While the Senate releases a CIA report without talking to the CIA directors, Jonathan Gruber refuses to say how much government money he received, and John Kerry raises $5billion for Gaza, the U.S. released six Gitmo detainees to Uruguay.

In a country where polls show a majority of people oppose the transfer of the prisoners, and as other Latin American countries declined, lame-duck president José Mujica,

a former guerrilla who was imprisoned for 14 years—said that while he had long criticized the U.S. for its “interventions and abuses,” he couldn’t decline a request by Mr. Obama to accept the men.

Mujica is also allowing them to travel in and out of Uruguay.

It’s not clear what passports from what countries would the six use.

Who are the released men?

Four were members of the “Syrian Group;” all are connected to Abu Zubaydah; only one was deemed as “medium risk,” the other five were “high risk.”

Thomas Joscelyn writes that 6 Guantanamo detainees transferred to Uruguay were part of al Qaeda’s network, files allege

Interestingly, the intelligence contained in JTF-GTMO’s files linked all six transferred detainees to Abu Zubaydah, who has been the subject of much controversy. Zubaydah was captured in 2002 and subjected to harsh interrogation techniques. Some have claimed that Zubaydah was not really a senior al Qaeda leader at the time of his capture, but this argument is contradicted by dozens of pieces of intelligence contained in the JTF-GTMO files, among other evidence.

The dossiers compiled by the US government for each of the six transferred detainees include multiple pieces of evidence pointing to their ties to both Abu Zubaydah and al Qaeda. Four of the former detainees were members of the so-called “Syrian Group,” which was based at a guesthouse funded by Zubaydah. A fifth detainee was allegedly part of Zubaydah’s “Martyrs Brigade,” which sought to attack US forces in 2002. And the sixth was identified by Zubaydah as a trainee at the Khaldan camp, which was run by Zubaydah and his comrade in arms, Ibn Sheikh al Libi.

Joscelyn talked about the six in John Batchelor’s show, which you can listen here.

In addition to being able to fly in and out of the country, the six terrorists can also bring their families to Uruguay.

Uruguay’s defense minister, Eleuterio Fernández Huidobro, is Polyanna of the week, expecting the six to “live in peace, sit in the stadium grandstand and become fans of some soccer team.”

Considering their background, that’s high hopes indeed.

Elsewhere in Latin America, Colombia’s FARC is using al-Qaeda for European drug trade.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

[Post corrected]

UNASUR, the Union of South American Nations, is holding its summit this week in Ecuador. The envoys or the heads of state of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Ecuador, Guayana, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay and Venezuela are in attendance.

Latin American countries, particularly the socialist countries, hold summits frequently throughout the year, so this is not unique. What’s making this particular one interesting is this: the possibility of an agreement on cooperation between Russia and UNASUR:

[Russian Ambassador to Ecuador Yan] Burlyai also noted that the Russian delegation will convey a message from President Vladimir Putin to Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa.

Burlyai explained that Russia’s interests coincide with UNASUR’s in the development of a politically and economically multipolar world, and that Russian engineering, technical knowhow, and equipment may be useful for regional development projects in areas such as railway construction and energy generation facilities. He noted that “for many decades,” South America was “mainly oriented at Western countries in economic cooperation…Now it is quite useful for them to have the alternative [of using] Russian companies such as Russian Railways, Gazprom and Rosneft.” Russia, on the other hand, stands to benefit from increased economic and trade cooperation with the 12-nation bloc, with its combined population of 400 million people and a $4 trillion economy. Latin America has already assisted Russia in its efforts toward trade diversification following the introduction of sanctions and countersanctions over the ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine.

The UNASUR summit, with the participation of Russian Foreign Ministry officials, follows Putin’s annual State of the Nation address to the country’s Federal Assembly on Thursday, where he stressed the importance of Russia’s increasing economic cooperation with Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

“Russian Railways, Gazprom and Rosneft,” along with long-range bombers conducting regular patrol missions from the Arctic Ocean to the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico and military bases in Nicaragua (not a member of UNASUR), that is.

In the short term, Putin avoids sanctions. In the longer term, is the sky the limit, now that the Obama administration declared dead the Monroe Doctrine?

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

Depending on the estimate, Venezuela needs to sell its oil between $150-$200/barrel. Estimate, because

The precise figure is difficult to determine, because Venezuela doesn’t disclose as much economic data as other countries do.

To say “Venezuela doesn’t disclose as much economic data as other countries do” is an understatement; Venezuela has not submitted economic data to the IMF for over 10 years.

What can be ascertained is that the Venezuelan economy is nealy entirely dependent on oil exports. In 1999, oil accounted for 80% of all exports. Back then the Annual Average Domestic Crude Oil Price (AADCOP) was $16.56. By last year, the number had risen to 95% at an AADCOP of $91.17.

Today’s opening oil price was $66.88. Venezuela’s oil, heavy and of poor quality, trades for much less. Some estimate (again!) that Venezuela gets as little as $24/barrel at this point,

As of yesterday, I discovered that Venezuela is selling its crude oil for $24 per barrel and struggling to deliver with it dilapidated production, processing, pipeline and terminal facilities. No one is interested in any contracts except at such a low price due inability to deliver.

What does that have to do with the U.S., you may ask?

For one,

While U.S. imports of primarily crude oil from Venezuela have been on the decline, U.S. exports of petroleum products to Venezuela have increased largely because of Venezuela’s tight finances that leave it unable to invest and maintain its own domestic refineries. A decade ago, the United States exported 7,000 barrels per day to Venezuela. In 2013, the United States sent Venezuela 84,000 barrels per day of petroleum products, primarily methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), intended for blending in gasoline, motor gasoline, and distillate fuel oil.

Additionally, even when the Obama administration declared the Monroe Doctrine dead, the hemisphere’s politics and economies affect the U.S. – just look at the illegal immigration flood from countries with ruinous policies.

Venezuela, however, is not only a country with ruinous policies; it’s a country ruled by an elite intimately connected and committed to spreading a Marxist revolution which it funds through oil proceeds, and is now propping the Communist regime in Cuba to the tune of 100,000 barrels of oil per day. It also sends oil to a dozen countries in the Caribbean and Latin America at a discounted price, plus it essentially gives Venezuelan drivers free gasoline at a nominal 5 cents/gallon.

So, of course Venezuela is in a bind. So much so, it apparently sold Goldman Sachs the debt that the Dominican Republic has with Venezuela in what may be “the new normal” for old shell games, since it’s possible that the DR may be the end buyer. Jamaica is looking at a similar deal.

Yesterday Venezuelan dictator Maduro

authorized a 20% cut in government spending and plans to modify the country’s complicated foreign-exchange system, opening the door to a possible devaluation.

Clearly, the country’s economy is collapsing as the oil prices drop, and Cuba, dependent on Venezuela, will follow.

Looking at Cuba, will this lead to another Mariel exodus? Would Obama use this as a pretext to end the embargo with Cuba?

Looking at Venezuela, would the ruling elite and the military attempt to remain in power by relying more heavily on the drug trade? Would rioting and looting lead to further oppression? Since Iran and Russia are in the same oil boat, what role will China play? Giving the Chinese an oil field seems out of the question – for now

The next option, which is where Venezuelans think there is some value, is that The Government will simply give the Chinese an oil field in exchange for money. This, in fact, has been tried before, except that Chávez, in his minimal wisdom, created new laws that restrict the control of the foreign partners over the joint ventures. Thus, PDVSA has to contribute part of the money to the JV’s, unless the partner lends the money to PDVSA. Except that the Chinese have not been very amenable to this. They want “joint” to mean joint, not I put up all the money and you control. Some companies have accepted this, but not the Chinese, who, in fact did not participate in one of the Carabobo oil fields, precisely because they were told they had to put up all the money

On the bright side, the changing economic landscape may bring Japan, which

is looking to Latin America as a potential source of energy and other natural resources, and it is eager to import liquified natural gas from the U.S. via an expanded Panama Canal.

Will any of this bring opportunities for democracy and trade in the hemisphere? More importantly, is the U.S. government prepared to recognize them?

Times like this require strong leadership in foreign policy, which is exactly what the U.S. lacks now.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American news, politics and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States:

“If you look at the history of immigration in this country, each successive wave there have been periods where the folks who were already here have said, ‘Well I don’t want those folks,'” he said. “Even though the only people who have the right to say that are some Native Americans.”

Video here (around 10:05)

Let’s look at this:

The only people who have the right to say that
The Constitution says (emphasis added),

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Indeed, all Americans have the inalienable right to free speech.


not alienable; not transferable to another or capable of being repudiated:

are some Native Americans

And who would be the one determining which Native Americans have the right to?

This is the kind of rhetoric we get from a president whose idea of governing is to bypass Congress.

And I use the word rhetoric advisedly,

(in classical oratory) the art of influencing the thought and conduct of an audience.

While the speech could not be thought of as classical oratory, you could say that the statement “Even though the only people who have the right to say that are some Native Americans,” qualifies as a classic.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics at Fausta’s Blog.

Thanksgiving Day is my favorite holiday of the year. As my friend Perla puts it, it’s a holiday everyone celebrates, no matter their religion. I would add to that, it is a holiday one can celebrate in ways small – alone, when circumstances demand, or big – in public or in private.

I also like Thanksgiving Day for its Americanness: The most prosperous, and I may add, blessed, nation in the history of mankind came up with a day of gratitude, closely connected to the nation’s origins.

Indeed, we have much to thank for; the debate on immigration shows that millions of people from around the world see and want to partake in our blessings. But let’s leave that debate aside for now.

My most favorite quote is from Ralph Waldo Emerson, an American,

I awoke this morning with devout thanksgiving for my friends, the old and the new.

Here’s what this sentence means to me:

  • I awoke this morning: I am conscious, in this new day
  • with devout thanksgiving: And I give thanks to God, the Creator who blesses us every day
  • for my friends,: For every person who honors me with their friendship, empathy, and support, including my family
  • the old: Friends I have had for a lifetime, or for many years, and also for friends young and old
  • and the new.: Because friendship is a garden that blooms throughout our lives, blessing us daily.

Apple pie is my favorite Thanksgiving Day dessert. Here’s my recipe:

IMG_0152Apple and pecan pie:
The day before: marinade 1/2 cup of raisins in a glass dish and add enough bourbon to cover the raisins. Cover the dish and set aside overnight (no need to refrigerate).

The day you’re serving the pie:
Heat oven to 400F.

In a very large bowl, mix:
8 large apples, peeled and cored, and cut into large (1/4″ thick) pieces
(You might want to caramelize the apples slightly, by sautéing in butter and a dash of freshly-grated nutmeg)
the raisins marinated in bourbon
1 tbs cinnamon sprinkled lightly as you add the apples
1 tsp vanilla extract
1/4 tsp salt
juice of 1/2 lemon
1 cup pecan pieces. You can also use chopped walnuts.
Mix all ingredients until well coated.

Line a deep pie dish with one Pillsbury pie crust (or you can make your own crust).

Pour the apples, raisins and pecans into the pie plate. Cut 1/4 lb (one bar) of refrigerated butter into chunks and dot the apples with the butter. Please use butter. Cover the apples with the other pie crust, seal the edges and perforate the top with a fork.

If you prefer your pie with no raisins or pecans, omit them and don’t add vanilla extract.

Bake at 400F for 45 minutes.

Serve warm with Vermont cheddar cheese, or with Edy’s No Sugar Added vanilla ice cream. I prefer the cheddar.

Note: While I add no sugar, if you use sweet apples the pie will be sweet. Bear that in mind if you must watch your blood sugars.
Additionally, this is not a low calorie dessert.


A happy Thanksgiving Day to all!

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog. She thanks Pete for the opportunity to blog here.

I did not watch Pres. Obama’s speech for a number of reasons, the main one being that I simply could not stand it. Instead, I read the transcript.

Leave it to the lawyers and experts on the Constitution to duke it out, but, no matter how you cut it, this was a flagrant violation of the separation of powers, and he knew it (video at the link):

For years, he has called such action illegal; in fact, “The Kelly File” found 25 instances in which Obama said so on camera.

Mickey Kaus posits that 

If Obama’s executive action is as broad as described, the Supreme Court will strike it down.

And sooner than we expect, by using a system-balancing rationale.

But that’s in the future.

Let’s look at last night’s speech, a low point for the putative greatest orator evah, who, while making up his rules, claims that

We expect people who live in this country to play by the rules.

First, there’s the racism, as Pete pointed out:

Are we a nation that tolerates the hypocrisy of a system where workers who pick our fruit and make our beds never have a chance to get right with the law?

Immediately followed by,

Or are we a nation that gives them a chance to make amends, take responsibility, and give their kids a better future?

Because the man who said, “You didn’t build that” cannot conceive that the #Fruitpickers and #Bedmakers can actually better themselves through education, perseverance and hard work in a business-friendly economic environment (which certainly government regulation and taxation – two of Obama’s preferred tools – hinder). To Obama, the #Fruitpickers and #Bedmakers are not (as he had said earlier in the same speech) “able to remake ourselves as [they] choose;” it’s their kids who must be given a better future.

But Obama was on a roll,

Are we a nation that accepts the cruelty of ripping children from their parents’ arms, or are we a nation that values families and works together to keep them together?

Of course, said by a man who support late-term abortion, one must conclude that liberals are irony-poor people.

Then there’s Scripture!

Scripture tells us, we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger.

Scott Johnson had something to say about that,

I will concede, however, that the Torah portion was brilliant. The White House functionaries love it so much that they highlight it in their post on the speech. Go down, Barry!

Obama has come down from the mountain as the lawgiver with his immigration commandments, but he left out the part about not bearing false witness. It’s not part of his immigration package.

Anyway, Obama is obviously more Pharaoh than Moses. Obama’s immigration commandments have no higher authority than his own say-so. He’s Pharaoh a la Yul Brynner in the classic 1956 movie, issuing edicts with the force of law: “So let it be written. So let it be done.”

No nadir is complete without a pull at the heartstrings, so, of course, there was a story about some girl who,

When she started school, she didn’t speak any English. She caught up to other kids by reading newspapers and watching PBS.

Allow my snark to flow: OF COURSE the kid learned American English from Sesame Street, and the Queen’s English from Thomas the Tank Engine and Downton Abbey! She must have even picked up a Scottish brogue from Donald and Douglas!

Again, the fact that parents may have actively participated in their child’s literacy while they themselves were learning English – as thousands, if not millions, of immigrant families have – is a concept that does not enter in Obama’s Life of Julia, Amnesty Applicant story.

And reading newspapers? Really? Don’t public schools have books at taxpayers’ expense anymore?

Twitchy caught what a real-life legal immigrant had to say, and she didn’t hold back:

Read the rest of her tweets here.

Parting question:
Now that he bypassed Congress for amnesty, and there’s that deal with Iran coming up, will Obama end the embargo with Cuba before year’s end?

Picked by PowerLine. Thank you!

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

I was in my friend Rick Moran’s November 5th Election Night Extravaganza podcast, and among the many topics we discussed, I mentioned that I relocated from Princeton, NJ to Miami, FL a few months ago. Rick asked me why, and I gave the totally honest, simple answer, “Taxes.”

I went on to explain that at the time I sold it, I was paying $16,000 in annual real estate and school taxes on my house. You also add to that NJ’s income tax, and, in the long term, estate and inheritance taxes, and yes, the answer is, Taxes.

I was scheduled to be in Rick’s podcast for a half hour but stayed on, and, after my reply, Jazz Shaw diverted the conversation to the question, were taxes an issue in the last election? Jazz and the other guest seemed to agree they weren’t.

For people like myself, whose child(ren) are grown and out of the house, who have family in low-tax states, and whose occupations are not tied to a location due to freelancing, travel, or even retirement, taxes are an issue when we decide to vote with our feet. Not the only issue, but a very important issue.

For people whose children are in local public/private schools which they like, with relatives (especially elderly parents) nearby, and in full-time local jobs, local taxes are a penury they continue to endure, since the purpose of the tax-payed bureaucracies is to expand themselves in every way. To them, as it was with me for years, life starts – as the Rabbi in the punchline* said – “when the kids leave the house and the dog dies.”

According to this article, which looked at data from a study by the Tax Foundation (a Washington, DC-based taxpayer advocacy group)

Turns out when it comes to taxes, less is more. Here are some of the conclusions drawn from the study. Keep in mind, the latest data used is from 2010. In the years since, many states have raised or lowered their tax rates, but those changes aren’t reflected here:

  • Collectively, the nine states that have no personal income tax – Alaska, Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming – gained $146.2 billion in AGI.
  • And collectively, the areas with the highest personal income tax – California, Hawaii, Oregon, Iowa, New Jersey, Vermont, New York, Maine, and Washington, DC – lost $107.4 billion AGI.
  • Looked at another way, the ten states* with the lowest per capita state and local tax burden netted an increase of $69.9 billion in AGI. The ten states** with the highest state and local tax burden per capita lost a whopping $139 billion in AGI.

But, were taxes really not an issue in the last election?

How about Obamacare? Was Obamare an issue in this election?

What are the headlines saying?

Democrats’ electoral disaster puts Obamacare in serious peril

The Supreme Court said Obamare is a tax, after all.

[* The joke goes,
A Catholic priest, a Protestant minister, and a Rabbi walk into a bar. The bartender asks, “when does life start?”
The priest says, “Life starts at conception.”
The minister says, “Life starts at birth.”
The Rabbi says, “Lie starts when the kids leave the house and the dog dies.”]

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

Obama’s amnesty (Obamanasty?) is just around the corner – probably next week; the Russians will be flying regular patrol missions from the Arctic Ocean to the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico; Jonathan Gruber’s the gift that keeps on giving,

Gruber said the measures in the bill that attempt to lower costs constitute a “spaghetti approach” — throwing everything against the wall to see what sticks. And while preferable to the status quo, Gruber said he could offer no guarantee that any of the measures would work.

It’s enough to give you a headache.

But despair not, BatDad’s here to cheer you up!

BatDad? Yes, BatDad!

A Georgia father of four dons the Dark Knight’s disguise and mimics the superhero’s husky voice to become BatDad, protecting his family and the suburbs from bad table manners, unbuckled seat belts and more in 6-second Vine clips.

The intrepid @BatDadBlake copes with the everyday travails of parenthood with a camera, a Vine, and a Batmam mask. When things get really tough, he dons a full suit,

The few seconds long snippets are funny, but when you watch the compilations you really end up laughing out loud. Anyone who’s had children (or has been in the company of children for extended periods of time) can’t help but admire BatDadBlake’s fun sense of humor and Mrs. BatDadBlake’s patience,

His wife Jen has become a central character, often getting startled while performing every day activities. “I feel bad for her,” Wilson said. “I know that I can be annoying.”

His dad, grandma, and brother Rob[in] make appearances, too.

The compilations have millions of YouTube viewers, so you’ll be in good company.

I must warn you, though, it’s addictive.

Go ahead, you know you want to.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

Honesty, you may ask?

Yes, honesty. MIT’s Jonathan Gruber has been quite explicit on his position:

Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical for the thing to pass.

As Alinsky said, “A good tactic is one your people enjoy,” and Gruber must relish calling Americans “too stupid” to understand Obamacare . . . otherwise, why would he keep repeating it (h/t THS)?

Gruber’s saying he now regrets his remarks. Like a child who’s sorry they got caught, Gruber may have been surprised over the brouhaha, and regrets having been so candid since, as Pete said,

Because he understood that the media would not reveal and/or report on it.

Indeed, there’s even a Pajama Boy-lookalike at the WaPo looking at “CONTEXT”, yes, all in caps:

Keith Hennessy, which Gruber might regard as one of the great unwashed, stupid American voters, looks at Dr. Gruber’s honesty about lying [note: Gruber has a PhD in economics, not an MD or DO in medicine]. Hennessy poses four questions

1. Is Dr. Gruber right that lack of transparency was a huge political advantage in enacting ObamaCare?
2. Do Dr. Gruber’s allies in Congress and the Obama White House agree that ObamaCare cross-subsidies were intentionally obscured to avoid politically unpopular votes?
3. Do they agree with the more general principle, that some large, explicit, and transparent subsidies will be unpopular, and that the only way to enact them is to hide and obscure them?
4. If so, is it ethical to hide and obscure large cross-subsidies (or large costs), in ObamaCare and elsewhere, so they can be enacted into law? Does the end of greater redistribution justify the means of obfuscation, of lying to voters?

Hennessy answers yes to the first three, no to the fourth, but more interesting is his list of nine areas

where American economic policy hides or obscures subsidies or costs, I believe intentionally.

And that‘s where the honesty dies.

Read Hennessy’s excellent post, of course. He also says (emphasis added),

Apparently Dr. Gruber thinks it’s OK to lie to American voters when his allies are in power to enact policies that he wants but the voters wouldn’t. He then says American voters are “stupid” both for not agreeing with his value choices and for not figuring out the deception.

Which brings me to Rich Weinstein, the Mild-Mannered Investment Adviser Who’s Humiliating the Administration Over Obamacare.

Gruber, the true voice of liberal arrogance, never learned that out there among the great unwashed, stupid American voters, some are actually paying attention.

For more Gruber fetidness, the Washington Free Beacon has a YouTube, if you can stand it.

P.S., Rich Weinstein, if you’re ever in Miami, I”ll buy you lunch at Versailles.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news and culture at Fausta’s Blog. Her major medical policy was cancelled under Obamacare since she did not have pediatric dental coverage, something she didn’t need when her child was growing up.

I expect that President Obama will grant amnesty to all illegal aliens by executive order before year’s end; indeed, I would be surprised if he doesn’t by the end of this month.

In his press conference after the Republican’s “good night”, Obama stated,

So before the end of the year, we’re going to take whatever lawful actions that I can take that I believe will improve the functioning of our immigration system that will allow us to surge additional resources to the border, where I think the vast majority of Americans have the deepest concern. And at the same time, I’ll be reaching out to both Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and other Republican as well as Democratic leaders to find out how it is that they want to proceed. And if they want to get a bill done — whether it’s during the lame duck or next year — I’m eager to see what they have to offer.

But what I’m not going to do is just wait.

Obama has much to gain by doing so, not the least of which is showing “leadership.” That he would trample over the Constitution matters not to him. If the newly-elected Republicans move to impeach him, he will benefit, and benefit greatly.

The Republicans in both the Senate, the House, and in every elected office in the country must not fall for this trap. Throwing themselves into the ensuing firestorm will cost them the 2016 election.

Instead, Republicans must focus on the following, which John Boehner and Mitch McConnell listed,

. . . authorizing the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, which will mean lower energy costs for families and more jobs for American workers; the Hire More Heroes Act, legislation encouraging employers to hire more of our nation’s veterans; and a proposal to restore the traditional 40-hour definition of full-time employment, removing an arbitrary and destructive government barrier to more hours and better pay created by the Affordable Care Act of 2010.

We’ll also consider legislation to help protect and expand America’s emerging energy boom and to support innovative charter schools around the country.

Legislation on these issues must be introduced and passed on the first 100 days:

The responsibility now on the GOP is to execute immediately. To follow the will of the people. To listen to what they just said and to get it right.

Anything other, no matter how grievous, is a mere distraction.

As Dr. Charles Krauthammer (yes, he’s an MD) spelled out in this video,

Here’s what I think you should do: You should be very smart and disciplined.

The prize here is not the impeachment of Obama and curtailing his term by three months. The prize is winning the White House in 2016 and changing the country. Now, the way to do it is you say, “this is unconstitutional, illegal; we’re going to find every way every way we can to make sure that it is not funded, that this does not get a penny of the purse. It is illegal to enact anything by executive order unless you get some appropriation from the Congress.” That’s number one; number two, you say, “on the day of the swearing in in 2017, if we win the White House, this is an executive order, and it lives only as long as the next President does not cancel it. It will be cancelled with a stroke of a pen.”

Stay focused. Don’t go for the bait. Impeachment is a losing game.

As I’ve said before, It’s not just about how you play the game, it’s how you win.

Ace points out that amnesty is already here.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American news, politics and culture at Fausta’s Blog.