Saturday, February 23, 2013

Barack Obama: The Man that Employed Mexico, Expanded Markets for the Mexican Drug Cartels He Armed and Built the LA RAZA SUPREMACY Welfare State in America



How To Accurately Detect Disingenuous Politicians

"Just look for the ones talking about jobs, taxes, health care, education, and government budgets, without addressing the negative impact of illegal immigration." -- William Gheen, President of ALIPAC.





 “Border Patrol agents will see their hours reduced.


The number of layoffs of public-sector workers during the first term of the Obama administration is twice that of any other presidency.


Obama has been pushing for this measure as part of a so-called “grand bargain” that would lower corporate taxes from the current rate of 35 percent to 28 percent, while including hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

Published by the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI)

Obama calls for more spending cuts to prevent “sequestration”

By Andre Damon
21 February 2013

US President Barack Obama called on congressional Republicans Tuesday to reach a deal to quickly implement billions of dollars in spending cuts in order to head off the so-called “sequestration” that is scheduled to take effect at the end of the month.

The sequestration, moved to the end of this month as a result of the bipartisan deal reached last year to avoid the so-called “fiscal cliff,” is a set of budget cuts that neither party supports because they include sharp reductions to military spending.

Speaking at a White House press conference, Obama called on lawmakers to adopt a “balanced approach” to deficit reduction that would include revenue increases in addition to spending cuts. Up to now, Republicans have stated their opposition to any deal that would raise revenues, whether by raising taxes or cutting tax “loopholes,” as the administration proposes.

Obama’s comments were, as always, contrived and cynical. On the face of things, Obama postured as the defender of teachers, firefighters and other workers who stand to be laid off as a result of the sequestration. But in reality his opposition to the sequester cuts is based entirely on the fact that the cuts to military spending it entails would reduce the US’s military capacity.

“Our military leaders have made clear, changes like this—not well thought through, not phased in properly—changes like this affect our ability to respond to threats in unstable parts of the world,” he said, adding, “Border Patrol agents will see their hours reduced. FBI agents will be furloughed. Federal prosecutors will have to close cases and let criminals go.”

Adding to Obama’s warnings, the Defense Department said Wednesday that if the cuts go through, 800,000 civilian employees would be forced to take one unpaid furlough day per week, beginning the last week of April. The measure would last 22 weeks, and include office staff, maintenance workers, and other personnel.

Earlier Wednesday, USA Today had reported that, were the sequestration to go into effect as scheduled, the Army and Navy alone would lay off or furlough 486,000 people throughout the country.

Obama’s opposition to the sequestration cuts has nothing to do with any real opposition to cuts to social spending. Obama has called for $1.5 trillion in additional “deficit reduction” on top of the roughly $2.5 trillion that has already been passed. While both parties agree to this ballpark figure in principle, Obama is insisting that that spending cuts be associated with increases in revenues, much of which will come through the elimination of tax benefits that benefit broader sections of the working class.

Obama has been pushing for this measure as part of a so-called “grand bargain” that would lower corporate taxes from the current rate of 35 percent to 28 percent, while including hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

Earlier Tuesday, Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, the former co-chairmen of the White Houses’s bipartisan deficit-reduction commission, held a press conference to propose a set of budget cuts along similar lines to Obama’s comprehensive proposal, although larger in size: $2.4 trillion over 10 years, compared to the White House’s proposed $1.5 trillion.

The Simpson-Bowles proposal would cut $600 billion from federal health care programs like Medicare and Medicaid, while Obama has proposed an additional $400 billion on top of the cuts that have already been imposed. Commentators were quick to point out that the proposal was far more similar to Obama’s plan than that of the Republicans, since it included a mixture of spending cuts and revenue increases.

The “sequester” is part of the stage-managed campaign by the two big business parties to impose unpopular policies through manufactured crises. The first installment was made in the aftermath of the 2011 debt ceiling crisis.

The next stage in the process was the so-called fiscal cliff, which was resolved through an agreement to increase taxes on workers, as well as a token increase in taxes on the rich, to be compensated for by planned cuts to corporate taxes that both parties have in principle agreed to.

The attempt by the Obama administration to posture as an opponent of budget cuts is cynical. Obama has overseen an austerity program unprecedented in postwar US history. The number of layoffs of public-sector workers during the first term of the Obama administration is twice that of any other presidency.

The so-called Obama recovery has been nothing but a recovery of corporate profits, which have set records three years in a row, at the expense of workers’ wages and working conditions.

This was amply demonstrated in data released last month by Emmanuel Saez, which found that between 2009 and 2011—the first two years of the “recovery”—“Top 1 percent incomes grew by 11.2 percent while bottom 99 percent incomes shrunk by 0.4 percent. Hence, the top 1 percent captured 121 percent of the income gains in the first two years of the recovery.”

While it is impossible to predict the immediate outcome of the sequestration debate, the end result will be the same: both parties are committed to trillions in spending cuts, whether piecemeal, as has been the case up to now, or in one large agreement.


The only thing that has changed since 2009, is that Obama has abetted the nation being flooded with illegals to build his LA RAZA PARTY BASE and keep wages depressed!


“At the hearing, Dr. Rakesh Kochar, Associate Director for Research at the Pew Hispanic Center, testified that in the year following the official end of the recession (June 2009), foreign-born workers gained 656,000 jobs while native-born workers lost an additional 1.2 million jobs.”


“What employers really want in many cases by hiring immigrants is to hold down wage costs, experts say.”






"We have a situation where the job market — the bottom fell out, yet we kept legal immigration relatively high without even a national debate," he said. "As a consequence, a lot of the job growth has been going to immigrants."

Mr. Obama did take action this year to grant many illegal immigrants up to 30 years of age a tentative legal status that prevents them from being deported and authorizes them to work in the United States.

Some Republicans in Congress have criticized Mr. Obama's policy, saying it violates his powers and will mean more competition for scarce jobs.


Guess LA RAZA his happy with OBAMA’S endless hispandering! THEY SHOULD BE!

There  are only eight states with a larger population than LOS ANGELES COUNTY, where 47% of those with a job are ILLEGALS USING STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS! This same mex gang infested county puts out $600 million in welfare to illegals!


“The inspections have determined that hundreds of companies throughout the U.S. have significant numbers of illegal immigrants on their payroll yet none have been punished, according to a Houston newspaper that obtained internal ICE records through the Freedom of Information Act. At least 430 audit cases listed as “closed” by the agency had high percentages of workers with “questionable” documents yet they faced no consequences.”



“We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers,” said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. “President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws.”


 “The principal beneficiaries of our current immigration policy are affluent Americans who hire immigrants at substandard wages for low-end work. Harvard economist George Borjas estimates that American workers lose $190 billion annually in depressed wages caused by the constant flooding of the labor market at the low-wage end.” Christian Science Monitor


Obama and the jobs crisis

12 November 2009

In the face of a record rise in joblessness, the Obama administration continues to demonstrate its callous indifference to the plight of millions of unemployed workers and their families.

The official unemployment rate shot up to 10.2 percent in October, the highest level since 1983. Nearly 16 million people are jobless, an increase of 7 million since the recession began. If workers who have given up looking for work and those forced to work part-time are added, the real unemployment rate is 17.5 percent—or more than one out of every six workers in the US—the highest rate since the Great Depression.

The White House responded to the job figures by repeating its mantra that employment is a “lagging indicator” in an otherwise recovering economy. While acknowledging 10 percent was a “sobering number,” the president said, “History tells us that job growth always lags behind economic growth.” The president added complacently, “Although it will take time and it will take patience, I am confident that we are moving in the right direction.”

The suggestion that the unemployment trend will soon reverse itself is a lie. Most economists now predict that double-digit unemployment will last for years. Nevertheless, the administration has rejected any government-funded public works program to hire the unemployed. The Washington Post recently noted that White House officials reject the idea because it “does not produce long-term value”; that is to say, it does not produce profits for big business.

The issue of employment has long been at the center of economic and political life in America. The last century saw New Deal public works projects, and “Full Employment” programs, which, while woefully inadequate, were presented as an effort to battle the scourge of mass unemployment. In the Obama administration the question has become a non-issue.

This inaction and indifference has produced a series of warnings from Obama’s liberal supporters concerned over the explosive social and political consequences of a worsening jobs crisis.

On Tuesday, New York Times columnist Bob Herbert worried that “more and more Americans are questioning [Obama’s] priorities, including millions that went to the mat for him in last year’s election.” “The lack of jobs,” he continued, “is fueling the nervousness, anxiety and full-blown anger that are becoming increasing evident in the public at large.”

In a Washington Post article, entitled, “Why won’t Obama give you a job?,” staff writer Alec MacGillis complained that the administration has “studiously avoided paying people to go to work” like the government did in the 1930s and 1970s. “Engaging in more forthright job creation could invite some political pitfalls (such as those constant accusations of socialism), but is double-digit unemployment any less a political risk?”

Such appeals fall on deaf ears. Obama’s disinterest is not a tactical mistake but the result of the social and class interests the president and both political parties defend.

While doing nothing to relieve working people, the administration has spared no expense and wasted no time in augmenting the wealth and power of the financial oligarchy that rules America. It has handed trillions to Wall Street, driven GM and Chrysler into bankruptcy to slash the wages of auto workers, and pushed the restructuring of the health care system to gut Medicare and reduce medical costs for big business. In foreign policy, the administration has squandered hundreds of billions and the lives of thousands of soldiers in two colonial wars to control the energy rich regions of world.

The continued high level of joblessness and economic insecurity is a deliberate aim of the administration. The threat of job losses is being used to break the resistance of American workers to a permanent reduction in their living standards and working conditions.

In the July-September quarter, productivity grew at a 9.5 percent annual rate, according to a government report. Even though working hours fell by a 5 percent annual rate, output increased at a 4 percent rate. “So people working shorter hours had to do the same amount of work as before, or more,” BusinessWeek noted. “People who kept their jobs had to pick up the work of ex-colleagues” or simply put in extra hours that weren’t counted in the statistics. As a result, unit labor costs fell 3.6 percent over the past year, the largest decrease since records were first kept in 1948.

This increase in exploitation is central to the administration’s plans to restructure American capitalism on behalf of the most powerful sections of the financial elite. The ruling class is seeking to lift itself out of the ruins of its own economic crisis by transforming the US into a cheap labor platform to increase exports, and by carrying out a policy of austerity at home to make the working class pay for the bailout of Wall Street.

If the working class is to oppose this assault it must assert it own class interests and develop a programmatic response to the economic crisis.

The Socialist Equality Party insists that employment and decent living standards must be guaranteed to all. The guiding principle of jobs policy must be to protect the working population from destitution, and provide employment for the purpose of raising the material and cultural level of the people, not profits for the capitalists.

The SEP calls for the sharing of available work among all workers with no loss of pay. Every worker should be guaranteed 30 hours of work at 40 hours of pay, with quality health and retirement benefits.

A multi-trillion public works program must be launched to hire the unemployed and put them to work to address pressing social needs. Projects must be launched to build affordable housing, guarantee high quality health care and education, expand public transportation and carry out other improvements in the physical and social infrastructure.

To secure the necessary resources, the grip of the financial aristocracy must be broken by nationalizing the banks under public ownership and confiscating the ill-gotten gains of the rich and super-rich. Capitalism is incapable of meeting the social needs produced by its own calamity. It must be replaced with a social system that does, socialism.

In place of the anarchy and socially destructive “free market” system, the economy must be reorganized on the basis of a democratic plan to meet the needs of society as a whole, not private profit. The socialist transformation of the US economy must be part of a globally planned economy, in which working people control the wealth that they produce.

The fight for this requires the building of a new political party of the working class to oppose the twin parties of big business and fight for political power. Such a party must be based on the fight for its political independence, internationalism and the socialist transformation of society. This is aim of the Socialist Equality Party.

Jerry White


Interceptions of immigrants stubbornly low

Border security efforts have a long way to go

The Washington Times

Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Despite massive increases in manpower, the U.S. Border Patrol is still intercepting only about 61 percent of would-be illegal immigrants along the U.S.-Mexico border, according to an audit that the investigative arm of Congress released Wednesday.

The findings, which for the first time show a broad estimate of how many illegal immigrants the Border Patrol fails to catch each year, emerge as pressure builds on Congress to move past border security and begin to grant legal status to the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S.

The Government Accountability Office report found that an estimated 208,813 illegal immigrants escaped capture along the nearly 2,000-mile border. Slightly more than half of them turned back to Mexico, and the others proceeded deeper into the U.S., the report said.

The report also said that the Obama administration has gone more than two years without having an effective yardstick for measuring border security, meaning there is no good way to evaluate the job the Border Patrol is doing.

"The bottom line is we are far from having operational control of our borders, particularly the southwest border, and as the GAO reports, there still are no metrics to quantify progress," said House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, Texas Republican. "Meanwhile, the threat from groups ranging from Islamist extremists to drug cartels continues to grow."

Border security has been a chief focus of immigration efforts since 2007, when the last major immigration reform bill failed in Congress. After that failure, Republicans said voters wanted the border secured before any legalization took place, and President Bush poured resources into the Border Patrol.

According to the GAO, the number of illegal border crossings has dropped, as has the number of illegal immigrants the Border Patrol apprehends. It's unclear how much of that is a result of stricter enforcement and how much is because of the slumping U.S. economy and changes in Mexico.

But the GAO report painted a picture of an agency struggling to come up with ways to measure its effectiveness.

Two years ago, the Obama administration ditched the "operational control" yardstick that the Bush administration developed. The yardstick showed that just a fraction of the border was effectively sealed.

The Homeland Security Department, which oversees the Border Patrol, said in its official response to the GAO that it is trying to come up with a new yardstick by the end of November — which would mean it will have gone three years without a measure of border enforcement effectiveness.

"[The Department of Homeland Security] fully appreciates the importance and need of having measurable goals to assess progress in the area of border security," Jim H. Crumpacker, Homeland Security's liaison to GAO, said in the department's response.

He said the Border Patrol has added some tools to try to track repeat illegal crossers, and uses internal measures to track progress.

The Border Patrol always has been able to say how many illegal immigrants it captured, but until recently it had little idea of how many crossed without being apprehended.

Now, with the boost in radar, sensors and other tools, the Border Patrol can estimate that number — and that gets it closer to coming up with a good yardstick of effectiveness, said Doris Meissner, a former commissioner of the defunct Immigration and Naturalization Service who just completed a review of immigration enforcement for the Migration Policy Institute.

She said that its particularly true in the Tucson, Ariz., sector, where the infrastructure has been built and where the Border Patrol is trying to figure out a measure of "baseline flows."

"What Tucson is trying to determine, and what some other parts of the border think that they're at, is what's their baseline flow — in other words, what do they have to recognize, all other things being equal, is the normal course of illegal crossing activity," Ms. Meissner said.

She said It's a difficult balance, since not all crossings are the same.

Some likely represent the same person trying to cross multiple times, while others are high-risk crossers from countries that pose a risk of terrorism. The Border Patrol is trying to grapple with all of those factors in coming up with a new measure of security.

In 2011, the GAO said, the Border Patrol apprehended 327,118 illegal border crossers, while it estimates another 208,813 got away. Of those, 85,827 escaped into the U.S. and the rest turned back.

Auditors cautioned that the numbers are not exact because they often depend on judgment calls about whether someone was deemed to have turned back based on tracks or other signs.

The Border Patrol is still working on numbers for 2012.

But the numbers do show progress from 2006, when the Border Patrol apprehended 1.1 million, while more than 900,000 got away.

President Obama has said he will write immigration legislation this year and submit it to Congress. The legislation is expected to contain a legalization program for the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S.

But Steven A. Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, said the numbers should be a warning to lawmakers who say the border is secure enough to tackle legalization.

"This doesn't count the northern border, the coastline, perhaps an equal number of people who overstay temporary visas in the United States," he said. "The question is, 'Is that control?' Most people would say if several hundred thousand people successfully sneak across one of your borders, you've still got a serious problem."

Among other findings, GAO investigators said the rate of repeat offenders has dropped from about 42 percent in 2008 to 36 percent in 2011.

Auditors also said that drug seizures were up 83 percent in 2011 compared with 2006. More than a quarter of that drug activity happened in the Tucson sector.
Read more:
Follow us:
@washtimes on Twitter


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


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.”


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.


No comments: