This weekend, I read about the proceedings at the Western Conservative Conference in Phoenix, Arizona as told by Floyd Brown, editor and also the Political Analyst, Military/Defense specialist for Capital Hill Daily website under title of The Scariest Military Retreat Since 2700 B.C.
According to Mr. Brown’s report, “Many of the speakers at the conference focused on domestic problems, but the discussion turned chilling when we probed threats to peace and security around the world. As so we believe here at The Contemplative Thinker. Espousing just a bit on what the Obama administration is doing to America’s military is nothing shy of dangerously disgusting.
In one session, Mr. Brown shared the podium with Trevor Loudon, a native of New Zealand. “I was fascinated by his unique perspective. Despite not being from the United States, he spoke with more passion about America and her strategic defenses than most Americans ever would.” And as a reporter, writer, and especially a U.S. Army veteran, the emotions that Brown experienced are indeed hair-raising and humbling.
You see, Loudon is worried about what will happen as America continues retreating from world leadership and allowing her military to be further degraded. It could be the ugliest retreat since the first war in recorded history, almost 5,000 years ago. Moreover, when one considers what retreating actually is, when defined, please take little or no heed to what the Obama administration would love to make us believe.
Retreating is so much more that a movement back, withdrawal from a position, troop withdrawal, or any other signal or order to relocate one’s troops from where they are. Retreating can also be a military function of backing down; furthermore, it could be stated that leaving, especially when hurried is definitely a time of retreating.
Loudon stated emphatically that a world with America in retreat is a more dangerous world, especially in regards to China. He reminded the audience that the leadership of China is still Communist. He admonished us to “not believe the propaganda that Red China has goodwill toward America.”
“They would collapse you in a minute, if they felt they had the strength and leverage to do it,” he said.
Moving along just three days when one stops to look into the Ukrainian matter and what Russia is now doing in Crimea is basically nothing shy of history repeating again on the same territory. Enough to the point that it serves as a point to review and strategize the necessity to reassess U.S. Foreign Policy – of course, that is if such a policy exists.
For centuries, Ukraine has been ground zero of an ongoing struggle between despotic rulers and people yearning to be free. The territory we know as Ukraine has been conquered, partitioned, and ruled by Poles, Ottomans, Hungarians, Austrians, Germans, and Russians for the last thousand years. Since the middle ages, the Ukrainian people have experienced self-government for only a few short periods.
And these periods of freedom have inevitably been followed by dark nights of repression, including the darkest under Joseph Stalin’s Soviet rule. Furthermore, it is not at all a shortcoming to review the history of the Cold War.
Currently the Obama administration has tucked tail and resembles a pathetic and cheap reply of a nation really on the verge of losing sovereignty. At this point, it is impossible to know what will happen in the weeks ahead. Perhaps Russian tanks will invade, and Putin will oversee a forced occupation of Ukraine.
No matter what, though, the Ukrainian people want freedom. They want to continue building a more prosperous future, just like the surrounding territories of the former Soviet empire.
The problem is Obama’s failed policies. He has ignored the freedom seekers in Ukraine, despite America’s history of providing aid and material support to freedom-seeking people. Under our current president, it seems all of that is changing.
Obama eases penalties for businesses hiring illegal immigrants
40 percent decrease in fines belies rhetoric
The Obama administration regularly cuts a break for businesses that hire illegal immigrants, reducing their fines by an average of 40 percent from what they should be, according to an audit released Tuesday that suggests the government could be doing more to go after unscrupulous employers.
According to the audit, conducted by the Homeland Security Department’s inspector general, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement cut one business’s fine from $4.9 million to slightly more than $1 million — a 78 percent drop.
Investigators said the reduction is legal, but it may be undercutting the administration’s goal of getting tough on businesses that hire illegal immigrants.
“The knowledge that fines can be significantly reduced may diminish the effectiveness of fines as a deterrent to hiring unauthorized workers,” the inspector general said.
The report was released the same day that a coalition of business groups wrote a letter to House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, asking him to pass an immigration bill this year. The business groups said they supported Mr. Boehner’s list of immigration principles, which would give businesses a new supply of legal guest workers while granting legal status to most illegal immigrants already in the U.S.
While most of the attention in the immigration debate goes to illegal immigrants themselves, analysts say the problem would be much smaller if businesses would abide by employment laws.
Under President Obama, the federal government was supposed to be putting more of an emphasis on going after employers. ICE specifically announced that it would conduct more audits of the I-9 forms all businesses are required to keep demonstrating that their employees are authorized to work in the U.S.
The goal was to try to ramp up pressure on businesses to hire legal workers.
“This audit confirms what I’ve found in reviewing ICE audit records obtained through FOIA,” Ms. Vaughan said in an email. “Some field offices are conducting worksite enforcement (albeit on a tight leash) as if they actually mean to deter and punish illegal employment. Others do not take it seriously and are just going through the motions. Their goal is to rack up enough audits so that the administration can use the numbers to claim that it is vigorously enforcing the law.”
The inspector general’s report said ICE submitted notices totaling fines of more than $52.7 million from 2009 through 2012, but ended up charging only $31.2 million — for a 40 percent break for businesses.
Investigators said the agency is allowed to reduce fines if it seems the businesses’ finances can’t handle a large penalty.
Investigators said overall, ICE showed little consistency in how it applied sanctions. Some field offices gave out far more warnings and far fewer fines than other offices.
All businesses are required to store the I-9 forms submitted by employees that show their legal work status.
Our two previous posts have dealt with simple definitions and explanations concerning economic theory in particular, the demand side of what we have always been told that the study of economics is about supply versus demand. And to all of those out there who have studied or majored in economics will readily admit that there is so much more than this block one of open market based economic theory in a capitalistic society. Then again it is so important to source properly so here is my attempt. Almost all economic theory came from a great source: A CAPITALIST MANIFESTO; Understanding the Market Economy and Defending Liberty, by Gary Wolfram who is a scholar, academia, and works at Hillsdale College and president of the Hillsdale Policy Group.
All of the other information with respect to the special interest groups, Department of Justice (DOJ), United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Service (USICES), Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco, Explosive Devices (ATF), Immigration and Nationality Act (s) (INS) and the general overall status of affairs regarding immigration and control of America’s borders is my personal expertise. As such source documentation is in my possession with assistance from NumbersUSA.
It should be noted that every single individual has a process in economic theory. Of course insofar as when it comes to satisfaction the number one overall want or need is controlled by an individual’s preferences. For all it is worth some people prefer the quality of Ralph Lauren’s Polo Shirts versus Stafford or other brands.
This factor of demand should be of no surprise to anyone. The number two most often used is determined by an individual’s income. It is not that difficult to equate the relationship between preference and money or money and preference.
Knowing that 12 million illegal immigrants have come to the U.S.A. based on information already established or better yet, “to make a better life for myself and my family” or “to gain more money to send home or back to Mexico” solidifies both preference and income.
Anytime that a marginal benefit supersedes the marginal cost then it has been observed that rational individuals will continue [buying] any activity as long as this formula exists. Marginal benefit and marginal costs are nothing more than when the next to the last or the last unit is at the margin.
Let us move onto how such a basic theory of supply and demand is so easily considered as a small factor by our government and most often is overlooked or simply passed over for anything; albeit, one’s golf game, world vacations with exotic destinations, or perhaps just about anything will do including being involved in some way with the process of illegal immigration.
As for us at The Contemplative Thinker we find the largest culprits would be the main-stream media for not covering or even reporting the real circumstances. As for the nation’s leadership – Congress (both houses) the entire U.S. judiciary proceedings, and above all the President of the United States (POTUS) because he is the leader of the agencies that deal with the problem.
Have you ever thought of somewhere between 12 and 30 million people? The easiest estimate for me was to look up the ten largest by population cities in the United States. There are more illegal immigrants living here than the combined total of the ten largest cities.
Considering the government agencies who are collectively responsible for keeping this number at its bare minimum we wonder who within that array of overpaid elected politicians have and continue to fail We the people…year by year by year. So I just want to leave you with this proof…
Audit Shows Obama Administration Going Easy on Businesses that Hire Illegal Workers
Pres. Obama has made cracking down on employers who hire illegal workers a focal point of his immigration reform plan, but a new audit shows that the administration is anything but tough on unscrupulous employers. According to the audit by the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general, administration officials have cut fines by an average of 40%.
According to the audit, one business had it’s fine of $4.9 million reduced to just over $1 million – a 78% reduction.
“The knowledge that fines can be significantly reduced may diminish the effectiveness of fines as a deterrent to hiring unauthorized workers,” the inspector general said.
The inspector general’s report found that ICE sent notices for fines totaling more than $52.7 million from 2009 to 2012, but only charged $31.2 million.
TRANSITION FROM THEORY TO FACT: THEORY WORKS WHEN ENFORCEMENT IS OF PRIME CONCERN
As previously promised today is the day that we make the transition. This transition involves the economic theory [open market] of rudimentary and fundamental postulates such as consistent rational thinking, with self-interest, and the desired act of purpose in obtaining something that we believe will enhance our lives. However, I am sure that we – all of us – want very similar needs, wants, and utility satisfaction to be granted at the lowest cost available to us.
We refer to the fact that an immigration policy with rules, procedures and laws does exist and that, for a very good reason. However, in order for any law to work, or procedure followed let us just complete the obvious – a law is nothing more than words on a sheet of paper, that when leadership, and especially enforcement agencies put forth the energy to support the law as well as the citizenry that enacted the moral values must not be wavering.
We are of the opinion that with the proper means of supporting our leadership especially through enforcement that when basic laws are disregarded, then people make up their own rules unless this situation has the very least – integrity – that is, doing the bare minimum of enforcement to maintain sovereignty of the United States. Please see below for crime within the system.
Millions of people are screaming everything from discrimination to racial profiling. Furthermore, at anytime that a newly instigated program is started and is successful we ask where is the moral values of our leadership? Such as Section 287(g) enforcement for communities.
The biggest difference between American immigration policy and Australia’s equivalent program is that in Australia their program is not put to the mercy of a non-constitutional-wannabe-king who hangs out with a pen and a phone.
Now is time for the news. It is rather obvious to us that 11 million people do not just come to another nation, take up residence, and that is just about it until certain special interest groups get involved.
Our nation’s immigration system is broken and our laws are not being enforced. Washington’s failure to fix them is hurting our economy and jeopardizing our national security. The overriding purpose of our immigration system is to promote and further America’s national interests and that is not the case today (Please click here for complete report).
I would really like the opportunity to ask Mr. Obama that very question; our immigration system is in obvious need of restructuring, with all due respect Sir, what have you done within the rule of law to assist making it better?
Remember Section 287(g) of the INS Act? This particular section was enacted for the sole purpose for making community living “communities” more safe to live in. Therefore, the United States Immigration and Custom Enforcement (USICE) where then hired and paid in advance to assist with identifying illegal immigrants and taking them to booking to free up ICE time. This program worked like magic until illegal’s started gripping to special interest groups then all of the sudden – out of nowhere, came “they are racial profiling” and this is discriminatory.
And Eric Holder’s Justice Department led an all out order to stop Section 287(g). And after suing at least 15 different states it was the local police and their states that electively stopped the program.
Or let us just mention E-Verify. As businesses were in hog heaven making bigger profits at the cost of illegal labor BIG BUSINESS originally started with “it is a crap shoot.” And again with special interest’s it was shut down.
Now that they have started to reenact E- Visa Verification who do you think they’ve hired to verify the old “crap shoot” verifying system? E-Verify.
What does all of this mean given economic theory? When U.S. government officials are caught and arrested for letting the cocaine, weed, and/or heroin or cash bring them to their knees as well as some Border Patrol Agents and ICE officials, AFT officers, and all of their management being involved as well then the system begins to break down.
Let us apply added benefit v added cost in here to solidify. Illegal member of MS-13 (major crime gang) without proper identification decides on moving north to America what are his added benefits. Let us start with anonymity; no one knows who this guy is so no criminal record is involved. Hum benefits… let us see now this guy has automatically upward mobility with some sort of job (that an American has lost), does he worry about his latest bullet wound. Nope because now this person has health care and it is probably for free. Oh but wait…our newest member of our society is very hungry, no matter, let us get him some food stamps and allow him to purchase weed with them as well. I think it is fair to say at this point that when someone – anyone elects to come over the U.S. border they instantly have more privileges than the Ward of any state.
Continuing from our earlier blog article, Economic Theory and Illegal Immigration, it is again noted that according to many renown economists, is the notion that they believe in studying individual behavior to assess and draw conclusions for a group of people to be most effective in reducing crime.
Again most economic theory begins with the assumption that the best model of how the world works rests on the idea of [important] of a rational, self-interested individual who act with purpose to achieve the highest level of satisfaction possible knowing that they will be confronted with certain circumstances.
In most disciplines and/or professions define rationality as consistent thinking. However economists take a small but different approach. Economists define rationality as “choosing the option that one believes will increase his satisfaction the most when presented with a constrained choice.”
When one looks at the variance of definitions there is not that much whatsoever. In fact the only inferences that I am able to draw is that economists use “choice” whilst others use “certain circumstances.” Either way we have a definition of rationality from both stating it is consistent thinking. We do not have any difficulty with either’s definition.
What do these theories mean about self-interest? One thing that hit me straight up was in the notion that self-interest does not mean or even remotely equate to selfishness. In fact let all of us remember that the decision involves choice, rational thinking, and purpose to achieve gaining the greater satisfaction or improvement of life. It is important to note that this decision can come from buying a new shirt or by giving away the shirt off one’s back. Again it should be noted that in a market economy people act to improve their well-being, not necessarily their wealth or number of possessions.
If we assume that individuals are rational and self-interested, then we can think of a simple rule that will lead us to maximize our satisfaction/improvement given any option. That rule is to compare the added benefit from an action to what the added costs will be. If the added benefits exceed the added costs, then most often people will undertake the action.
Now back to the example of criminal activity. According to the economist’s, they would look at a criminal and say that if she commits a crime it is because she has made a rational choice. Essentially therefore, the person weighed the benefits from the crime against the added costs and determined that the added benefits of the crime outweighed the added costs and therefore, with purpose committed the crime. The practical implication of this concerning public policy is that if one wanted to reduce criminal activity, then one must reduce the benefits of committing the crime and one must increase the costs.
Now that is about as basic as it comes. It is just like saying if there is enough demand for something then people will just about find the costs. How anything as simple as this basic assumption could somehow go wrong is I believe something only humans are able to engineer.
Back to the criminal data assessment. We have mentioned that given the age characteristics as well as educational level, family status as children and adults, race, and of course psychological profiles all are characteristics of humankind; regardless, of having anything to do with crime. But if only for the moment I would like to introduce the rationale of why people do the things they do – or better still is as to what limits will people go to make themselves satisfied with their dispositions?
We can all agree that educational level can assist when time to look for a new position, right. So let us assume our newly paroled lady did not get the opportunity to finish high school. Ut oh! She is there filling out applications when to sudden the question comes up – have you ever been arrested, or convicted of a crime? Now there is an altogether set of circumstances. Most people might allude to the notion of “okay let’s see, we have a high school dropout that has done a short stint in the big house, what gives with that…”
Who stated anything about criminal activity being a rational choice? Tomorrow we will begin to look at policies, and what should we do with somewhere between 14 to 30 million illegal immigrants who were given choices and for some reason applied some economics theories without or even with rational thought.
ECONOMIC THEORIES AND ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
I am sure we have all heard the expression, “We want it all, and we want it now.” We let us start by linking in some economics, social sciences, religion, and pure fantasy for this article.
On the religious level or for Christians we are instructed that although we may think we all have needs and wants, yet furthermore in copious quantities we are outright told not to worry about such little things; moreover, we are told all of our needs and most of our wants are known to our Creator. Furthermore, and what I find amazing lies within the notion that we will be provided with both our needs and our wants.
Just one step further, we are even instructed to ask, yes ask for our needs and wants and they will be rendered. Notice how I do not want to give even a sign that I may know the answer, therefore, I openly admit to all my religious friends who subscribe to a different name, could you write in or comment how and particularly where the same notion is taught in your religion. Thanking you in advance.
Now on to social sciences. Would you say that your focus is on an individual – or – a group level? Some social sciences make the individual the focus of their research while other disciplines may focus on the groups of individuals in which to maximize their research potential. It is a good thing that this article is not about the benefits of individual versus group behavior.
Yet this article is going to use (at times) both individuals and groups especially with relationship to crime and the activity of being an illegal immigrant residing in the United States. This is definitely where we employ simple economic strategies to give us a way to define why a person would enter the realm of illegal living.
A very distinctive characteristic in the field of economics is its focus on the individual. While other social scientists, often examine the characteristics of groups and use group behavior to explain or predict individual behavior in our experience can and does solidify false claims by its nature. We cannot even infer that anything that happens within a group (let alone what group) can or does parallel that of an individual. Economists do exactly the opposite. They gather data on individual behavior to discuss the behavior of potentially those who are in groups.
Examining criminal behavior is a classic example and a good one too. One method of looking at such behaviors starts with criminals as a group. We could try to find criminal characteristics such as age, educational level, family status as children and adults, race, and various psychological profiles. Then we would draw inferences from these characteristics and try to change criminals as a group.
Suppose we find that 60 percent of convicted robbers are twenty-five year old urban males with an eighth-grade education who have been convicted of a crime before the age of fifteen, come from a single parent family and are unmarried. From this information, we might try to explain how each of these characteristics contributes to criminal activity, and then as most politicians do begin to initiate policies to reduce crime.
We could initiate a policy that offers people within a group the opportunity to increase their education level of …urban males. Economists instead use theories of individual behavior to draw conclusions about what sorts of policies would be effective in reducing crime.
Next within our policy making group of economists move into their own assumptions such as a staunch belief that our world works because of an idea that people – for the most part – are rational, self-interested folks who acts purposefully to achieve the highest level of satisfaction possible while operating under certain circumstances…to be taken up in detail at the start of the next blog entry. Until then…
WOMEN’S ISSUE NOW SLOTTED FOR IMMIGRATION REFORM
While House Republicans have been adamant that immigration reform is all but dead this year, a coalition of women’s groups is hoping to revive the issue, wrapping it into the “war on women” offensive. Commingling of issues never serves to assist anyone with any matter.
Far be it from me or us in this case, The Contemplative Thinker believes who in their right mind could possibly dream up another barrier to entry. We remain adamant that the issue given immigration reform is altogether a misnomer. Who seriously believes that anything will be done to accentuate the ideas of reform? In fact it is a simple oxymoron to infer immigration reform has anything to do with reform whatsoever. (Reform keywords: improve, amend, correcting faults, unacceptable habits, reorganization, and improvement.)
Every person in this country needs to be on the same page – illegal immigrants included – insofar as to what is reality based, or what can be done, and the wishes and desires of everyone rendering an opinion. Seriously this “reform” matter is looking like a “Hopewell To-Do List.” You name it and it is on it from citizenship, to pathways to citizenship, deferred action for childhood arrivals, states now voting on what entitlements will automatically be received as well as arguing for a higher minimum wage. Simple words of advice…Keep it simple…or else.
What is at the rudimentary level with immigration “reform” is a kaput system that has laws, policies, and procedures. However, pursuant to the leadership of this country since 1986 we believe it has been a Presidential oversight which is our way of saying that the Commander-in-Chief’s Obama, Bush the younger, Clinton, Bush the Elder, as well as President Ronald Reagan or for the past 28 years have intentionally disregarded the rule of law. Envision our country whilst allowing illegal immigration versus a horribly out of date Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) operate.
Arguing that women and children bear the brunt of the burden from a broken system, and that women will be decisive in the 2014 and 2016 elections, organizers said that Republicans should reconsider their approach to immigration reform. Or this sounds like a threat to me. Moreover, let us string the words — women and children bear the brunt of burden of the broken system; however, and let us be reasonable here — are women just victims according to Pramila Jayapal, or would it be more believable to take some attribution.
“Unless we actually have action from House leadership, from Speaker Boehner, to move a bill forward so that the majority of his members in his House can actually vote to move this bill forward, we will continue to push and push and make sure that women voters in November understand who has blocked immigration reform,” Pramila Jayapal, chair of We Belong Together, which advocates for immigration reform, said Wednesday.
This is precisely saying if the Republicans do not fare well especially in 2016 Ms. Jayapal definitely wants to exacerbate the problem by alleging it was women who caused the raucous and not the Hispanics who feel as though they had something to do with the electoral process in 2012.
Jayapal said that the timeline for reform cannot be dictated by a small group of people, and that the lack of GOP action will have a political cost for the party as it tries rebranding its image and appealing to a more diverse pool of voters. Ah yes…when in doubt…what we need is diversity!
“If the Republican leadership really looks at the cost of not moving immigration reform forward…the cost for their leadership in Congress, they will start to understand that the lack of action is continuing to play into a frame that already exists,” she said.
Ms. Jayapal has really done most of us, as well as the House a good deal. Frustratingly she seems to have identified all of the buzz words the same as every other advocacy group out there, such as the National Council of The Race, the Gang of Eight led Senate, and several other special interest groups. Yet the one thing out of all those words that is missing…(1) What is the problem? and (2) What does the We Belong Together organization suggest that the House, Senate, or American people should do to rectify the fallen system.
PRESIDENT OBAMA’S “POLICY INITIATIVES” ARE A FAILURE…
Just as our title implies, it will be years perhaps even decades before the chaotic menagerie of Obama’s sometimes held close to the breast pocket, without very many people in Washington D.C, or clearly elsewhere having even the slightest bit of knowledge of what this man has been capable of doing.
Far be it from me, who says that everything done on domestic improvements within the Nation should as a matter of due-diligence be directed toward the American people if, for nothing else, the very feedback the president’s advisors, policy experts, and need based function people (perhaps even unknown) can render their reasons for public policy enhancements or how about “shovel ready jobs.”
I will admittedly agree that if as in the 1970s one was being charged $95.00 per toilet seat when the real cost was $1.50 and so forth with nails, and just about every government contract, without proper checking either through one’s “people” or making sure the matters are well in control. There can be only a few words that can simply identify that incompetence, and corruption is the first that comes to mind.
I also openly admit that through The Heritage Foundation and their distinguished blog, The Foundry, information is now being released. As for me I am not sure if this man and those he surrounds himself with are really as stupid as they have proven they are, it just seems to me that imagine that you are the President. And you have worked for months coming up with the name which was The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that he knew well in advance he would be needing the funds. I am only able to cover a portion of these findings, however, I will post another page if you care to see what this person has done.
As a follow up to the Green Graveyard overview, this post provides additional information concerning the funding for each of the now-bankrupt green energy companies. In one of the most extensive compilations to date, Heritage has identified 19 bankrupt green energy companies that were unable to succeed even with the government’s promise to provide generous financial assistance totaling a whopping $2.6 billion.
1. Abound Solar: George W. Bush’s Administration first offered this Colorado-based company federal assistance in 2007 to the tune of $3 million as well as a $400 million loan guarantee. Before announcing bankruptcy in June 2012, Abound was promised an additional $374.6 million from the Obama Administration. The company was also offered $12.6 million in federal tax credits. During its short-lived heyday, Abound received the distinction of ranking 17th out of “100 Recovery Act Projects That Are Changing America.”
Government’s Bad Bet: $ 790.3 million
2. Solyndra: Despite the fact that Vice President Joe Biden once hailed this now-infamous company and its $535 million loan guarantee as an “unprecedented investment this Administration is making in renewable energy and exactly what the Recovery Act is all about,” Solyndra succumbed to Chapter 11 status in September 2011. That’s two short years after being offered federal financial assistance. Despite supportive statements and visits from top Obama Administration officials, Solyndra was unable to avoid its fate in the Green Graveyard.
Government’s Bad Bet: $570 million (includes federal loans and state tax breaks not listed)
3. A123 Systems: Having been showered with visits from a host of elected and government officials during the Obama Administration (then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Energy Secretary Steven Chu, and Representative Ed Markey (D-MA), to name only a few), government funding for A123 actually began in 2001 during the Bush Administration. The company declared bankruptcy in October 2012, a little over one year from the date that President Obama offered this encouraging remark: “There is A123, a clean energy manufacturer in Michigan that just hired its 1000th worker as demand has soared for its vehicle components. Companies like these are taking root and putting people to work in every corner of the country.” And this isn’t the only form of praise A123 received. Secretary Chu called A123 “a great example of how we are working with industries to create jobs, strengthen our manufacturing industry, and help our auto companies compete in the global market.” In fact, A123 is also still listed as a “Hall of Fame” company on the Small Business Innovation Research website.
Now how can these alleged experts, advisors, and policy analyst be making the unabashed biggest mistakes in the totality of their professional careers. Again if you were president – wouldn’t you at least find out who the best most accountable accountant there was to hire. No kidding here gang, I sit and read reports of the staff at Heritage Foundation, it is simply amazing how often one of their scholars get it ALL right.
Please read on by clicking here.
WHAT IS STIFLING THE AMNESTY DREAM..?
Here, plain as a sunny day, a real “I can see for miles and miles” kind of day it has become a favorite past time of mine to show an example of what true multimedia publishing and reporting is – and I will again try to make the article a true fair and balanced assessment pursuant to what really is going on with regards to immigration “reform” in the U.S.A.
Furthermore, since this little article where I have used his source citations and examples, I will email this response to irresponsible reporting to Mr. Nakamura who I believe is some type of reporter for the Washington Post.
“Thirteen years ago, President George W. Bush welcomed Vicente Fox of Mexico to Washington to lay the groundwork for an overhaul of U.S. immigration laws — sensing that fellow Republicans were finally ready to go along with a new legalization effort. The push included a rare address to Congress on Sept. 6, 2001, when Fox declared that immigrants “invariably enrich the cultural life of the land that receives them.”
After reading the full context of President Vicente Fox’s rare address to Congress, it is odd if not outright embellishing the true favor of the nation. It seems rather ridiculous to say that there will be an overhaul predicated upon “sensing” that fellow Republicans were finally ready to go along with a new legalization effort and that according to Mr. David Nakamura.
“For more than a quarter century, it has never been the right time for immigration reform. And the biggest stumbling block always seems to be concerns, primarily among conservatives, that border
controls are not tough enough and must be strengthened further before anything else can be done.
Yes and indeed quite accurate and true. Anyone, or in the larger context, any nation can proceed with stifling immigration reforms. However, the arguments that are presented warrant scrutiny. The first argument concerns the never ending drama of lying and corruption, or just plain mismanagement and improper allocation of resources.
The second argument simply illustrates how unfair and imbalanced those who seek “reform” are by wanting to jump logistical steps in seeing to it that said reform is accomplished. In other words, why should anyone in the USA trust or give more, knowingly, predicated upon past performances that simply show that the two definitions of reform are on opposite sides of the street.
Furthermore, let us not be manipulated by the ever increasing author of the original Washington Post article. In all true reality, the majority of those who are seeking reforms are actually illegal immigrants that already live in the U.S.A. looking to get more from an already over-spending government.
“But the situation is largely out of Obama’s hands, and the latest impasse has frustrated longtime advocates.” First the situation is not out of Obama’s hands. Earlier in the article it was alleged that Obama launched his immigration plans one year ago. Nothing could possibly be further than the truth. Obama easily started six years ago, yet matters that he felt were more important – ObamaCare, Welfare reform, the authorization of more food stamps and other entitlements, Fast and Furious, and any one of the five major scandals that are still open and unsolved at the time of this writing.
Why does the writer make such statements? Are the longtime advocates dismayed for some reason? Does the situation exist whereby someone has not been open and realistic with them? Or it can be and almost is always the case that the primary work is not finished or the incumbent government has not completed what they say they would have done.
It is a debate that has raged since President Ronald Reagan signed the last major overhaul of immigration laws in 1986, a bipartisan achievement hailed as a solution to the crisis of 5 million immigrants living in the country illegally. The Immigration Reform and Control Act put 2.7 million people on the path toward citizenship, marking the largest legalization program in U.S. history.
The number of people living in the country illegally rose again quickly, reaching more than 11.7 million last year. Yet, keep in mind the original program the IRCA (1986) was twenty-eight (28) years ago.
DIPLOMACY AND CIVILITY
I openly believe that overall here, especially since there is no possible way to ever get Mr. Obama’s figures to line up with Mr. Bush’s, and for that matter as well we consider Mr. Clinton’s ramblings as misnomers in themselves, but who really knows? The fact remains that as long as we have a representative government that chooses to ignore and in that same breath lie to us as well I do not think that the truth will ever be known to anyone. What is the evidence, nomenclature, or reality of the figures we have been given?
I openly believe that public opinion polls and responses from surveys done properly and efficiently should have been enacted years ago. I do remember the year 2007 as though it was yesterday. And I further believe that any reasonable, moreover, rational person would readily admit that our immigration system is no better now than it was then.
Before I go any further I am of the position that we line some issues up and do a comparison of our own part. We can agree on many issues before we even get started into the specific details.
Such as of the 535 members of Congress, in addition where do the over 200 individuals who work at the White House live? The Supreme Court justices, as well as the overwhelming portion of the executive branch men and women, live that makes them so sure they know what is best for you or I and those we live around. I would like to ask Mr. Will the same question.
Allow me to ask you folks, when was the last time either a legal or illegal immigrant came up to you and said, “This is a wonderful country we live in…” I can remember and the next statement any of us proffered was, “and I thank you and yours for making it this way…” Of course that is normally from the age demographic of 45 years of age and older.
Now it is completely the exact opposite. The United States is by no measure wimps to anything or especially anyone; if anyone mentions it the other way around, please just mention Dessert Shield, Dessert Storm, how we trampled Fallujah. Then remind them that it was our service members that whipped the Taliban; yet, at every excursion from urination to mercy killing that is what leads in the papers.
One issue that has gotten to my marrow is the notion of diplomacy and especially civility. Diplomacy just received approximately 100 or more Taliban murders out of prison. Civility surely must be how well these people are treated after committing grotesque acts against our people and how we ignore it then how well we treat them in return. Where are the Gitmo detainees?
We need to address those “certain details” now. If you don’t mind I would like to submit them or some of them to you: Entitlements, healthcare benefits, in state tuition, Diversity (Visa) lotteries, son or daughter citizens being anointed into one’s family and the benefits that go with it such as welfare, food stamps, aid to families with dependent children (a graduated welfare entitlement). I have spoken with too many people who tell me quite openly how much they receive from our government.
Let us put the record straight here. These people are collecting vast sums of money if for no other reason than just being present in this nation. So then has anyone ever considered the costs of what education our illegal immigrant population receives? I will say that it is a lot. The U.S. Department of Education figures approximately four billion per year. Now I must regress for the moment. I did say that they received education benefits as well as other benefits from the government – I error, insofar as they get the funds from us.
I would however love to point out that the statistical data on the amount of arrivals of border-jumper’s is not depressed at all. Many decided to go home to wait out the economic conditions here. It is also believed that the ears start working when your neighbors are out of work…and your president is lying and skewing the numbers in a downward fashion. So you tell me…can there ever come a time when being overly civil to someone and their potential 20 million friends that it becomes lost? Diplomacy has not proved a thing and I cannot recall a time when it did. Here are just a few mementos that I leave with you today.
• It does not matter what George Will says, what Republicans say, or what Democrats say.
• There is absolutely no justification for legalizing 15 million illegal aliens and eventually giving them citizenship and the right to bring in 30 million of their closest relatives. Excuse me but is borderline insane as well as lunacy.
• There is absolutely no justification for making it easier for illegal aliens to take American jobs and force down wages as they have been doing for decades.
• There is absolutely no justification for ever accepting illegal’s into our society or giving them free healthcare, food stamps, welfare, right to vote, Medicaid, Medicare, or Social Security.
• There is no reason we should keep allowing their children born here to be automatic US citizens.