"Most Californians, who have seen their taxes increase while public services deteriorate, already know the impact that mass illegal immigration is having on their communities, but even they may be shocked when they learn just how much of a drain illegal immigration has become." FAIR President Dan Stein
Wednesday, August 1, 2018
DEMOCRAT PARTY WANTS ALL ILLEGALS TO VOTE (for more) - WILL MEXICO ELECT ALL FUTURE PRESIDENTS?
Charlie Daniels: We
Need a Wall – But That’s Just the Beginning
“I believe that if Hillary had been elected she
would have found a way to give amnesty and eventually citizenship to all the
millions of Hispanics who are now here illegally and would have, in theory,
have opened the border so that more and more could cross and be eligible to
vote, until an undefeatable voting block would have been created, putting a
more and more progressive electorate into power.” CHARLIE DANIELS
“If the Constitution did not forbid cruel
and unusual punishment, the sentence I would like to see imposed would place
both Bill and Hillary Clinton in the same 8-by-12
cell.” ROBERT ARVAY – AMERICAN THINKER com
Majority of Democrats: Illegal Aliens Should be Given the Right to Vote
A majority of Democrat voters now say that the 12 million illegal aliens currently residing in the United States should be given the right to vote.
In a new poll by Rasmussen Reports, a majority of 54 percent of Democrats said illegal aliens in the U.S. should be given the right to vote so long as they pay taxes. Illegal aliens paying taxes ensures the identity theft of Americans.
Likewise, 53 percent of self-described liberal voters said they too support giving the 12 million illegal aliens in the U.S. the right to vote.
While the majority of Democrats support illegal aliens having the right to vote, the plan is very unpopular with American voters overall. Nearly 60 percent of voters said illegal aliens should not be given voting rights.
Already, as Breitbart California reported, the city of San Francisco will now allow non-citizens to vote in the area’s regional school board elections. Cities like Chicago, Illinois, and Cambridge, Massachusets also allow non-citizens to vote in regional elections.
Giving the illegal alien population the right to vote would almost ensure Democrat dominance in statewide and national elections, as foreign populations are vastly more likely to favor Democrats over Republicans.
As Breitbart News previously noted, districts with booming foreign born populations have become Democrat strongholds and the country’s legal immigration system is set to import at least eight million new foreign born voters in the next two decades.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
“Protecting citizens from industrial capitalism’s
giant corporations? Where were the Securities and Exchange Commission, the
Federal Reserve, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Office of Federal
Housing Enterprise Oversight as the mortgage bubble blew up in 2008, nearly
taking the whole financial system with it and producing the worst economic bust
since the Great Depression, which even today has sunk the labor-force
participation rate and hiked the suicide rate among working-class men and women
to record levels?”
“By contrast, many voters give Barack Obama no such
credit for his analogous response to the Great Recession.”
“Mexican criminals really have infiltrated the
country and really have killed Americans, inevitably, under the
administration’s anything-goes immigration stance.”
this year’s presidential contest is the sense that the U.S. government no
longer belongs to the people and no longer represents them. And this uneasy
feeling is not misplaced. It reflects the real state of affairs.
lost the government we learned about in civics class, with its democratic
election of representatives to do the voters’ will in framing laws, which the
president vows to execute faithfully, unless the Supreme Court rules them
unconstitutional. That small government of limited powers that the Founders
designed, hedged with checks and balances, hasn’t operated for a century. All
its parts still have their old names and appear to be carrying out their old
functions. But in fact, a new kind of
government has grown up inside the old structure, like those parasites hatched
in another organism that grow by eating up their host from within, until the
adult creature bursts out of the host’s carcass. This transformation is not an
evolution but a usurpation.
now largely displaced the Founders’ government is what’s called the
Administrative State—a transformation premeditated by its main architect,
Woodrow Wilson. The thin-skinned, self-righteous college-professor president,
who thought himself enlightened far beyond the citizenry, dismissed the
Declaration of Independence’s inalienable rights as so much outmoded “nonsense,”
and he rejected the Founders’ clunky constitutional machinery as obsolete. (See
“It’s Not Your Founding Fathers’
Republic Any More,” Summer 2014.) What a modern country needed, he
said, was a “living constitution” that would keep pace with the fast-changing
times by continual, Darwinian adaptation, as he called it, effected by federal
courts acting as a permanent constitutional convention.
Modernity, Wilson thought,
demanded efficient government by independent, nonpartisan, benevolent,
hyper-educated experts, applying the latest scientific, economic, and
sociological knowledge to industrial capitalism’s unprecedented problems, too
complex for self-governing free citizens to solve. Accordingly, he got Congress
to create executive-branch administrative agencies, such as the Federal Trade
Commission, to do the job. During the Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt
proliferated such agencies, from the National Labor Relations Board and the
Federal Housing Administration to the Federal Communications Commission and the
Securities and Exchange Commission, to put the New Deal into effect. Before
they could do so, though, FDR had to scare the Supreme Court into stretching
the Constitution’s Commerce Clause beyond recognition, putting the federal
government in charge of all economic activity, not just interstate
transactions. He also had to pressure the justices to allow Congress to
delegate legislative power—which is, in effect, what the lawmakers did by
setting up agencies with the power to make binding rules. The Constitution, of
course, vests all legislative power in
Congress, empowering it to make laws, not to make legislators.
Administrative State’s constitutional transgressions cut deeper still. If
Congress can’t delegate its legislative powers, it certainly can’t delegate
judicial powers, which the Constitution gives exclusively to the judiciary.
Nevertheless, after these administrative agencies make rules like a
legislature, they then exercise judicial authority like a court by prosecuting
violations of their edicts and inflicting real criminal penalties, such as
fines and cease-and-desist orders. As they perform all these functions, they
also violate the principle of the separation of powers, which lies at the heart
of our constitutional theory (senselessly curbing efficiency, Wilson thought),
as well as the due process of law, for they trample the citizen’s Fifth
Amendment right not to lose his property unless indicted by a grand jury and
tried by a jury of his peers, and they search a citizen or a company’s private
papers or premises, without bothering to get judge-issued subpoenas or search
warrants based on probable cause, flouting the Fourth Amendment. They can issue
waivers to their rules, so that the law is not the same for all citizens and
companies but is instead an instrument of arbitrary power. FDR himself ruefully
remarked that he had expanded a fourth branch of government that lacked
constitutional legitimacy. Not only does it reincarnate the arbitrary power of
the Stuarts’ tyrannical Star Chamber, but also it doesn’t even meet the minimal
conditions of liberty that Magna Carta set forth 801 years ago.
insult to injury, Wilson, his allies, and their current followers call
themselves “progressives,” a fatuous boast implying that they are the
embodiments and chosen instruments of the spirit of an ever-improving,
irresistible future. In tune with the German idealist philosophy that Wilson
and his circle studied, they claim to be marching toward an as-yet-unrealized
goal of human perfection. But that perfection, the German philosophers
believed, would look something like Prussia’s enlightened despotism. For
Americans to think that it is progress to move from the Founders’ revolutionary
achievement—a nation of free citizens, endowed with natural rights, living
under laws that they themselves have made, pursuing their own vision of
happiness in their own way and free to develop as fully as they can whatever
talent or genius lies within them—to a regime in which individuals derive such
rights as they have from a government superior to them is contemptible. How is
a return to subjection an advance on freedom? No lover of liberty should ever
call such left-wing statism “progressive.” In historical terms, this elevation
of state power over individual freedom is not even “liberal” but quite the
As these agencies have
metastasized, they have borne out not a single premise that justified their
creation, and their increasingly glaring failure has drawn citizens’ angry
attention to them. Expert? As a New Deal congressman immediately recognized
with shock, many of those who staffed the Administrative State were kids just
out of law school, with zero real-world experience or technical knowledge.
Efficient? Can-do America, which built the Empire State Building in 11 months
and ramped up airplane production during World War II from 2,000 in 1939 to nearly
100,000 in 1944, now takes years of bureaucratic EPA busywork to repair a
bridge or lay a pipeline, and who knows how many businesses never expand or
even start because the maze of government regulation is too daunting and costly
to navigate? Only last year, EPA “experts” fecklessly stood by as workers under
their supervision accidentally dumped 3 million gallons of toxic wastewater
into the Colorado River, and the agency vouchsafed not a word of warning to
downstream Colorado and New Mexico officials for an entire day before the
poisonous, fluorescent-orange flood hit them. Over at Veterans Affairs, those
who’ve fought for their country die in droves while waiting for medical care.
But what’s the problem? asks agency head Robert MacDonald blithely. After
all, at ever-popular Disneyland, “do they measure the number of hours you wait
Ask Lois Lerner at the Internal Revenue Service. Oh wait: she pleaded the Fifth
Amendment—and her boss, John Koskinen, simply ignores Congress’s orders, even
as more than 2,000 of his enforcement agents have acquired military-grade
weaponry, among 200,000 of such administrative-agency officers now similarly
equipped with lethal arms, presumably for coercion of the citizens they
supposedly serve. Or there’s the Federal Elections Commission and the Federal
Communications Commission, lackeys of President Obama and his ultra-partisan
Protecting citizens from industrial capitalism’s
giant corporations? Where were the Securities and Exchange Commission, the
Federal Reserve, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Office of Federal
Housing Enterprise Oversight as the mortgage bubble blew up in 2008, nearly
taking the whole financial system with it and producing the worst economic bust
since the Great Depression, which even today has sunk the labor-force
participation rate and hiked the suicide rate among working-class men and women
to record levels? Moreover, from the establishment of the first administrative
agency—the Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887, essentially designed to
create shared railroad cartels—these agencies have been key instruments of
crony capitalism, which today often takes the form of senators and congressmen
pressuring agencies for rule changes or waivers to benefit their contributors,
usually at the expense of their competitors as well as the public, as the
author of the recent Confessions of Congressman X complains of his
fellow legislative “puppets.” Little wonder that today’s Americans think that
such people don’t represent them. Pollsters report that trust in government is
at its lowest level ever, with only 19 percent expecting government to do the
right thing, according to last year’s Gallup and Pew polls.
the citizens’ health and safety? Where is the Food and Drug Administration as
counterfeit medicines and medical supplies from China infiltrate our hospitals?
As for the infamously dysfunctional Transportation Security Administration, its
Keystone Kops’ regularly reported inability to spot journalists carrying banned
weapons onto airplanes, while they are too busy fondling travelers’ private
parts or undressing grannies, is a standing national joke—on us. We lost our
constitutional safeguards for this?
FDR spewed out his
agencies in a “try anything” spirit to cure a Depression that his predecessor’s
misguided palliatives had worsened, and debate still surges over whether the
New Deal agencies did harm or good, putting aside their doubtful legitimacy.
But the majority of Americans at the time gave the president credit for good
intentions. By contrast, many voters
give Barack Obama no such credit for his analogous response to the Great
Recession. They see it as a cynically calculated ploy to extend government’s
power over the people, especially given the White House chief of staff’s crack
that a president should “never let a good crisis go to waste.” So on the
pretext of addressing the financial crisis, the administration partially
socialized American medicine with legislation that only Democrats voted for,
without bothering to read it, and that citizens who opposed the measure—still a
solid majority of those polled—saw as a kind of coup d’état, framed with utter
irresponsibility and ignoring the scary financial mess. As happened during the
New Deal, a timid Supreme Court found the act constitutional only by the
politically driven legerdemain frequent in that institution’s checkered
history. It struck many as flimflam, not government by consent.
result was a spectacular expansion of the Administrative State, with some 150
new agencies and commissions created; no one knows the exact number. And these
agencies purposely removed the Administrative State even further from
government by the people. One agency, the Independent Payment Advisory
Board—the so-called death panel—is so democratically unaccountable that
Congress can only abolish it by a three-fifths vote in both houses within a
seven-month period next year. After that, the law bars Congress from altering
any of the board’s edicts, a provision as far from democratic self-government
as you can get.
administration finally confronted the financial crisis, lengthened by
Obamacare’s disincentives to hiring, its reflex response was to expand the
Administrative State still further with the Dodd-Frank Act, named for its two
legislative sponsors, both of whom had been in bed with the mortgage racket,
one figuratively and one literally. Whether it solved the problem is dubious.
What is certain is that it is as undemocratic as Obamacare, with its Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau, whose budget Congress can’t control, its Financial
Stability Oversight Council, whose rulings no court may review, and its army of
regulators occupying the big banks and squeezing multimillion-dollar penalties
out of CEOs clinging to their supersize compensation, regardless of what
happens to the stockholders. Meanwhile, the opaque Federal Housing Finance
Agency, formed during the crisis to salvage the misbegotten mortgage giants
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, seems bent on nationalizing permanently this
sizable chunk of the economy, putting the government in charge of citizens’
housing as well as their health care.
the “stimulus” that was supposed to give a Keynesian boost to the economy:
since you can’t prove a negative, no one can show that if all that money had
stayed in the private economy, it would have created more jobs and economic
growth than the economically anemic Obama era has done. What unemployed or
underemployed workers saw, though, is that a good portion of stimulus money
went to protect the jobs of public employees, whose welfare evidently trumps
that of the citizens whom they supposedly serve. Coal miners saw that, even as
the administration aimed to kill their jobs, its stimulus shoveled out hundreds
of millions of dollars to now-defunct Solyndra and other nonviable,
crony-capitalist “green” energy companies, supposed solutions to a
global-warming crisis that many think a hoax, though some two dozen public
officials seem keen to suppress, Inquisition-style, the very utterance of that
thought. And voters noticed that America’s three highest-income counties are in
the Washington suburbs that house the federal government’s recession-proof
functionaries. (See “Hail Columbia!,” Winter 2013.)
Unease over illegal
immigration also has stoked today’s fear that the government no longer belongs
to the people, and it’s important to understand the separate but mutually
reinforcing ways that it has done so. Once again, President Obama has made a
bad situation worse—this time, by his contemptuous refusal to execute the laws
faithfully. His catch-and-release policy for illegal border-crossers, as well
as his ban on deporting young aliens brought here by their illegal-immigrant
parents, are imperial, antidemocratic edicts that might have sparked
impeachment proceedings, had not Congress’s silly move to impeach Bill Clinton
for lying about his sex games with an intern tainted that weapon for years to
come. The result of Obama’s diktat, as contrary to the spirit of the Founders’
Constitution as is the Administrative State, is that law-abiding taxpayers must
pay for the kids’ welfare support, health care, and schooling—as they already
do for “anchor babies” born to mothers who have sneaked over the U.S. border for
the purpose of having a child eligible for “child-only” welfare benefits,
scarcely less than ordinary welfare payments and vastly more than the income of
Central American peasant families. No American voted to incur these costs,
which, if current trends continue, are likely to persist for several
generations of such families, so they amount to taxation without representation
as naked as George III’s.
As for the illegals who work, often for long
hours at low pay, off the books: because immigrants, 13 percent of the
population, hold 17 percent of the jobs—and no one knows the percentage of
workers who are here illegally—jobless working-class citizens have
understandably concluded that a lawless government, by countenancing such cheap
labor, is taking the bread out of their mouths. Should they eat cake instead?
America’s highest-income counties are in the suburbs that house
Washington’s recession-proof functionaries.
citizens want to know is that, of all the world’s people who seek to live in
America, our government will admit those who come legally, whose families will
not harm us, and who will add to the wealth of the nation, not reap where they
have not sown. After all, public safety—not clean energy or national health
care—is government’s purpose. Nevertheless, Mexican
criminals really have infiltrated the country and really have killed Americans,
inevitably, under the administration’s anything-goes immigration stance. Further, it’s no comfort
to any American who has suffered loss from an Islamist terror attack within our
borders—from Ground Zero and Fort Hood to San Bernardino and Orlando—that such
incidents pose no threat to our existence as a nation, as the president has
said by way of reassurance, while refusing to call such outrages by their right
name. How many citizens would have to die in a dirty-bomb attack in Grand
Central Terminal for such events to strike him as a threat to the nation’s
question of providing a path to citizenship for the 12 million illegal aliens
already here is also germane to the debate about whom the U.S. government
serves and to whom it belongs. Talk radio’s Rush Limbaugh jokes that “illegal
aliens” is a politically incorrect term; we must say “undocumented Democrats”
instead. But it’s a joke with a barb, for no one
can doubt that these 12 million, if they could vote, would vote for the
Democratic program of an ever-larger, richly paid government extracting
ever-larger transfer payments from productive workers to the dependent
poor—James Madison’s definition of the tyranny of the majority in Federalist10. With black poverty and exclusion steadily ameliorating,
thanks to decades of striving by well-intentioned Americans of all races—even
though Obama’s ex–attorney general Eric Holder devoted his tenure to
denying this plain truth—the Democratic Party needs a new class of victims to
justify its “helping” agenda and its immense cadre of well-paid government
“helpers.” Central American peasants fill the bill.
our open economy drew the enterprising and energetic to these shores, and our
lack of a public safety net, with only private ethnic and religious charities
to help the unfortunate, meant that those who couldn’t contribute to the U.S.
economy went home. But today, when we have a
vast welfare state that didn’t exist during earlier waves of immigration, the
mothers of anchor babies come for handouts, and even the children of
hardworking legal Hispanic immigrants end up on the welfare rolls at
troublesomely high rates. In addition, our showering of self-proclaimed refugees with
welfare benefits, which attracts the shiftless rather than the enterprising,
only compounds the government-sustained dependency problem—dependency upon
taxpayers who didn’t choose this particular philanthropy.
The phalanx of privately
supported settlement houses and other institutions that met the great
immigration wave around the turn of the twentieth century, along with the
public school system, aimed to “Americanize” the new arrivals—teaching them our
language, manners, and customs, and especially our republican civic ethic.
Culture, after all, is as important an element of national identity as
political institutions. To become an American in those days meant little more
than learning English and subscribing to a broadly shared creed of
self-reliance, self-government, self-improvement, and allegiance to a tolerant
nation that most people agreed was unique in the freedom and opportunity it
afforded—as well as in its readiness to confer citizenship on newcomers who
almost universally desired it. But today’s legal
Hispanic immigrants often don’t apply for American citizenship, or retain dual
nationalities: Americanization often is not high on their agendas.
our new doctrine of multiculturalism gives today’s immigrants nothing to
assimilate to, since current intellectual fashion—set by the universities,
Hollywood, and the mainstream media—celebrates everything that makes us
different rather than the creed that once made one nation out of many
individuals. And multiculturalism’s accompanying creed of victimology
encourages dependency rather than self-reliance. Who are the victimizers of
illegal Hispanic aliens? According to today’s politically correct
“progressivism,” it is the neocolonial United States that has exploited the
Third World’s natural resources, shored up its ruling oligarchies, and
subverted its incipient democratic governments. And then it further victimizes
them with racism when they try to escape to this country.
to the greater wisdom of government, which Wilsonian progressivism deems a
better judge of what the era needs and what the people “really” want than the
people themselves, has been silently eroding our unique culture of enterprise,
self-reliance, enlightenment, and love of liberty for decades. But if we cease
to enshrine American exceptionalism at the heart of our culture—if we set equal
value on such Third World cultural tendencies as passive resignation, fatalism,
superstition, devaluation of learning, resentment of imaginary plots by the
powerful, and a belief that gratification deferred is gratification forgone—the
exceptionalism of our institutions becomes all the more precarious.
American anger over illegal immigration and its consequences is the politically
correct ban on openly discussing it, with even the most reasoned reservation
dismissed as racism and yahooism. And political correctness generates its own
quantum of anger among citizens, who think of freedom of speech and debate as
central to American exceptionalism. But elite culture stigmatizes plain
speaking, so that now a rapist or a murderer is a “person who committed a
crime” or an “individual who was incarcerated,” says the Obama Department of
Justice, or, according to the latest humbug from the Department of Education, a
“justice-involved individual.” Implicit in these euphemisms is the theory that
“society,” not the criminal, is to blame for crime, a long-exploded idea aimed
at blurring the distinction between right and wrong.
what makes it so disheartening to learn that the University of California has
just deemed it a politically incorrect offense to declare America a land of
opportunity, so as not to stigmatize those who’ve failed to seize it. It’s
disheartening not only because such a retreat from our traditional culture will
hold back immigrants, but also because our long cultural unraveling already has
damagingly demoralized the native-born working class in the face of economic
change. They dimly know that, and part of what makes them so angry is what they
have allowed themselves to become.
When Theodore Roosevelt,
who unsuccessfully ran against Woodrow Wilson in 1912 on the Progressive Party
ticket, first declared his intention to go into politics, his fellow clubmen
jeered at him for wanting to associate with the “saloon-keepers, horse-car
conductors,” and other “rough and brutal” characters running the nation’s
political parties. “I answered,” recalled TR, “that if this were so it merely
meant that the people I knew did not belong to the governing class, and that
the other people did—and that I intended to be one of the governing class.”
That’s the true voice of “progressivism” speaking. As the Founders often
cautioned, a self-governing republic doesn’t have a governing class. Part of America’s
current predicament is that it now has such a class, and the American people
are very angry about it.
Myron Magnet, City Journal’s editor-at-large and its
editor from 1994 through 2006, is a recipient of the National Humanities Medal.
His latest book is The Founders at Home.
YOU WONDERED WHY
OBAMA-HOLDER WORKED SO HARD TO SABOTAGE AMERICAN VOTING FOR MORE ILLEGALS???
Those are the subliterate, low-skill,
non-English-speaking indigents whose own societies are unable or unwilling to
usefully educate and employ them. Bring these people here and they not only
need a lot of services, they are putty in the hands of leftist demogogues as
Hugo Chavez demonstrated - and they are very useful as leftist voters who will
support the Soros agenda.
Of course, the game of the Democrats is to avoid
at all costs any of the safeguards against fraud, such as photo ID
requirements. That should tell anyone with integrity what they are
up to. But most media continue to ignore this stain on
democracy. THOMAS LIFSON – AMERICAN
BARACK OBAMA and ERIC HOLDER’S SABOTAGE OF HOMELAND SECURITY: The “zero tolerance”
program was dismantled by Attorney General Erc Holder once it had
successfully cut the transit of migrants by roughly 95 percent.
Initially, officials made 140,000 arrests per year in the mid-2000s, but the
northward flow dropped so much that officials only had to make 6,000 arrests in
2013, according to a 2014 letter by two
pro-migration Senators, Sen. Jeff Flake and John McCain. NEIL MUNRO
SENATOR SMACKDOWN GETS THE NOD FOR NOVEMBER
"The man who, as Wikipedia explains, is “known professionally as Kevin de León” testified that “half of my family” would be eligible for deportation under Trump’s executive order because they used false identification, drivers licenses, Social Security and green cards. And that explains why the man who styles himself Kevin de León authored California’s sanctuary state law." LLOYD BILLINGSLEY - FRONTPAGEMAG
In California primaries the top two vote-getters advance regardless of party. Republicans are again shut out of the Senate race, leaving state senate boss Kevin de León to contend with Dianne Feinstein. The San Francisco Democrat, 85, seeks her fifth term in the Senate but the California Democratic Party fails to follow along.
“The name on his birth certificate isn’t Kevin de León,” explains Christopher Cadelago of the Sacramento Bee. On his birth certificate and voter rolls, the name is Kevin Alexander Leon and “the certificate says he was born on Dec. 10, 1966, at California Hospital on South Hope Street in Los Angeles.”
According to this document, which has not been revealed to the public, the father is Andres Leon, “a 40-year-old cook whose race was Chinese and whose birthplace was Guatemala” and mother Carmen Osorio, “was also born in Guatemala.” Kevin Alexander Leon remembers meeting Andres and thinks he is “a quarter, or as much as half-Chinese, pointing to the pockets of Asian populations in Mexico, including Mexicali.”
So at some point the Guatemalan Andres Leon must have moved to Mexico. But as a child his son Kevin Alexander de Leon “spent time on both sides of the border” and “identifies strongly with Mexican culture.” The story defies belief but does clarify some issues.
The man who, as Wikipedia explains, is “known professionally as Kevin de León” testified that “half of my family” would be eligible for deportation under Trump’s executive order because they used false identification, drivers licenses, Social Security and green cards. And that explains why the man who styles himself Kevin de León authored California’s sanctuary state law.
In a variation on Jose Vasconselos’ La Raza Cosmica, the California senate boss believes that illegals are “more American” and just better people than those Anglo Yankees who are destined to fade away along with blacks and those underachieving “Mongols.” So no surprise that the senate boss appointed a false-documented illegal to a state position, a violation of state law that bans ethnic preferences in state employment. So the termed-out senate boss does not exactly support the rule of law, state or federal.
The professional Kevin de León is a big fan of the late New Left icon Tom Hayden, a fervent supporter of Communist Vietnam. Last year, when Vietnamese refugee Janet Nguyen spoke out against Hayden, the Democrats shut down the Republican’s microphone then had her carted off the senate floor. So the Democrat senate boss is not exactly a fan of free speech or legal Asian refugees from Communist countries. Opponent Dianne Feinstein, on the other hand, pioneered the Nazi smear.
Feinstein showcased the smear last September in a confirmation hearing involving Amy Coney Barrett and Joan Larsen, both on President Trump’s original list for the Supreme Court. Feinstein said the backdrop for the hearing was the “neo-Nazis and white supremacists” in Charlottesville. “These are ideologies that people across the world died in a war fighting to defeat Nazism,” and just in case anybody wondered, “there isn’t any good in Nazism.”
Feinstein may deploy the Nazi smear in hearings for Trump Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. That would be a way to show she is tougher on Trump than her Democrat opponent, who has other forces working for him.
A 2015 California law “streamlines” the process of voter registration and kicks in when someone gets a driver’s license at the DMV. As of March, 2018, more than one million illegals have received licenses. Secretary of state Alex Padilla touts “firewall” protections against ineligible voters. This is the same official who refused to cooperate with a federal probe of voter fraud, so legal residents and taxpayers have good reason to wonder what he is hiding. It is already a matter of record that false-documented illegals vote in local, state and federal elections.
De Léon holds far-left views on immigration, gun control, and other issues. Last year, he admitted that half of his family was in the country illegally. Earlier this year, he appointedan illegal alien to a statewide office. He is also the author of SB 54, one of the three surviving “sanctuary state” laws that the Trump administration challenged earlier this year.
KEVIN DeLEON SAYS MEXICANS ARE ABOVE THE LAW IN THE LA RAZA SUPREMACY STATE of MEXIFORNIA
ILLEGAL IN CA LAW SCHOOL, AND HER ILLEGAL FAMILY SHOVE THEIR MEX FLAG and the LAWS OF THIS STATE and COUNTRY UP AMERICA’S NOSES!
How much welfare, “free” education, “free” healthcare and tax free mex underground economy have these Mexicans sucked in and yet they wave their mex flags in our faces.
In a Facebook post in 2016, apparently celebrating her graduation from Santa Clara University School of Law, Mateo declared, in Spanish: “[E]verything is dedicated to Oaxaca, Mexico!! to that land that I miss so much.”
Adios, Sanctuary La Raza Welfare State of California
A fifth-generation Californian laments his state’s ongoing economic collapse. By Steve Baldwin American Spectator, October 19, 2017 What’s clear is that the producers are leaving the state and the takers are coming in. Many of the takers are illegal aliens, now estimated to number over 2.6 million. The Federation for American Immigration Reform estimates that California spends $22 billion on government services for illegal aliens, including welfare, education, Medicaid, and criminal justice system costs.
BLOG: MANY DISPUTE CALIFORNIA’S EXPENDITURES FOR THE LA RAZA WELFARE STATE IN MEXIFORNIA JUST AS THEY DISPUTE THE NUMBER OF ILLEGALS. APPROXIMATELY HALF THE POPULATION OF CA IS NOW MEXICAN AND BREEDING ANCHOR BABIES FOR WELFARE LIKE BUNNIES. THE $22 BILLION IS STATE EXPENDITURE ONLY. COUNTIES PAY OUT MORE WITH LOS ANGELES COUNTY LEADING AT OVER A BILLION DOLLARS PAID OUT YEARLY TO MEXICO’S ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS. NOW MULTIPLY THAT BY THE NUMBER OF COUNTIES IN CA AND YOU START TO GET AN IDEA OF THE STAGGERING WELFARE STATE MEXICO AND THE DEMOCRAT PARTY HAVE ERECTED SANS ANY LEGALS VOTES. ADD TO THIS THE FREE ENTERPRISE HOSPITAL AND CLINIC COST FOR LA RAZA’S “FREE” MEDICAL WHICH IS ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT $1.5 BILLION PER YEAR.
Liberals claim they more than make that up with taxes paid, but that’s simply not true. It’s not even close. FAIR estimates illegal aliens in California contribute only $1.21 billion in tax revenue, which means they cost California $20.6 billion, or at least $1,800 per household. Nonetheless, open border advocates, such as Facebook Chairman Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the Center for Immigration Studies has documented, the vast majority of illegals are poor, uneducated, and with few skills. How does accepting millions of illegal aliens and then granting them access to dozens of welfare programs benefit California’s economy? If illegal aliens were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, California, with its 2.6 million illegal aliens, would be booming. Furthermore, the complexion of illegal aliens has changed with far more on welfare and committing crimes than those who entered the country in the 1980s. Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute has testified before a Congressional committee that in 2004, 95% of all outstanding warrants for murder in Los Angeles were for illegal aliens; in 2000, 23% of all Los Angeles County jail inmates were illegal aliens and that in 1995, 60% of Los Angeles’s largest street gang, the 18th Street gang, were illegal aliens. Granted, those statistics are old, but if you talk to any California law enforcement officer, they will tell you it’s much worse today. The problem is that the Brown administration will not release any statewide data on illegal alien crimes. That would be insensitive. And now that California has declared itself a “sanctuary state,” there is little doubt this sends a message south of the border that will further escalate illegal immigration into the state.
"If the racist "Sensenbrenner Legislation" passes the US Senate, there is no doubt that a massive civil disobedience movement will emerge. Eventually labor union power can merge with the immigrant civil rights and "Immigrant Sanctuary" movements to enable us to either form a new political party or to do heavy duty reforming of the existing Democratic Party. The next and final steps would follow and that is to elect our own governors of all the states within Aztlan." Indeed, California goes out of its way to attract illegal aliens. The state has even created government programs that cater exclusively to illegal aliens. For example, the State Department of Motor Vehicles has offices that only process driver licenses for illegal aliens. With over a million illegal aliens now driving in California, the state felt compelled to help them avoid the long lines the rest of us must endure at the DMV. And just recently, the state-funded University of California system announced it will spend $27 million on financial aid for illegal aliens. They’ve even taken out radio spots on stations all along the border, just to make sure other potential illegal border crossers hear about this program. I can’t afford college education for all my four sons, but my taxes will pay for illegals to get a college education.
California used to be home to America's largest and most affluent middle class. Today, it is America's poverty capital. What went wrong? In a word: immigration.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau's Official Poverty Measure, California's poverty rate hovers around 15 percent. But this figure is misleading: the Census Bureau measures poverty relative to a uniform national standard, which doesn't account for differences in living costs between states – the cost of taxes, housing, and health care are higher in California than in Oklahoma, for example. Accounting for these differences reveals that California's real poverty rate is 20.6 percent – the highest in America, and nearly twice the national average of 12.7 percent.
Likewise, income inequality in California is the second-highest in America, behind only New York. In fact, if California were an independent country, it would be the 17th most unequal country on Earth, nestled comfortably between Honduras and Guatemala. Mexico is slightly more egalitarian. California is far more unequal than the "social democracies" it emulates: Canada is the 111th most unequal nation, while Norway is far down the list at number 153 (out of 176 countries). In terms of income inequality, California has more in common with banana republics than other "social democracies."
More Government, More Poverty
High taxes, excessive regulations, and a lavish welfare state – these are the standard explanations for California's poverty epidemic. They have some merit. For example, California has both the highest personal income tax rate and the highest sales tax in America, according to Politifact.
Not only are California's taxes high, but successive "progressive" governments have swamped the state in a sea of red tape. Onerous regulations cripple small businesses and retard economic growth. Kerry Jackson, a fellow with the Pacific Research Institute, gives a few specific examples of how excessive government regulation hurts California's poor. He writes in a recent op-ed for the Los Angeles Times:
Extensive environmental regulations aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions make energy more expensive, also hurting the poor. By some estimates, California energy costs are as much as 50% higher than the national average. Jonathan A. Lesser of Continental Economics ... found that "in 2012, nearly 1 million California households faced ... energy expenditures exceeding 10% of household income."
Some government regulation is necessary and desirable, but most of California's is not. There is virtue in governing with a "light touch."
Finally, California's welfare state is, perhaps paradoxically, a source of poverty in the state. The Orange Country Register reports that California's social safety net is comparable in scale to those found in Europe:
In California a mother with two children under the age of 5 who participates in these major welfare programs – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps), housing assistance, home energy assistance, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children – would receive a benefits package worth $30,828 per year.
... [Similar] benefits in Europe ranged from $38,588 per year in Denmark to just $1,112 in Romania. The California benefits package is higher than in well-known welfare states as France ($17,324), Germany ($23,257) and even Sweden ($22,111).
Although welfare states ideally help the poor, reality is messy. There are three main problems with the welfare state. First, it incentivizes poverty by rewardingthe poor with government handouts that are often far more valuable than a job. This can be ameliorated to some degree by imposing work requirements on welfare recipients, but in practice, such requirements are rarely imposed. Second, welfare states are expensive. This means higher taxes and therefore slower economic growth and fewer job opportunities for everyone – including the poor.
Finally, welfare states are magnets for the poor. Whether through domestic migration or foreign immigration, poor people flock to places with generous welfare states. This is logical from the immigrant's perspective, but it makes little sense from the taxpayer's. This fact is why socialism and open borders arefundamentally incompatible.
Why Big Government?
Since 1960, California's population exploded from 15.9 to 39 million people. The growth was almost entirely due to immigration – many people came from other states, but the majority came from abroad. The Public Policy Institute of California estimates that 10 million immigrants currently reside in California. This works out to 26 percent of the state's population.
BLOG: COME TO MEXIFORNIA! HALF OF LOS ANGELES 15 MILLION ARE ILLEGALS!
This figure includes 2.4 million illegal aliens, although a recent study from Yale University suggests that the true number of aliens is at least double that. Modifying the initial figure implies that nearly one in three Californians is an immigrant. This is not to disparage California's immigrant population, but it is madness to deny that such a large influx of people has changed California's society and economy.
Importantly, immigrants vote Democrat by a ratio higher than 2:1, according to a report from the Center for Immigration Studies. In California, immigration has increased the pool of likely Democrat voters by nearly 5 million people, compared to just 2.4 million additional likely Republican voters. Not only does this almost guarantee Democratic victories, but it also shifts California's political midpoint to the left. This means that to remain competitive in elections, the Republicans must abandon or soften many conservative positions so as to cater to the center.
California became a Democratic stronghold not because Californians became socialists, but because millions of socialists moved there. Immigration turned California blue, and immigration is ultimately to blame for California's high poverty level.
In 1973, as I was going through customs in New York, the customs agent rifling my bag looked at my passport and said, with a Bronx sneer, “Bruce Thornton, huh. Must be one of them Hollywood names.”
Hearing that astonishing statement, I realized for the first time that California is as much an idea as a place. There were few regions in America more distant from Hollywood than the rural, mostly poor, multiethnic San Joaquin Valley where my family lived and ranched. Yet to this New Yorker, the Valley was invisible.
BLOG: FEINSTEIN & BOXER THREE TIMES ATTEMPTED TO INSERT IN VARIOUS BILLS AN AMNESTY FOR FARM WORKERS TO REPAY THEIR BIG AG BIG DONORS.
ONE-THIRD OF ALL FARM WORKERS END UP ON WELFARE AS SOON AS THE ANCHOR BABIES START COMING
Coastal Californians are sometimes just as blind to the world on the other side of the Coast Range, even though its farms, orchards, vineyards, dairies, and ranches comprise more than half the state’s $46 billion agriculture industry, which grows over 400 commodities, including over a third of the country’s vegetables and two-thirds of its fruits and nuts.
Granted, Silicon Valley is an economic colossus compared to the ag industry, but agriculture’s importance can’t be measured just in dollars and cents. Tech, movies, and every other industry tends to forget that their lives and businesses, indeed civilization itself, all rest on the shoulders of those who produce the food. You can live without your iPhone or your Mac or the latest Marvel Studios blockbuster. But you can’t live without the food grown by the one out of a 100 people who work to feed the other 99.
A Politically Invisible Valley
Living in the most conservative counties in the
deepest-blue state, Valley residents constantly see
their concerns, beliefs, and needs seldom taken
into account at the state or federal level.
Registered Democrats in California outnumber registered Republicans by over 19%, and the State Legislature seats about twice as many Democrats as Republicans (California’s one of only eight states nationwide with a trifecta of a Democratic and two Democratic controlled legislative bodies).
California’s Congressional delegation is even more unbalanced: in the House of Representatives, currently there are fourteen Republicans compared to thirty-nine House Democrats (at least half of those GOP districts are in danger of turning blue this fall); half the Republicans represent Central Valley districts, none bordering the Pacific Ocean. The last elected Republican US Senator left office in 1991. The last Republican governor was the politically light-pink action-movie star Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose second term ended in 2011.
This progressive dominance of the state has led to policies and priorities that has damaged its agricultural economy and seriously degraded the quality of life in the Valley.
Despite a long drought that has diminished the run-off of snow from the Sierra Nevada, projects for dams and reservoirs are on hold, seriously impacting the ag industry that relies on the snowmelt for most of its water. Worse yet, since 2008, a period including the height of the drought, 1.4 trillion gallons of water have been dumped into the Pacific Ocean to protect the endangered Delta Smelt, a two-inch bait-fish. Thousands of agricultural jobs have been lost and farmland left uncultivated, all to satisfy the sensibilities of affluent urban environmentalists. And even after a few years of abundant rain, Valley farmers this year are receiving just 20% of their South-of-the-Delta water allocation.
Or take California’s high-speed rail project, currently moribund and $10 billion over budget just for construction of the easiest section, through the flat center of the Valley. Meanwhile, State Highway 99, which bisects the Valley from north to south for 500 miles, is pot-holed, inefficient, and crammed with 18-wheel semis. It is the bloodiest highway in the country, in dire need of widening and repair. Yet to gratify our Democratic governor’s
high-tech green obsession, billions of dollars are
being squandered to create an unnecessary link
between the Bay Area and Los Angeles. That’s $10 billion that could have been spent building more reservoirs instead of dumping water into the ocean because there’s no place to store it.
The common thread of these two examples of
mismanagement and waste is the romantic
environmentalism of the well-heeled coastal left.
They serially support government projects and
regulations that impact the poor and the aged, who
are left to bear their costs.
The same idealized nature-love has led to regulations and taxes on energy that have made California home of the third-worst energy poverty in the country. In sweltering San Joaquin Valley counties like Madera and Tulare, energy poverty rates are 15% compared to 3–4% in cool, deep-blue coastal enclaves. Impoverished Kings County averages over $500 a month in electric bills, while tony Marin Country, with an average income twice that of Kings County, averages $200. Again, it’s the poor, aged, and working class who bear the brunt of these costs, especially in the Valley where temperatures regularly reach triple digits in the summer; unlike the coast, where the clement climate makes expensive air-conditioning unnecessary.
Deteriorating Quality of Life
It’s no wonder then that Fresno, in the heart of the
Valley, is the second most impoverished city in the
poorest region of a state that has the highest
poverty levels in the country and one of the
highest rates of income inequality. Over one-fifth
of its residents live below the poverty line, and it
More broadly, the dominant cultures and mores of the dot.com north and the Hollywood south are inimical to those of the Valley. Whether it is gun-ownership, hunting, church-going, or military service, many people in the San Joaquin Valley of all races are quickly becoming cultural minorities marginalized by the increasingly radical positions on issues such as abortion, guns, and religion.
Despite the liberal assumption that all Hispanics favor progressive policies, many Latino immigrants and their children find more in common with Valley farmers and natives with whom they live and work than they do with distant urban elites.
Indeed, as a vocal conservative professor in the local university (Fresno State), I have survived mainly because my students, now more than half Latino and Mexican immigrants or children of immigrants, are traditional and practical in a way that makes them impatient with the patronizing victim-politics of more affluent professors. They have more experience with physical labor, they are more religious and, like me, they are often the first in their families to graduate from college. As I did with the rural Mexican Americans I grew up with, I usually have more in common with my students than I do with many of my colleagues.
And this is the great irony of the invisibility of the “other” California: the blue-coast policies that suit the prejudices and sensibilities of the affluent have damaged the prospects of the “others of color” they claim they want to help. Over-
represented on the poverty and welfare rolls, many
migrants both legal and illegal have seen water
policies that destroy agricultural jobs, building
restrictions that drive up the cost of housing,
energy policies that increase their cost of living, “sanctuary city” policies that put back on the
streets thugs and criminals who prey mainly on
their ethnic fellows, and economic policies that
favor the redistribution rather than the creation of wealth and jobs.
Meanwhile, the coastal liberals who tout a cosmetic diversity live in a de facto apartheid world, surrounded by those of similar income, taste, and politics. Many look down on the people whom they view as racists and xenophobes at worst, and intellectually challenged rubes at best. This disdain has been evident in the way the media regularly sneer that House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes is a “former dairy-farmer” from Tulare County, an origin that makes “the match between his backstory and his prominence” seem “wholly incongruous,” per Roll Call's David Hawkings.
Finally, those of us who grew up and live in the rural Valley did so among a genuine diversity, one that reflected the more complex identities beyond the crude categories of “white” or “black” or “Hispanic.”
Italians, Basques, Portuguese, Armenians, Swedes, Mexicans, Filipinos, Southern blacks, Chinese, Japanese, Volga Germans, Scotch-Irish Dust Bowl migrants—all migrated to the Valley to work the fields and better their lives. Their children and grandchildren went to the same schools, danced together and drank together, helped round up each other’s animals when they got loose, were best friends or deadly enemies, dated and intermarried, got drafted into the Army or joined the Marines—all of them Americans who managed to honor their diverse heritages and faiths, but still be a community. Their most important distinctions were not so much between races and ethnicities, though those of course often collided, but between the respectable people––those who obeyed the law, went to church, and raised their kids right–– and those we all called “no damned good.” Skin-color or accents couldn’t sort one from the other.
What most of us learned from living in real diversity in the Valley is that being an American means taking people one at a time.
That world still exists, but it is slowly fading away—in part because of the policies and politics of those to our west, who can see nothing on the other side of the Coast Range.
Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, a Research Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution, and a Professor of Classics and Humanities at the California State University. He is the author of nine books and numerous essays on classical culture and its influence on Western Civilization. His most recent book, Democracy's Dangers and Discontents (Hoover Institution Press), is now available for purchase.
The Mexican Invasion & Occupation