HOW
CHEAP IS THAT STAGGERINGLY EXPENSIVE “CHEAP” MEXICAN LABOR?
FACTOR IN THE CRIME TIDAL WAVE THAT COMES WITH IT, THE LA
RAZA CONTEMPT FOR OUR LANGUAGE, FLAG AND CULTURE, AND WE ARE SIMPLY FORCED TO
PAY FOR OUR OWN INVASION BY MEXICO!
A 2004 Heritage
Fund study found the average lifetime cost of low-skilled immigrant households
was about $1.2 million to taxpayers - about the net benefit to taxpayers of a
college-educated family.
CA – A STATE IN FINANCIAL MELTDOWN, PUTS OUT $20
BILLION PER YEAR IN SOCIAL SERVICES TO ILLEGALS AGAINST DEFICITS OF $28 BILLION
PER YEAR.. ACCORDING TO ATTORNEY GEN KAMALA HARRIS, NEARLY HALF OF ALL MURDERS
ARE BY MEXICAN GANGS!
ON TOP OF THE ABOVE FIGURES, COUNTIES ALL OVER
CA HAND OUT EVEN MORE TO ILLEGALS, WITH LOS ANGELES COUNTY PAYING OUT $600
MILLION PER YEAR IN WELFARE TO LA RAZA!
AMERICA CANNOT AFFORD MORE
IMMIGRANTS
By
Frosty Wooldridge
January 30, 2012
NewsWithViews.com
January 30, 2012
NewsWithViews.com
Let’s
face it—the entire third world, which comprises much of Africa, Asia, Mexico,
Central America and South America would love to migrate to the United States of
America. Three to four billion human beings subsist on less than $2 daily.
Millions line up to immigrate legally each year. Millions more line up to
immigrate illegally. They move to America for a better life.
That’s
four billion wanna-be immigrants. As it is, America takes more immigrants than
all other countries combined. It cannot continue on its current path if it
expects to survive the 21st century with any sense of ecological, economical
and standard of living viability.
In a
five minute astoundingly simple yet brilliant video, “Immigration, Poverty, and
Gum Balls”, Roy Beck, director of www.numbersusa.ORG, graphically illustrates
the impact of overpopulation. Take five
minutes to see for yourself.
*
*
At
our current rate of legal immigration, our kids will have to deal with 75
million immigrants within 24 years and 100 million more immigrants landing in
this country within the next 38 years. That’s a numerical fact. If Americans continue
to be apathetic, lethargic and just plain stupid, their kids will reap
horrendous consequences.
As
you can see below, our Congress continues dallying, delaying and obfuscating
any meaningful action. But it continues mass immigration without pause.
As
chairman of the Immigration, Border Security, and Claims Subcommittee of the
House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Hostettler held a hearing on July 18, 2006:
“Should we embrace the Senate’s grant of amnesty to millions of illegal aliens
and repeat the mistakes of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986?”
*
11 MILLION ILLEGALS? THEY’VE
BEEN USING THAT PHONY NUMBER FOR THE LAST TWO DECADES AS MILLIONS OF ILLEGALS
HOPPED OUR BORDERS, JOBS AND BREED LIKE BUNNIES FOR ANCHOR BABY WELFARE!
*
“Today
there are approximately 11 million illegal aliens in the United States, making
illegal immigration one of the most serious issues facing our nation,” said
Hostettler. “In May, the Senate passed legislation that would provide amnesty
for most of the illegal aliens currently in the U.S., in a way that is eerily
similar to the amnesty Congress granted in 1986.
“At
this hearing we have the opportunity to examine how the U.S. dealt with illegal
immigration 20 years ago, why that approach did not work, and the direction we
should take in light of our past failure. In 1986, there were approximately
3-million illegal aliens in the U.S. Congress responded by passing the
Immigration Reform and Control Act, or IRCA. There are several key features to
IRCA. First, it provided amnesty to 2.7-million illegal aliens in several different
categories.
“Aliens
who had been illegally present since 1982 were granted a general amnesty, while
agricultural workers who arrived more recently were granted amnesty under the
Special Agricultural Worker Program. The amnesty was accompanied by a plan
designed to stop employment of illegal aliens in the U.S. IRCA created an
employer sanctions scheme for employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens, and
required employers to check the identity and work eligibility documents of all
employees, to ensure lawful immigration status.
“At
the time, policy makers truly believed that it would be a one-time amnesty, and
the problem of illegal immigration would be solved. Congress rejected
recommendations made by the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy
in 1981, which stated, in part:
The Commission believes that
a legalization program is a necessary part of enforcement, but it does not
believe that the U.S. should begin the process of legalization until new
enforcement measures have been instituted to make it clear that the U.S. is
determined to curtail new flows of undocumented illegal aliens. Without more
effective enforcement than the U.S. has had in the past, legalization could
serve as a stimulus to further illegal entry. The Select Commission is opposed
to any program that could precipitate such movement.
“Then-Senator
Alan Simpson (R-WY), co-author of IRCA, affirmed his commitment to amnesty in
exchange by stating, “I firmly believe that a one-time only legalization
program is not only good public policy, it is good sense, and it is fully in
the best interests of this country.” Time showed us that IRCA has utterly and
completely failed, mainly due to the fact that Congress did not heed the
warning of the Select Commission regarding the need for real enforcement prior
to any discussion of such legislation.
“Illegal
immigration has not been controlled, but has increased significantly in the
past two decades. Employer sanctions have been enforced in a farcical manner.
Furthermore, the I-9 [Employment Eligibility Verification Form] system has
proved to be a failure, because an illegal alien can cheaply and easily obtain
counterfeit documents to show his or her employer. Employers, in a Catch 22
situation, cannot require additional proof that the documents presented are
legitimate for fear of running afoul of discrimination laws.
“In
May [2006], the Senate passed the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty, which is remarkably
similar to the 1986 amnesty. The Reid-Kennedy bill also provides several
categories of amnesty, including a general amnesty for anyone who can show that
he has been in the country for more than five years, and including an
agriculture amnesty. Again, proponents of the current proposals believe that
this amnesty will solve the problem once and for all. But Congress and the
administration have no credibility with the American people.
“Why
should Americans have any reason to believe that the supposed enhanced
enforcement provisions in Reid-Kennedy will be effectively enforced by the
administration any more than successive administrations have enforced IRCA? The
administration will probably implement amnesty for millions of illegal aliens
quite quickly. Enforcement will likely lag behind, if it occurs at all.
“We
will find ourselves in exactly the same place we found ourselves 20 years ago.
Amnesty sends out the message that the U.S. is not serious about enforcing our
laws. It is an affront to the millions of immigrants...who wait their turn and
use the legal immigration system. When the U.S. grants amnesty and forgives law
breaking, it encourages more illegal immigration in the future. The grant of
amnesty in 1986 did nothing to resolve the illegal immigration problem; it made
the problem worse, as increased numbers of illegal aliens pour across the border
waiting for their turn.
“With
an amnesty, a new wave of illegal aliens will come to wait for theirs. I
believe that Benjamin Franklin once said that “The definition of insanity is
doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results.” We cannot
expect to solve the problem of illegal aliens by encouraging law breaking
through amnesty. It didn’t work in 1986, and it will certainly not work in
2006.”
It
won’t work in 2012. Our U.S Congress continues to dither while millions flood
into our country. We face ominous consequences as to numbers, languages,
cultures and poverty. It is not possible to continue on our current immigration
path.
This
is why:
“Immigration
by the numbers—off the chart” by Roy Beck
This 10 minute demonstration shows Americans the results
of unending mass immigration on the quality of life and sustainability for
future generations: in a word “Mind boggling!” www.NumbersUSA.org
I
don’t know why Americans aren’t marching in the streets, screaming at every
mayor, governor, U.S. senator, House rep and media outlet. I am beyond
understanding why our citizens choose this accelerating death spiral of our
country. But because of our apathy, the immigrants keep pouring into this
country at over 100,000 per month (legally), they birth children at 900,000
annually and the illegals never stop their onslaught. Folks, we face incredible
consequences, but we continue our apathy that will lead to our demise. I have
been writing these warnings weekly for 20 years and still, no action by
Americans or our leaders. We must want to destroy our civilization and way of
life. We will get our wish if we continue on this path.
For
further information, you may visit www.TheSocialContract.com to read about the devastating effects of mass immigration.
Listen to Frosty Wooldridge on Wednesdays as he interviews top
national leaders on his radio show "Connecting the Dots" at www.themicroeffect.com at 6:00 PM Mountain Time. Adjust tuning in to your time
zone.
Frosty Wooldridge possesses a unique view of the world,
cultures and families in that he has bicycled around the globe 100,000 miles,
on six continents and six times across the United States in the past 30 years.
His published books include: "HANDBOOK FOR TOURING BICYCLISTS";
“STRIKE THREE! TAKE YOUR BASE”; “IMMIGRATION’S UNARMED INVASION: DEADLY
CONSEQUENCES”; “MOTORCYCLE ADVENTURE TO ALASKA: INTO THE WIND—A TEEN NOVEL”;
“BICYCLING AROUND THE WORLD: TIRE TRACKS FOR YOUR IMAGINATION”; “AN EXTREME ENCOUNTER:
ANTARCTICA.” His next book: “TILTING THE STATUE OF LIBERTY INTO A SWAMP.” He
lives in Denver, Colorado.
*
READING THIS ARTICLE, ONE GETS AN EVEN GREATER PICTURE OF
OBAMA AS SIMPLY A CON MAN. THE MAN THAT CONNED A NATION WITH “CHANGE”, AND THEN
WHEN HE FIGURED HE’D CONNED US ENOUGH, WENT AFTER THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES BY
PROMISING THEM OUR JOBS, DREAM ACTS, OPEN BORDERS, AND AMNESTY or at least
CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT.
Obama's 'American story'
faces fresh scrutiny
By James Rosen
Published July 05, 2012
| FoxNews.com
advertisement
When he first took the national stage, with his
electrifying keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in the
summer of 2004, Barack Obama, then an Illinois state senator, briefly
summarized his unusual life story, with its biracial themes and
trans-continental setting. "I stand here knowing that my story is part of
the larger American story," he said, adding: "In no other country on
earth is my story even possible."
That story, of course, would become even more
astonishing, and profoundly American, four years later, when its teller would
be elected president of the United States. But the first time Obama related his
life story -- and in the greatest detail -- was with the publication of his
1995 memoir, Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.
The book, which won wide critical acclaim and
rose to No. 1 on the New York Times bestseller list, recounted the complex tale
that is by now familiar to most Americans: the young Obama's racial confusion
as the son of a white mother from Kansas and a dark-skinned, absentee father
from Kenya; his mother's remarriage to, and eventual split from, the boy's
Indonesian stepfather, with a spell in a Muslim school in Jakarta; the boy's
rearing by white grandparents in Hawaii, who sent him to a private school
there; his journeys through Occidental College and Columbia University, marked
by a shifting intellectual worldview and numerous romances, some of them
inter-racial; his path-breaking stint as the first black editor of the Harvard
Law Review; and his exploits as a community organizer and Chicago lawyer with a
deepening interest in politics.
In the introduction, Obama openly admitted
changing some people's names and compressing both characters and chronology,
mostly for the sake of narrative flow. Over the years, the president’s
biographers have made inroads piecing together which characters were based on
which real-life individuals, and which events were compressed or conflated.
That process has now reached a kind of zenith,
with the publication last month of Barack Obama: The Story, a deeply
researched, 600-page study of the president's ancestry and early life by
Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and Washington Post editor David Maraniss. The
result reflects the hyper-scrutiny that attaches to our chief executives. It
also offers a window into how much of the life story of this self-made man may
have been made up.
By some counts, The Story presents more than
three-dozen instances of material discrepancy where Dreams fails to
align with the facts as Maraniss reports them. Case in point: Maraniss
confirmed that Mr. Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, left his father, Barack Obama,
Sr., a volatile bigamist, and not the other way around, as related in Dreams.
Dreams also related the tale of Obama's paternal
grandfather, Hussein Onyango, who was said to have been detained and tortured
in a prison outside Nairobi for six months because of his brave defiance of
British colonialists. But after a half-dozen interviews and other research,
Maraniss deemed the tale "unlikely."
Maraniss did not respond to several calls
requesting an interview, but Fox News caught up with him outside a Washington
book signing. "I think there's a difference between a memoir and the
serious, rigorous factual history of a biography," he said. "Some of
what he did was the result of mythologies that were passed along from his
family, and some were for the purposes of advancing themes in his book which
had more to do with finding his racial identity."
In an Oval Office interview prior to the
publication of The Story, Maraniss handed the president a copy of Maraniss's
introduction, which conveyed the degree to which The Story would be
challenging various scenes in Obama's memoir. The president confirmed
Maraniss's research and offered sometimes guarded explanations for those
instances when he had chosen to employ an approach in Dreams that was
less than strictly factual.
Still, Maraniss never accuses the president of
having fabricated anything or of having lied to his readers. "I consider
his book very valuable in terms of understanding his interior dialogue, his
struggle that he went through," the author told Fox News.
Gerald Early, a noted professor of English
literature and African-American studies at Washington University in St. Louis,
agreed. "It really doesn't matter if he made up stuff," Early told
Fox News. "I mean, after all, it's like you going to a psychiatrist and
you make up stuff, and the psychiatrist can still psychoanalyze you because
they're your lies."
David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker
magazine and author of a previous biography, The Bridge: The Life and Rise
of Barack Obama, published in 2010, judged Dreams to be "a
mixture of verifiable fact, recollection, recreation, invention, and artful
shaping." Remnick concluded that Author Obama wanted his life story to fit
into a long tradition of African-American literature: a "narrative of
ascent" discernible in early slave memoirs right up through contemporary
classics like Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man (1952) and The
Autobiography of Malcolm X (1965).
But Obama's early life, while sad in many
respects, was too marked by privilege -- recreational drug use, a Hawaii
upbringing with financially comfortable white parents, enrollment in elite
private schools and universities -- to mesh neatly with the aggrieved black
literature in which the young author was so well read and conversant.
"Obama seems to sense this problem and, at the very start of his book,
darkens his canvas as well as he can," Remnick wrote.
Maraniss confirmed this. For example, the back
story offered for a composite character in Dreams known as
"Regina," another black student at Occidental who helped the young
Obama embrace his African heritage, Maraniss found to have been based in large
part on Michelle Obama. The future president would not meet Mrs. Obama until
eight years after he had left Occidental for Columbia.
And where Dreams related the story of
Obama quarreling with a white girlfriend after the two attended a black theatre
production in Manhattan -- a searing experience that left the author feeling
more acutely estranged from white people at the time -- Maraniss found that the
incident actually happened with a different girlfriend, in Chicago.
The false portrayal of the incident as having
happened with Obama's white girlfriend in New York was startling to Australian
native Genevieve Cook, who confirmed to Maraniss that she was that girlfriend.
Cook, who provided to Maraniss the love letters she and the future president
exchanged, also told Maraniss that Obama had "greatly exaggerated" in
Dreams the details of another encounter between them.
Henry Ferris, the editor who helped Obama shape
his rough and overly long manuscript nearly two decades ago, told Fox News he
does not remember discussing with the author his use of literary license.
"I was immediately struck by how talented the writer was and what an
unusual story it was," said Ferris, now a vice president and executive
editor at the New York publisher William Morrow. As for the departures from the
facts, Ferris cautioned that it is "not uncommon" for memoirists.
"I think there's the very good possibility...that what he intended to do
is to protect the privacy of these people he writes about in his book."
"Autobiographies are not really good
sources if you're looking for absolute complete factual accounts of someone's
life," agreed Professor Early. "Autobiographies serve another kind of
purpose for the person writing the book. I don't think it much matters whether
Barack Obama has told the absolute truth in Dreams From My Father.
What's important is how he
wanted to construct his life."
*
Barack Obama’s falsified
Social Security numberBy Frosty Wooldridge
First the “birthers” announced that Barack Obama could not be eligible for the office of president of the United States because of his questionable birth certificate. Writer Jerome Corsi wrote a defining book about Obama’s lack of a valid birth certificate in Where’s the birth certificate?
Since reaching the White House, all of Obama’s personal information have remained under seal by order of the court via Obama's lawyers. He cannot be scrutinized by any exploratory media personnel. However, his unequivocally falsified Social Security number may prove his undoing as a presidential candidate within the next five months.
With “042” as the prefix numbers for his SS#, Obama should have been a resident of Connecticut. He never lived in that state, which is the only way he could have gained that number on his Social Security card, but his grandmother worked at a Social Security office and the growing evidence shows that she “borrowed” a dad man’s SS# because her grandson Barack also known as Barry Soetoro could not produce a valid birth certificate from the United States.
Recently Dr. Jack Cashill, an Emmy-award winning writer and producer wrote a book: Deconstructing Obama. He finds many trouble aspects to the identity of Barack Obama.
Cashill said, “If Barack Obama has an immediate eligibility problem, it is more likely to derive from the Social Security Number he has been using for the last 25 years than from his birth certificate. Ohio private investigator Susan Daniels has seen to that. On Monday, July 2, she filed suit in Geauga County (Ohio) Common Pleas Court demanding that Jon Husted, Ohio secretary of state, remove Obama’s name from the ballot until Obama can prove the validity of his Social Security Number. Daniels has done her homework. In her filing, she thoroughly documents her contention “that Barack Obama has repeatedly, consistently, and with intent, misrepresented himself by using a fraudulently obtained Social Security Number.”
At no time in American history has one man so blatantly distorted himself with a false social security number. It’s not his, it’s not legal, it’s not original and it’s not valid. Yet the main stream media chooses to ignore it. Most of the American public remains oblivious as to their own president’s lack of eligibility for the office of president of the United States.
Since 2009, Daniels has questioned the “042” prefix in that it could not possibly belong to Obama because it belonged to a dead man. The fact remains that only a person living in Connecticut could register and be given that particular prefix from that state.
“When Daniels ran the numbers immediately flanking Obama’s, she came to the firm conviction that Obama’s number was issued in March 1977 in Connecticut,” said Cashill. “By all accounts, as Daniels thoroughly documents, Obama was then a 15 year old living in Hawaii. There is no record of him even visiting Connecticut in or near this time frame. To have gotten a Social Security card at this time Obama would have had to show up for a “mandatory in-person interview.””
What concerns me stems from the fact that the mainstream media refuses to follow up on Obama’s lack of eligibility to serve as a US president. No other person in the 21st century could escape such scrutiny.
Daniels has filed suit to gain access to more records.
“Defendant Husted, through this filing,” she argues, “has been made aware that the Democratic Candidate has been using a fraudulent Social Security Number, which would render Barack Obama ineligible under both the Ohio and U.S. Constitutions.”
Whether or not some of the big wigs like George Will, Thomas Friedman, Kathleen Parker or Cal Thomas will follow up on this very hot trail remains to be seen. In this age of obfuscation, lies and deceit, Obama leads the pack with things to hide, things he did and things contrary to the foundation of this constitutional republic.
Out in Colorado, talk show host Peter Boyles, www.KHOW.com , has taken several top experts to task as to Obama’s Social Security card. I have listened with a growing sense of disgust that many at the top know the truth, but most at the top continue to cover up this national predicament.
This journalist hopes that more financially able writers and investigators cover this issue like a Colorado wildfire to get to the bottom of this national calamity of forgery. That’s what it is: outright fraud by a sitting president.
##
Frosty Wooldridge has bicycled across six continents - from the Arctic to the South Pole - as well as eight times across the USA, coast to coast and border to border. In 2005, he bicycled from the Arctic Circle, Norway to Athens, Greece. His latest book is: How to Live a Life of Adventure: The Art of Exploring the World by Frosty Wooldridge, copies at 1 888 280 7715/ Motivational program: How to Live a Life of Adventure: The Art of Exploring the World by Frosty Wooldridge, click:
www.HowToLiveALifeOfAdventure.com
*
IBD Editorials
The Tragic Illusion Of Obama's Fine
Mind
06/27/2012 06:26 PM ET
The Obama Record
The Obama Record: As it becomes
clear our "brilliant" president has failed to turn the economy
around, a poll shows half of Americans want to know how he did in college.
Forty-nine percent of respondents to an
exclusive IBD/TIPP survey say they agree that Obama "should release his
academic records" before November. Only 28% strongly disagree. Seven
percent answered "not sure."
Voters got a look at the college
coursework and grades of President Bush, as well as Democratic challengers Al
Gore and John Kerry. Obama, however, refuses to release his transcripts,
despite media requests.
It's natural voters would now
wonder about his academic performance. Other polls show they're increasingly
unhappy with his job performance.
With signs the economy may be
slipping back into recession, and the president's economic policies looking
woefully ineffective, many voters are waking up to the notion he may not be
nearly as smart as he's made out to be.
Obama's storied intellect simply isn't
measuring up to the hype created by media sycophants like MSNBC's Chris
Matthews, who's called him "very smart," or historians like Michael
Beschloss, who said he's "probably the smartest guy ever to become president."
Coming into office on the heels of a
tongue-tied predecessor, the well-spoken Obama was supposed to have all the
answers. But it turns out he doesn't know any better. His bright ideas, from
energy policy to health care and jobs, haven't worked.
Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast
When it comes to economics, Obama
is tragically lost. Yet he insists he knows best. He thinks with his own
superior intelligence he can solve any problem.
When he ran for the U.S. Senate,
Obama bragged about how relatively well-read and cosmopolitan he was.
"There is a certain self-consciousness that I possess as somebody with
probably too much book learning, and also a very polyglot background," he
sniffed in a 2004 interview with BeliefNet.com.
He seems to look down on ordinary Americans,
views them as rubes. He griped in the same interview that the American people
"get confused sometimes, watch Fox News or listen to talk radio. That's
dangerous."
No, what's dangerous is his intellectual
elitism. Besides clouding his judgment, it fools others into thinking his
judgment is beyond reproach.
Worse, his smugness may be
unearned. Obama's brainy reputation is based almost entirely on his ability to
string together sentences. But most of his thoughts are scripted. Unlike George
Bush, Obama needs a teleprompter just to talk to elementary school kids.
While Obama may come across as an
erudite professor, he is actually quite sloppy in his scholarship. His misattributing
a quote to MLK in the rug he had custom-made for the Oval Office is one
example. Another is his absurd statement to French TV that based on America's
"7 million" Muslim population, we'd be one of the largest Muslim
nations. The actual size is a third that figure.
Bush was ridiculed for not reading
enough books. Yet he was at least familiar enough with the word
"corps" — as in Navy "corpsman" — not to confuse it with a
dead body like Obama did at a prayer breakfast. At a recent summit, Obama the "polyglot"
world traveler mangled the Argentine term Malvinas as "Maldives."
Defenders say the fact Obama wrote
two books alone proves his intellectual firepower. But there are doubts he
actually penned his first memoir. His subversive pal Bill Ayers recently
claimed authorship. Much of the book's prose, in fact, resembles Ayers' writing
style.
Regardless, both Obama
autobiographies are riddled with howling factual errors. He even got several
key dates wrong in his family history.
We have a lot of evidence Obama is
not a genius, and little proof that he is. The empirical proof remains sealed
at Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard University.
(We would add the University of Chicago, where
he once lectured, because as far as we can tell, he never wrote a scholarly
article or joined intellectual debates while employed there.)
There's at least anecdotal evidence that Obama
was a terrible student in high school and college, where he routinely got high
on pot and cocaine, skipped class and turned assignments in late. Yet somehow —
somehow — he got into Ivy League schools.
Even Obama confessed in 2007 that he was
"a goof-off in high school . . . There was a whole stretch of time where I
didn't apply myself." That stretch runs at least through his entry into
Columbia in the fall of 1981, as a member of one of the worst transfer classes
in the school's history. Breitbart.com found it had the worst SAT scores in
recent memory.
In fact, Obama may have had a lower score than
C-student Bush, whom the media have maligned as the dumbest president.
Perhaps this is why Columbia professors
haven't come forward to exalt Obama as a standout. In fact, Obama had to beg
Northwestern University professor John McKnight, who worked with him as a
street organizer in Chicago, for a letter of recommendation to Harvard.
Apparently other professors balked.
There are a lot of unanswered questions about
this president. Now, many Americans are wondering, with good reason, if his
superior intellect is a myth.
Seeing a first term marked by callowness and
incompetence, some are wondering if he conned his way to the top, or got into
Ivy League schools not on academic merit but through racial preferences.
His academic records would help voters
determine whether they've been sold a bill of goods. They have a right to see
all of them before the election.
*
QUOTE FROM JOHN EDWARDS CAMPAIGN MANAGER
"Barack Obama's kind of
change is where you sit down and you cut a deal with the corporate world,"
Edwards Campaign Manager David Bonior said during an interview with MSNBC’s Joe
Scarborough. "If you look at his record in Illinois when he had a major —
sponsored a major health bill that's what he did. He watered down with the help
of the corporate lobbyist and they got a weak product out of that."
Scarborough asked: "Are
you saying that Barack Obama is a sellout to corporate interests?"
Bonior replied: "He was
four years ago in Illinois. All you have to do is look at the legislation I'm
referring to."
Bonior was referring to health
care legislation that Obama was instrumental in passing when he was an Illinois
state senator five years ago, in part because he worked with insurance
companies to make additions to the bill that would ensure their approval of the
measure.
*
All this while the administration was cutting backroom deals with every manner of special interest - from drug companies to auto unions to doctors - in which favors worth billions were quietly and opaquely exchanged.
All this while the administration was cutting backroom deals with every manner of special interest - from drug companies to auto unions to doctors - in which favors worth billions were quietly and opaquely exchanged.
DENVERPOST.com
opinion
Krauthammer: The decline of Obama
By
Charles Krauthammer
Posted:
09/04/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT
What happened to President Obama? His wax wings having melted, he is the man who fell to earth. What happened to bring his popularity down further than that of any new president in polling history save Gerald Ford (post-Nixon pardon)?
The
conventional wisdom is that Obama made a tactical mistake by
All this while
the administration was cutting backroom deals with every manner of special
interest - from drug companies to auto unions to doctors - in which favors
worth billions were quietly and opaquely exchanged.
farming
out his agenda to Congress and allowing himself to be pulled left by the
doctrinaire liberals of the Democratic congressional leadership.
ALL
THREE, OBAMA, REID AND PELOSI MAKE JUDICIAL WATCH’S 10 MOST CORRUPT EVERY YEAR!
But
the idea of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi pulling Obama left is quite ridiculous.
Where do you think he came from, this friend of Chavista ex-terrorist William
Ayers, of PLO apologist Rashid Khalidi, of racialist inciter Jeremiah Wright?
But
forget the character witnesses. Just look at Obama's behavior as president,
beginning with his first address to Congress.
Unbidden,
unforced and unpushed by the congressional leadership, Obama gave his most
deeply felt vision of America, delivering the boldest social democratic
manifesto ever issued by a U.S. president. In American politics, you can't get
more left than that speech and still be on the playing field.
In
a center-right country, that was problem enough. Obama then compounded it by
vastly misreading his mandate. He assumed it was personal.
This,
after winning by a mere seven points in a year of true economic catastrophe, of
an extraordinarily unpopular Republican incumbent, and of a politically weak
and unsteady opponent.
Nonetheless,
Obama imagined that, as Fouad Ajami so brilliantly observed, he had won the
kind of banana-republic plebiscite that grants caudillo-like authority to
remake everything in one's own image.
Accordingly,
Obama unveiled his plans for a grand makeover of the American system, animating
that vision by enacting measure after measure that greatly enlarged state
power, government spending and national debt.
Not
surprisingly, these measures engendered powerful popular skepticism that burst
into tea-party town-hall resistance.
Obama's
reaction to that resistance made things worse. Obama fancies himself tribune of
the people, spokesman for the grass roots, harbinger of a new kind of politics
from below that would upset the established lobbyist special-interest order of
Washington.
Yet
faced with protests from a real grass-roots movement, his party and his
supporters called it a mob - misinformed, misled, irrational, angry, unhinged,
bordering on racist.
All this while
the administration was cutting backroom deals with every manner of special
interest - from drug companies to auto unions to doctors - in which favors
worth billions were quietly and opaquely exchanged.
"Get
out of the way" and "don't do a lot of talking," the great
bipartisan scolded opponents whom he blamed for creating the "mess"
from which he is merely trying to save us.
If
only they could see. So with boundless confidence in his own persuasiveness, Obama
undertook a summer campaign to enlighten the masses by addressing substantive
objections to his reforms.
Things
got worse still. With answers so slippery and implausible and, well, fishy, he
began jeopardizing the most fundamental asset of any new president - trust.
You
can't say that the system is totally broken and in need of radical
reconstruction, but nothing will change for you; that Medicare is bankrupting
the country, but $500 billion in cuts will have no effect on care; that you
will expand coverage while reducing deficits - and not inspire incredulity and
mistrust. When ordinary citizens understand they are being played for fools,
they bristle.
After
a disastrous summer - mistaking his mandate, believing his press, centralizing
power, governing left, disdaining citizens for (of all things) organizing -
Obama is in trouble.
Let's
be clear: This is a fall, not a collapse. He's not been repudiated or even
defeated. He will likely regroup and pass some version of health insurance
reform that will restore some of his clout and popularity.
But
what has occurred - irreversibly - is this: He's become ordinary. The spell is
broken. The charismatic conjurer of 2008 has shed his magic. He's regressed to
the mean, tellingly expressed in poll numbers hovering at 50 percent.
For
a man who only recently bred a cult, ordinariness is a great burden, and for
his acolytes, a crushing disappointment. Obama has become a politician like
others.
And
like other flailing presidents, he will try to salvage a cherished reform - and
his own standing - with yet another prime-time speech.
But
for the first time since election night in Grant Park, he will appear in the
most unfamiliar of guises - mere mortal, a treacherous transformation to which
a man of Obama's supreme self-regard may never adapt.
*
OBAMA’S CRONY
CAPITALISM, A LOVE STORY BETWEEN THE ACTOR PRESIDENT, AND HIS BANKSTER DONORS!
Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors are employees of financial industry giants - Goldman Sachs ($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207) and Citigroup ($358,054).
Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is
Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and
Union Bosses
BY
TIMOTHY P CARNEY
Editorial
Reviews
Obama
Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?
Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer,
the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed
to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government
policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics,
investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media
ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and
Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming
he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory
robbery—it’s Obamanomics.
Congressman Ron Paul says,
“Every libertarian and free-market conservative needs to read Obamanomics.”
And Johan Goldberg, columnist and bestselling author says, “Obamanomics
is conservative muckraking at its best and an indispensable field guide to the
Obama years.”
If you’ve wondered what’s
happening to America, as the federal government swallows up the financial
sector, the auto industry, and healthcare, and enacts deficit exploding
“stimulus packages,” this book makes it all clear—it’s a big scam. Ultimately,
Obamanomics boils down to this: every time government gets bigger, somebody’s
getting rich, and those somebodies are friends of Barack. This book names the
names—and it will make your blood boil.
*
Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?
Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer,
the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed
to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government
policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers.
Investigative reporter
Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White
House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering
corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate
America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics. In
this explosive book, Carney reveals:
* The Great Health Care
Scam—Obama’s backroom deals with drug companies spell corporate profits and
more government control
* The Global Warming Hoax—Obama has bought off industries with a pork-filled bill that will drain your wallet for Al Gore’s agenda
* Obama and Wall Street—“Change” means more bailouts and a heavy Goldman Sachs presence in the West Wing (including Rahm Emanuel)
* Stimulating K Street—The largest spending bill in history gave pork to the well-connected and created a feeding frenzy for lobbyists
* How the GOP needs to change its tune—drastically—to battle Obamanomics
* The Global Warming Hoax—Obama has bought off industries with a pork-filled bill that will drain your wallet for Al Gore’s agenda
* Obama and Wall Street—“Change” means more bailouts and a heavy Goldman Sachs presence in the West Wing (including Rahm Emanuel)
* Stimulating K Street—The largest spending bill in history gave pork to the well-connected and created a feeding frenzy for lobbyists
* How the GOP needs to change its tune—drastically—to battle Obamanomics
If you’ve wondered what’s
happening to our country, as the federal government swallows up the financial
sector, the auto industry, and healthcare, and enacts deficit exploding
“stimulus packages” that create make-work government jobs, this book makes it
all clear—it’s a big scam. Ultimately, Obamanomics boils down to this: every
time government gets bigger, somebody’s getting rich, and those somebodies are
friends of Barack. This book names the names—and it will make your blood boil.
*
Praise for Obamanomics
Praise for Obamanomics
“The notion that ‘big
business’ is on the side of the free market is one of progressivism’s most
valuable myths. It allows them to demonize corporations by day and get in bed
with them by night. Obamanomics is conservative muckraking at its best.
It reveals how President Obama is exploiting the big business mythology to
undermine the free market and stick it to entrepreneurs, taxpayers, and
consumers. It’s an indispensable field guide to the Obama years.”
—Jonha Goldberg, LA Times columnist and best-selling author
—Jonha Goldberg, LA Times columnist and best-selling author
“‘Every time government gets
bigger, somebody’s getting rich.’ With this astute observation, Tim Carney
begins his task of laying bare the Obama administration’s corporatist governing
strategy, hidden behind the president’s populist veneer. This meticulously
researched book is a must-read for anyone who wants to understand how
Washington really works.”
—David Freddoso, best-selling author of The Case Against Barack Obama
—David Freddoso, best-selling author of The Case Against Barack Obama
“Every libertarian and
free-market conservative who still believes that large corporations are trusted
allies in the battle for economic liberty needs to read this book, as does
every well-meaning liberal who believes that expansions of the
welfare-regulatory state are done to benefit the common people.”
—Congressman Ron Paul
—Congressman Ron Paul
“It’s understandable for
critics to condemn President Obama for his ‘socialism.’ But as Tim Carney
shows, the real situation is at once more subtle and more sinister. Obamanomics
favors big business while disproportionately punishing everyone else. So-called
progressives are too clueless to notice, as usual, which is why we have Tim
Carney and this book.”
—Thomas E. Woods, Jr., best-selling author of Meltdown and The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to American History
—Thomas E. Woods, Jr., best-selling author of Meltdown and The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to American History
*
· Hardcover: 256 pages
· Publisher: Regnery Press (November 30, 2009)
· Language: English
· ISBN-10: 1596986123
· ISBN-13: 978-1596986121
OBAMA AND THE FALL of AMERICA:
*
THERE IS NOTHING IN OBAMA BUT A PERFORMANCE!
“That's the candidate
in him, the one that prefers performing for adoring crowds instead of
performing Oval Office duties.”
CHANGE? IT’S HIS BUSH THIRD TERM!
*
OBAMA HAS SABOTAGED E-VERIFY AND
PUT HILDA SOLIS, A LA RAZA SUPREMACIST IN AS SEC of (illegal) LABOR!
The economy, like
everything else adverse, is someone else's fault. But if only we borrowed and
spent a trillion dollars, unemployment would stay beneath 8%, Obama promised.
It soared far above. It's still above. No apology. No acknowledgment. Now, he
hails any dip as proof of progress when, in fact, it comes because so many just
give up seeking work.
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2012/04/change-will-nation-buy-another-obama.html
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2012/04/change-will-nation-buy-another-obama.html
Who is this guy pretending to be president?
By ANDREW MALCOLM
Posted 04/13/2012 08:18 AM ET
Has anyone seen Barack Obama recently? WHAT WOULD HE LOOK LIKE IF WE DID?
You know, the optimistic hopeful fellow with the charming smile who promised so many positive things four and five years ago, how he was going to change the harsh, partisan tone of our nation's capital and bring the country together as its first African American president.
Even allowing for political hyperbole, his empty resume and the invisible witnesses from the past, Obama was such a Real Good Talker that even some who didn't vote for him still had hope that he could change some things for the better in what seemed a sadly-splintered society.
WTH did that Obama go? Have you listened recently to this Chicago Doppelganger who's replaced him? This 2012 Obama is strident and mean, even deceitful, divisive, telling half-truths after half-truths. He's using Air Force One as his personal Brinks truck with wings to collect cash all over the country, disguising the trips as official.
He tries to intimidate the Supreme Court, an equal branch of government, when its thinking might stray from his. He distorts history, and if no one calls him, then it's true. If he's caught, this Obama says you obviously mis-heard. Because, as everyone knows, he could never mis-speak.
The economy, like everything else adverse, is someone else's fault. But if only we borrowed and spent a trillion dollars, unemployment would stay beneath 8%, Obama promised. It soared far above. It's still above. No apology. No acknowledgment. Now, he hails any dip as proof of progress when, in fact, it comes because so many just give up seeking work.
He chastises House Republicans for their draconian budget when his Senate Democrats haven't written a single one in three years; so, the fiscal drift abides. And wait till he exaggerates the frightening things the GOP wants to do, instead of presenting his own ideas.
Obama claims credit for the bottom half of a pipeline he had nothing to do with, when he killed the top half. He brags that domestic oil drilling is up when the part he's responsible for is down.
He says no one should ever go to Las Vegas on the taxpayer's dime. Then his wife, daughters and entourage do just that.
This year's Obama talks of the importance of windmills, algae and green energy, but he takes a 17-SUV motorcade to a photo op with an electric car. He lambasts oil companies for getting the same legal tax incentives (he calls them "subsidies") that other companies receive, hoping to aim anger at them so voters won't notice that gas prices have doubled since his inauguration with Honest Abe's Bible.
Take this Tuesday. The 2012 Obama flew to Florida for an official presidential speech on the economy, then three fundraisers. That way his campaign only pays a fraction of Air Force One's $182,000 per flight hour cost. All presidents do that, though none have done near as many.
But read the four speeches. You can't tell which is official and which is political. They're all political. He can't be a real president for one lousy speech? Why the phony presidential fig leaf? To chintz the United States of America out of a few thousand bucks when he plans to raise a billion?
The Buffet Rule? Americans have always admired the successful. The only thing wrong with rich people is we're not one of them -- yet. But now he's pitting most of us against rich folks, which is him, come to think of it. The only way he's bringing us together now is to resent their paying a smaller legal rate because theirs is a different kind of income.
And speaking of taxes, which are due Tuesday, how can the president of the United States allow 36 of his own White House aides to fall $833,000 behind in their tax payments?
How is that what the first Obama offered, making him an example of American success? (Hint: His GOP opponent is far richer than Obama and earned it the old-fashioned way through work, not fronting books.)
OK, Obama wants political skirmishes all over on any petty thing so people won't notice the absence of any conceivably positive record to run on. Risky when Americans start paying attention. But if that's his only card. It's all the Republicans' fault, of course. That's the candidate in him, the one that prefers performing for adoring crowds instead of performing Oval Office duties.
But whatever happened to the president part? The leader. The principled man who through his personal story, skills and charm was going to inspire, convince, cajole Americans as diverse as himself to work together for a common national success? That official part has merged with the political, like the four Florida speeches. Now, he's just trying to fool everybody about everything.
In a way, this could be good news for Republicans. The duplicate Ernst Blofeld makes Mitt Romney look like Mr. Rogers.
But without real presidential leadership, Obama's hand-picked harpie atop the Democratic National Committee feels empowered to assign a hired gun to dismiss his opponent's wife, the cancer-surviving mother of five sons, as someone who's never worked a day in her life. Are they that scared already?
Seriously? We're going to pit now one kind of working woman against another? The guy who talks about having so many women in his life isn't going to fire the women responsible for that? He thinks American women will buy this stuff?
OK, Obama was raised by grandparents because he didn't always have a stay-at-home mom or dad. But this is a nation, not a dysfunctional family or a windy city party where factions are left to their own wards and Solyndras.
Obama is the guy who said his own wife was off limits politically, the guy whose mother-in-law has resided since Day One in the White House at taxpayer expense as a live-in nanny so the first lady can campaign for money and healthy foods? But a woman who stays at home with her kids at no public expense can be trashed because of her party?
We were never exactly fond of the Original Obama. But we'd take him any day over the twilight character that inhabits the Oval Office now.
RELATED:
Why is Obama so rattled?
*
By ANDREW MALCOLM
Posted 04/13/2012 08:18 AM ET
Has anyone seen Barack Obama recently? WHAT WOULD HE LOOK LIKE IF WE DID?
You know, the optimistic hopeful fellow with the charming smile who promised so many positive things four and five years ago, how he was going to change the harsh, partisan tone of our nation's capital and bring the country together as its first African American president.
Even allowing for political hyperbole, his empty resume and the invisible witnesses from the past, Obama was such a Real Good Talker that even some who didn't vote for him still had hope that he could change some things for the better in what seemed a sadly-splintered society.
WTH did that Obama go? Have you listened recently to this Chicago Doppelganger who's replaced him? This 2012 Obama is strident and mean, even deceitful, divisive, telling half-truths after half-truths. He's using Air Force One as his personal Brinks truck with wings to collect cash all over the country, disguising the trips as official.
He tries to intimidate the Supreme Court, an equal branch of government, when its thinking might stray from his. He distorts history, and if no one calls him, then it's true. If he's caught, this Obama says you obviously mis-heard. Because, as everyone knows, he could never mis-speak.
The economy, like everything else adverse, is someone else's fault. But if only we borrowed and spent a trillion dollars, unemployment would stay beneath 8%, Obama promised. It soared far above. It's still above. No apology. No acknowledgment. Now, he hails any dip as proof of progress when, in fact, it comes because so many just give up seeking work.
He chastises House Republicans for their draconian budget when his Senate Democrats haven't written a single one in three years; so, the fiscal drift abides. And wait till he exaggerates the frightening things the GOP wants to do, instead of presenting his own ideas.
Obama claims credit for the bottom half of a pipeline he had nothing to do with, when he killed the top half. He brags that domestic oil drilling is up when the part he's responsible for is down.
He says no one should ever go to Las Vegas on the taxpayer's dime. Then his wife, daughters and entourage do just that.
This year's Obama talks of the importance of windmills, algae and green energy, but he takes a 17-SUV motorcade to a photo op with an electric car. He lambasts oil companies for getting the same legal tax incentives (he calls them "subsidies") that other companies receive, hoping to aim anger at them so voters won't notice that gas prices have doubled since his inauguration with Honest Abe's Bible.
Take this Tuesday. The 2012 Obama flew to Florida for an official presidential speech on the economy, then three fundraisers. That way his campaign only pays a fraction of Air Force One's $182,000 per flight hour cost. All presidents do that, though none have done near as many.
But read the four speeches. You can't tell which is official and which is political. They're all political. He can't be a real president for one lousy speech? Why the phony presidential fig leaf? To chintz the United States of America out of a few thousand bucks when he plans to raise a billion?
The Buffet Rule? Americans have always admired the successful. The only thing wrong with rich people is we're not one of them -- yet. But now he's pitting most of us against rich folks, which is him, come to think of it. The only way he's bringing us together now is to resent their paying a smaller legal rate because theirs is a different kind of income.
And speaking of taxes, which are due Tuesday, how can the president of the United States allow 36 of his own White House aides to fall $833,000 behind in their tax payments?
How is that what the first Obama offered, making him an example of American success? (Hint: His GOP opponent is far richer than Obama and earned it the old-fashioned way through work, not fronting books.)
OK, Obama wants political skirmishes all over on any petty thing so people won't notice the absence of any conceivably positive record to run on. Risky when Americans start paying attention. But if that's his only card. It's all the Republicans' fault, of course. That's the candidate in him, the one that prefers performing for adoring crowds instead of performing Oval Office duties.
But whatever happened to the president part? The leader. The principled man who through his personal story, skills and charm was going to inspire, convince, cajole Americans as diverse as himself to work together for a common national success? That official part has merged with the political, like the four Florida speeches. Now, he's just trying to fool everybody about everything.
In a way, this could be good news for Republicans. The duplicate Ernst Blofeld makes Mitt Romney look like Mr. Rogers.
But without real presidential leadership, Obama's hand-picked harpie atop the Democratic National Committee feels empowered to assign a hired gun to dismiss his opponent's wife, the cancer-surviving mother of five sons, as someone who's never worked a day in her life. Are they that scared already?
Seriously? We're going to pit now one kind of working woman against another? The guy who talks about having so many women in his life isn't going to fire the women responsible for that? He thinks American women will buy this stuff?
OK, Obama was raised by grandparents because he didn't always have a stay-at-home mom or dad. But this is a nation, not a dysfunctional family or a windy city party where factions are left to their own wards and Solyndras.
Obama is the guy who said his own wife was off limits politically, the guy whose mother-in-law has resided since Day One in the White House at taxpayer expense as a live-in nanny so the first lady can campaign for money and healthy foods? But a woman who stays at home with her kids at no public expense can be trashed because of her party?
We were never exactly fond of the Original Obama. But we'd take him any day over the twilight character that inhabits the Oval Office now.
RELATED:
Why is Obama so rattled?
*
PAT BUCHANAN ON OBAMA’S
HISPANDERING FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES:
“What is the response of
Barack Obama, who took an oath to see to it that federal laws are faithfully
executed?”
“He is siding with the
law-breakers. He is pandering to the ethnic lobbies. He is not berating a
Mexican regime that aids and abets this invasion of the country of which he is
commander in chief. Instead, he attacks the government of Arizona for trying to
fill a gaping hole in law enforcement left by his own dereliction of duty.”
*
TOWNHALL.com
Whose
Country Is This?
Pat Buchanan
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
With
the support of 70 percent of its citizens, Arizona has ordered sheriffs and
police to secure the border and remove illegal aliens, half a million of whom
now reside there.
Arizona
acted because the U.S. government has abdicated its constitutional duty to
protect the states from invasion and refuses to enforce America's immigration
laws.
"We
in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act,"
said Gov. Jan Brewer. "But decades of inaction and misguided policy have
created an unacceptable situation."
We
have a crisis in Arizona because we have a failed state in Washington.
What is the response of
Barack Obama, who took an oath to see to it that federal laws are faithfully
executed?
He is siding with the
law-breakers. He is pandering to the ethnic lobbies. He is not berating a
Mexican regime that aids and abets this invasion of the country of which he is
commander in chief. Instead, he attacks the government of Arizona for trying to
fill a gaping hole in law enforcement left by his own dereliction of duty.
He
has denounced Arizona as "misguided." He has called on the Justice
Department to ensure that Arizona's sheriffs and police do not violate anyone's
civil rights. But he has said nothing about the rights of the people of Arizona
who must deal with the costs of having hundreds of thousands of lawbreakers in
their midst.
How's
that for Andrew Jackson-style leadership?
Obama
has done everything but his duty to enforce the law.
Undeniably,
making it a state as well as a federal crime to be in this country illegally,
and requiring police to check the immigration status of anyone they have a
"reasonable suspicion" is here illegally, is tough and burdensome.
But what choice did Arizona have?
The
state has a fiscal crisis caused in part by the burden of providing schooling
and social welfare for illegals and their families, who consume far more in
services than they pay in taxes and who continue to pour in. Even John McCain
is now calling for 3,000 troops on the border.
Police
officers and a prominent rancher have been murdered. There have been
kidnappings believed to be tied to the Mexican drug cartels. There are nightly
high-speed chases through the barrios where innocent people are constantly at
risk.
If
Arizona does not get control of the border and stop the invasion, U.S. citizens
will stop coming to Arizona and will begin to depart, as they are already
fleeing California.
A country that cannot control
its borders isn't really a country anymore, Ronald Reagan reminded us.
What
we are talking about here is the Balkanization and breakup of a nation into
ethnic enclaves. A country that cannot
control its borders isn't really a country anymore, Ronald Reagan reminded us.
The
tasks that Arizonans are themselves undertaking are ones that belong by right,
the Constitution and federal law to the Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, and Homeland Security.
Arizona
has been compelled to assume the feds' role because the feds won't do their
job. And for that dereliction of duty the buck stops on the desk of the
president of the United States.
Why
is Obama paralyzed? Why does he not enforce the law, even if he dislikes it, by
punishing the businessmen who hire illegals and by sending the 12 million to 20
million illegals back home? President Eisenhower did it. Why won't he?
*
OBAMA
THE HISPANDERING PRESIDENT SELLING OUT HIS OWN COUNTRY FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES!
*
Because
he is politically correct. Because he owes a big debt to the Hispanic lobby
that helped deliver two-thirds of that vote in 2008. Though most citizens of
Hispanic descent in Arizona want the border protected and the laws enforced,
the Hispanic lobby demands that the law be changed.
Fair
enough. But the nation rose up as one to reject the
"path-to-citizenship" -- i.e., amnesty -- that the 2007 plan of
George W. Bush, McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama envisioned.
Al
Sharpton threatens to go to Phoenix and march in the streets against the new
Arizona law. Let him go.
JOBS?
NO LEGAL NEED APPLY HERE!
Let
us see how many African-Americans, who are today frozen out of the 8 million
jobs held by illegal aliens that might otherwise go to them or their children,
will march to defend an invasion for which they are themselves paying the
heaviest price.
Last
year, while Americans were losing a net of 5 million jobs, the U.S. government
-- Bush and Obama both -- issued 1,131,000 green cards to legal immigrants to
come and take the jobs that did open up, a flood of immigrants equaled in only
four other years in our history.
What
are we doing to our own people?
Whose
country is this, anyway?
America
today has an establishment that, because it does not like the immigration laws,
countenances and condones wholesale violation of those laws.
Nevertheless,
under those laws, the U.S. government is obligated to deport illegal aliens and
punish businesses that knowingly hire them.
This
is not an option. It is an obligation.
Can
anyone say Barack Obama is meeting that obligation?
*
FAIRUS.org
The
Administration's Phantom Immigration Enforcement Policy
According
to DHS’s own reports, very little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or
otherwise) are secure, and gaining control is not even a goal of the
department.
By
Ira Mehlman
Published on 12/07/2009
Townhall.com
Published on 12/07/2009
Townhall.com
The
setting was not quite the flight deck of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln with a
“Mission Accomplished” banner as the backdrop, but it was the next best thing.
Speaking at the Center for American Progress (CAP) on Nov. 13, Homeland
Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared victory over illegal immigration
and announced that the Obama administration is ready to move forward with a
mass amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens already living in the United
States.
Arguing
the Obama administration’s case for amnesty, Napolitano laid out what she
described as the “three-legged stool” for immigration reform. As the
administration views it, immigration reform must include “a commitment to
serious and effective enforcement, improved legal flows for families and
workers, and a firm but fair way to deal with those who are already here.”
Acknowledging
that a lack of confidence in the government’s ability and commitment to
effectively enforce the immigration laws it passes proved to be the Waterloo of
previous efforts to gain amnesty for illegal aliens, Napolitano was quick to
reassure the American public that those concerns could be put to rest.
“For
starters, the security of the Southwest border has been transformed from where
it was in 2007,” stated the secretary. Not only is the border locked up tight,
she continued, but the situation is well in-hand in the interior of the country
as well. “We’ve also shown that the government is serious and strategic in its
approach to enforcement by making changes in how we enforce the law in the
interior of the country and at worksites…Furthermore, we’ve transformed
worksite enforcement to truly address the demand side of illegal immigration.”
If
Rep. Joe Wilson had been in attendance to hear Secretary Napolitano’s CAP
speech he might well have had a few choice comments to offer. But since he
wasn’t, we will have to rely on the Department of Homeland Security’s own data
to assess the veracity of Napolitano’s claims.
According
to DHS’s own reports, very little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or
otherwise) are secure, and gaining control is not even a goal of the
department. DHS claims to have “effective control” over just 894 miles of
border. That’s 894 out of 8,607 miles they are charged with protecting. As for
the other 7,713 miles? DHS’s stated border security goal for FY 2010 is the
same 894 miles.
The
administration’s strategic approach to interior and worksite enforcement is
just as chimerical as its strategy at the border, unless one considers
shuffling paper to be a strategy. DHS data, released November 18, show that
administrative arrests of immigration law violators fell by 68 percent between
2008 and 2009. The department also carried out 60 percent fewer arrests for
criminal violations of immigration laws, 58 percent fewer criminal indictments,
and won 63 percent fewer convictions.
While
the official unemployment rate has climbed from 7.6 percent when President
Obama took office in January to 10 percent today, the administration’s worksite
enforcement strategy has amounted to a bureaucratic game of musical chairs. The
administration has all but ended worksite enforcement actions and replaced them
with paperwork audits. When the audits determine that illegal aliens are on the
payroll, employers are given the opportunity to fire them with little or no
adverse consequence to the company, while no action is taken to remove the
illegal workers from the country. The illegal workers simply acquire a new set
of fraudulent documents and move on to the next employer seeking workers
willing to accept substandard wages.
In
Janet Napolitano’s alternative reality a mere 10 percent of our borders under
“effective control” and sharp declines in arrests and prosecutions of
immigration lawbreakers may be construed as confidence builders, but it is hard
to imagine that the American public is going to see it that way. If anything,
the administration’s record has left the public less confident that promises of
future immigration enforcement would be worth the government paper they’re
printed on.
As
Americans scrutinize the administration’s plans to overhaul immigration policy,
they are likely to find little in the “three-legged stool” being offered that
they like or trust. The first leg – enforcement – the administration has all
but sawed off. The second – increased admissions of extended family members and
workers – makes little sense with some 25 million Americans either unemployed
or relegated to part-time work. And the third – amnesty for millions of illegal
aliens – is anathema to their sense of justice and fair play.
As
Americans well know, declaring “Mission Accomplished” and actually
accomplishing a mission are two completely different things. When it comes to
enforcing immigration laws, the only message the public is receiving from this
administration is “Mission Aborted.”
*
MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com
Obama soft on illegals enforcement
Arrests of illegal immigrant
workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures
released Wednesday. Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and
convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50
percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.
The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). Mr. Smith, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said a period of economic turmoil is the wrong time to be cutting enforcement and letting illegal immigrants take jobs that Americans otherwise would hold.
The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). Mr. Smith, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said a period of economic turmoil is the wrong time to be cutting enforcement and letting illegal immigrants take jobs that Americans otherwise would hold.
*
Here is the Department of Homeland Security's Hotline for
reporting suspected illegal employees and employers: 866-347-2423 (YOU MAY BE
WASTING YOUR TIME HERE. HISPANDERING OBAMA SELECTED LA RAZA JANET NAPOLITANO TO
HEAD “HOMELAND SECURITY = PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP” FOR OPEN AND UNDEFENDED
BORDERS)
*
Shaping up to be the most corrupt
administration in American history:
administration in American history:
- Obama’s team:
Not the “best of the Washington insiders,” as the liberal media style
them, but rather, a dysfunctional and dangerous conglomerate of
business-as-usual cronies and hacks
- In the first two
weeks alone of his infant administration, Obama had made no fewer than 17
exceptions to his “no-lobbyist” rule
- Why the fact
that the massive infusion of union dues into his campaign treasury didn’t
trouble him in the least reveals Obama’s credibility as a reformer
- The lack of
unprecedented pace of withdrawals and botched appointments -- and how
getting through the confirmation process was no guarantee of ethical
cleanliness or competence, even as Obama’s cheerleaders were glorifying
the Greatest Transition in World History
- Inconsistency:
How Obama, erstwhile critic of the campaign finance practice known as
“bundling,” happily accepted more than $350,000 in bundled contributions
from billionaire hedge-fund managers
- How Obama broke
his transparency pledge with the very first bill he signed into law --
helping make hostility to transparency is a running thread through Obama’s
cabinet
- Michelle Obama:
Beneath the cultured pearls, sleeveless designer dresses, and eyelashes
applied by her full-time makeup artist, is a hardball Chicago politico
- Joe Biden: It’s
not just that he lies, it’s that he lies so well that you think he really
believes the stuff he makes up
- Treasury
Secretary Geithner: His ineptness and epic blundering -- including how he
nearly caused the collapse of the dollar in international trade with a
single remark
- The appalling
story of Technology Czar Vivek Kundra, the convicted shoplifter in charge
of the entire federal government’s information security infrastructure
- Obama’s “Porker
of the Month” Transportation Secretary, Roy LaHood: An earmark-addicted
influence peddler born and raised on the politics of pay-to-play
- SEIU:
Responsible for installing a cabal of hand-chosen officers who exploited
their cash-infused fiefdoms for personal gain and presided over rigged elections
-- in the process, becoming all that they had professed to stand against
as representatives of the downtrodden worker
- How Obama lied
on his “Fight the Smears” campaign website when he claimed that he “never
organized with ACORN”
- ACORN: How the
profound threat the group poses is not merely ideological or economic --
it’s electoral
- ACORN’s own
internal review of shady money transfers among its web of affiliates: How
it underscores concerns that conservatives have long raised about the
organization
- Liar, liar,
pantsuit on fire: How Hillary Clinton has already trampled upon her
promise not to let her husband’s financial dealings sway her decisions as
Secretary of State
- How even a few
principled progressives are finally beginning to question the cult of
Obama -- even as Obama sycophants in the mainstream media continue to
celebrate his “hipness” and “swagga”
*
ARE AMAZED AT HOW UTTERLY BRAZEN THESE CORPORATE OWNED
POLITICIANS ARE?
GET THIS BOOK!
Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats,
Crooks, and Cronies
by Michelle Malkin
Editorial Reviews
In her shocking new book, Malkin digs deep into the records
of President Obama's staff, revealing corrupt dealings, questionable pasts, and
abuses of power throughout his administration.
From the Inside Flap
The era of hope and change is dead....and it only took six
months in office to kill it.
Never has an administration taken office with more inflated
expectations of turning Washington around. Never have a media-anointed American
Idol and his entourage fallen so fast and hard. In her latest investigative
tour de force, New York Times bestselling author Michelle Malkin delivers a
powerful, damning, and comprehensive indictment of the culture of corruption
that surrounds Team Obama's brazen tax evaders, Wall Street cronies, petty
crooks, slum lords, and business-as-usual influence peddlers. In Culture of
Corruption, Malkin reveals:
* Why nepotism beneficiaries First Lady Michelle Obama and
Vice President Joe Biden are Team Obama's biggest liberal hypocrites--bashing
the corporate world and influence-peddling industries from which they and their
relatives have benefited mightily
* What secrets the ethics-deficient members of Obama's
cabinet--including Hillary Clinton--are trying to hide
* Why the Obama White House has more power-hungry,
unaccountable "czars" than any other administration
* How Team Obama's first one hundred days of appointments
became a litany of embarrassments as would-be appointee after would-be
appointee was exposed as a tax cheat or had to withdraw for other reasons
* How Obama's old ACORN and union cronies have squandered
millions of taxpayer dollars and dues money to enrich themselves and expand
their power
* How Obama's Wall Street money men and corporate lobbyists
are ruining the economy and helping their friends In Culture of Corruption,
Michelle Malkin lays bare the Obama administration's seamy underside that the
liberal media would rather keep hidden.
• Publisher:
Regnery Publishing (July 27, 2009)
• Language:
English
• ISBN-10:
1596981091
• ISBN-13:
978-1596981096
*
WHAT DID THE BANKSTERS KNOW ABOUT OUR ACTOR OBAMA THAT WE
DIDN’T KNOW?
Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors
are employees of financial industry giants - Goldman Sachs ($571,330), UBS AG
($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207) and Citigroup ($358,054).
BARACK OBAMA HAS COLLECTED NEARLY TWICE AS MUCH MONEY AS
JOHN McCAIN
BY DAVID SALTONSTALL
DAILY NEWS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT
July 1st 2008
Wall Street firms have chipped in more than $9 million to
Barack Obama. Zurga/Bloomberg
Wall Street is investing heavily in Barack Obama.
Although the Democratic presidential hopeful has vowed to
raise capital gains and corporate taxes, financial industry bigs have
contributed almost twice as much to Obama as to GOP rival John McCain, a Daily
News analysis of campaign records shows.
"Wall Street wants change and wants a curtailment in
spending. It wants someone who focuses on the domestic economy," said Jim
Cramer, the boisterous host of CNBC's "Mad Money."
Cramer also does not discount nostalgia for the go-go 1990s,
when Bill Clinton led the largest economic expansion in history.
"It wants a Clinton like in 1992, but not a Hillary
Clinton," he said. "That's Barack Obama."
For both candidates, Wall Street's investment and banking
sectors have become among their portliest cash cows, contributing $9.5 million
to Obama and $5.3 million to McCain so far.
It's a haul that is already raising concerns that, as the
nation's faltering economy has become issue No. 1, the two candidates may have
a hard time playing tough on issues like market regulation or corporate-tax
loopholes.
"No matter who wins in November, Wall Street will have
a friend in the White House," said Massie Ritsch of the Center for Responsive
Politics, which crunched the data for The News.
The
New Case Against Immigration: Both Legal and Illegal
By
MARK KRIKORIAN Review
“When it comes to our immigration mess, no one
has a deeper understanding of the facts than Mark Krikorian. Pay attention:
America's future is at stake.”
-- Michelle Malkin
“Mark Krikorian steps back from today’s debates and examines the big picture, questioning the place of immigration in a modern society. Agree or disagree with his proposals, this is an important book— not just for conservatives, but for all Americans.”
-- William J. Bennett, host of Bill Bennett’s Morning in America
“Superbly researched and brilliantly argued, The New Case Against Immigration should settle the debate once and for all. Civilized, compassionate, and wise, this short book may save a great nation.”
-- David Frum, resident fellow, American Enterprise Institute
“Mark Krikorian has waged an often lonely war to restore some sanity to immigration policy. His latest book will be caricatured by many as insensitive—especially his calls to select legal immigrants carefully only on the basis of skills and merit. Yet The New Case Against Immigration is a classically liberal call for assimilation and integration in the best past traditions of a multiracial America. The onus is on his critics to show where his economic, cultural, and social arguments are flawed or inexact—and that will be difficult indeed, given such a carefully researched and argued book.”
-- Victor Davis Hanson, Hoover Institution, Stanford University; author of Mexifornia
“This is a radical book, clearly and forcefully written, with the potential to change the immigration debate forevermore. No matter where you stand on immigration policy, you better be ready to confront The New Case Against Immigration.”
-- Heather MacDonald, John M. Olin Fellow, Manhattan Institute; coauthor of The Immigration Solution
“Mark Krikorian concisely marshals the arguments on one side of the immigration debate. I am sure that many will disagree with his inferences and conclusions—but I am also sure that anyone wishing to seriously argue the other side will have to address the many questions and doubts presented here. In short, this is a must-read for anyone interested in the most volatile social policy issue of the new century.”
-- George Borgas, Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
“Mark Krikorian has been the go-to guy for those of us skeptical of the Bush- McCain approach to immigration. He combines deep knowledge, political savvy, calm and compassion with something that’s rare in this field: common sense. In this ambitious book he takes the immigration debate a step further, placing it in an overarching framework that will be as controversial as it is powerful. If you want to find all the best anti-amnesty arguments in one place, The New Case Against Immigration is the place to look. It is to the immigration debate what Losing Ground was to the poverty debate. My copy is already dog-eared.”
-- Mickey Kraus, author of The End of Equality
-- Michelle Malkin
“Mark Krikorian steps back from today’s debates and examines the big picture, questioning the place of immigration in a modern society. Agree or disagree with his proposals, this is an important book— not just for conservatives, but for all Americans.”
-- William J. Bennett, host of Bill Bennett’s Morning in America
“Superbly researched and brilliantly argued, The New Case Against Immigration should settle the debate once and for all. Civilized, compassionate, and wise, this short book may save a great nation.”
-- David Frum, resident fellow, American Enterprise Institute
“Mark Krikorian has waged an often lonely war to restore some sanity to immigration policy. His latest book will be caricatured by many as insensitive—especially his calls to select legal immigrants carefully only on the basis of skills and merit. Yet The New Case Against Immigration is a classically liberal call for assimilation and integration in the best past traditions of a multiracial America. The onus is on his critics to show where his economic, cultural, and social arguments are flawed or inexact—and that will be difficult indeed, given such a carefully researched and argued book.”
-- Victor Davis Hanson, Hoover Institution, Stanford University; author of Mexifornia
“This is a radical book, clearly and forcefully written, with the potential to change the immigration debate forevermore. No matter where you stand on immigration policy, you better be ready to confront The New Case Against Immigration.”
-- Heather MacDonald, John M. Olin Fellow, Manhattan Institute; coauthor of The Immigration Solution
“Mark Krikorian concisely marshals the arguments on one side of the immigration debate. I am sure that many will disagree with his inferences and conclusions—but I am also sure that anyone wishing to seriously argue the other side will have to address the many questions and doubts presented here. In short, this is a must-read for anyone interested in the most volatile social policy issue of the new century.”
-- George Borgas, Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
“Mark Krikorian has been the go-to guy for those of us skeptical of the Bush- McCain approach to immigration. He combines deep knowledge, political savvy, calm and compassion with something that’s rare in this field: common sense. In this ambitious book he takes the immigration debate a step further, placing it in an overarching framework that will be as controversial as it is powerful. If you want to find all the best anti-amnesty arguments in one place, The New Case Against Immigration is the place to look. It is to the immigration debate what Losing Ground was to the poverty debate. My copy is already dog-eared.”
-- Mickey Kraus, author of The End of Equality
Product Description
New research reveals why America can no longer
afford mass immigration
Mark Krikorian has studied the trends and concluded that America must permanently reduce immigration— both legal and illegal—or face enormous problems in the near future.
His argument is based on facts, not fear. Wherever they come from, today’s immigrants are actually very similar to those who arrived a century ago. But they are coming to a very different America—one where changes in the economy, society, and government create different incentives for newcomers.
Before the upheavals of the 1960s, the U.S. expected its immigrants—from Italy to India—to earn a living, learn English, and become patriotic Americans. But the rise of identity politics, political correctness, and Great Society programs means we no longer make these demands. In short, the problem isn’t them, it’s us. Even positive developments such as technological progress hinder the assimilation of immigrants. It’s easy now for newcomers to live “transnational” lives.
Immigration will be in the headlines through Election Day and beyond, and this controversial book will help drive the debate.
Mark Krikorian has studied the trends and concluded that America must permanently reduce immigration— both legal and illegal—or face enormous problems in the near future.
His argument is based on facts, not fear. Wherever they come from, today’s immigrants are actually very similar to those who arrived a century ago. But they are coming to a very different America—one where changes in the economy, society, and government create different incentives for newcomers.
Before the upheavals of the 1960s, the U.S. expected its immigrants—from Italy to India—to earn a living, learn English, and become patriotic Americans. But the rise of identity politics, political correctness, and Great Society programs means we no longer make these demands. In short, the problem isn’t them, it’s us. Even positive developments such as technological progress hinder the assimilation of immigrants. It’s easy now for newcomers to live “transnational” lives.
Immigration will be in the headlines through Election Day and beyond, and this controversial book will help drive the debate.
Product
Details
·
Hardcover: 304 pages
·
Publisher: Sentinel HC (July 3, 2008)
·
Language: English
·
ISBN-10: 1595230351
·
ASIN: B001KVZ6RA
|
*
*
BOOK: Mexifornia: SHATTERING OF AN
AMERICAN DREAM (illegals call it their DREAM ACT)
*
THESE FIGURES ON WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY ARE DATED. IT NOT EXCEEDS $600 MILLION PER YEAR!!! (source: Los Angeles County & JUDICIAL WATCH)
*
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1949085/posts
*
LOS ANGELES – A MEXICAN WELFARE AND CRIME STATE WHERE THE JOBS ALSO GO TO ILLEGALS
THESE FIGURES ON WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY ARE DATED. IT NOT EXCEEDS $600 MILLION PER YEAR!!! (source: Los Angeles County & JUDICIAL WATCH)
*
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1949085/posts
*
LOS ANGELES – A MEXICAN WELFARE AND CRIME STATE WHERE THE JOBS ALSO GO TO ILLEGALS
http://mexicanoccupa¬tion.blogs¬pot.com/20¬11/04/mexican-welfar¬e-state-in¬-los-angel¬es.html
*
One tragic thing about this book is that it was written in 2003. Since then the Mexican occupation has doubled. Welfare to illegals is up to $20 BILLION in California. Welfare to illegals in sanctuary city Los Angeles is past $600 million per year, while Mexican gangs murder all over the state. Yet the lifer-politicians continue to fight for open borders, more perks for illegals, and their illegal votes!
*
BOOK:
MEXIFORNIA – THE SHATTERING
OF THE AMERICAN DREAM
WITH THE MEXICAN INVASION AND
OCCUPATION
"Victor Davis Hanson brings a lifetime of experience in California's
Central Valley to this indictment of multiculturalism and mass
immigration." -- Mark Krikorian, Center for Immigration Studies
NOTE: MOST NON-GOVERNMENT AND LA
RAZA PROPAGANDA SOURCES PUT THE REAL NUMBER OF ILLEGALS IN OUR NATION AT 40
MILLION, AND NOT 12 MILLION, AND THEY’RE BREEDING FAST.
VISIT CALIFORNIA! DRIVE FROM THE
MEXICAN BORDER TO SAN FRANCISCO AND SEE FOR YOURSELF! YOU MAY NOT HEAR ENGLISH
THE ENTIRE JOURNEY!
*
By
"The New Case Against Immigration"
cuts through distortions and P.C. positions on the topic with convincing and
shocking data.
The 12 million illegal Mexican immigrants, along with the 17 million Americans of Mexican origin and another 16 million Cubans and other Hispanics total more than those of the next ten most common immigrant nations. Hispanics total about 50% of our total immigrants, posing major implications for assimilation. This is further acerbated by cheaper calls, easier access to Mexico, support from American businesses, and considerable legal support from the Mexican government and elites within the U.S.
Massive Mexican immigration into the U.S. is a relatively new problem - in 1970 less than 800,000 Mexicans were in the U.S. Once in the U.S., Mexican women's fertility rises from 2.4 (in Mexico) to 3.5 in the U.S. - considerably greater than native-born American women. (2002 data)
Mexican immigrants have the lowest citizenship rate - 19%, vs. 42% for Canadians, 54% for Chinese. They are also the least-educated major immigration group - 62% without a high-school education, while their children and grandchildren have a dropout rate of 25%. About 43% of illegal Mexican households use at least one major welfare program, and 50% are eligible for EITC. Even third generation Mexican-Americans use welfare at a level 3X that of American natives.
Over half of Mexicans believe the American S.W. belongs to them. Their consulates in the U.S. lobby for acceptance of matricula cards (opposed by the FBI as inadequate) for ID, in-state tuition, drivers licenses, sanctuary city status, etc.
Studies have found Mexican immigrants somewhat less likely to be criminals than native-born Americans, but their children are much more likely to be. Second-generation males aged 18-39 from El Salvador and Guatemala are incarcerated nearly 6X as often as their parents, those from Mexico 8X, and Vietnamese 12X.
Mass immigration overwhelms our capacity to screen out enemies or locate and remove them. A sampling found a high volume of fraud (40-80%) in H-1B, P-3 (artists and entertainers), L-1 (intra-company transfers) applications. Meanwhile, U.S. agencies held competitions in 2006 for the fastest processing times - approvals are the easiest.
Studies find illegal immigrants pulling down wages, especially at the bottom - about 40% in California between 1969-1997, and undermine the incentives to automate production. (Japan has decided to automate rather than import foreign workers.)
The U.S. spent about $4.5 billion subsidizing the education of foreign college students in 2005-06. Immigrants created about 86% of the growth in uninsured in 1998-2003; 47% of immigrant families were either uninsured or on Medicaid. The number of E.D.s in the U.S. fell 9% from 1993-2003, while visits increased 26%.
A 2004 Heritage Fund study found the average lifetime cost of low-skilled immigrant households was about $1.2 million to taxpayers - about the net benefit to taxpayers of a college-educated family.
Bottom Line: "The New Case Against Immigration" demands a stronger stand against both legal and illegal immigration. Its recommended direction is to continue the effort to prevent their taking American jobs, getting drivers licenses and benefits.
The 12 million illegal Mexican immigrants, along with the 17 million Americans of Mexican origin and another 16 million Cubans and other Hispanics total more than those of the next ten most common immigrant nations. Hispanics total about 50% of our total immigrants, posing major implications for assimilation. This is further acerbated by cheaper calls, easier access to Mexico, support from American businesses, and considerable legal support from the Mexican government and elites within the U.S.
Massive Mexican immigration into the U.S. is a relatively new problem - in 1970 less than 800,000 Mexicans were in the U.S. Once in the U.S., Mexican women's fertility rises from 2.4 (in Mexico) to 3.5 in the U.S. - considerably greater than native-born American women. (2002 data)
Mexican immigrants have the lowest citizenship rate - 19%, vs. 42% for Canadians, 54% for Chinese. They are also the least-educated major immigration group - 62% without a high-school education, while their children and grandchildren have a dropout rate of 25%. About 43% of illegal Mexican households use at least one major welfare program, and 50% are eligible for EITC. Even third generation Mexican-Americans use welfare at a level 3X that of American natives.
Over half of Mexicans believe the American S.W. belongs to them. Their consulates in the U.S. lobby for acceptance of matricula cards (opposed by the FBI as inadequate) for ID, in-state tuition, drivers licenses, sanctuary city status, etc.
Studies have found Mexican immigrants somewhat less likely to be criminals than native-born Americans, but their children are much more likely to be. Second-generation males aged 18-39 from El Salvador and Guatemala are incarcerated nearly 6X as often as their parents, those from Mexico 8X, and Vietnamese 12X.
Mass immigration overwhelms our capacity to screen out enemies or locate and remove them. A sampling found a high volume of fraud (40-80%) in H-1B, P-3 (artists and entertainers), L-1 (intra-company transfers) applications. Meanwhile, U.S. agencies held competitions in 2006 for the fastest processing times - approvals are the easiest.
Studies find illegal immigrants pulling down wages, especially at the bottom - about 40% in California between 1969-1997, and undermine the incentives to automate production. (Japan has decided to automate rather than import foreign workers.)
The U.S. spent about $4.5 billion subsidizing the education of foreign college students in 2005-06. Immigrants created about 86% of the growth in uninsured in 1998-2003; 47% of immigrant families were either uninsured or on Medicaid. The number of E.D.s in the U.S. fell 9% from 1993-2003, while visits increased 26%.
A 2004 Heritage Fund study found the average lifetime cost of low-skilled immigrant households was about $1.2 million to taxpayers - about the net benefit to taxpayers of a college-educated family.
Bottom Line: "The New Case Against Immigration" demands a stronger stand against both legal and illegal immigration. Its recommended direction is to continue the effort to prevent their taking American jobs, getting drivers licenses and benefits.
latimes.com
Opinion
California must stem the flow of
illegal immigrants
The state should go after employers
who hire them, curb taxpayer-funded benefits, deploy the National Guard to help
the feds at the border and penalize 'sanctuary' cities.
Illegal immigration is another matter entirely. With the state budget in tatters, millions of residents out of work and a state prison system strained by massive overcrowding, California simply cannot continue to ignore the strain that illegal immigration puts on our budget and economy. Illegal aliens cost taxpayers in our state billions of dollars each year. As economist Philip J. Romero concluded in a 2007 study, "illegal immigrants impose a 'tax' on legal California residents in the tens of billions of dollars."
*
PAT BUCHANAN ON OBAMA’S HISPANDERING
FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES:
What is the response of
Barack Obama, who took an oath to see to it that federal laws are faithfully
executed?
He is siding with the
law-breakers. He is pandering to the ethnic lobbies. He is not berating a
Mexican regime that aids and abets this invasion of the country of which he is
commander in chief. Instead, he attacks the government of Arizona for trying to
fill a gaping hole in law enforcement left by his own dereliction of duty.
*
TOWNHALL.com
Whose
Country Is This?
Pat Buchanan
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
With
the support of 70 percent of its citizens, Arizona has ordered sheriffs and
police to secure the border and remove illegal aliens, half a million of whom
now reside there.
Arizona
acted because the U.S. government has abdicated its constitutional duty to
protect the states from invasion and refuses to enforce America's immigration
laws.
"We
in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act,"
said Gov. Jan Brewer. "But decades of inaction and misguided policy have
created an unacceptable situation."
We
have a crisis in Arizona because we have a failed state in Washington.
What is the response of
Barack Obama, who took an oath to see to it that federal laws are faithfully
executed?
He is siding with the
law-breakers. He is pandering to the ethnic lobbies. He is not berating a
Mexican regime that aids and abets this invasion of the country of which he is
commander in chief. Instead, he attacks the government of Arizona for trying to
fill a gaping hole in law enforcement left by his own dereliction of duty.
He
has denounced Arizona as "misguided." He has called on the Justice
Department to ensure that Arizona's sheriffs and police do not violate anyone's
civil rights. But he has said nothing about the rights of the people of Arizona
who must deal with the costs of having hundreds of thousands of lawbreakers in
their midst.
How's
that for Andrew Jackson-style leadership?
Obama
has done everything but his duty to enforce the law.
Undeniably,
making it a state as well as a federal crime to be in this country illegally,
and requiring police to check the immigration status of anyone they have a
"reasonable suspicion" is here illegally, is tough and burdensome.
But what choice did Arizona have?
The
state has a fiscal crisis caused in part by the burden of providing schooling
and social welfare for illegals and their families, who consume far more in
services than they pay in taxes and who continue to pour in. Even John McCain
is now calling for 3,000 troops on the border.
Police
officers and a prominent rancher have been murdered. There have been
kidnappings believed to be tied to the Mexican drug cartels. There are nightly
high-speed chases through the barrios where innocent people are constantly at
risk.
If
Arizona does not get control of the border and stop the invasion, U.S. citizens
will stop coming to Arizona and will begin to depart, as they are already
fleeing California.
A country that cannot control
its borders isn't really a country anymore, Ronald Reagan reminded us.
What
we are talking about here is the Balkanization and breakup of a nation into
ethnic enclaves. A country that cannot
control its borders isn't really a country anymore, Ronald Reagan reminded us.
The
tasks that Arizonans are themselves undertaking are ones that belong by right,
the Constitution and federal law to the Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, and Homeland Security.
Arizona
has been compelled to assume the feds' role because the feds won't do their
job. And for that dereliction of duty the buck stops on the desk of the
president of the United States.
Why
is Obama paralyzed? Why does he not enforce the law, even if he dislikes it, by
punishing the businessmen who hire illegals and by sending the 12 million to 20
million illegals back home? President Eisenhower did it. Why won't he?
*
OBAMA
THE HISPANDERING PRESIDENT SELLING OUT HIS OWN COUNTRY FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES!
*
Because
he is politically correct. Because he owes a big debt to the Hispanic lobby
that helped deliver two-thirds of that vote in 2008. Though most citizens of
Hispanic descent in Arizona want the border protected and the laws enforced,
the Hispanic lobby demands that the law be changed.
Fair
enough. But the nation rose up as one to reject the
"path-to-citizenship" -- i.e., amnesty -- that the 2007 plan of
George W. Bush, McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama envisioned.
Al
Sharpton threatens to go to Phoenix and march in the streets against the new
Arizona law. Let him go.
JOBS?
NO LEGAL NEED APPLY HERE!
Let
us see how many African-Americans, who are today frozen out of the 8 million
jobs held by illegal aliens that might otherwise go to them or their children,
will march to defend an invasion for which they are themselves paying the
heaviest price.
Last
year, while Americans were losing a net of 5 million jobs, the U.S. government
-- Bush and Obama both -- issued 1,131,000 green cards to legal immigrants to
come and take the jobs that did open up, a flood of immigrants equaled in only
four other years in our history.
What
are we doing to our own people?
Whose
country is this, anyway?
America
today has an establishment that, because it does not like the immigration laws,
countenances and condones wholesale violation of those laws.
Nevertheless,
under those laws, the U.S. government is obligated to deport illegal aliens and
punish businesses that knowingly hire them.
This
is not an option. It is an obligation.
Can
anyone say Barack Obama is meeting that obligation?
*
FAIRUS.org
The
Administration's Phantom Immigration Enforcement Policy
According
to DHS’s own reports, very little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or
otherwise) are secure, and gaining control is not even a goal of the
department.
By
Ira Mehlman
Published on 12/07/2009
Townhall.com
Published on 12/07/2009
Townhall.com
The
setting was not quite the flight deck of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln with a
“Mission Accomplished” banner as the backdrop, but it was the next best thing.
Speaking at the Center for American Progress (CAP) on Nov. 13, Homeland
Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared victory over illegal immigration
and announced that the Obama administration is ready to move forward with a
mass amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens already living in the United
States.
Arguing
the Obama administration’s case for amnesty, Napolitano laid out what she
described as the “three-legged stool” for immigration reform. As the
administration views it, immigration reform must include “a commitment to
serious and effective enforcement, improved legal flows for families and
workers, and a firm but fair way to deal with those who are already here.”
Acknowledging
that a lack of confidence in the government’s ability and commitment to
effectively enforce the immigration laws it passes proved to be the Waterloo of
previous efforts to gain amnesty for illegal aliens, Napolitano was quick to
reassure the American public that those concerns could be put to rest.
“For
starters, the security of the Southwest border has been transformed from where
it was in 2007,” stated the secretary. Not only is the border locked up tight,
she continued, but the situation is well in-hand in the interior of the country
as well. “We’ve also shown that the government is serious and strategic in its
approach to enforcement by making changes in how we enforce the law in the
interior of the country and at worksites…Furthermore, we’ve transformed
worksite enforcement to truly address the demand side of illegal immigration.”
If
Rep. Joe Wilson had been in attendance to hear Secretary Napolitano’s CAP
speech he might well have had a few choice comments to offer. But since he
wasn’t, we will have to rely on the Department of Homeland Security’s own data
to assess the veracity of Napolitano’s claims.
According
to DHS’s own reports, very little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or
otherwise) are secure, and gaining control is not even a goal of the
department. DHS claims to have “effective control” over just 894 miles of
border. That’s 894 out of 8,607 miles they are charged with protecting. As for
the other 7,713 miles? DHS’s stated border security goal for FY 2010 is the
same 894 miles.
The
administration’s strategic approach to interior and worksite enforcement is
just as chimerical as its strategy at the border, unless one considers
shuffling paper to be a strategy. DHS data, released November 18, show that
administrative arrests of immigration law violators fell by 68 percent between
2008 and 2009. The department also carried out 60 percent fewer arrests for
criminal violations of immigration laws, 58 percent fewer criminal indictments,
and won 63 percent fewer convictions.
While
the official unemployment rate has climbed from 7.6 percent when President
Obama took office in January to 10 percent today, the administration’s worksite
enforcement strategy has amounted to a bureaucratic game of musical chairs. The
administration has all but ended worksite enforcement actions and replaced them
with paperwork audits. When the audits determine that illegal aliens are on the
payroll, employers are given the opportunity to fire them with little or no
adverse consequence to the company, while no action is taken to remove the
illegal workers from the country. The illegal workers simply acquire a new set
of fraudulent documents and move on to the next employer seeking workers
willing to accept substandard wages.
In
Janet Napolitano’s alternative reality a mere 10 percent of our borders under
“effective control” and sharp declines in arrests and prosecutions of
immigration lawbreakers may be construed as confidence builders, but it is hard
to imagine that the American public is going to see it that way. If anything,
the administration’s record has left the public less confident that promises of
future immigration enforcement would be worth the government paper they’re
printed on.
tion’s plans to overhaul immigration policy,
they are likely to find little in the “three-legged stool” being offered that
they like or trust. The first leg – enforcement – the administration has all
but sawed off. The second – increased admissions of extended family members and
workers – makes little sense with some 25 million Americans either unemployed
or relegated to part-time work. And the third – amnesty for millions of illegal
aliens – is anathema to their sense of justice and fair play.
As
Americans well know, declaring “Mission Accomplished” and actually
accomplishing a mission are two completely different things. When it comes to
enforcing immigration laws, the only message the public is receiving from this
administration is “Mission Aborted.”
*
AS OBAMA SQUANDERS BILLIONS PROTECTING THE BORDERS OF MUSLIM DICTATORS OVER THERE, HE IS ABSOLUTELY DETERMINED TO PUSH OUR BORDERS OPEN WIDER AND WIDER FOR HORDES MORE ILLEGALS
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, September 28, 2009
And T.J. BONNER, president of the National Border Patrol Council, will weigh in on the federal government’s decision to pull nearly 400 agents from the U.S.-Mexican border. As always, Lou will take your calls to discuss the issues that matter most-and to get your thoughts on where America is headed.
Monday, September 28, 2009
And T.J. BONNER, president of the National Border Patrol Council, will weigh in on the federal government’s decision to pull nearly 400 agents from the U.S.-Mexican border. As always, Lou will take your calls to discuss the issues that matter most-and to get your thoughts on where America is headed.
*
No comments:
Post a Comment