Now an Airport Blocked? ENOUGH!

Now protesters under the Black Lives Matter banner have blocked an airport.  Yes, you read that right.  They blocked the London City Airport this morning.

When will U. S. and U. K. authorities stop going easy on Black Lives Matter?  Willful unlawful blocking of transport cannot be tolerated in a free society.  Yet the perps are handled with kid gloves and then given slaps on the wrist, if even that.  So, predictably, their attacks on free travel are escalating.

Being nice to these people must not continue. Airports and major roads and highways should be cleared of unlawful protesters with whatever force is necessary to clear them quickly.  If there are injuries, that’s the protester’s d#$% fault.  The time it is now taking authorities to oh-so-gently clear protesters from roads and now runways is absurd. 

And sentences should be commensurate with all the hours these people rob from everyday decent people simply trying to go about their business - in other words, months and even years, not . . . well has any of the BLM crowd gotten more than a day or two?

Willfully blocking a nation’s transport is the equivalent of false imprisonment of the victims; it is a crime and should be treated as such.  And that includes stopping the crime with all necessary force.  ENOUGH with the predations of Black Lives Matter and affiliated Leftists and of going easy against them.

By the way, most of the criminals in the London City Airport blockage are white.  This has nothing to do with skin color.  It has to do with the rule of law in a free society and with protecting citizens above protecting criminals.

Downfall VI: Obama Uses Sequestration Excuse to Dump Illegals From Detention on Red States

I have not been one of those calling for the impeachment of Obama, but after this I am getting closer.  His regime, using sequestration “cuts” as a lame excuse, has dumped illegal aliens from detention onto Texas, Florida, Louisiana, and Arizona.  (Three red states and a purple state. I haven’t seen anything that there’s been a release on blue California.  Coincidence?)  Most or all of these were picked up due to (additional) law violations.

This is a willful dereliction of duty by Obama using sequestration, a mild slowdown in federal spending, as an excuse.   Yes, despite the Obama-fed noos media hype, sequestration is a very modest slowdown in federal spending.  If you haven’t seen this charted yet, look at the chart at the above link to get an idea just how modest.  Go ahead, I’m waiting . . .

O. K. Now repeat after me: “Sequestration doesn’t cut spending; it merely slows the growth rate of projected spending. Sequestration doesn’t cut spending; it merely slows . . ."    

Thank you.  Now what we have here is a president trying to make this modest spending slowdown as painful and noxious as possible even before it actually happens instead of making common sense moves to live within it and/or to work with others to adjust it.  Governors got a flavor of that in a meeting with Obama:

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said the governors asked Obama to come up with better cuts, or even to delay future spending, like the Medicaid expansion in Obamacare, if the budget situation is as dire as the administration says. "The answer to everything we got was no," Haley said. . . .

"Everybody has known that this was coming," [Gov. Bobby Jindal] said. "When did [Obama] go to his Cabinet heads and say, 'If you had to make these reductions, what would be the least painful way to do it?' "

There's no indication Obama has done anything to make the cuts easier on the public. To the contrary, it is in his political interest to make the cuts as painful as possible and then blame them on Republicans.

It certainly appears that is exactly what Obama is doing.  If so, that is, again, a willful dereliction of duty for political gain.  It is an outrageous dereliction of duty in any case:

Any way you cut it, this is a dangerous politically motivated maneuver coming from a President who absolutely refuses to not only restrain spending, but also refuses to prioritize spending, public safety be damned.  There is absolutely no grounds whatsoever for prematurely releasing prisoners- especially when the reasoning behind your cuts is based on what are essentially phony budget cuts to a 3.8 trillion dollar budget.

In 1980, it was Fidel Castro. who in an act of spite towards the United States released thousands of prisoners and mentally ill persons in what became known as the Mariel Boatlift.   We now have an American president- Barack Obama – whose extreme malice towards his own country [particularly red states – ed.] is directly responsible for endangering the people he was elected to protect and serve.

----

UPDATES:

Rush led off his program this morning with this, stating, “This is an impeachable offense.”  So this is quickly becoming an issue.

I now think Obama’s act and the crime that will inevitably result may eventually cause enough outrage to contribute to bringing down his regime.  Therefore I’ve added this to my Downfall series, and substituted “Downfall VI” for “OUTRAGE”.

I do not think I emphasized enough that Obama took this action before the sequester.  There is no law or budget that required him to release criminals from detention.  He is completely without excuse.

HOUSEKEEPING: Blogger is acting up, messing up fonts, deleting this post and some of the links, etc.  I'm doing the best I can (unlike Obama) to make do.