October 30, 2018

Blame Game

Here’s an example of playing the “blame game” the way a pool shark plays billiards: with multiple bank shots that aim for winning by going all over the place.

Lisa Carr at the Victory Girls blog traces how the leftwing website manages to blame the homeless problem on President Trump, which allows them to blame the homeless crazy guy in Florida mailing pipe bombs to Democrats on Trump, which they blame on Trump focusing his attention on illegal immigration and stopping that caravan of thousands of migrants from entering the US illegally instead of homelessnes, which they also blame on Republicans who voted for Trump and oppose illegal immigration.  Dizzy yet?



Maybe you’re thinking, “Wait a minute: homeless people have been around for decades. It’s Trump’s job to enforce immigration laws and protect the border. The pipe bomber lost his home while Obama was President and lived in his van in Debbie Wasserman Shultz’s district.  Illegal immigrants increase homelessness by taking jobs from lower educated citizens.  And they suck up billions of dollars in social services that could have been used to help the homeless.”   


If so, then you’re obviously a hateful bigot who endorses sending pipe bombs to Democrats.  You probably also engage in uncivil and dishonest political rhetoric.


Read this, then go take your entire family and all your friends to vote Republican.



Situational ethics

Well, there’s still one more day of October to go, and I guess “October surprises” are now coming at the rate of at least one a day, so here’s the latest to slip in under the deadline:


A conservative activist says that on Thursday, he will reveal the identity of a “very credible” accuser who claims that special counsel Robert Mueller raped her at a hotel in Boston in 2010.  Mueller claims the rape charge is false and politically-motivated (I thought that never happened?), that other women told him money was offered to them to accuse Mueller, and he’s turned the scheme over to the FBI to investigate. The activist denies knowing the women that Mueller referred to and accused Mueller of lying to evade the charge.


Here’s a story about the charges and Mueller’s response:


And the Gateway Pundit site obtained a redacted copy of the woman’s statement:


Of course, at this point, there’s no way of knowing whether the charge is true or not, but Mueller deserves the presumption of innocence, as do all who are accused.  The only thing we do know for sure at this juncture is that the same liberal politicians and media figures for whom Mueller is their last hope of overturning the 2016 election, and who trashed the presumption of innocence and told us to “believe all women” during the Kavanaugh hearings, are already branding this woman as a paid-off lying liar, and they don’t even know her name yet. 


I believe the term for this is "situational ethics."

Commentary continues below advertisement

Reader responses to Betty Bongo story

Marti A:  Any chance her speech script is available?  Sounds very informative.  Thank you.


Laura:  Betty was speaking from her heart, without a script or, as I recall, even note cards.  I tried to paraphrase her remarks very accurately, so please share the article.  Also, I’m certain a a video camera was recording her, so I’ll see if I can find out when and where the video will be available.



Connie:  If there is some kind of way I can donate monetarily, please let me know.   I will be praying for these women.  Thank you for sharing your stories.


Laura:  Thank you so much, Connie!  If you would like to donate to help these children, please go to the website for the Malaika Orphanage --- There are many ways to help, by donating or by sponsoring or even adopting a child.  I have a friend who sponsors eight children!  One newborn was named after him.



Birthright citizenship

President Trump revealed that he plans to use an executive order to end birthright citizenship, which is the practice of declaring any baby born on US soil to be an American citizen.  This has given rise to the so-called “anchor baby” concept of illegal immigrants trying to get to the US to have children so they will be citizens, then use them to get the rest of the family to America (i.e., “chain migration.”)


There’s doubt whether he can do this legally. There will certainly be strenuous opposition from the left (along with lots of colorful curses and pejoratives), and no doubt some federal judges who think they’re the President will rule against him. But Trump might be willing to fight it all the way, just to see if the Supreme Court will rule in his favor, if he thinks the issue is important enough. Or maybe he’s just doing this to draw attention to the problems stemming from the practice and nudge Congress to act.  Either way, he's at least forcing people to reexamine flawed policies that have been allowed to continue for decades until they're set in cement. 


This link has some background and legal arguments on the subject.


And at this link, Instapundit blog master and university law professor Glenn Reynolds gives a first reaction to the order’s legal prospects and throws it open for discussion, with some commenters making interesting points about the legal history of birthright citizenship and whether it can be changed by executive order.



Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Leave A Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

Comments 1-16 of 16

  • Macie Bryan McGuffey

    11/01/2018 10:09 AM

    I turned 18 years old in 1980 & my first time to vote was Reagan/Mondale. I’ve voted every since & have taught my wife & out two adult children that we (as Americans) should ALWAYS exercise our right to vote. Thanks Mike,

  • Ross Billy

    10/31/2018 05:36 PM

    How to stop illegal immigration? Require all supporters beginning with elected officials to take in a family or 2 & keep them until they become legal citizens as required by law. They are totally responsible for all their upkeep & legal dealings.

  • Helen Sustachek

    10/31/2018 03:08 PM

    Mike, isn't it funny how the Dems hate the Constitution so much shown during the Kavanaugh hearings and everywhere until President Trump wants to change something. They are all saying how it is against the Constitution. Oh my! Did they worry about it when Obama wrote his own rules?
    Helen Sustachek

  • Larry Rippere

    10/31/2018 02:50 PM

    We are waiting to hear more about that pipe bomb caper. So far the surface has been scratched and then <HUSH!!!>. What's going on? More questions unanswered than answered! Are you going to dig into this one??? The "bombs" look like toy props, reminiscent of "Clock-Boy's" clock. How delivered? Hopefully NOT USPS!!!

  • howard boggs

    10/31/2018 10:00 AM

    Concerning the "citizenship" debate, it seems that the focus of the Constitutional reference is the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". Historical references as well as the Federalist Papers seem to indicate that the phrase means "not having allegiance to or subject to the jurisdiction of any other". Illegal aliens or even Permanent Lawful Residents do not fall under this definition. So, there is legal basis for arguing whether or not the President can, via Executive Order, refuse citizenship status to those born in the U.S. of parents who are citizens of another country. We shall see. I doubt you'll see this argument presented in the main n stream media.

  • Richard Payne

    10/31/2018 08:50 AM

    I think we should end the birth right condition we have in this country. I just have a problem with an Executive Action. Bring it before congress, and we will see where they all stand.

  • Lucy Hooker

    10/31/2018 08:43 AM

    I am not a legal scholar, but I have believed for a while that, since the fourteenth amendment specifies being ‘ subject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States, it automatically would exclude illegal aliens who are breaking the laws of this country by illegally being here. How can willfully violating a country’s laws by illegally entering the country be viewed as a person ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of that country?

    “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,”
    The 1898 case cited to extend the fourteenth amendment to immigrants dealt with a legal immigrant who was abiding by the laws of the United States. I am weary of the left’s continual conflating of legal and illegal immigrants. I lived in a number of other countries and I had permits to LEGALLY work in two. I have experienced the life of being an immigrant and I always respected the laws of the countries in which I lived. If I had not entered legally, I would not have been allowed there and would not have been allowed to work there. I also would not have been considered a person ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of those countries. It’s very simple. God bless President Trump. I pray he succeeds in changing this corrupt practice and this corrupt perversion of the fourteenth amendment. If they want to come to this country, respect our laws and come legally.

  • Kathleen E Blais

    10/31/2018 06:44 AM

    Dear Gov. Huckabee,
    Yesterday, I commented on your Birthright article asking about when and how the allowance of anchor babies came about. Fox News, and OAN has done a great job of explaining it, so I don't want to waste your time to answer about that part.
    I still don't understand, though, why Congress has not clarified the 14th Amendment to stop the Anchor Baby, Chain Migration situation. I thought that our Elected Officials swore to protect our country, not let foreigners, especially felons, just about take it over.

    I realize that you are being kept very busy, but Americans are very blessed to have an advocate such as you. I really appreciate all of the information that you give us. May God continue to bless you and your family.

  • Gregory Weinman

    10/31/2018 12:54 AM

    Regarding Birthright Citizenship:
    The clause " the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is ambiguous. Too many exceptions can present. The president has the authority to interpret ambiguous law to his benefit.
    Most know children born to ambassadors and other foreign dignitaries are specifically excluded from birthright citizenship as they are not subject to US jurisdiction or that of the state wherein they reside. Few know children born to alien parents who have established lasting permanent residence have birthright citizenship according to Supreme Court rulings issued in the late 19th century. What everyone is unsure of is children born to alien parents who are transients. No case law covers the situation. In the absence of case law the court looks to common law. I do not believe US common law exists with any certainty regarding children born to transient aliens.
    It is time to decide this. The president should push this to the SCOTUS.

  • James Evart

    10/31/2018 12:01 AM

    When will this nation ever wake up and realize that we are being raped by illegal invaders? Go to any other nation in the world, try to go to work and live there illegally on that countries welfare tab and see how far you get. Go to Mexico and try going to work illegally and see what kind of reception you get.
    Our president is on the right track.

  • Debbie Graham

    10/30/2018 11:35 PM

    I hope Trump gets that passed....It is crazy to keep letting these people drain our country's resources. If you are born to illegal parents, you are illegal too!! That should stop some of these people coming over here.
    I would rather see the billions spent on illegals go to forced mental institutions to get the nut jobs off our streets and get families the
    help they need for a mentally disturbed family member.

  • Gary L. Heckman

    10/30/2018 11:03 PM

    Good Evening, Governor
    If the Democrats want all those people in the USA, why don't they invite them to live with them in their several 30 room mansions in California, pay their food, insurance etc, etc, etc.? Especially all those women in Congress (I'm sure you know who I am thinking of) who have millions of dollars and all that empty space not being used... that would save the American people and our Country from having to keep their care. Also, all that money going to the Democratic race could be used for all those people. It would be interesting to see what would happen then????

  • Gary a. Feltz

    10/30/2018 10:22 PM

    Assuming we maintain the House and Senate, we need Congress to stop dribbling and score some points too. President Trump wants to play with the whole team!

  • Rebecca Grossett

    10/30/2018 10:16 PM

    I think Tucker Carlson's opening 10/30/18 segment with Michael Anton gives a lot of good information and history on the 14th amendment and why it can be argued that it was not intended for illegal immigrant babies. I would love if more conservatives really looked in to this rather than assuming the status quo is correct and "constitutional".
    Love your perspective, and your humor. Thanks for these evening editions.

  • Deborah Kaba

    10/30/2018 10:14 PM

    The redacted document on Gateway Pundit has been removed.

  • Marty Pope

    10/30/2018 09:51 PM

    My daughter figured out many years ago that there is no such thing as birthright citizenship, because illegals are not under the jurisdiction of the government. Glad Trump is fighting against this!