Illegal
Immigration Is the Reason California Is Burning
A
firefighting helicopter makes a water drop over the Easy Fire on October 30,
2019, near Simi Valley, California. (David McNew/Getty Images)
California is collapsing
in front of our eyes.
Everyone with the money and common sense
is running for
their lives. The question is why
is this happening to such a rich and beautiful
state?
Let's start
with a comparison of the taxes in California with my state of Nevada (right
next door to California). While California was burying its citizens with among
the nation’s highest personal income taxes, highest corporate income taxes,
highest sales taxes, and highest gas taxes, Nevada’s citizens have enjoyed
among the lowest taxes in the country.
That could be
why millions of people have left California in the past decade — almost all for
the low tax states like Nevada, Texas, Florida, Utah, Colorado, Washington, and
Arizona. Those states lead the nation in population growth, while California
and other high tax, blue states lead the nation in population loss.
Keep in mind
this was all before the
nonstop blackouts and $6 per gallon gas in California.
Who can live
in a place where the electric utility company shuts off the power to homes and
businesses for days on end, multiple times per year? Because the wind is
blowing hard? California has truly become a Third World Nation.
Keep in mind,
this is what you got for all those high taxes.
So why is this
happening? I lived in California for 15 wonderful years. The winds howled back
then too. We had 80 MPH Santa Ana winds. And plenty of fires, floods,
mudslides, and earthquakes. I lived through all of them. My home almost burned
three times. My car was almost carried away by a massive mudslide.
Yet in my 15
years in California, no one shut off electricity because the wind was blowing.
No one shut off electricity because there was the threat of a fire.
I’m not a
California hater. I loved my time in California. It is the most beautiful state
in America, with the greatest weather. But something has dramatically changed
since I left. Today I wouldn’t live there if you gave me a $5 million
oceanfront mansion for free.
What’s changed is disastrous
liberal policy.
Lots of
liberal ideas ruined California: high taxes, stifling regulations, climate
change policy, permissive policies towards homeless encampments, the highest
welfare benefits in the nation, a $15 minimum wage. It’s impossible to run a
business in California. Restaurants are closing by the hundreds.
And did I
mention poop, pee, and drug needles in the streets? And homeless camps
everywhere.
Now add in
blackouts that make life
miserable
and bankrupt businesses.
California
has become an unlivable third-
world
hellhole.
But despite
all those liberal policies that have contributed to the rot of California, one
issue is at the root of California’s current problems. One issue stands heads
and tails above all the rest.
First and
foremost, illegal immigration is the
problem. Since I left two decades ago,
California has collectively spent hundreds of
billions of dollars on illegal
aliens and their
bills — public schools, free meals at school,
special
bi-lingual teachers, healthcare,
housing allowances, low income energy
assistance, aid to families with dependent
children, prisons, cops, courts,
public
defenders, welfare, food stamps, and a
hundred other government
handouts. And
don’t forget special lower college tuition for
illegal
immigrants.
Can you
imagine if all those billions of dollars were instead spent on new
infrastructure, moving power poles underground, upgraded electrical equipment,
modernized electrical systems, homeless vets, more cops, and better schools for
children born in California. Can you imagine what a better place California
would be for its own citizens?
Think about it
in personal terms. What if a husband and father has a drug problem. He's
addicted to cocaine or heroin. He spends $20,000 a year on his drug addiction
for 20 years. That's $400,000. But his life remains in control. Until one day
he finds out his child has cancer. The bill is $100,000 (after insurance pays).
But he doesn't have the $100,000. His child is dying. If only he had the
$400,000 back that he wasted on drugs.
That's
California and illegal immigration. The state has squandered hundreds of
billions on illegal immigration in the 20 years since I've been gone. They
could use that money today. They desperately need it back to pay for the
hundred billion dollar job of upgrading and modernizing their electric grid.
But they don't
have the money. It's all
been wasted on
illegal aliens. And it's
gone forever.
I guarantee
you one thing Californians: if you had all that money back, you wouldn’t be
sitting in the dark.
In my next
column, I’ll get to Part II of the disastrous mistakes of liberalism that have
destroyed California. Think idiotic environmental policies and climate change
fraud.
That's another
few hundred billion dollars wasted — and gone forever. Think about that, as you
sit in the dark, shivering or sizzling, with your food spoiling.
Think about
that as you fill up your gas tank with $5 our $6 per gallon gas, driving on
crumbling highways, in massive traffic jams.
All the
money to fix your misery was spent
on illegal
aliens, not you. How does that
make you
feel?
Trust me, if
you impeach President Trump and elect Democrats to run the country, Democrats
will turn the whole America into one big crappy, miserable, unlivable
California.
Except you
won't even get the sunshine and perfect 75 degree days.
Wayne Allyn Root is the host of
"The Wayne Allyn Root Show" on Newsmax TV, nightly at 8 p.m. ET,
found on DirecTV channel 349, Dish TV channel 216, or at NewsmaxTV.com. He is also a nationally
syndicated radio host. Wayne Allyn Root is a former libertarian vice
presidential nominee. He is the best-selling author of "The Power of
Relentless." Read more reports from Wayne Allyn Root — Click Here Now.
Democrats turning California into
a third-world hellhole: Going without electricity edition
Democrats are turning California into a third-world hellhole
without electricity, water, and freedom.
Due to Democrats' love
for trees, at least 800,000 Californians will be without power for several
days. Instead of properly managing California forests to reduce the
chances of big fires, Democrats are saying Californians have to go without
lights, refrigerators, and air-conditioning. Democrats could also
avoid this by not making the power company financially liable for all forest
fire damages, but since PG&E is a company, not an illegal alien, the
Democrats couldn't care less about doing what's best for California.
While they try to blame
climate change and the infrastructure, the reality is that neither of those has
caused any significant changes in the last ten years — but now, suddenly, due
to Democrat policies, Californians have to start living in the 18th century.
The Democrats who run
California also refuse to build more water storage capacity even though the
state's population has dramatically increased, ensuring that water has to be
rationed during droughts.
Democrats are turning
California into a third-world country economically. The income
inequality between the über-rich Silicon Valley workers and the rest of
Californians is huge, just like in third-world countries, while the elites live
in luxury and the rest live in squalor.
Democrats are doing a
great job manufacturing poverty and homelessness even as they fail to instill
hope in Californians.
California has four times more homeless per
capita and three times more poor per capita than the rest of
America. Half the homeless in America are in California, even though
California has only 12% of the U.S. population. Also, blacks are six
times more prevalent in the San
Francisco homeless population than they are in California in general.
The homeless explosion
has brought the return of third-world diseases like typhus to California — not
to mention streets littered with human feces.
Democrats are trying to
keep people from having cars, just like the people of the Third
World. After all, a car gives people the freedom to move, and
freedom is a bad thing in the minds of Democrats since it limits the power the
government has over citizens.
Recently, Gavin Newsom,
the Democrat governor, transferred millions of dollars that the voters had been
ensured would go to improve the state's failing road infrastructure to a fund
designed to convince Californians to give up their cars.
Democrats are also
working to make cars unaffordable for any but the richest Californians.
Californians pay $1.53 more for a gallon for
gasoline than the rest of America. That's $21 more for a tank of
gasoline. Facebook employees won't notice it, but the poor in
California who can't afford to live near their jobs are paying through the
teeth.
Like all third-world
tyrants, Democrats are doing everything they can to eliminate democracy in
California.
The jungle primary, where
the top two candidates in the primaries go against each other, has resulted in
many races where two Democrats are running against each other, giving voters
who don't agree with the Democrats' failed policies no one to vote for.
California is doing
nothing to ensure that people who shouldn't vote don't
vote. Instead, the people running the state are doing everything
possible to let illegal aliens vote. When illegal aliens go pick up
their driver's licenses, they're automatically enrolled to vote unless they say
they're not citizens.
California is also trying
to end democracy by keeping the Republican presidential candidate off the
ballot. Democrats passed an unconstitutional law to keep any
candidate who didn't release his tax returns off the ballot solely to keep
Californians from voting for Trump.
Finally, the Democrats
are going after freedom of the press. An undercover journalist
revealed that Planned Parenthood was selling aborted baby
parts. Instead of investigating that illegal practice, Democrat
Kamala Harris decided to put the journalist on trial.
Democrats keep telling us
California is the future if they get elected. That means that
poverty, homelessness, the end of democracy, and a press that reports only what
Democrats want heard are what Democrats are promising us.
If you're an immensely
wealthy Google employee, California is Heaven. If you're not, it's
becoming more and more like Hell.
OPEN BORDERS: IT’S ALL ABOUT KEEPING WAGES
DEPRESSED!
"In the decade following the
financial crisis of 2007-2008, the capitalist class has delivered powerful
blows to the social position of the working class. As a result, the working class
in the US, the world’s “richest country,” faces levels of economic hardship not
seen since the 1930s."
"Inequality has reached unprecedented
levels: the wealth of America’s three richest people now equals the net
worth of the poorest half of the US population."
PELOSI,
FEINSTEIN, KAMALA HARRIS AND GAVIN NEWOMS’S MEXIFORNIA
Report:
California’s Middle-Class Wages Rise by 1 Percent in 40 Years
Justin
Sullivan/Getty Images
3 Sep 2019172
6:24
Middle-class wages in
progressive California have risen by 1 percent in the last 40 years, says a
study by the establishment California Budget and Policy Center.
“Earnings for California’s
workers at the low end and middle of the wage scale have generally declined or
stagnated for decades,” says the report, titled “California’s Workers Are
Increasingly Locked Out of the State’s Prosperity.” The report continued:
In
2018, the median hourly earnings for workers ages 25 to 64 was $21.79, just 1%
higher than in 1979, after adjusting for inflation ($21.50, in 2018 dollars)
(Figure 1). Inflation-adjusted hourly earnings for low-wage workers, those at
the 10th percentile, increased only slightly more, by 4%, from $10.71 in
1979 to $11.12 in 2018.
The report admits that the
state’s progressive economy is delivering more to investors and less to
wage-earners. “Since 2001, the share of state private-sector [annual new
income] that has gone to worker compensation has fallen by 5.6 percentage
points — from 52.9% to 47.3%.”
In 2016, California’s Gross
Domestic Product was $2.6 trillion, so the 5.6 percent drop shifted $146
billion away from wages. That is roughly $3,625 per person in 2016.
The report notes that wages
finally exceeded 1979 levels around 2017, and it splits the credit between the
Democrats’ minimum-wage boosts and President Donald Trump’s go-go economy.
The 40 years of flat wages are
partly hidden by a wave of new products and services. They include almost-free
entertainment and information on the Internet, cheap imported coffee in
supermarkets, and reliable, low-pollution autos in garages.
But the impact of California’s
flat wages is made worse by California’s rising housing costs, the report says,
even though it also ignores the rent-spiking impact of the establishment’s
pro-immigration policies:
In just the last decade
alone, the increase in the typical household’s rent far outpaced the rise in
the typical full-time worker’s annual earnings, suggesting that working
families and individuals are finding it increasingly difficult to make ends
meet. In fact, the basic cost of living in many parts of the state is more
than many single individuals or families can expect to earn, even if all adults
are working full-time.
…
Specifically, inflation-adjusted
median household rent rose by 16% between 2006 and 2017, while
inflation-adjusted median annual earnings for individuals working at least 35
hours per week and 50 weeks per year rose by just 2%, according to a Budget
Center analysis of US Census Bureau, American Community Survey data.
The wage and housing problems are made worse —
especially for families — by the loss of
employment benefits as companies and investors spike stock prices by cutting
costs. The report says:
Many workers are being paid
little more today than workers were in 1979 even as worker productivity has
risen. Fewer employees have access to retirement plans sponsored by their employers,
leaving individual workers on their own to stretch limited dollars and
resources to plan how they’ll spend their later years affording the high cost
of living and health care in California. And as union representation has
declined, most workers today cannot negotiate collectively for better working
conditions, higher pay, and benefits, such as retirement and health care, like
their parents and grandparents did. On top of all this, workers who take on
contingent and independent work (often referred to as “gig work”), which in
many cases appears to be motivated by the need to supplement their primary job
or fill gaps in their employment, are rarely granted the same rights and legal
protections as traditional employees.
The center’s report tries to blame
the four-decade stretch of flat wages on the declining clout of unions. But
unions’ decline was impacted by the bipartisan elites’ policy of mass-migration
and imposed diversity.
In
2018, Breitbart reported how Progressives for
Immigration Reform interviewed Blaine Taylor, a union carpenter, about the
economic impact of migration:
TAYLOR: If I hired a framer to do
a small addition [in 1988], his wage would have been $45 an hour. That was
the minimum for a framing contractor, a good carpenter. For a helper, it was
about $25 an hour, for a master who could run a complete job, it was about $45
an hour. That was the going wage for plumbers as well. His helpers typically
got $25 an hour.
…
Now, the average wage in Los
Angeles for construction workers is less than $11 an hour. They can’t go lower
than the minimum wage. And much of that, if they’re not being paid by the hour
at less than $11 an hour, they’re being paid per piece — per piece of plywood
that’s installed, per piece of drywall that’s installed. Now, the subcontractor
can circumvent paying them as an hourly wage and are now being paid by 1099,
which means that no taxes are being taken out. [Emphasis added]
Diversity
also damaged the unions by shredding California’s civic solidarity. In 2007,
the progressive Southern Poverty Law Center posted a report with the title
“Latino Gang Members in Southern California are Terrorizing and Killing
Blacks.” In the same year, an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times described another murder by Latino
gangs as “a manifestation of an increasingly common trend: Latino ethnic
cleansing of African Americans from multiracial neighborhoods.”
The center’s board members
include the executive director of the state’s SEIU union, a professor from the
Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and
the research director at the “Program for Environmental and Regional Equity” at
the University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Outside
California, President Donald Trump’s low-immigration policies are pressuring
employers to raise Americans’ wages in a hot economy. The Wall Street Journal reportedAugust 29:
Overall, median weekly earnings
rose 5% from the fourth quarter of 2017 to the same quarter in 2018, according
to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. For workers between the ages of 25 and 34,
that increase was 7.6%.
.
Please let us know if you're having issues with
commenting.S
Report:
Immigration Encourages Job Discrimination Against Americans
Dave
Einsel/Getty
29 Oct 2019118
9:50
Mass migration encourages mass discrimination against Americans,
especially black employees, according to federal data unearthed by the Center
for Immigration Studies.
“You really have to be out of touch with reality to argue that
there are no negative effects of immigration on native workers,” said Jason
Richwine, a statistician who studied the issue for the Center for Immigration
Studies.
“Forty
percent of the decline in labor participation rates among black workers over
three decades was attributable to competition from illegal immigration,” labor
lawyer Peter Kirsanow said at a CIS press
event at the press club. That “comes to nearly 1 million fewer jobs for
black Americans as a result of the competition from illegal immigrants … and it
is the wage levels also,” Kirsanow told the audience on October 25.
The huge impact of this discrimination is mostly ignored by
wealthy “woke” professionals, who prefer to use discrimination claims as a
political club against conservatives. The documented discrimination is just
“the tip of the iceberg,” but left-wing critics have gone silent since Donald
Trump was elected, said CIS director Mark Krikorian,
Yet white-collar workers are also losing salaries and jobs
because of discrimination, said Kevin Lynn, founder of Progressives for
Immigration Reform:
The gains made by women and minorities in STEM fields over the
past three decades have really been reversed. For example, today on average 12
percent of women earn degrees in computer science. In 1984 it was 37 percent.
So you have to ask yourself what’s going on. Well, when the opportunities
become scant and the workplaces become hostile to women, they typically choose
other career alternatives.
….
There is a preference for hiring Indians over Americans in these
[Indian-run] consulting firms because, one, they will work longer hours. It’s a
quiescent workforce, largely because they’re here on H-1B visas. And a lot of
what goes into this is they are given the hope that their company will sponsor
them for an – a green card, and then they’ll eventually get citizenship here in
the U.S. Unfortunately for the American worker, that means that they’re
competing with someone who is willing to work for less, work for increasingly
lower benefits and other benefits that go along with their salaries, and it
just ultimately makes things a lot more difficult.
The press club event was scheduled to spotlight Richwine’s study
of discrimination lawsuits by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission. He summarized several of the EEOC cases, often quoting
directly from the commission’s reports:
When a warehouse in Memphis began using a new employment agency
to fill its daily work crew, the agency, quote from EEOC, “essentially replaced
the African Americans with Hispanics.” End quote. Potential workers would line
up outside the warehouse each day, but the agency would select Hispanics over
blacks even when black workers were farther ahead in line. Sometimes managers
would send potential black workers home by announcing in English that there
were no more positions. After the African Americans left, the Hispanics were
allowed to come into the warehouse and work. Again, systematic – neither
subconscious nor subtle.
Richwine described cases where Hispanic managers discriminated
against American blacks:
Perhaps the most egregious example of this comes from Prestige
Transportation Services. It would discard or refuse to accept employment
applications from non-Hispanic blacks. Quote from EEOC: “On multiple occasions
when a black person applied for employment, Prestige managers Mr. Ramirez and
Ms. Rodriguez would stand behind the applicant and rub their hand on their skin
to display their disdain for black people.” End quote. Staff meetings were
conducted in Spanish only.
The record shows that some Indian immigrants also discriminates
against blacks, he said.
At a Hampton Inn in Colorado, three non-Hispanic white
housekeepers were fired by the new general manager and replaced by Hispanics.
The owners, Falgun Patel and Mukund Patel, told the general manager that they
prefer that maids be Hispanic because in their opinion Hispanics worked harder
while American employees are lazy. The general manager allegedly told a
Hispanic employee to recruit friends for the incoming vacancies because the
owner preferred a Hispanic workforce. After three months, all of the Hampton
Inn’s non-Hispanic housekeepers were gone.
The pattern of lawsuits by Hispanics is very different, said
Richwine. Instead of losing job opportunities because of discrimination,
Latinos lose workplace protections that were once normal for Americans, he
said:
When Hispanics file suits, they are not complaining that they
are being replaced by some other group in the workforce; instead, they’re
complaining about working conditions, they complain about low pay, they
complain about dangerous situations on the job site, and they complain about
harassment. Harassment oftentimes is ethnically based, ethnic slurs and so on
directed at them. The saddest part is that when we’re talking about Hispanic
women, sexual harassment is a very pervasive problem if you believe these EEOC
lawsuits,
The examples are merely the most egregious ad straightforward
cases, he said, ensuring that they are likely many other cases of
discrimination that do not end up in court.
Deputies for President Donald Trump have partly reversed some
discrimination against blacks, for forcing wages up to record levels.
But his deputies done little to curb the white-collar
discrimination, partly because there is so much more money at stake for
high-tech firms, hospitals, and investors.
For example, the federal government rewards companies that
discriminate in favor of Indian “OPT” work-permit workers by rejecting American
graduates, Lynn said.
American companies which hire Indian graduates are not required
to pay Social Security taxes, he said, adding:
That’s about a 15 percent premium that is added to hiring
someone on the OPT program and, again, these people compete directly with our
new [American] graduates in the workplace … [where] a [U.S.] student today
might exit university with anywhere from $35 [thousand] to $85,000 in debt.
That’s a lot of money, and … they’re having their legs broken as they leave the
gate into the workplace.
Instead,
American victims of Indians’ discrimination are suing the Indians firms in
court. For example, in a 2016 lawsuit against a giant Indian software firm,
Infosys, American witnesses alleged:
Hiring Manager Instructions: an Infosys hiring manager admitted
“There does exist an element of discrimination. We are advised to hire Indians
… because they will work off the clock without murmur and they can always be
transferred across the nation without hesitation unlike [a] local workforce.”
Talent Acquisition Unit Observations: Recruiters in Talent
Acquisition observed that Indians were highly favored, and it was extremely
difficult to move non-South Asians ahead in the hiring process. Non-Indians
were regularly rejected as being “not a good fit,” – an Infosys euphemism for
“non-Indian.” This discrimination is on-going. In 2016 for example, an Infosys
manager in their Talent Acquisition Unit observed that of Infosys’ 2,900
hires in the United States, 2,200 (76%) were Indian. She observed a similar
hiring disparity in prior years.
Applicant Data Manipulation: Infosys manipulates applicant
tracking data in such a way that consideration of non-South Asians and
non-Indians is minimized, and the hiring of South Asians is maximized. For
example, recruiters have observed that non-South Asian applicants were
repeatedly deleted from Infosys’ applicant tracking system, forcing one
recruiter to keep a separate spreadsheet of applicants on his computer.
Recruiters have also observed South Asian applicants, located by Infosys’
“sourcers” in India, manually entered into the applicant tracking system
despite those individuals not having formally applied, thus streamlining the
hiring process. Individuals sourced in this way were moved “to the front of the
line” ahead of applicants in the U.S. A recruiter also observed that applications
for United States positions were regularly not reviewed, and in 2016,
approximately 11,000 to 12,000 were rejected en masse.
Immigration
Numbers:
Each year, roughly four million young Americans join the
workforce after graduating from high school or a university. This total
includes about 800,000 Americans who graduate with skilled degrees in business
or health care, engineering or science, software, or statistics.
But the
federal government then imports about 1.1 million legal immigrants. It also
adds replacement workers to a resident population of more than 1.5 million
white-collar visa workers — including approximately one million H-1B workers
and about 500,000 blue-collar H-2B, H-2A, and J-1 visa workers. The
government also prints more than one
million work
permits for
new foreigners, and it rarely punishes companies for employing illegal
migrants.
This policy
of inflating the labor supply boosts economic growth and
stock values for investors. The stimulus happens
because the extra labor ensures that employers do not have to compete for
American workers by offering higher wages and better working conditions.
The federal
policy of flooding the market with cheap,
foreign white-collar graduates and blue-collar labor shifts wealth
from young employees toward older
investors. It also widens wealth gaps, reduces high-tech
investment, increases state and local tax
burdens, reduces marriage rates, and hurts
children’s schools and college educations.
The
cheap-labor economic strategy also pushes Americans away from
high-tech careers, and it sidelines millions of marginalized Americans, including
many who are now struggling with drug addictions.
The labor
policy also moves business investment and
wealth from the Heartland to the coastal cities, explodes rents and housing costs, undermines suburbia, shrivels real estate values in
the Midwest, and rewards investors for creating low-tech, labor-intensive workplaces.
But President Donald Trump’s “Hire American” policy is boosting
wages by capping immigration within a growing economy.
The Census
Bureau said September 10 that men
who work full-time and year-round got an average earnings boost of 3.4 percent
in 2018, pushing their median salaries up to $55,291. Women gained 3.3 percent
in wages, bringing their median salaries to $45,097 for full-time, year-round
work.
"Chuck
Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, the twin nutters of Congress, were certain they could
beat Trump at his own game, but have made fools of themselves, as
usual. The stand-off is not over but with each passing day, the
Democrats reveal more of their anti-American, pro-illegal immigration agenda.
Conservatives have been sounding the alarm for years: Democrats do not
care about American citizens!" PATRICIA McCARTHY
In the next two decades, should the country’s
legal immigration policy go unchanged, the U.S. is set to import about
15 million new foreign-born voters. About eight million of these new
foreign-born voters will have arrived through the process known as “chain
migration,” whereby newly naturalized citizens are allowed to bring an
unlimited number of foreign relatives to the country. JOHN BINDER
This policy
of flooding the market
with cheap, foreign, white-collar graduates and
blue-collar labor also shifts
enormous wealth from young employees
towards older investors, even as it also widens wealth
gaps, reduces high-tech
investment, increases state and
local tax burdens, and hurts children’s schools and college educations.
It also pushes Americans
away from high-tech careers and sidelines millions of marginalized Americans,
including many who are now struggling with
fentanyl addictions. The labor policy also moves business investment and
wealth from the heartland to the coastal cities, explodes rents
and housing costs, shrivels real estate
values in the Midwest, and rewards investors for creating low-tech, labor-intensive workplaces.
JOHN BINDER
The Democrats' Alien Voting
Strategy
2020 Democrats All Have the
Same Immigration Position: Open Borders
2020 Democrats all have the same immigration
position: Open borders
Other than offering
some vague nods to “border security,” Democrats never put forth any policy that
would prevent the hundreds of thousands of unknown people streaming into the
U.S. Yet if you point out that the party doesn't care about securing the
border, a confounded news anchor will insist, “Silly fool! Why, everyone
supports border security!”
It’s a cover-up for
what Democrats truly believe in: An open border that discriminates against no
one from anywhere.
Look at any one of the
Democrats running for the party’s presidential nomination, and you will not
find a single policy proposal that would stop a single illegal entrant. Or even
just the top five of them in the RealClearPolitics national average.
Former Vice President
Joe Biden’s plan on his website: “We have got to
address the root causes of migration that push people to leave behind their
homes and everything they know to undertake a dangerous journey for the chance
at a better life." It says nothing about halting the obscene numbers of
migrants showing up at the border with bogus claims for asylum or the illegal
border crossers with histories of child sex abuse
and violent gang affiliations caught daily. Ah, but it does check the
empty “secure our border and enforce our laws” banality.
Vermont Sen. Bernie
Sanders calls for expanding protections for illegal immigrants already in the
U.S., “developing a humane policy for those seeking asylum," and virtually
eliminating the deportation and detention of illegal aliens altogether.
Sanders’ website doesn’t even bother nodding to the “border security” cliché.
Massachusetts Sen.
Elizabeth Warren doesn’t mention immigration at all on her website. But in
interviews, she says the same nothing that every Democrat says. “We need an
immigration system that is effective, that focuses on where problems are,” she
said Wednesday on CNN, though Democrats
never seem to find “where the problems are” when talking about the topic. They
deny that even one illegal immigrant might be a rapist or drug dealer, even
though there are scores of them. They deny that there’s a “crisis” at the
border, where five children have died in recent weeks. They deny that illegal
immigrants soak up welfare benefits (even though they do). So where exactly are
the “problems”? Warren said in the interview that “we need immigration laws
that focus on people who pose a real threat,” but how exactly do Democrats
define “real threat”? They apparently see no threat, otherwise they wouldn’t
oppose the construction of a border wall with the fury of a volcano god.
California Sen. Kamala
Harris has compared Immigration and Customs Enforcement to the Ku Klux Klan,
called on Senate Democrats to resist funding any measure or resource on the
border that functions to apprehend and detain illegal border crossers, and made
protections for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients among her top
issues. I think we know where
she stands on “border security.”
South Bend, Ind., Mayor
Pete Buttigieg finally got some policy positions on his website and he proposes
“immigration laws to reflect today’s humanitarian and economic needs” as well
as “reasonable security measures at the border.” Well, I feel better now, how
about you? Last month, Buttigieg said he would be happy to
welcome an infinite number of immigrants, legal or not, to his
city, where he thought they would contribute to the snowplowing and need for
more firefighters. Aw, shucks! Is that what the tiny Guatemalan woman who
arrived at the Texas border with seven children wanted to do all along? Why
didn’t they say so? Hand them each a helmet and hose!
The 2020 Democrats,
with the media’s help, will either avoid the immigration issue as long as
possible, or keep repeating “border security, border security, border security”
in hopes that no one notices what they’re really after: Open borders and
unabated immigration.
The murder of legal immigrant and Newman
Police Corporal Ronil Singh on Christmas
night by an illegal alien in the sanctuary state of California shows
not only that the claims by Chuck Schumer and the “bride of Chucky”
Nancy Pelosi that
the Democrats support border
security is a deadly and bald-faced lie.
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.
Potential
Speaker Candidate Marcia Fudge: Nancy Pelosi an ‘Elitist,’ ‘Very Wealthy
Person’
Pelosi’s Pacific Heights
needs refugees
Pacific
Heights is one of San Francisco’s most expensive neighborhoods. It boasts
dramatic views of the Golden Gate Bridge, the Marin Headlands, and the blue
waters of San Francisco Bay.
Oracle
founder Larry Ellison is one of its more prominent and distinguished residents,
as is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
For
all its attractiveness as a neighborhood with its boutique shops and upscale
restaurants, Pacific Heights lacks two vital ingredients to make it a truly
great American neighborhood -- economic and cultural diversity.
That’s
why President Donald Trump’s plan to resettle “refugees” in sanctuary cities
should be embraced by Pacific Heights’ residents.
By
inviting the refugees now stranded at the border, Pacific Heights would not
only strengthen the sinew of its community but also contribute to alleviating
the humanitarian crisis at the border.
Our
strength is our diversity, and Pacific Heights lacks that strength. It is
culturally homogenous in a city that is diverse.
In
San Francisco, earning $117,000 a year or less makes you a
low-income earner. Placing refugees in Pacific Heights
where housing and other costs are truly astronomical would require the
compassion and economic assistance of its residents. The former they have long
signaled, and the latter they are more than able to do.
Nancy
Pelosi lives in
a walled mansion on a large expanse of land with
majestic views. Her mansion could easily house thirty or forty refugee
families, and she is hardly there. The expansive grounds could house dozens of
refugee families in tents.
Imagine
refugee children who survived the arduous and life-threatening journey from
Central America playing on Pelosi’s lawn while breathing the clean and
invigorating air from off the San Francisco coastline. Imagine alleviating
the humanitarian crisis by creating additional tent cities in Pacific Heights’
splendid parks.
Pelosi, through her holdings in local restaurants
and vineyards, is reputed to be one of the largest
employers of illegal labor in Northern California.
Consequently, the people she would compassionately house might be able to find
work in her network of businesses, especially her fabled
vineyard on the banks of the Napa River.
Pelosi
also owns a second mansion in the Wine Country north of San Francisco. This too
is walled and could hold dozens of refugee families.
Neither
Pelosi herself nor the community of Pacific Heights can solve the refugee
problem, but they could set a standard that other wealthy and pro-sanctuary
communities could easily emulate.
Just
a few miles away from Pacific Heights, my liberal acquaintances “Ann” and
“Christopher” live in a complex that is more difficult to enter than the
Central Intelligence Agency. They both support the sanctuary status of San
Francisco and think the border wall, but not their complex’s barrier, is
immoral. Ann is a big DACA supporter although she has been seen adroitly
ignoring and bypassing the homeless that proliferate in her neighborhood and
sleep on her streets. Her compassion obviously has its limits.
Their
complex boasts extensive patios between the stacks of apartments. These could
host a dozen or more tents and port-a-potties that could alleviate the cagelike
situations at the border that they lament as deplorable. Although these
facilities would constitute an eyesore and block the light and view Ann and
Christopher currently enjoy, creating a tent community for refugees would
demonstrate the concern and compassion that people like Ann and Christopher
love to remind the rest of us that they possess.
Real
compassion in Western Civilization derives from the Biblical sense of the term
and means to share in the suffering and emotions of others. When Jesus saw his
friends weeping at the grave of Lazarus, He wept with them and acted.
Compassion means to suffer with and to be motivated to take immediate action to
alleviate the suffering of others.
So,
let the virtue-signaling liberals in sanctuary cities who incessantly lecture
us on their commitment to taking in everyone, liberals who find the rest of us
insensitive and heartless, let them manifest in deed the compassion they so
relentlessly embrace in word. Let them fulfill the Biblical imperative to
suffer with and take immediate action.
And
they will be rewarded for this in knowing that their upscale white communities
can find new strength in the economic and cultural diversity that the refugees
will provide. I am looking forward to the sprouting of tent cities in Pacific
Heights and elsewhere in the upscale parts of San Francisco. Diversity is truly
a community’s strength.
Abraham H. Miller is an emeritus
professor of political science, University of Cincinnati and a distinguished
fellow with the Hyam Salomon Center
Pelosi - Illegals - Sunkist - Her investments!
Pelosi's corrupt insider
passing of bills that make her rich.
Check for yourself
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's home House
District includes San Francisco.
Star-Kist Tuna's headquarters are in San
Francisco, Pelosi's home district.
Star-Kist is owned by Del Monte Foods and is a
major contributor to Pelosi.
Star-Kist is the major employer in American Samoa
employing 75% of the Samoan workforce.
Paul Pelosi, Nancy's husband, owns $17 million
dollars of Star-Kist stock.
In January, 2007 when the minimum wage was
increased from $5.15 to $7.25, Pelosi had American Samoa exempted from the
increase so Del Monte would not have to pay the higher wage. This would make
Del Monte products less expensive than their competition's.
Last week when the huge bailout bill was passed,
Pelosi added an earmark to the final bill adding $33 million dollars for an
"economic development credit in American Samoa".
Pelosi has called the Bush Administration
"corrupt".
Check some more for yourself
Conservative Activist Jumps Pelosi's Fence With
Illegal Aliens to Prove a Vital Point
Conservative activist Laura Loomer, who is known for going undercover
with James O'Keefe, took alleged illegal aliens from Mexico and Guatemala to
Speaker Nancy Pelosi's home in California. There, the group jumped the fence
and Loomer demanded the group be let into the home. The group set up a pop up
tent with the word "morality" on it and hung the pictures of those
who were killed by illegal aliens, The Daily Caller reported.
Illegals and the American Dream
When talking about
immigration, Democrats like to conflate illegal and legal immigration, dropping
the word “illegal” and spouting meaningless babble about no human being
illegal. They like to preach that illegal immigrants commit crimes at a
lower rate than American citizens, a factoid that has been exposed as a
lie.
The murder of legal immigrant and Newman Police Corporal Ronil Singh on
Christmas night by an illegal alien in the sanctuary state of California shows
not only that the claims by Chuck Schumer and the “bride of Chucky” Nancy
Pelosi that the Democrats support border security is a deadly and bald-faced
lie. It
highlights the difference between legal and illegal immigrants, between those
who love America and want to be Americans and those who murder them.
Ronil Singh came to the
U.S. from his native Fiji to fulfill a lifelong dream of becoming an officer,
joining a small-town police force in California and working to improve his
English. The day after Christmas, he stopped another immigrant, this one in the
country illegally, who shot and killed the corporal, authorities said Thursday…
"This suspect is in
our country illegally. He doesn't belong here. He is a criminal,"
Stanislaus County Sheriff Adam Christianson, whose agency is leading the
investigation, told reporters.
Newman Police Chief Randy
Richardson fought back tears as he described Singh, a 33-year-old with a
newborn son, as an "American patriot."
"He came to America
with one purpose, and that was to serve this country," Richardson said…
"He was living the
American dream," said Stanislaus County Sheriff's Deputy Royjinder Singh,
who is not related to the slain officer but knew him. "He loved camping,
loved hunting, loved fishing, loved his family."
And now he is dead. The
blood of Kate Steinle, Mollie Tibbetts, and
now Ronil Singh and others is on the hands of open border advocates and the
sanctuary city loons who provide no sanctuary for the American citizen victims
of illegal alien criminals.
Even if it were true that
illegal aliens commit crimes, including murder, at rates lower than American
citizens, that would be irrelevant. The murder rate for illegal aliens should
be zero because none of them should be here and the indisputable fact is that
Jamiel Shaw Jr., Kate Steinle, and Mollie Tibbetts would be alive today if the
illegal aliens who slew them were still staring at the other side of a border
wall liberals refuse to build.
One-third of the world’s
nations have border walls or barriers with their neighbors.
Pelosi believes this is
immoral.
Tell that to Israel,
Hungary, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, India, Pakistan, Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Ireland,
etc.
And Nancy Pelosi has a
wall around the backyard at her home in San Francisco.
What is immoral is a policy endorsed by Pelosi and Schumer of
sanctuary cities and even states that allows such criminal aliens in our
country to murder Americans and a Democratic caucus that would abolish I.C.E.
and those who risk their lives daily to provide some semblance of border
security.
What is immoral is politicians such as Oakland Mayor Libby
Schaaf not only refusing to cooperate with I.C.E. butgiving illegal aliens a heads-up when
I.C.E. raids are imminent.
In the wake of the Singh
murder, Schaaf still insists that warning illegal aliens about I.C.E. raids was
and is the right thing to do, the lives of American citizens she is sworn to
protect be damned:
Oakland Mayor Libby
Schaaf -- who once warned Northern California residents about an impending ICE
raid -- said she has “no regrets” for her actions and said the federal
immigration agency “has gone astray.”
“I have no regrets, none.
The more time goes by, the more certain I feel that I did the right thing in
standing up for our community and pointing out our values are not aligned with
our laws,” Schaff toldBuzzFeed in an interview. “That’s hopefully the
message that is sent out.”
The father of an
8-year-old Guatemalan boy who died in U.S. custody took his son to the border
after hearing rumors that parents and their children would be allowed to
migrate to the United States and escape the poverty in their homeland, the
boy's stepsister told the Associated Press.
Felipe Gomez Alonzo died
Monday at a New Mexico hospital after suffering coughing, vomiting and fever,
authorities said. It was the second such death this month. Another Guatemalan
child, 7-year-old Jakelin Caal, died in U.S. custody on Dec. 8.
The fact is that if we
had a wall, or whatever the hair-splitters want to call it, both these children
would be alive today. And it is American kids are dying too, killed and
murdered by illegal aliens who have no right to be here. Just ask the parents
of Justin Lee, 14, who was killed in a hit-and-run
accident by an illegal alien:
An illegal immigrant has
pleaded guilty to a hit and run that killed a Wixom teen in June.
Miguel Ibarra-Cerda, 22,
entered his plea Thursday, the day his trial was set to begin before Judge
Cheryl Matthews in Oakland County Circuit Court.
Ibarra-Cerda is charged
with failing to stop at the scene of an accident when at fault, resulting in
death, and reckless driving causing death for the collision which killed Justin
Lee, 14. Ibarra-Cerda faces up to 15 years in prison and a $10,000 fine for the
first charge and 15 years in prison and a $2,500-$10,000 fine on the second
charge. Matthews will sentence him Dec. 20.
Police in Connecticut
have arrested an 18-year-old undocumented immigrant from Jamaica on murder
charges related to the shooting death of an innocent 12-year-old boy a week
before Christmas.
Bridgeport Police Chief
Armando Perez on Monday announced the charges against Tajay Chambers stemming
from the December 18 death of Clinton Howell outside his family's home on
Willow Street.
Chambers has been charged
with murder; murder with special circumstances; use of a firearm during the
commission of a felony; illegal possession of a firearm without a permit; risk
of injury to a child; reckless endangerment, and larceny….
CTpost.com reported, citing
police sources, that earlier that evening, Chambers and his alleged
co-conspirators were driving in a stolen car when they got into an argument
with some people walking along Willow Street, among them Howell’s relative.
The wall would in fact
pay for itself, if only in the reduced cost of crimes that would be eliminated,
saving both dollars from overburdened social services and the cost of illegal
alien crimes, particularly the cost in human lives such as that of Ronil Singh,
who is survived by his wife and young son.
His death, the death of a
legal immigrant pursuing the American dream, and countless other American
citizens, including children, is on the hands of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck
Schumer. Perhaps Pelosi can attend Singh’s funeral and explain how his death
and the deaths of others in the absence of a wall is all President Trump’s
fault and that not building the wall is the moral thing to do.
Daniel
John Sobieski is a freelance writer whose pieces have appeared inInvestor’s Business Daily, Human
Events, Reason Magazine and the ChicagoSun-Times among
other publications.
CALIFORNIA and
the RISE OF THE LA RAZA MEXICAN FASCIST WELFARE STATE
"The costs of illegal immigration are being carefully hidden by
Democrats."
"The public schools
indoctrinate their young charges to hate this country and the rule of
law. Illegal aliens continue overwhelming the state, draining
California’s already depleted public services while endangering our lives,
the rule of law, and public safety for all citizens."
"America’s elites,
now overwhelmingly represented by the Democratic Party, have a single overriding
interest: their self-indulgent lifestyle."
Class Conflict within the
Democratic Party
Over
many decades, the American Left, the Democratic Party and their mutual
propaganda arm, the self-styled “mainstream media,” have successfully portrayed
conservatives and the Republican Party as a coalition of the wealthy and
intolerant. Further, the Democrats and the left have claimed that they
are the true champions of the working or middle class as they unceasingly fight
to defeat and marginalize this evil menace.
The
reality, however, is that this cabal has virtually no interest in defending or
aiding the working class as they are, in fact, the party of a bifurcated
constituency: the wealthy and those dependent on the largess of the government.
Of
the fifty wealthiest congressional districts throughout the country, the
Democrats now represent
forty-one. Of the remaining nine
represented by Republicans, three are in Texas, the only red state on the list
of fifty districts. Not coincidentally the residents of these same fifty
districts are supposedly among the most well-educated and sophisticated.
This transformative process is not a recent phenomenon as the trend began
in the 1980’s and accelerated rapidly in the early 2000’s.
America’s
elites, now overwhelmingly represented by the Democratic Party, have a single
overriding interest: their self-indulgent lifestyle. This is
manifested in their mistaken belief that conservatives (i.e. the “right”) are
hell bent on enforcing their version of morality on the nation, thus
potentially calling into question the lifestyles of the rich and
solipsistic.
The
veracity of this claim is immaterial as it would require an element of
deliberation not emotion -- a trait in extremely short supply among the
nation’s privileged class, nearly all of whom have difficulty in generating an original
thought due to the ill-education rampant in America’s universities. Thus,
the mindless accusations of racism, misogyny and Fascism directed at the
conservative rubes in middle America are acceptable, and in far too many
instances believed, particularly as many had the temerity to vote for Donald
Trump – who, although wealthy and Ivy League educated, is considered the
ultimate unsophisticated rube.
As
conservatives are the dominant force in the Republican Party and this nation
cannot function politically with more than two major political parties, the
alternative is the Democratic Party. An entity dominated by the American
Left, an assemblage whose core philosophy is antithetical to the interests of
the wealthy and privileged. Yet, determined to protect their lifestyles
and vilify conservatives, they willingly ally with the left and overwhelmingly
support virtually any Democratic candidate. In the recent 2018 mid-terms,
Democratic House candidates outspent their Republican opponents by a two to one
margin thanks primarily to this wealthy but myopic assemblage.
Their
colleagues in the Democratic Party, and the preponderance of the membership,
are those dependent on the largess of the federal and state governments.
On the other hand, the growing segment of the citizenry who are working and
self-sufficient are increasingly joining those who believe in limited
government in migrating to the Republican Party-- a process that is
accelerating with the policies and tactics of Donald Trump in combating the
entrenched left and their determination to culturally and economically
transform the nation. The Republican Party will inevitably become the
party of the working or middle class. As such, they could potentially
dominate the political agenda for the foreseeable future.
The
left and the Democratic Party, in order to offset this possibility, must
aggressively seek to increase the number of dependents by promoting the
legalization and ultimate citizenship for untold millions of illegal immigrants
and promising all Americans cradle to grave economic security. In order
to enact this strategy to defeat the Republicans, the left must have the active
participation and financial support of the nation’s wealthy-- which they
have.
The Democratic Party has evolved into essentially an
incompatible two-tier class-driven entity encompassing the nation’s wealthiest
and the nation’s poorest. Nonetheless, it is at
present a convenient home for the elites to hold off the imaginary horde of
conservatives outside their gilded doors.
However,
the voting numbers within the party are overwhelmingly with those who generally
support the leftist philosophies of redistribution (e.g. socialized medicine
and guaranteed incomes) and curtailing of freedom (e.g. speech, assembly and
religion). While it may not manifest itself to the affluent who have cast
their lot with the Democrats, the redistribution of wealth must, by necessity,
come from the wealthy, as that is where the bulk of the nation’s wealth
resides. It is also this same small-in-numbers group that benefits
the most from freedom of speech and assembly.
Once
fully embroiled in this marriage of convenience, a divorce will be impossible
as the co-inhabitant of the Democratic Party, the dependent class, must
continue grow in order to electorally defeat the Republicans and protect the
left’s agenda. Further, the oversold expectations promulgated by the left
will never be satisfied regardless of how many promises are made or token
redistributive programs are enacted by the current ruling class. Only a
complete transformation of this nation into a failed socialist state will
satiate the left, their acolytes and their attendant army of dependency.
A goal more in reach than ever thanks to the inability of the nation’s elites
to give a damn about the future of the country.
There
is not a more short-sighted and self-absorbed group of citizens in this nation
than the white, wealthy well-educated urban and suburban voters. They are willing to rend the fabric of this nation in order
to protect their privilege and lifestyle. While the vast majority of
Americans will ultimately pay the price, the current ruling class and their
progeny will have far more to lose.
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.
It certainly is a
good time to be an illegal alien in California. Democratic State Sen. Ricardo
Lara last week pitched a bill to permit illegal immigrants to serve on all
state and local boards and commissions. This week, lawmakers unveiled a $1 billion health care plan that would include spending
$250 million to extend health care coverage to all illegal alien adults.
“Currently,
undocumented adults are explicitly and unjustly locked out of healthcare due to
their immigration status. In a matter of weeks, California legislators will
have a decisive opportunity to reverse that cruel and counterproductive fact,”
Assemblyman Joaquin Arambula said in Monday’s Sacramento Bee.
His
legislation, Assembly Bill 2965, would give as many as 114,000
uninsured illegal aliens access to Medi-Cal programs. A companion bill has been
sponsored by State Sen. Richard Lara.
But that could just
be a drop in the bucket. The Democrats’ plan covers more than 100,000 illegal
aliens with annual incomes bless than $25,000, however an estimated 1.3 million
might be eligible based on their earnings.
In addition, it is
estimated that 20 percent of those living in California illegally are uninsured
– the $250 million covers just 11 percent.
So, will politicians
soon be asking California taxpayers once again to dip into their pockets to pay
for the remaining 9 percent?
Before they ask for
more, Democrats have to win the approval of Gov. Jerry Brown, who cautioned
against spending away the state’s surplus when he introduced his $190 billion budget
proposal in January.
Given Brown’s
openness to expanding Medi-Cal expansions in recent years, not to mention his
proclivity for blindly supporting any measure benefitting lawbreaking
immigrants, the latest fiscal irresponsibility may win approval.
And if he takes a pass, the two Democrats most likely to succeed Brown –
Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa –
favor excessive social spending and are actively courting
illegal immigrant support.
COST to AMERICANS of the LA RAZA MEXICAN OCCUPATION in CALIFORNIA ALONE: $2,370 per legal.
All that “cheap” labor is staggeringly expensive!
"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.
Californians bear
an enormous fiscal burden as a result of an illegal alien population estimated
at almost 3 million residents. The annual expenditure of state and local tax
dollars on services for that population is $25.3 billion. That total amounts to
a yearly burden of about $2,370 for a household headed by a U.S. citizen.
The Gospel According to Nancy: No
Borders, Kill Babies (UNLESS THEY'RE LA RAZA ANCHOR BABIES!)
Tucker
Carlson pointed out a few days
ago how the already insufferable leader of the
Congressional Democrats has recently been "ordained….an archbishop in the
church of progressive sanctimony." For a while now, Nancy
Pelosi's been the country's expert on morality (e.g., border wall: immoral;
abortion on demand: moral). She's now taken to telling the country
how much she prays, and she's urging others to do it, too – at least that old
sinner, Donald Trump. After last Thursday's televised squabble in
the Oval Office, Pelosi shared with reporters how she told Trump she was praying for
him and urged the president (whom she also called
a "skunk"
while ridiculing his manhood) to accept the Democrats' budget proposal with no
funding for a border wall. "In fact," she said with
stomach-turning piety, "I asked him to pray over it."
When
a smug person ends an argument by telling you to "pray over it,"
she's really saying, "Ask God. He knows I'm
right!"
Summarizing
her and Chuck Schumer's meeting with Trump, she told the media, "I myself
thought we should open the meeting with a prayer, which I did. I
told him about King Solomon, when he was to become king of the Jews, he prayed
to God, he said: 'I need you to give me great understanding and wisdom,
Lord.'"
King
Solomon is Pelosi's favorite Bible character, especially because he proposed
solving a problem by cutting a baby in half.
Now
Sister Nancy's praying for
Trump to keep the government open so federal
employees can finish their Christmas shopping.
It's
an axiom that if a conservative says his faith informs his political decisions,
he'll be condemned for establishing a state religion, while liberals get to
veer back and forth over the church-state centerline as freely as those
motorists who love to text while driving. Right now the liberal
media are applauding the way Pelosi "schooled President
Donald Trump about the Bible," but it's not clear why. It's not
as if they're suddenly in favor of anyone being schooled in the Bible,
especially anyone in a public
classroom.
Pelosi
never bats an eye without a political motive. This Saint Nancy act
might be her attempt to occupy the spiritual high ground that, obviously,
Donald Trump has shown no interest in occupying himself. Pelosi
wouldn't dare try this with a president like George W. Bush, who, while he
didn't boast about his piety on TV, was recognized as genuine in his Christian
faith – prompting the left's usual reaction: Ross
Douthat wrote in 2006 that "the fear of theocracy
has become a defining panic of the Bush era."
Theology
was less of an issue for liberals during the Obama years; he was their messiah,
and they just worshiped him. Meantime, Obama conspicuously dissed
orthodox Christians with everything from calculated snubs and criticism to
gratuitously tormenting the Little
Sisters of the Poor, all the while devotedly celebrating
the unblemished virtues of
Islam. In 2015, Hillary bluntly
stated that "[d]eep-seated ... religious beliefs
... have to be changed" to accommodate the unlimited abortion
license. Then, last year, Democratic National Committee chairman Tom
Perez said it is "not
negotiable" that "[e]very Democrat" support
abortion. Pelosi tried to mitigate Perez's remarks by saying "of course"
there's room for pro-lifers in the Democratic Party, but try to find one who's
not actually voting Perez-style.
This
year, Pelosi watched the Democrats lurch wildly to the extreme
left. For decades before that, they were trusted allies in the
left's war on conventional morality and religion (except Islam!) for being
repressive, patriarchal, and counterrevolutionary. It may be that,
alarmed that the Democrat brand has become too materialistic, amoral, and
atheist, she thinks she can give it religion. Maybe she can draw an
unfavorable comparison between the reprobate and undisciplined Donald Trump and
herself: the "ardent, practicing Catholic," who exhorts the President
to beg for "the great understanding and wisdom" that she (and Chuck
Schumer?) have already been granted by God. Haven't Republicans
marched under the banner of morality and Christian values long
enough? Now that they've elected the unholy Trump, why can't the
Democrats seize that banner for themselves?
For
one thing, because no evangelical or conservative Catholic would ever buy
it. Sure, the Democratic Party is crowded with Catholics, but the
serious ones left years ago. The leading unserious Catholic is
Pelosi herself, who professes her devotion to the faith but does it while
living in open, willful defiance of the Church's crystal-clear teaching against
abortion: "It is the
teaching of the Catholic Church from the very beginning
that the killing of an unborn child is always intrinsically evil and can never
be justified."
When
her duplicity threatened to become an issue in 2004, Pelosi pretended that,
moved by her "ardent" devotion to the Church, she had been studying
the Church's teaching on the beginning of life "a long time," and she
stated falsely to Tom Brokaw on Meet the Press that the Church
has never
defined it. Asked when human life begins, she
replied, "We don't know," and that "[t]he point is, that it
shouldn't have an impact on the woman's right to choose" – the
"it" being when a human life begins, which shouldn't have an
impact on the decision to get an abortion. Easy mistake to
make when your catechism is Roe v. Wade.
Later,
when a reporter mentioned the Gosnell infanticides and challenged her own
support for partial-birth abortion, an agitated Pelosi snarled back that
"[a]s a practicing and respectful Catholic, this is sacred
ground to me when we talk about this[.] ... This
shouldn't have anything to do with politics." But as a
politician, she never stops talking about it, and the sacred ground she was
talking about wasn't human life, but the exercise of a mother's "free
will" to terminate her child. In response, New York's Cardinal
Egan said, "Anyone who dares to
defend that [the unborn] may be legitimately killed
because another human being 'chooses' to do so or for any other equally
ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy
worthy of the name." Her own bishop reluctantly corrected her
misstatements in a public
letter, necessitated by "the widespread consternation
among Catholics" of her deliberate distortions of Catholic
doctrine. Pope Benedict counseled her, in person, on
the Church's express teaching, "which enjoins all Catholics, and
especially legislators," to protect "human life at all stages of its
development." Pelosi, " the respectful Catholic" who
presumed to tell Trump to pray for wisdom, emerged from thatmeeting no
wiser for it, obtusely extolling the "Church's leadership in fighting
poverty, hunger and global warming."
Jesus
warned against hypocrites who make a public display of praying "that they
may be seen by men." The way Pelosi pretends to exemplify
"prayerful" politics, and the way she told Trump "in
private" that she's praying for him – and immediately announced it in a
televised press conference – is pure Pelosi: cynical, addlebrained,
phony. If it might hurt Trump, she'll pontificate how every MS-13
killer retains a "spark of divinity,"
then goes right back to her life's work snuffing out that spark from 60 million
innocents and counting. The Bible never says it's intrinsically evil
to build a wall or protect a border, but it's still got that commandment
against murder.
Let
the Democrats canonize this Pharisee if they need a patron
saint. Her feast day can fall on January 22.
T.R. Clancy looks at the world from Dearborn,
Michigan. You can email him at trclancy@yahoo.com.
The Schumer & Pelosi show
Chuck
Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, the twin nutters of Congress, were certain they could
beat Trump at his own game, but have made fools of themselves, as
usual. The stand-off is not over but with each passing day, the
Democrats reveal more of their anti-American, pro-illegal immigration
agenda. Conservatives have been sounding the alarm for
years: Democrats do not care about American citizens!
We
are an annoying inconvenience, especially those of us who do not buy what they
are selling. We vote against them, which makes them
angry. They lash out at us, call us names, impugn our intelligence
with fervor. All of the late-night comics, the Bill Mahers of the
comedy branch of the entertainment industry, are especially
venal. Jimmy Kimmel has decried those who have contributed to
the GoFundMe
page to fund the border wall as meth addicts. It was begun by
a Vet, Brad
Kolfage, who lost three limbs and it's raised nearly
$15m.
It
appears that Democratic members of Congress are as snowflakey as millennials on
our university campuses. They assume that anyone who opposes their
ridiculous socialist, genderless, climate-alarmist, virtue-signaling
directives is a Neanderthal, unfit to have an opinion. It is then
thoroughly acceptable to malign such people, those of us who oppose every
aspect of their anti-America-as-founded agenda, in any and
every disgusting manner they can devise.
The
left is all about identity politics. They assign all of us to a
group -- racial, class, and/or all of their fabricated gender categories. The
right is all about individuals, their character, their talent, their
contributions to society. We do not care about skin color, economic
class or sexual orientation. We do care about good vs.
evil, right vs. wrong. This makes us quite villainous in the
eyes of the left for whom everything is relative. For example, we do not think
poverty causes crime, unlearned values of Western Civilization
do. Try to steal an election? It is moral if it takes out an
opponent. We are, it appears, the left vs. the right, very different
on a neurological level.
Schumer and Pelosi have armed guards whenever they are amongst the
public. But they are both fervent in their quest to deny us the
right to bear arms and to prevent a wall on the southern border to protect us
from the flood of lethal drugs that flow into the US. They are
impervious to the crimes of the barbaric gangs like MS13, no matter how many
innocent Americans they kill. They do not give a thought to the many
illegals from terrorist nations that also seek to enter the country on a daily
basis. Schumer, Pelosi and their willing subjects in Congress ignore
completely the horrific hazards that cross the border every
day. They want cheap labor, no matter how many Americans are left
jobless, and they want, more than anything, a dependent underclass whom they
mean to give the right to vote. They already vote anyway, thanks to
the Left's rejection of Common-sense voter ID.
If
there were a television program based on Schumer and Pelosi, it would have to be
a comedy; the two of them are so inept, so childish. They would be Dumb and Dumber redux. Each
of them seems to believe they run the country and can dictate to the president
how he will govern. They demand that Trump abandon the wall. They
have no intention of compromising; they only want to deny Trump and his
supporters what they want -- border security that works. So enraged,
so benighted, by Trump's presidency, they would rather see us overrun by
migrants from third-world nations, like those who have destroyed the UK,
Germany, Sweden, and the rest of Europe, than protect America as a sovereign
nation.
The
"government shutdown" is just a ploy, many times overused by now,
relatively meaningless to the lives of most Americans. The Schumer & Pelosi
show will do everything they can to hype it as a disaster, but we all know it
is nothing of the kind. Trump must hold out for funding of the
wall.
While
there have been some bad actors in our government in the past, Schumer and
Pelosi are the worst of the worst. They are equally arrogant, each
thoroughly ignorant of reality beyond the bubble of wealth and privilege they
inhabit. They both believe themselves to be smarter than the rest of
us, when in fact they are both really dim bulbs, long past their sell-by
date. Yes, Pelosi is good at raising money; how and why is a
mystery. That each of them is repeatedly re-elected does not
say much for their constituents' familiarity with the Constitution, the law,
American history or the facts in their own communities.
San
Francisco, Pelosi's district is now a hell-hole but for her walled
compound. New York too, like California, is a
state that residents are fleeing as fast as they can. Both
states have been destroyed by moonbatty leftists; high taxes, dumbing down of
education for political purposes, and the sacrifice of common sense to global
warming alarmists. Schumer and Pelosi have for years been on board
with every silly attempt to restructure, to transform, American
society. They both jumped on the Obama bandwagon the moment he was
elected. Along with Obama, they are responsible for incalculable
damage done to this country over the eight years of that
administration. While their constant appearances on television are
so often humorous (Pelosi's silly, practiced hand gestures and
Schumer's relentless badgering of Trump), they are not one bit
funny. They are just loathsome.
Pelosi's Stake in Illegal Immigration
The Minuteman Project,
founded by Jim Gilchrist (who is also the co-author of the book Minutemen: The
Battle to Secure America’s Borders), is made up of citizen volunteers who watch
our border with Mexico and report illegal entry to the border patrol. For
performing that thankless task in full compliance with the law, Gilchrist and
his colleagues have been falsely maligned as fascists, racists, and even murderers.
They have been driven off the speaker’s platform at Columbia University and
vilified by Leftist politicians and their handmaidens in the liberal press.
So it was no surprise
that the mainstream media chose to ignore a recent press release, issued by his
publisher, in which Gilchrist asked the question about Nancy Pelosi’s ethics
that should be on the minds of every law-abiding American – including those
immigrants who are following the law to become citizens here the proper way:
“Do we really need a House Speaker whose every action is calculated to enhance
her own financial interests, instead of focusing on how porous borders will
affect the security of everyday American citizens?”
Gilchrist did not stop
there. He demanded an investigation into Pelosi’s “economic stake in just the
kind of illegal alien exploitation that we deplore in Minutemen.” But you would
never know it from the liberal media, who - while ignoring this demand - have
had no compunctions in calling for Speaker Hastert’s head in the wake of the
Foley page controversy.
Gilchrist was reacting to
my report several weeks ago in FrontPage Magazine that Pelosi – who owns
non-union vineyards in Napa Valley where grape-picking depends chiefly on the
availability of cheap foreign labor – is doing everything she can to help open
the floodgates to more illegal immigration. And she wants the American
taxpayers to pay their way. As even more proof of this than I previously
reported, Pelosi does not want employers like her to be required to pay the cost
of illegal aliens’ hospital care. She voted against a bill that would make
employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee seeks
medical attention. And she voted in favor of
rewarding illegal aliens from Mexico with Social Security benefits.
At the same time, Pelosi
has led the Democratic opposition to any effective border controls or
documentation requirements. She opposed the Secure Fence Act of 2006, signed
into law by President Bush, and voted against final passage of a border security
and enforcement bill in 2005 which required that all businesses must use an
electronic system to check if all new hires have the legal right to work in
this country. She voted against a bill to bar drivers' licenses for illegal
aliens in 2005. This year she opposed legislation requiring presentation of a
legitimate government-issued photo ID to prove eligibility to vote, claiming
that “there is little evidence anywhere in the country of a significant problem
with non-citizen voters.” She is dead wrong. For example, an accused terrorist
by the name of Nuradin Abdi was just recently reported to have illegally
registered to vote at the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Nuradin Abdi was
indicted earlier this year as part of a conspiracy to blow up the Columbus
Mall.
How many other terrorist
suspects may have slipped through the system because Leftists like Pelosi
oppose any meaningful screens? Instead she continues to advocate our
recognition of the flimsy, non-validated ID card that the Mexican consulates provide
to illegal aliens before they cross over our border, called the “matricula
consular”, which gives them phony documentation to set up bank accounts, apply
for jobs, obtain social benefits, board airplanes, identify themselves to
police, enter buildings that require IDs, obtain drivers’ licenses and then
perhaps use those drivers’ licenses to try to illegally register to vote in our
elections.
Pelosi also believes in
giving sanctuary to illegal aliens. She opposed legislation to deny federal
homeland security funding to state and local governments who refuse to share
information they learn about an individual's immigration status with Federal
immigration authorities. Pelosi’s hometown of San Francisco is one of the
sanctuary cities she voted to protect for the benefit of illegal aliens. Pelosi
even voted against strengthening our immigration law with regard to the
deportability of alien terrorists.
Jim Gilchrist cut to the
chase with this devastating observation that the mainstream media does not want
you to read:
"As we’ve shown
again and again in ‘Minutemen,’ the Democrats aren’t just hypocrites, but are
working actively to subvert our legislative system to their own ends. Their
only goal is votes, votes and more votes, no matter where they come from, no
matter if they’re cast legally, no matter whether the person casting them is
dead, alive, a citizen or an illegal alien."
Pelosi sees Jim
Gilchrist’s Minutemen Project as a threat to her pro-illegal alien agenda. More
illegal aliens mean more votes for the Democrats and more grape-pickers for
Napa Valley vineyards like hers. So she even voted against a measure that would
have cut off the use of U.S. taxpayers’ funds to tip off illegal aliens as to
where the Minutemen citizen patrols may be located! She obviously wants to see
the Minutemen put out of business – permanently. She can count on the liberal
press to distort the work of the Minutemen and to keep out of the public eye
Gilchrist’s pointed questions about her motivations for helping illegal aliens
during the run-up to the mid-term elections that may make her the next Speaker
of the House.
Gilchrist, of course, is
accustomed to being vilified and prevented by the Left from getting his message
out. In early October, he was prevented from finishing his speech at the
"Minutemen Forum" sponsored by the Columbia College Republicans.
Gilchrist had spoken for just a few minutes and managed to utter the words “I
love the First Amendment” when a group of radical protestors took the stage and
interrupted him, displaying a big banner saying "There are no
illegals." More protestors then stormed the stage. Chaos erupted and the
audience members who had come to hear Gilchrist speak never got the chance,
which was precisely the protestors’ objective. As reported online by the staff
of Columbia’s undergraduate newspaper, “a mosh pit of triumphal students and
community members danced and chanted outside, "Asian, Black, Brown and
White, we smashed the Minutemen tonight!" They also put out a statement
declaring:
“The Minutemen are not a
legitimate voice in the debate on immigration. They are a racist, armed militia
who have declared open hunting season on immigrants, causing countless hate
crimes and over 3000 deaths on the border. Why should exploitative corporations
have free passes between nations, but individual people not? No human being is
illegal.” (Emphasis added)
We have come to the point
in this country where a bunch of radical protestors get to decide who is and
who is not a legitimate voice in the debate on as critical a public policy
issue as immigration. Such Leftists think that migration in a borderless world
is a basic human right. They want no barriers, no guards, and no proof of
lawful residency. They certainly do not want the Minutemen watching the border and
reporting illegal entry to the authorities.
Leftist slogans like “no
human being is illegal” are red herrings. It is not the human being who is
illegal; it is what the human being does that may be illegal. One’s conduct is
the test, not simply who one is. Immigrants who follow our rules are welcome
here. Those who do not abide by our laws have no right to be here. A person who
breaks into your house without your permission does not deserve room, board and
a job as a reward, even if the intruder may be much poorer than you. He has
broken the law and deserves to be punished for what he has done. Our country’s
boundaries and rules for entry and residency similarly define who is permitted
to be here and how we choose to protect ourselves. We are a land of immigrants,
but we are also a land of laws with certain core values. Those seeking to enter
our country and remain here must learn to accommodate to our laws and values,
not the other way around. That is the way prior generations of immigrants did
it, including those who passed through Ellis Island. Why should the law be
thrown aside now?
What we are witnessing is
a frontal challenge to our nation’s sovereignty. Mexico’s Foreign Secretary
wants to drag us before the United Nations for intending to build a fence on
our side of the border with our money to keep out aliens who seek to enter our
country illegally. They will probably get a sympathetic ear as some UN
bureaucrats believe there should be no such thing as “illegal” immigrants in
the first place. For the first time in our history, Americans are being asked
to cede the right to decide how we define ourselves as a nation and protect our
own borders to a globalist governance body. Will Pelosi lead her liberal
loyalists as House Speaker to support the UN against America’s right to control
its own borders? Do we really want to risk finding out?
It is high time, as Jim
Gilchrist demanded in the press release ignored by the mainstream media, that
Pelosi come clean under oath as to her personal stake in the illegal
immigration issue before she can do even more damage as House Speaker.
No comments:
Post a Comment