Arizona meets the “Obama Doctrine”

Many presidents have been remembered in history as promoters of doctrines, defined formulations to project their vision of governance, nationally and internationally. We are now living under the new parameters of the “Obama Doctrine.” President of the United States, Barack Obama, graduate of Harvard Law School, once editor of the Harvard Law Review and occasional Law instructor violated every single lawyerly and law court professional code of conduct, and the fundamental pillars of Rule of Law in his first public articulation of the lens through which he evidently views the world: “I don’t know the facts, but the police acted stupidly.”

This concise sentence of the ideology of arbitrary and dangerously malleable “impressions” and “feelings” over facts, actual investigation and the truth, combined with a corrosive foundational distrust of police as an institution and as individual professionals, presuming guilt until proven innocent, has been applied in full force from President Obama on down through myriad United States Departments of the Obama Administration to Arizona for Arizona’s SB 1070.

Cambridge, Massachusetts was the first city to discover Obama’s penchant for pre-judging police comportment with Obama quickly raising what normally would have been a sooner forgotten the better local kerfuffle to a national issue by publically coming down on one side, solely based on race, because Obama admitted he didn’t “know the facts.” He saw “black” and “white cop,” and jumped all over it by his use of  White House bully pulpit – the press conference.

Arizona is the first state to discover the Obama Doctrine as applied to illegal immigration issues:

President Barack Obama: “In Arizona if you don’t have your ID… it’s ‘Adios amigos!”

The Secretary of Homeland Security and former Arizona Governor:

John McCain: “Have you had a chance to review the law?
Janet Napolitano: “I have not reviewed it in detail. I certainly know of it.”
John McCain: So you are not prepared to make a judgment on it.”
Janet Napolitano: “Ahhh … I BELIEVE it’s a bad law …I BELIEVE it mandates and requires…”

United States Attorney General Eric Holder: The nation’s highest law enforcement officer:

Congressman Poe: “Have you read the Arizona law?”
Eric Holder: “Ah … I have not had a chance to … I’ve glanced at it. I have not read it. Um.”
Congressman Poe: “Even though you have not read the law, do you have an opinion whether it’s Constitutional?”
Eric Holder: “Ah …I’ve not really … I’ve not been briefed yet.”
Congressman Poe: “Are you going to read the law?
Eric Holder: “I’m sure I will read the law … in anticipation of that briefing. They will put that in front of me and I will spend a good evening reading that law.”  at 2:45:05

United States Department of State:
Assistance Secretary of State Michael Posner, formerly of the Open Borders- promoting “Human Rights First” organization apologizes to the Chinese for something they hadn’t even mentioned, the Arizona SB l070: “We brought it up early and often.”

State Department Spokesman P.J. Crowley in defense of Posner’s surrender style of negotiating with our enemies:  “Have I read the law?  No.”

The Obama Doctrine: Facts are to be ignored. Only the political and ideological goals of the Progressive Left Agenda matter. Police are not trusted, because they harbor bigotry.

Is it any surprise that with the willingness of the President on down through his administration to criticize a state law that they “don’t know the facts” about, that agitators feel they have a green light to harass Arizona?

First San Francisco, now Los Angeles Democratic Party politicians have held publically announced they intend harm to the state of Arizona by punishing Arizona economically first with bans on city employee on city business to Arizona and second trying to widen that to the general public to boycott Arizona. Political pressure has been put on sports franchises to boycott, to change venues, to hurt Arizona and Arizona businesses as much as possible through loss of income.

If successful, a boycott will only serve to force Arizona businesses, already squeezed by the economic slide, like restaurants, shops and hotels to lay off more employees, and by the law of unintended consequences, more illegals will be the first out of work, literally forced more by the economic impact of boycotts than SB1070 to move out of state. That’s the short term effect, the long term effect is more insidious and dangerous to the nation’s integrity.

President Barack Obama, by engaging in this rhetoric, while comforting the President of Mexico that he sympathizes with Mexico’s political position over American citizens is engaging in incredibly divisive leadership. Leadership as a quality is neutral; the results depend on where the people are led, set by the character of the leader – led to greater achievement or led down to the pit.

It is worse than ridiculous that Democrat Party city mayors in California, and now in Ohio, are actively promoting economic damage against another state. If not stopped in its tracks, it’s setting the stage for more comprehensive strife and national disunity. At the same time, this has been a more sustained public poisoning of distrust against police. Arizona police and sheriff departments haven’t done anything, yet their thoughts, their motives, their impartiality has all been publically denigrated – judged by a less than impartial pubic and highly partisan jury, guided by the POTUS himself. Every law enforcement officer in the state of Arizona knows he or she is going to be dragged out as Exhibit A if they make one misstep, say one wrong word, one arrest the day SB 1070 goes into effect that will bring down the legal carpetbaggers like a flock of vultures on their heads.

Police departments have for years been running “sensitivity” classes, revamping their hiring, their training, all to address complaints and concerns about how they conduct their public duties. But when was the last time any of those who’ve complained actually praised the concrete improvements? Americans may not see anything special about the typical American policing, so it’s easy to focus constantly on faults, but if they were to compare the average American police officer against his or her Mexican counterpart, they will be surprised. Compare against the average British officer, the average Russian officer, the average Indonesian police, the average Kenyan police … the list goes on and on. American police are head and shoulders above their international counterparts, but when was the last time anyone gave them credit for their high commitment to professionalism?

The President of the United States has a Constitutional duty to “preserve domestic tranquility.”

Obama is not silent on the deterioration of national dignity; he is encouraging agitation between states and mobilizing Federal offices in a joint punitive approach against Arizona and all its legal citizens, a population of all “colors,” languages, cultures and creeds, more diverse in “American Roots” than most other states. His Constitutional duty is to see FIRST to the needs of the lawful citizens, NOT to pander to a foreign government, which holds national interests different than our own. His duty is not to encourage or ignore destructive squabbling between states, but to provide leadership to prevent that or discourage such negative behaviors.

 Obama did not come out and rebuke California politicians for their provocative rhetoric and abusive administrative actions; he’s encouraged them by criticizing Arizona – for something that hasn’t even as yet been implemented. He is corrosively continuing his public denigration of our police as an institution to whom the important task of providing local domestic security falls, while stoking agitation that will put the police literally in harm’s way. President Obama’s doctrine should be focusing like a laser beam on doing his constitutionally mandated job to “preserve domestic tranquility” as he fulfills his duty to “provide for the common defense” by credibly securing our national borders.


  1. Oberserve says

    I hate to break it to you guys, but most of the GOP legislators who voted for it, both in the House and Senate, didn’t read it either.

    Not reading bills seems to be some kind of normal standard these days.

    If you want to criticize, fix the person in the mirror first.

  2. Stephen Kohut says

    Under the AZ constitution all bills are read in full in both houses over three differnt days. In AZ a legislator doesn’t escape knowing what is in a bill.

  3. Oberserve says

    Have you actually seen or heard them get read? They are read at 100mph. No one listens. Watch the films. They are all online.

  4. Oberserve says

    Further, legislators are voting on bills based on what they are TOLD is in the bill. When shown the actual bill a common reply was “I wasn’t told that was in there.” “Someone didn’t tell me the truth.” Counterreply: “That’s funny because you are COSPONSOR and you voted on it.”

    They don’t like being in that situation, but it happens all the time. LOL


  5. Ok Observe:

    Since you read the bill, what in it do you object to?

  6. Iris Lynch says

    Great point, Carlist. It sure got quiet.

    This is a great thoughtful article and leads me to the natural conclusion that civil war IS being invoked. Before you all get a little nuts, please consider ALL of Obama’s moves and sayings. Just where does he lead us? And exactly who doesn’t get hammered with negative comments? Radical Muslims? Black panthers? Mexican gangs?

    True he doesn’t come out and say white people should die or rich people should die or Christians should die. However don’t any of you feel like you are being set up? I think the whole country and economy is being set up to fail.

    Well tomorrow is another day, said Scarlett. Let’s see where the Dow Jones leads us.

  7. Lydia D. says

    Iris, I believe the Obama Administration and Company are waiting for folks like you and I to “blink.” They will push the envelope, you can count on it.

  8. kralmajales says

    I’ll bite on what I think is wrong that is in the bill…but more about how it will be enforced and what enforcement will do to the state.

    First, I object to having our state and local law enforcement enforce federal law without a shred of money from the state legislature to do so. I guess that is something that is NOT in the bill. The money.

    Two, I object to the fact that citizens can sue our police for not enforcing it. Which is a massive burden on our police and will encourage frivolous lawsuits. Not to mention the fact that I don’t believe in opening a flood of lawsuits against men and women who took this job to make us safe.

    Three, the law is not the federal law. Federal law does not force most federal agents to enforce immigration law. It reserves that for people who are well trained and understand the complexity of the issue. Moreover, most fed officer do not enforce those laws because it would detract it from their work making us safe. Every minute in the courtroom, minute waiting for ICE or border patrol is a minute not spent on enforcement.

    Four, I have a massive problem with reasonable suspicion. It is one thing to make a law that has an officer check immigration status after arrest or probable cause standards are met, but want on earth constitutes reasonable suspicion that someone is here illegally? Whether it says you can’t racially profile or not, who would know? It is one of the most difficult crimes to prove and the authors of the bill knew this.

    Just a few things in the bill that I think are off base.

    Last, how we enforce or don’t enforce many many laws on the books depends on many things. We give great discretion to police who use it everyday. They enforce or not enforce based on context. One issue that gives many Americans the willies is that this law is about deporting the 11 million here illegally…many who have been here for many many years….also their children…some who are citizens.

    It is what makes many evangelical christians, catholics, and others think this law is just not Christian.

  9. Oberserve Says:
    May 20th, 2010 at 1:35 pm
    I hate to break it to you guys, but most of the GOP legislators who voted for it, both in the House and Senate, didn’t read it either.

    Not reading bills seems to be some kind of normal standard these days.

    If you want to criticize, fix the person in the mirror first

    Fine words.
    Have you applied them to quick to criticize Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton, Janet Napolitano, Barack Obama, amongst scores and scores of politicians and elites who have publically admitted they “don’t know the facts, but Arizona acted stupidly?”

    How many of these people are lawyers by profession, who should know better? How many would be thrown out of court if they tried to pull that over on a judge? By their rhetoric they are creating a national hysteria against Arizona all based on … heresay and a bias against police.

    That’s CLASSIC lynch mob justification, NOT the comportment of responsible people in whom the national trust has been vested.

  10. Stephen Kohut says


    kralmajales does not read either. “Reasonable suspicion” was removed from S1070 by a follow up bill and is not longer party of the law. Reading seems to be an issue with him as well.

  11. John Doe, P.E, electrical says

    How about our idiot Corporation Commission commissioner who wanted to shutoff electrical power to California? That’s the problem – the lack of any rational thinking.

    Good Lord, you would think this adult diapers called legislature’s could actually comprehend the intent of diatribe they spew.

    Personally, whats option “B” for 2012? The Republicans are not taking charge.

  12. Stephen Kohut says


    You picked a good fake name. Does quiver and hide when hunted. Gary Pierce shows a spine and you have a problem with it? Did you field test for hot circuits by sticking your finger into too many light sockets or are you just one of SA’s current RINO crop?

  13. Oberserve says

    wanumba, none of those Democrats you mentioned voted on the bill. I’m talking about those legislators who voted yes and never read it.

    Come to find out they dont read most of the bills. Even ones they cosponsor.

    So if you’re going to complain that others dont read bills, our own legislators dont read the bills they vote on.

    So, dont be hypocritical.

  14. I’m not being hypocritical.
    You are dodging the issue by throwing up nonsense. It doesn’t matter if no one in the AZ legislature read it or not. That’s irrelevent. 100% fog. Further, these state legislators do not have their hands on FEDERAL power levers that make this S1070 demonizing so dangerous and abusive.

    THe issue at hand is that the POTUS and his cabinet officials who are tasked with implementing his political vision via behemouth US government bureaucracies mouthed off in striking unison that SB1070 is “racist” that it “profiles,” that it’s “abusive” and “mean.” ON what basis do they assert that when they didn’t read it? THat’s why Janet Napolitiano backpedalled, “AH, ah…” That’s why Eric Holder mumbled, “Um …I…I …I.”
    He KNOWS he has no grounds, but he as Attorney General of the entire USA was intoning publically all sorts of JUDGMENTS against it, PREJUDICING the public against it. Using the full force of the authority of the US government and the stature of the office of the Attorney General to PREJUDICE the NATION against the State of Arizona. Holder KNOWS he’s wrong and he was covering his legal butt. Justice ain’t blind with him, is it?
    Meanwhile, while our Attorney General and our Homeland Security are busy jacking public opinion against AZ, our President and State Department are actively working on PREJUDICING FOREIGN nations against Arizona. The only saving grace at the moment is that the Chinese think Asst. Secretary of State Posner is a stupid idiot, so they dismiss most of what he says.

  15. Isn’t it ironic that a ‘female’ governor had the cahones to sign S1070 into law.

    The law is not a blow to AZ tourism. It’s the best thing that has happened to them in at least a decade. Tourists who were staying away out of fear of the crimes and dangers that come with unrestricted illegal invasions will now be able to return to AZ.

    To the AZ corporation commission, I say unplug L.A. Let ’em freeze with Obama and the illegals they love more than America.

    GO AZ!

  16. Well, well, the cheap and corrosive theatrics continue:

    Democratic lawmaker pushing “protest bracelets” against AZ.

    These people cry “make peace not war” or “peace is the answer” then they blithely demonize an entire population of law-abiding people. That is NOT the path to any sort of “peace” or “justice.”

  17. James Davidson says


    You supported the shameful taxing of the poor for the sake of government, so your position on anything further is suspect. When push came to shove you went with goverrnment over the poor. That is a disgrace.

    Reasonable suspicion comes into play only after a lawful stop, detention, or arrest has been made, and race cannot be considered as a factor in forming a reasonable suspicion. That is what the law says.

    In reality, this law will have three major effects:

    1. It will void out any sanctuary city nonsense.

    2. It will force the issue to the forefront, and will cost liberals dearly at the electons. The modest increase Obama had enjoyed in April has reversed and his numbers are dropping.

    3. Illegal aliens will likely increase their moves to California, New Mexico, and other states.

    John Doe, P.E.,

    Stick to engineering. Pearce’s letter obviously was intended to expose the craven hypocrisy of the Los Angeles Mayor and City Council, and it served the purpose quite nicely.

  18. James Davidson says

    And let’s remember one other thing about the President,

    “BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the going to Obama, according to the Center for past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money Responsive Politics.”

    Reuters, May 5, 2010,

Leave a Reply