of the Senate for the Dems' gains).

So, what of the 'refugee' majority of 'able-bodied muslim men of prime fighting age'?

Much of this has been discussed over the past months, but continues to be buried in the mainstream lib press, because it simply doesn't fit the narrative that their Democratic masters desire, particular the top One...

Of course, we know how that played out, a mere few hours after he uttered 'widows', a female suicide bomber exploded in Paris. And do we really have to go through the litany of what's wrong with his 'orphan' comment?
An ISIS School Teaches Jihad To Children At Age 3
ISIS videos show children training to kill
Petulant Obama Mocks Republicans for Fearing 3-Year-Old Orphans, While ISIS Trains Children to Become Jihadi Killers

Now that we've cleared that up, notice something that Obama continues to leave out? How about all these able-bodied men?

After digging past the media deception, one honest reporter highlights his observations on the reality of the Syrian 'refugee' crisis in the European Union:
  • 70% of “refugees” are able-bodied young men. Few women or children were present.
  • Refugees are told which countries offer the most benefits and told to avoid countries offer less free stuff. Denmark is considered a “bad” country for refugees.
  • Refugees are instructed to fake medical conditions.
  • Refugees are taught how to avoid being finger printed and how to evade the law.
  • Refugees trashed the train station and made no effort to “pitch in” or clean up. They instead played soccer, charged cell phones, and hit on girls.

So, if the majority of the supposed Syrian 'refugees' are able-bodied muslim men of prime fighting age, then one HUGE question looms:

Why won’t these men fight for their homeland?

There are some secondary questions that could be coupled with it (If they won’t fight for their homeland, how will they help to maintain law & order in countries they're migrating to? Would they be willing to defend those countries from ISIS if called upon?), but this is the primary consideration.
Cleveland.com: More than half of U.S. Governors have questioned allowing Syrian refugees into their states over legitimate security questions. Here's another question: Should able-bodied, single, male Syrian refugees be back home fighting for their country, instead of fleeing to Europe and North America?

We've all seen the heartbreaking images of parents with their children and orphans, fleeing the hell hole that Syria has become. The compassion and shelter from harm they need and deserve is obvious and warranted.

But more than once, I've watched as reporters have followed groups of single men and women in their twenties and thirties on the refugee trail into Europe. In one such case, the men described themselves as leaving upper-middle class lifestyles. Each time I watch such a scene, I wonder how come these able-bodied men aren't back in Syria fighting for their country, while men from other nations are? What would essentially amount to a full-force, free Syrian army, has instead been marching into Europe among fathers, mothers, their children and orphans. It's easy to understand a father attempting to get his family to safety. I have a harder time having empathy for able-bodied single men leaving the fight for others who aren't even Syrians.

The boots on the ground in Syria, first and foremost, should be on the feet of able-bodied Syrian men, who fight their fight, not flee it.
Even Chris Matthews (yes, that Chris Matthews!) addresses 'all those able-bodied men' in the most lucid, rational response ever heard from his lips...
"Is there just one in a million Syrians willing to fight for Syria? Is that the deal? Is it? Would just one in a million Americans be willing to fight for our country if it were taken from us, if it came to that? There are dread implications to these numbers."

"Some said here last night that we can't ask Syrians to fight for their country because they have families. Well tell that to the American families, those we care most about, who have a member of their family on their fourth deployment right now. ... If we had Syrians playing their rightful part in the liberation of their country, they would be the ones taking it over!"
Also, from much of the research that Mike Cernovich and others have done, a not-so-picturesque image of welfarism's allure arises, and not without its lawlessness...
Over 70% of the Syrian “refugees” are young, fit men. They do not want to fight for their own homelands. They are not even legitimate refugees, as they are seeking free government welfare from the richest European Union nations rather than safety from war.
Aside from the priorities of hitting on chicks, playing soccer, charging their electronics, and all while trashing their temporary habitations, so-called 'humanitarian' groups teach 'refugees' how to evade the law by avoiding fingerprinting, not registering in Denmark that limits asylum to its borders, and directing them towards countries that provide the most free benefits (apparently Germany and Austria).

But one has to question if there's something more sinister going on here. With all of this coming to American shores, promoted by an out-of-touch president and his rogue party, along with a cowering political opposition, the ease of infiltration by America's enemies becomes so brazenly apparent.

Can you spot who in this group is ISIS?

Of course not. Obama doesn't want you to, and he'd shame you for even trying.

And whoever emigrates for the cause of Allah will find on the earth many [alternative] locations and abundance. And whoever leaves his home as an emigrant to Allah and His Messenger and then death overtakes him - his reward has already become incumbent upon Allah . And Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful. ~ Quran 4:100

“Just wait. It’s our dream that there should be a caliphate not only in Syria but in all the world and we will have it soon, God willing. ... They are going like refugees. Others just go to Europe to be ready.” ~ ISIS smuggler, 9/4/15
Nearly 70 are arrested in America over ISIS plots and they include refugees
Turkey arrests 8 ISIS suspects posing as … Syrian refugees
Syrians Detained Trying to Cross Texas Border
ADDENDUM: Via RedState:
According to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, over 62% of all Syrian “refugees” are military age males. This is a problem. Single, military age men are very rarely refugees as defined by US law. They are, however, fertile recruiting ground for terrorists. The Obama administration has sought to downplay this risk by, well, lying.

Related links: French PM: Some attackers used refugees crisis as cover
Syrian community leader: ISIS is already in America

Ryan, House GOP leaders set the stage to CAVE to Obama's Syrian refugee resettlement chaos

Unless this is the biggest head-fake we've ever seen out of the Republican Party, it's looking very much like the new boss is same as the old boss...younger, cleaner, less orange-y, of course, and yet slicker, just as defeatist...
Breitbart: Newly elected House Speaker Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is setting the stage this week to cave to President Barack Obama’s efforts to resettle thousands of Syrian refugees across America, even in the wake of the Paris terrorist attacks.

On Wednesday afternoon at 4 p.m. ET, the House Rules Committee will meet to prepare a bill from House Homeland Security Committee chairman Rep. Mike McCaul (R-TX) that doesn’t end up stopping Syrian refugee resettlement in America. Sources Congress-wide confirm to Breitbart News that McCaul’s bill leaves the entire refugee program unchanged and doesn’t affect funding for the program.

The bill number is H.R. 4038 and its title is the American SAFE Act of 2015. “SAFE” stands for “Security Against Foreign Enemies,” and McCaul has billed the legislation in the headline of a House Homeland Security Committee press release as an act that would “Protect Americans from ISIS.”

The bill requires the nation’s top security officials—the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of the FBI, and the Director of National Intelligence—to certify before admitting any Syrian or Iraqi refugee into the United States that the individual does not represent a security threat.

But despite McCaul’s and the committee’s tough-sounding rhetoric, the bill—several congressional aides and the actual text of the legislation confirm—simply requires one new step for Syrian and Iraqi refugee admittance and resettlement: That the Director of National Intelligence, the director of the FBI and the Secretary of Homeland Security approve any such refugees beforehand. Each of those people work for President Obama at the pleasure of the president.

This so-called extra approval process of requiring three top aides to the president to sign off on his planned refugees only applies to very recent departures from Iraq and Syria—those who have left in the last four and a half years—and it doesn’t even apply to those coming from other predominantly Muslim countries like Somalia.

At the Rules Hearing on Wednesday evening, Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX)—a member who’s also got his own legislation that would block such Syrian refugees from getting into America—plans to offer an amendment that would strengthen McCaul’s bill to more closely match McCaul’s rhetoric. Babin’s amendment would institute a six-month moratorium on the refugee program and make substantive changes to the program to help clear it up. It’s unclear if House Rules Committee chairman Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) plans to allow the amendment or block it, but without it McCaul’s bill wouldn’t change anything.

What’s more, according to D.C. insider trade publication E&E News, this is at least part of—potentially all of—Speaker Ryan’s efforts to cave on actually stopping the president’s plans to resettle refugees from Syria all across America.

Technically, the only way to actually stop refugee resettlement in the United States would be for the House of Representatives—and the U.S. Senate—to include language in the base appropriations bill that funds the government that would block taxpayer dollars from being used for this purpose by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).

Current government funding legislation runs out in early December, so that means if an effort to defund is included in the upcoming legislation—which will be considered after Thanksgiving—it could lead to brinksmanship with the president and even a government shutdown if Obama doesn’t agree to shutting down the refugee program.

But that fight will never happen if Republican leaders in Congress don’t step up to pick it. And it looks right now like they’re going to stand down to Obama’s refugee resettlement plans, meaning Ryan’s first act as Speaker of the House would be funding with taxpayer dollars President Obama’s efforts to place refugees from Syria—potentially connected with ISIS—in cities and towns across America.

All is not said and done yet, either, and each of these guys could turn this around and block the funding for this program in the December funding bill. Ryan had previously signaled he was open to such a fight. At this time there is no omnibus bill yet that has been introduced as it’s currently being negotiated.
As we know, there are others fighting in the House, as well as Cruz's legislation in the Senate to halt Syrian refugee resettlement in America and Paul's call to stop all immigration, visitors and students from countries with jihadist movements. Of course, Obama has already threatened to veto such a bill. SO GIVE IT TO HIM! Let him do that before the majority of Americans who don't agree and let him own it.

Within this article, it states, at least for now, that from McConnell, McCain and Cochran to Sessions and Shelby, many top ranking senators have left the door open to defunding measures being attached to a forthcoming omnibus spending bill. That should be the direction of the young Speaker, to unite Republicans behind what's RIGHT to protect the citizenry and allow this post-American president to own what is WRONG. Instead, it's feeling like an ol' Boehner-style cave is coming...please prove us wrong, Speaker!