Thursday, June 6, 2013
Moving My Stance From FaceBook to Here
I've decided it's time to publish my opinions in a friendlier environment. Living in Los Angeles, and being a musician as well, I spend a lot of time with people who do not share my views and quite frankly, don't want to read or discuss them. Prior to the latest Presidential Election, I thought it important that I continue on FB in hopes of convincing at least a few to see the dangers at hand. Now well beyond the Election, it seems the only thing I accomplish is to further alienate them and that's not what FB is about. However, this is my Blog and I CAN speak my mind here without concern because, unlike FB, you're here because you want to know what I think...I like that.
Feel free to share your views with me here as well. Know that I'm not defensive by nature, but I am very staunch in my opinions and I like to think that my opinions come from research and study. That doesn't mean I'm right but it does mean I've given it some thought. :-)
My reason for writing here is that I still strongly believe we are in grave danger of losing the freedom and liberty we hold dear in this country I love. As Merle Haggard wrote in The Fightin' Side of Me, "If you don't love it, leave it, let this song that I'm singing be a warning. When you're running down my way of life, you're walking on the fighting side of me."
Sunday, July 8, 2012
Well, here's more food for thought. Obama signs an Executive Order essentially granting asylum to the under-30 illegal immigrants, right? I'm still scratching my head on how he can go against our democracy so blatantly and still remain in favor, but I'll save that line of thought for another time. My issue is this and it is a drum I have always beaten regarding right and wrong: When you make decisions based on the symptoms instead of the cause and effect changes accordingly, the foundation of the good intentions are built on shifting sand and cannot endure the litmus test of truth. Huh you ask?
Obama granted amnesty to these young illegals which means they can freely apply for a 2-year work permit without fear of deportation and can renew their work permit an unlimited number of times - in other words without even an end game. "The president also made clear the change was not amnesty, immunity or a path to citizenship." Walks and talks like amnesty to me, but I digress. Anyway, let's look at this and see what SHOULD happen legally if our INS properly performs their duties.
These under-30 illegals can now come out of hiding and apply for work permits without fear of deportation, right? What if you're the illegal family of these children/young adults? Chances are good these "legal illegals" are living in the same house as the illegal-illegals, right? The other illegals don't fall under this umbrella of protection, right? Now the INS has an address where known illegal-illegals are hiding. Shouldn't it be incumbent on them to properly carry out their duties to identify and deport those who are in this country illegally? Isn't that why they were hired and why our tax dollars are being used? It becomes quite a powder keg for Obama, demanding either repeal of the Executive Order or an order for the INS to stand down and not do their job at all. We should demand that they do the job for which our tax dollars are being used, don't you think? And don't even try to throw the "it's not fair" or "race card" in on this discussion. It wasn't fair that they illegally gained access to the opportunities and welfare of our country while so many law-abiding people are dealing with a complicated system for legal entry and opportunity, it it? And the race card doesn't apply as the law clearly defines illegals without regard to color or origin. Just because the law ends up targeting a certain race in no way means the law was written only for such, so the race card is invalid. For example, just because the prison population has a higher percentage of Black and Hispanic doesn't mean it was racially designed to do such...it's a reality, not an ideology.
Now, back to my earlier "drum." I'm sure the Liberals would cry foul over this claiming it's inhumane, against their civil rights and basically unconstitutional with regards to unlawful search and seizure, BUT ----- once you commit an illegal act, you bear the consequences of that act. Simply living out a life illegally does not grant immunity for your illegal act and that's not any different than a murderer living responsibly for years after the crime. In the same manner, what a person has built or accomplished cannot override the fact that it was done on an illegal foundation. Everything AFTER the illegal act cannot and should not be taken into consideration in reaching a decision of deportation.
Actually, I'm pretty sure the law is clear - you enter illegally, we find you, we return you to where you were legal. The only breakdown I see is in the lack of resolve our of Federal government to enforce the democratically-decided laws. Even worse, when a sovereign state attempted to enforce it, the Feds tried to handcuff them and when that didn't work, Obama dissolved the Memorandum of Agreement. This is the epitome of a refusal to acknowledge the sovereign rights of each state to protect and care for their people and is EXACTLY what the anti-Federalists feared during the drafting and ratification of our Constitution.
Okay, I've jumped off my soapbox. Your turn......
Thursday, July 5, 2012
Let's elect Lt Col Allen White as our next president. I think 4 years of him in the White House might not solve all of our crises, but I do believe it would at least get our focus back on the USA and our vision of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. As a minimum, at least it would end our constant global apologies and cow-towing to those who wish to do us harm.
What ya think? Let's hear from you.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Carnival Splendor Engine Fire?
A friend sent this article to me recently. Ironically, just this morning I was wondering what was ever discovered about the so-far unexplained missile launch off our coast. I wasn't buying the Pentagon's explanation of an aircraft...I live by one of the busiest airports in the world (LAX) and I think most people in this area know what an aircraft contrail looks like.
If the following article is even close to true (which I believe it's scary close), then we are in an unannounced Cold War with China that could easily escalate to a global scale. I've said it before, and I will keep beating this drum --- OBAMA IS THE WORST THING THAT COULD HAPPEN TO THE U.S. His true agenda (still unknown) and lack of political/financial expertise will topple this once-great country of ours.
Why did it take the US Navy 11 hours to respond to this, if true? If true, it rings eerily similar to Clinton's retaliatory strikes against terrorism during his Presidency. What's really wagging the dog here?
ARTICLE:
Carnival Splendor attacked by EMP missile???
A new report circulating in the Kremlin today prepared for Prime Minister Putin by Director Anatoly Perminov of the Russian Federal Space Agency states that an Arkon-1 military satellite monitoring the western coastal regions of North America detected an EMP anomalous event occurring on November 8th at 0600 Pacific Standard Time (-8 hours GMT) that bore the direct signature of a YJ-62 subsonic anti-ship missile fired from a Chinese Peoples Liberation Navy Type 041 submarine (NATO code name Yuan-Class) known to be patrolling approximately 200 kilometers off United States coast.
Nearly 11 hours after this EMP event this report further says, Arkon-1 then detected a BGM-109 (Tomahawk) subsonic cruise missile launched from a US Navy Ohio-Class submarine operating off the coast of California on a training mission from its home port located at US Navy s Kitsap Base in Washington State and was enroute to the largest American Naval Base on the US west coast in San Diego, California.
Note: A Russian military intelligence (GRU) addendum to this report states that the training mission the Ohio-Class submarine was on is related to a new US law passed this year allowing for the first time in history for women to serve on US Navy subs and was an operational exercise testing female Naval Officers competence prior to their first operational deployment
The immediate effect of the Chinese Navy’s firing of their EMP missile, this report continues, was the catastrophic crippling of the US based cruise ship Carnival Splendor that stranded its nearly 4,500 passengers and crew in a dead in the water boat and prompting the Americans to send the US Navy’s Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier, warplanes, and supply aircraft to protect it from further attack after all of its electronic systems were destroyed.
An electromagnetic pulse (EMP) such as was used upon the Carnival Splendor is a burst of electromagnetic radiation that causes rapidly changing electric fields (or magnetic fields) that when coupling with electrical/electronic systems produces damaging current and voltage surges destroying all non-hardened electrical systems.
The US Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) had previously warned that American ships were vulnerable to such attacks with EMP Assessment Group Leader of Blaise Corbett stating that the consequences of failing to take appropriate precautions to protect fleet mission critical systems can ultimately prove catastrophic to the Navy’s mission.
The purpose of this Chinese EMP upon an American ship, this report says, was twofold: 1.) A test of the EMP weapon itself that in a war against the Americans and would be used against their Naval Fleet and Marine Forces operating out of California and the west coast of the US, and 2.) A test of the response time for American retaliatory measures against any Chinese warship attacking the US and/or its interests in the Pacific.
The GRU further states that the timing of this attack was timed even more crucially due to China s testing of America Ts response time during a period when their President, as Commander In Chief of all US Military Forces, was out of the country, as Obama was as he was in India at the time.
The Americans response time of nearly 11 hours between the EMP attack on the Carnival Splendor and the US retaliatory strike, the GRU states, virtually assured that the Chinese submarine responsible for the attack escaped, but which they further point out may have been intended by the Americans so as not to escalate this crisis.
To the geo-political reason(s) for a Communist Chinese attack upon the Americans just days before the crucially important G-20 Summit in South Korea, which both Presidents Hu and Obama will be attending, this report says was due to the United States, in essence, declaring total economic war upon the rest of the world by its printing of nearly $1 Trillion US Dollars in order to monetize its staggering debt and that China warned:
If the United States can increase the volume of dollars and it can transmit inflation to other countries to lessen the pressure of debt, then it will bring about a catastrophic influence on the world.
If the following article is even close to true (which I believe it's scary close), then we are in an unannounced Cold War with China that could easily escalate to a global scale. I've said it before, and I will keep beating this drum --- OBAMA IS THE WORST THING THAT COULD HAPPEN TO THE U.S. His true agenda (still unknown) and lack of political/financial expertise will topple this once-great country of ours.
Why did it take the US Navy 11 hours to respond to this, if true? If true, it rings eerily similar to Clinton's retaliatory strikes against terrorism during his Presidency. What's really wagging the dog here?
ARTICLE:
Carnival Splendor attacked by EMP missile???
A new report circulating in the Kremlin today prepared for Prime Minister Putin by Director Anatoly Perminov of the Russian Federal Space Agency states that an Arkon-1 military satellite monitoring the western coastal regions of North America detected an EMP anomalous event occurring on November 8th at 0600 Pacific Standard Time (-8 hours GMT) that bore the direct signature of a YJ-62 subsonic anti-ship missile fired from a Chinese Peoples Liberation Navy Type 041 submarine (NATO code name Yuan-Class) known to be patrolling approximately 200 kilometers off United States coast.
Nearly 11 hours after this EMP event this report further says, Arkon-1 then detected a BGM-109 (Tomahawk) subsonic cruise missile launched from a US Navy Ohio-Class submarine operating off the coast of California on a training mission from its home port located at US Navy s Kitsap Base in Washington State and was enroute to the largest American Naval Base on the US west coast in San Diego, California.
Note: A Russian military intelligence (GRU) addendum to this report states that the training mission the Ohio-Class submarine was on is related to a new US law passed this year allowing for the first time in history for women to serve on US Navy subs and was an operational exercise testing female Naval Officers competence prior to their first operational deployment
The immediate effect of the Chinese Navy’s firing of their EMP missile, this report continues, was the catastrophic crippling of the US based cruise ship Carnival Splendor that stranded its nearly 4,500 passengers and crew in a dead in the water boat and prompting the Americans to send the US Navy’s Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier, warplanes, and supply aircraft to protect it from further attack after all of its electronic systems were destroyed.
An electromagnetic pulse (EMP) such as was used upon the Carnival Splendor is a burst of electromagnetic radiation that causes rapidly changing electric fields (or magnetic fields) that when coupling with electrical/electronic systems produces damaging current and voltage surges destroying all non-hardened electrical systems.
The US Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) had previously warned that American ships were vulnerable to such attacks with EMP Assessment Group Leader of Blaise Corbett stating that the consequences of failing to take appropriate precautions to protect fleet mission critical systems can ultimately prove catastrophic to the Navy’s mission.
The purpose of this Chinese EMP upon an American ship, this report says, was twofold: 1.) A test of the EMP weapon itself that in a war against the Americans and would be used against their Naval Fleet and Marine Forces operating out of California and the west coast of the US, and 2.) A test of the response time for American retaliatory measures against any Chinese warship attacking the US and/or its interests in the Pacific.
The GRU further states that the timing of this attack was timed even more crucially due to China s testing of America Ts response time during a period when their President, as Commander In Chief of all US Military Forces, was out of the country, as Obama was as he was in India at the time.
The Americans response time of nearly 11 hours between the EMP attack on the Carnival Splendor and the US retaliatory strike, the GRU states, virtually assured that the Chinese submarine responsible for the attack escaped, but which they further point out may have been intended by the Americans so as not to escalate this crisis.
To the geo-political reason(s) for a Communist Chinese attack upon the Americans just days before the crucially important G-20 Summit in South Korea, which both Presidents Hu and Obama will be attending, this report says was due to the United States, in essence, declaring total economic war upon the rest of the world by its printing of nearly $1 Trillion US Dollars in order to monetize its staggering debt and that China warned:
If the United States can increase the volume of dollars and it can transmit inflation to other countries to lessen the pressure of debt, then it will bring about a catastrophic influence on the world.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
US Government Files Lawsuit Against AZ SB1070
Well, I didn't think it would actually come to this. From everything I've read, coupled with the intense scrutiny AZ law enforcement has been under the past 2 years because of Sheriff Arpaio's "Tent City," I am VERY confident that SB1070 goes far above and beyond in ensuring it does NOT authorize racial profiling, nor does it supplant Federal Law.
I find it interesting that the Obama Administration did NOT file suit against AZ for racial profiling. Isn't that exactly what all of the opponents to this Bill are screaming from every mountain top? I have not heard dissension of any other aspect of this Bill, yet the Federal Government's lawsuit doesn't address it EVEN though those were the first words out of Pelosi, Holder and Obama - RACIAL PROFILING!!!
It's clear they're just playing "Hot Button" politics. Why else would a government sue a state for doing nothing more than enforcing the Federal laws? Don't forget where the Federal government is getting the funds to litigate this lawsuit - YOUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS!!! With our government farther in debt than ever before, money that can be better utilized will be expended in frivolous lawsuits against one of our own - could the situation be more ludicrous?
Following is a statement released by Gov. Jan Brewer regarding our government's action against her state. If you'd like more information, check out their website at www.keepazsafe.com.
STATEMENT
Statement by Governor Jan Brewer
PHOENIX – “Today I was notified that the federal government has filed a lawsuit against the State of Arizona. It is wrong that our own federal government is suing the people of Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law. As a direct result of failed and inconsistent federal enforcement, Arizona is under attack from violent Mexican drug and immigrant smuggling cartels. Now, Arizona is under attack in federal court from President Obama and his Department of Justice. Today's filing is nothing more than a massive waste of taxpayer funds. These funds could be better used against the violent Mexican cartels than the people of Arizona.
“The truth is the Arizona law is both reasonable and constitutional. It mirrors substantially what has been federal law in the United States for many decades. Arizona’s law is designed to complement, not supplant, enforcement of federal immigration laws. Despite the Department of Justice’s claims in paragraph 62 of today’s lawsuit, Arizona is not trying ‘to establish its own immigration policy’ or ‘directly regulate the immigration status of aliens.’ Arizona Revised Statutes § 11-1051(E) states that the federal government, along with local law enforcement officers authorized by the federal government, can only determine an alien’s immigration status.
Subsection (L) of that same section goes on to state that the law ‘shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration.’
“The irony is that President Obama’s Administration has chosen to sue Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law and not sue local governments that have adopted a patchwork of ‘sanctuary’ policies that directly violate federal law. These patchwork local ‘sanctuary’ policies instruct the police not to cooperate with federal immigration officials.
“The best thing government can do is to create a stable, predictable environment, governed by an easily understood set of rules or laws. We do not need to make this more complicated than it already is. We must first and foremost create a secure border. Enhanced trade,economic opportunity and freedom will surely follow.
“I am pleased that President Obama and the Department of Justice did not pursue the
baseless claims of illegal racial profiling in the lawsuit. When signing S.B. 1070, I said, ‘My signature today represents my steadfast support for enforcing the law — both against illegal immigration AND against racial profiling.’ Arizona’s law expressly prohibits unconstitutional racial profiling.
However, words are not enough. For this reason, I ordered the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (AZPOST) to develop training on the new law for Arizona’s police officers. AZPOST has completed the training course and has published it for the all world to see at www.azpost.state.az.us/SB1070infocenter.htm.
AZPOST has done its job professionally and served Arizona well. “I will not stop fighting to protect the citizens of Arizona, and to defend Arizonans in federal court. I have set up a legal defense fund to pay the substantial legal fees that Arizona has been, and will be, forced to incur as a result of all of these lawsuits.
Contributions to the Border Security and Immigration Defense Fund can be made at www.keepazsafe.com. My legal team will not hesitate to assert the rights of the State of Arizona in this matter. Arizona will ultimately prevail against the lawsuits – including this latest assault by the Obama Administration. Our laws will be found to be constitutional – because that is exactly what they are.”
I find it interesting that the Obama Administration did NOT file suit against AZ for racial profiling. Isn't that exactly what all of the opponents to this Bill are screaming from every mountain top? I have not heard dissension of any other aspect of this Bill, yet the Federal Government's lawsuit doesn't address it EVEN though those were the first words out of Pelosi, Holder and Obama - RACIAL PROFILING!!!
It's clear they're just playing "Hot Button" politics. Why else would a government sue a state for doing nothing more than enforcing the Federal laws? Don't forget where the Federal government is getting the funds to litigate this lawsuit - YOUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS!!! With our government farther in debt than ever before, money that can be better utilized will be expended in frivolous lawsuits against one of our own - could the situation be more ludicrous?
Following is a statement released by Gov. Jan Brewer regarding our government's action against her state. If you'd like more information, check out their website at www.keepazsafe.com.
STATEMENT
Statement by Governor Jan Brewer
PHOENIX – “Today I was notified that the federal government has filed a lawsuit against the State of Arizona. It is wrong that our own federal government is suing the people of Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law. As a direct result of failed and inconsistent federal enforcement, Arizona is under attack from violent Mexican drug and immigrant smuggling cartels. Now, Arizona is under attack in federal court from President Obama and his Department of Justice. Today's filing is nothing more than a massive waste of taxpayer funds. These funds could be better used against the violent Mexican cartels than the people of Arizona.
“The truth is the Arizona law is both reasonable and constitutional. It mirrors substantially what has been federal law in the United States for many decades. Arizona’s law is designed to complement, not supplant, enforcement of federal immigration laws. Despite the Department of Justice’s claims in paragraph 62 of today’s lawsuit, Arizona is not trying ‘to establish its own immigration policy’ or ‘directly regulate the immigration status of aliens.’ Arizona Revised Statutes § 11-1051(E) states that the federal government, along with local law enforcement officers authorized by the federal government, can only determine an alien’s immigration status.
Subsection (L) of that same section goes on to state that the law ‘shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration.’
“The irony is that President Obama’s Administration has chosen to sue Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law and not sue local governments that have adopted a patchwork of ‘sanctuary’ policies that directly violate federal law. These patchwork local ‘sanctuary’ policies instruct the police not to cooperate with federal immigration officials.
“The best thing government can do is to create a stable, predictable environment, governed by an easily understood set of rules or laws. We do not need to make this more complicated than it already is. We must first and foremost create a secure border. Enhanced trade,economic opportunity and freedom will surely follow.
“I am pleased that President Obama and the Department of Justice did not pursue the
baseless claims of illegal racial profiling in the lawsuit. When signing S.B. 1070, I said, ‘My signature today represents my steadfast support for enforcing the law — both against illegal immigration AND against racial profiling.’ Arizona’s law expressly prohibits unconstitutional racial profiling.
However, words are not enough. For this reason, I ordered the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (AZPOST) to develop training on the new law for Arizona’s police officers. AZPOST has completed the training course and has published it for the all world to see at www.azpost.state.az.us/SB1070infocenter.htm.
AZPOST has done its job professionally and served Arizona well. “I will not stop fighting to protect the citizens of Arizona, and to defend Arizonans in federal court. I have set up a legal defense fund to pay the substantial legal fees that Arizona has been, and will be, forced to incur as a result of all of these lawsuits.
Contributions to the Border Security and Immigration Defense Fund can be made at www.keepazsafe.com. My legal team will not hesitate to assert the rights of the State of Arizona in this matter. Arizona will ultimately prevail against the lawsuits – including this latest assault by the Obama Administration. Our laws will be found to be constitutional – because that is exactly what they are.”
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Root Cause of Federal Inabiity To Secure Border
COMMENT: Talk about political double-talk?!?!? The only reason Obama is addressing this issue (above the more pressing Gulf issue I might add) is for political purposes, yet he has the audacity to claim it hasn't been reformed yet because of GOP political pressure. What, what? The Republican's (and majority of Americans) don't want to see immigration reform without border security. Obama claims our borders are too vast to secure, yet he is still pushing immigration reform - that amounts to a never-ending cycle of amnesty and illegal overpopulation. I shall comment throughout this article as there are simply too many "hot buttons" to cover before.
ARTICLE:
By DARLENE SUPERVILLE, Associated Press Writer Darlene Superville, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Thursday blamed immigration policy gridlock on "political posturing and special interest wrangling."
In a speech, Obama took Republicans to task, in particular 11 GOP senators who supported recent efforts to improve the immigration system. He did not name any, but told his largely supportive audience at American University that those lawmakers had succumbed to the "pressures of partisanship and election-year politics."
COMMENT: I wish he would have gone on to specifically state what those pressures actually were - probably would learn that they would NOT be re-elected if they granted any form of amnesty without first securing our borders adequately. end comment
Seeking to build new momentum on an issue many advocates hoped would be resolved by this point, Obama laid out his rationale for a comprehensive approach to fixing what he and others, Republicans included, say is a broken immigration system.
He said the problem cannot be solved "only with fences and border patrols" but said the government should be held accountable for its responsibility to secure the border. Obama also said that businesses should face consequences for knowingly employing illegal immigrants. And he said those who enter the country illegally should own up to their actions before they can begin the process of becoming citizens.
COMMENT: What kind of "mamsy-pamsy" statement is this? "...should own up to their actions before they can begin the process..." Does he really think the 11M+ illegals are going to raise their hands and take responsibility BEFORE being granted amnesty? They're not interested in becoming US citizens (just look at how they fly the Mexican flag ABOVE the US flag in our own country); they just want to take what they can from America and ship it back to Mexico. end comment
"The question now is whether we will have the courage and the political will to pass a bill through Congress, to finally get it done," the president said. "I'm ready to move forward, the majority of Democrats are ready to move forward and I believe the majority of Americans are ready to move forward. But the fact is that without bipartisan support, as we had just a few years ago, we cannot solve this problem."
COMMENT: Who destroyed the bipartisan support? He lays the partisan atmosphere at the feet of the Republican party, but ObamaCare demonstrated how much the Dems really care about bipartisanship. The atmosphere was bipartisan when the GOP was the majority, but it doesn't work that way now that Congress is Demoncrat controlled. end comment
"Reform that brings accountability to our immigration system cannot pass without Republican votes," he said. "That is the political and mathematical reality."
In response, Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, one of the 11 Republican senators Obama alluded to in his talk, said he had a good reason for his position this time around.
"My constituents have said do everything you can to secure the border first," Kyl told Fox News Channel. "It's our job to secure the border, whether or not we end up passing so-called comprehensive immigration reform."
COMMENT: To quote Obama, Kyl's statement IS the "political and mathematical reality." end comment
White House officials say recent developments influenced Obama's decision to give his first formal speech on the issue as president, most notably Arizona's enactment of a tough anti-immigrant law and the reaction to it across the country. But advocates also have been pressing him to give such a speech as a demonstration of his commitment to seeing the effort through.
Obama didn't dwell on the Arizona law in the speech. He called it an understandable byproduct of public frustration with the government's inability to tighten the system, but also said the law is ill-conceived, divisive and would put undue pressure on local authorities.
The law requires police enforcing another statute to clarify a person's immigration status if there's reason to believe that person is in the U.S. illegally. Immigrant advocates want the Justice Department, which is reviewing the law, to sue Arizona to block it from taking effect this month.
In the speech, Obama extolled America's history as a melting pot of immigrants and lauded their many contributions to the nation.
But an Associated Press-GfK Poll conducted in May found 57 percent saying illegal immigrants are mostly a drain on society and 38 percent said they believe immigrants make a contribution. Eight in 10 said the federal government should do more to keep immigrants from illegally entering the U.S.
Obama has endorsed a proposal by Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., that would require illegal immigrants to admit they broke the law, pay fines and back taxes and perform community service to eventually obtain legal status. But Graham since has balked at acting on immigration this year, and no other Senate Republican has come forward.
COMMENT: Why do I feel like Jimmy Carter's back in the White House? The proposal above is just as naive as Carter wanting to unilaterally disarm our nuclear weapons as a testament of faith that the Russians would do the same. What makes anyone believe they will (1) Admit they broke the law, (2) Pay fines and back taxes and, (3) Perform community service? Pay fines with what money? How would we even determine what back taxes they owe? They're being paid under-the-table by employers who know they're breaking the law. Lastly, I don't believe the majority are serious about becoming citizens, so why would they agree to community service? end comment
Some Republicans, like Kyl, are pushing a "border security first" approach focused on enforcement.
"It won't work," Obama said. He said there now are more "boots on the ground" on the U.S.-Mexico border than ever before and that "our borders are just too vast for us to be able to solve the problem only with fences and border patrols."
COMMENT: Oops! He just admitted that a major portion of his reform is not possible. So what is possible? Granting amnesty? YEP Allowing all of them on government programs? YEP Getting them all into the tax-payer supplemented side of ObamaCare? YEP Preventing influx that necessitated AZ SB 1070? NOPE!!! end comment
Obama recently ordered 1,200 National Guard troops to the border to boost security and asked Congress for an additional $600 million to support personnel and improve technology there. More than 500 of those Guard troops are headed for Arizona.
COMMENT: Why send 1200 troops and ask for another $600M if you're convinced the borders are too vast to secure? Does anyone REALLY believe Obama has a clue what he's doing? Does anyone TRULY believe the rhetoric?
ARTICLE:
By DARLENE SUPERVILLE, Associated Press Writer Darlene Superville, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Thursday blamed immigration policy gridlock on "political posturing and special interest wrangling."
In a speech, Obama took Republicans to task, in particular 11 GOP senators who supported recent efforts to improve the immigration system. He did not name any, but told his largely supportive audience at American University that those lawmakers had succumbed to the "pressures of partisanship and election-year politics."
COMMENT: I wish he would have gone on to specifically state what those pressures actually were - probably would learn that they would NOT be re-elected if they granted any form of amnesty without first securing our borders adequately. end comment
Seeking to build new momentum on an issue many advocates hoped would be resolved by this point, Obama laid out his rationale for a comprehensive approach to fixing what he and others, Republicans included, say is a broken immigration system.
He said the problem cannot be solved "only with fences and border patrols" but said the government should be held accountable for its responsibility to secure the border. Obama also said that businesses should face consequences for knowingly employing illegal immigrants. And he said those who enter the country illegally should own up to their actions before they can begin the process of becoming citizens.
COMMENT: What kind of "mamsy-pamsy" statement is this? "...should own up to their actions before they can begin the process..." Does he really think the 11M+ illegals are going to raise their hands and take responsibility BEFORE being granted amnesty? They're not interested in becoming US citizens (just look at how they fly the Mexican flag ABOVE the US flag in our own country); they just want to take what they can from America and ship it back to Mexico. end comment
"The question now is whether we will have the courage and the political will to pass a bill through Congress, to finally get it done," the president said. "I'm ready to move forward, the majority of Democrats are ready to move forward and I believe the majority of Americans are ready to move forward. But the fact is that without bipartisan support, as we had just a few years ago, we cannot solve this problem."
COMMENT: Who destroyed the bipartisan support? He lays the partisan atmosphere at the feet of the Republican party, but ObamaCare demonstrated how much the Dems really care about bipartisanship. The atmosphere was bipartisan when the GOP was the majority, but it doesn't work that way now that Congress is Demoncrat controlled. end comment
"Reform that brings accountability to our immigration system cannot pass without Republican votes," he said. "That is the political and mathematical reality."
In response, Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, one of the 11 Republican senators Obama alluded to in his talk, said he had a good reason for his position this time around.
"My constituents have said do everything you can to secure the border first," Kyl told Fox News Channel. "It's our job to secure the border, whether or not we end up passing so-called comprehensive immigration reform."
COMMENT: To quote Obama, Kyl's statement IS the "political and mathematical reality." end comment
White House officials say recent developments influenced Obama's decision to give his first formal speech on the issue as president, most notably Arizona's enactment of a tough anti-immigrant law and the reaction to it across the country. But advocates also have been pressing him to give such a speech as a demonstration of his commitment to seeing the effort through.
Obama didn't dwell on the Arizona law in the speech. He called it an understandable byproduct of public frustration with the government's inability to tighten the system, but also said the law is ill-conceived, divisive and would put undue pressure on local authorities.
The law requires police enforcing another statute to clarify a person's immigration status if there's reason to believe that person is in the U.S. illegally. Immigrant advocates want the Justice Department, which is reviewing the law, to sue Arizona to block it from taking effect this month.
In the speech, Obama extolled America's history as a melting pot of immigrants and lauded their many contributions to the nation.
But an Associated Press-GfK Poll conducted in May found 57 percent saying illegal immigrants are mostly a drain on society and 38 percent said they believe immigrants make a contribution. Eight in 10 said the federal government should do more to keep immigrants from illegally entering the U.S.
Obama has endorsed a proposal by Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., that would require illegal immigrants to admit they broke the law, pay fines and back taxes and perform community service to eventually obtain legal status. But Graham since has balked at acting on immigration this year, and no other Senate Republican has come forward.
COMMENT: Why do I feel like Jimmy Carter's back in the White House? The proposal above is just as naive as Carter wanting to unilaterally disarm our nuclear weapons as a testament of faith that the Russians would do the same. What makes anyone believe they will (1) Admit they broke the law, (2) Pay fines and back taxes and, (3) Perform community service? Pay fines with what money? How would we even determine what back taxes they owe? They're being paid under-the-table by employers who know they're breaking the law. Lastly, I don't believe the majority are serious about becoming citizens, so why would they agree to community service? end comment
Some Republicans, like Kyl, are pushing a "border security first" approach focused on enforcement.
"It won't work," Obama said. He said there now are more "boots on the ground" on the U.S.-Mexico border than ever before and that "our borders are just too vast for us to be able to solve the problem only with fences and border patrols."
COMMENT: Oops! He just admitted that a major portion of his reform is not possible. So what is possible? Granting amnesty? YEP Allowing all of them on government programs? YEP Getting them all into the tax-payer supplemented side of ObamaCare? YEP Preventing influx that necessitated AZ SB 1070? NOPE!!! end comment
Obama recently ordered 1,200 National Guard troops to the border to boost security and asked Congress for an additional $600 million to support personnel and improve technology there. More than 500 of those Guard troops are headed for Arizona.
COMMENT: Why send 1200 troops and ask for another $600M if you're convinced the borders are too vast to secure? Does anyone REALLY believe Obama has a clue what he's doing? Does anyone TRULY believe the rhetoric?
Friday, June 25, 2010
Amnesty As An Executive Order?
COMMENT:
I really like the "positives" this proposed Executive Order contains - would stop the immigration protests and make the controversial SB1070 in Arizona effectively null and void. Do they think nobody else is coming across the border now? Is the amnesty for those in the US now, or does it somehow extend to everyone who comes across the border in the future? If not, then Arizona's Bill will be just as effective next week as this week - they're still coming in!!!
What about the economic impact of this Executive Order? Obama just commissioned a panel to examine why the Federal deficit is exploding (results not expected before December). I hope it doesn't contain rocket scientists because that would be a waste of their time. Here's a great way to explode the deficit - take 11 million illegals and give them a blank check to legally get into the welfare and healthcare system. Yep, add 11 million people to the Obamacare portion that the taxpayers have to fund 100% - that's a lot of money that won't go to running our country, BUT it's precisely what Obama's goal has been all along with Obamacare...have the few pay for the majority and have HIS majority dictate how the healthcare system runs.
The only way to float it at all is to have the government handle ALL of the insurance. Yep, bye bye private insurance carriers and bye bye to you keeping your plan, and bye bye to more of your hard-earned money going to cover this "black hole of Federal money."
ARTICLE:
Jody Brown - OneNewsNow - 6/23/2010 2:25:00
Is Barack Obama drafting an executive order that would grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens?
Illegal alien climbing fenceFox News is reporting that a group of Republican senators have asked President Obama to clarify reports that he is drafting a plan to issue blanket amnesty for millions of people who are in the U.S. illegally. The plan would reportedly be unilateral in nature -- circumventing Congress entirely as the administration struggles to gain support on Capitol Hill for what the administration calls "comprehensive immigration reform" -- and be issued in the form of an executive order.
In a letter to the president, says Fox News, Senators Chuck Grassley (Iowa), Orrin Hatch (Utah), David Vitter (Louisiana), Jim Bunning (Kentucky), Saxby Chambliss (Georgia), Johnny Isakson (Georgia), James Inhofe (Oklahoma), and Thad Cochran (Mississippi) have urged the president to "abandon" what they describe as a plan to "unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens...."
The letter, sent to the White House on Monday, argues that such a move "would further erode the American public's confidence in the federal government and its commitment to securing the borders and enforcing the laws already on the books."
Fox News points out that an executive order granting a blanket amnesty would likely stem the high number of immigration-related protests across the country -- and would effectively make null and void the controversial bill signed into law recently by the governor of Arizona that allows state authorities to enforce federal laws regarding illegal immigration.
According to the report, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security estimated last year almost 11-million people live in the United States illegally.
I really like the "positives" this proposed Executive Order contains - would stop the immigration protests and make the controversial SB1070 in Arizona effectively null and void. Do they think nobody else is coming across the border now? Is the amnesty for those in the US now, or does it somehow extend to everyone who comes across the border in the future? If not, then Arizona's Bill will be just as effective next week as this week - they're still coming in!!!
What about the economic impact of this Executive Order? Obama just commissioned a panel to examine why the Federal deficit is exploding (results not expected before December). I hope it doesn't contain rocket scientists because that would be a waste of their time. Here's a great way to explode the deficit - take 11 million illegals and give them a blank check to legally get into the welfare and healthcare system. Yep, add 11 million people to the Obamacare portion that the taxpayers have to fund 100% - that's a lot of money that won't go to running our country, BUT it's precisely what Obama's goal has been all along with Obamacare...have the few pay for the majority and have HIS majority dictate how the healthcare system runs.
The only way to float it at all is to have the government handle ALL of the insurance. Yep, bye bye private insurance carriers and bye bye to you keeping your plan, and bye bye to more of your hard-earned money going to cover this "black hole of Federal money."
ARTICLE:
Jody Brown - OneNewsNow - 6/23/2010 2:25:00
Is Barack Obama drafting an executive order that would grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens?
Illegal alien climbing fenceFox News is reporting that a group of Republican senators have asked President Obama to clarify reports that he is drafting a plan to issue blanket amnesty for millions of people who are in the U.S. illegally. The plan would reportedly be unilateral in nature -- circumventing Congress entirely as the administration struggles to gain support on Capitol Hill for what the administration calls "comprehensive immigration reform" -- and be issued in the form of an executive order.
In a letter to the president, says Fox News, Senators Chuck Grassley (Iowa), Orrin Hatch (Utah), David Vitter (Louisiana), Jim Bunning (Kentucky), Saxby Chambliss (Georgia), Johnny Isakson (Georgia), James Inhofe (Oklahoma), and Thad Cochran (Mississippi) have urged the president to "abandon" what they describe as a plan to "unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens...."
The letter, sent to the White House on Monday, argues that such a move "would further erode the American public's confidence in the federal government and its commitment to securing the borders and enforcing the laws already on the books."
Fox News points out that an executive order granting a blanket amnesty would likely stem the high number of immigration-related protests across the country -- and would effectively make null and void the controversial bill signed into law recently by the governor of Arizona that allows state authorities to enforce federal laws regarding illegal immigration.
According to the report, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security estimated last year almost 11-million people live in the United States illegally.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)