Sometimes lesser is better…and I should be sticking more to blogosphere format. Early on when my primary profession as a journalist, syndicated author, with contributions for text books and the international press issues began to subside I ventured into the blogosphere to espouse some of my own experiences as well as write in such a manner that what I was concerned about was easier to understand.
Thank you for the “other informative web site.” This is definitely the place where I could I get that kind of information written in such a perfect way? Where else could I go to obtain high quality information in such a perfect and easy to read way? I have a challenge that I’m just now running on, and I’ve been on the lookout for such info.
When I first started out – I was impetuous with other writers and especially bloggers. How long should my material be? At what point did a “normal” reader get tired of my stories? Ad nauseum and more.
What I gained in answers to my question was about as practical as I would have thought. “Three hundred and fifty words maximum; keep to one to one and a half sentence length per paragraph; make sure to cite your sources, but above all, keep it short and simple.
As time advanced I noticed that my writing was managing to get longer and longer – oh sheee—it! What I found out was in order to make my writing unique, in demand, and interesting naturally used more words. But was that necessary?
How about digging through my books, tapes, cd’s, and so on to remember a notion I refer to as “economy writing.” Economy writing is exactly as the name implies – use less words to make the same point. The most difficult part is aligning words, or, finding a word that means the same and look to cut approximately on a 12 to one ration. That is cutting out 12 words and replacing them with one single word.
That ideal is the reason why my posts are getting shorter or receiving less verbiage with far more links – therefore, it inevitably comes down to YOU…by letting me know what you prefer.
Fireworks in the House!
How many out there was able to catch the idiot of the state, Elijah Cummings (D-MD), the representative from Maryland who also because of tenure is the ranking democrat in the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform today during the Committee’s investigation or the Internal Revenue Service and former officer Ms. Lois Lerner?
During a hearing of the House Oversight Committee into allegations that the Internal Revenue Service scrutinized conservative groups’ tax-exempt status filings unduly, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) exploded at Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (D-CA). Cummings charged that the way in which the proceedings were being conducted were “Un-American.”
Unbeknownst to Cummings apparently Rep. Issa had already adjourned the Committee’s meeting. While making a statement before the committee, Issa stood up and asked Cummings to yield, actually quite civilly and respectful.
Whilst screaming, “If you will sit down and allow me to ask a question,” Cummings insisted. “I am a member of a Congress of the United States of America.” Great is precisely what I was thinking.
However this time the clearly maniacal Cummings blurted out, “I am tired of this,” he continued. “You cannot just have a one-sided investigation. There is absolutely something wrong with that, and it is absolutely un-American.”
“We had a hearing. It was adjourned,” Issa replied. “I gave you an opportunity to ask your questions. You had no questions.”
Before anymore credit goes to Rep. Elijah Cummings for what was clearly unprofessional conduct, not to mention borderline rage, I believe that there are some issues that should be mentioned.
First it was Rush Limbaugh who pointed out that he believed Rep. Cummings was grandstanding. I am in full agreement with Mr. Limbaugh; however, I would more likely say, “Cummings looks like the typical Democrat when not getting his way…whatever that is…”
My main point is this Elijah Cummings rage saga is this…GOOD, GREAT!! With the frustration he seems to be experiencing or even his “I’ve had it!” blurting out, maybe now he can understand how most of us feel about the job he and his organization is doing.
OBAMA’s lack of knowledge in areas of Foreign Policy
What is coming more and more, even day by day, and finally we know now that President Obama is not prepared, to plan or implement any Foreign Policy with matters in Crimea or the significant invasion that is occurring in the Ukraine at present.
The implications of his lack of planning are currently frustrating (not wanting to mention embarrassing) as well they should be insofar as it is America as a whole that is suffering on the international platform.
To think even for an instant that America has had a solid position for at least the last sixty-five years which of course is for the most part designed, constructed, and implemented by successive Republican controlled legislation and presidential administrations for nearly a century.
All one really need to do is look at The Cold War. This is not mentioned because Barack Obama believes that the Cold War does not exist. Moreover, we think that it is safe to understand that any and all Democrat Party members as well as those Obama supporters in the main-stream media are exhausting themselves pushing these last rounds of the lack of foreign policy on President Bush.
Notwithstanding the utter ignorance by those who engage in the “Bush Bashing;” we find it critical to observe President Obama’s record as a U.S. Senator and find his own positions a matter of record in Congressional update information. For further reading please see…click here.)
Don’t You Just Hate It when Alleged Responsible People Project Inaccurate Information
An organization that publishes many of the issues that I write about sent me an email the other day to see if I had any comments on a recent poll and/or the written commentary that went along with it; an opportunity that I have been unable to shake since viewing and reviewing the article since its publication.
The article which I am referring to is at none other than the Pew Research Center’s section called, Fact Tank News in the Numbers written by Ana Gonzales – Barrera. The article that is titled, Record number of deportations in 2012 is generally lacking any of The Pew Institutes integrity for truth in reporting and carelessly allowed the article to be published.
The “Alleged Responsible People” mentioned in my title is Ana Gonzales – Barrera, who proffers such self –titles as Research Associate at the Hispanic Trends Project. Putting this title in an as-it-were type vernacular, thrusts an interested or more knowledgeable reader into a position of looking to see if, in fact, the Hispanic Trends Project is part of The Pew Research Institute. And it is, as we know from their good work in other area projects.
Before anyone gets uppity with my assessment please understand that I have already viewed the writer’s sources which openly has admitted to publishing information that was given to them by President Obama and it was in fact full of “various inaccuracies” of number pilfering. Please see by clicking here a more accurate report.
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.
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.
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.
As for me this is going to be flamboyantly exciting. As many who already know Mr. George Will has been an idol to me in his thinking and writing primarily since my undergraduate days in college. Did I think there would ever come that time in my life that I would ever debate against him? Not on your life! However today I’ve read some issues that I feel confident about and would like to comment on them.
According to George Will he espouses, “distilled to their discouraging essence, Republicans’ reasons for retreating from immigration reform reflect waning confidence in American culture and in the political mission only Republicans can perform — restoring U.S. economic vigor. Without this, the nation will have a dismal future only Democrats can relish: government growing in order to allocate scarce opportunity.
Please do not misunderstand me; that is quite a claim by Mr. Will, albeit I do see some merit to his thesis. However, let us break this down matter by matter. Retreating from immigration reform predicated upon waning confidence in American culture and especially in the political mission that Republican’s do well – the ability to restore economic vigor in the U.S.
Although these words may have some truth to them, it is essential that Mr. Will understand that as far as managerial leadership is concerned, it is those who are in their prime that must carry on the utility of American Patriot Politics.
Again Mr. Will makes a scathing point with this being written. “Many Republicans say immigration policy divides their party. If, however, the party becomes a gaggle of veto groups enforcing unanimities, it will become what completely harmonious parties are: small.”
As I read the wording, Mr. Will is addressing what James Madison would refer to as “factions.” I believe there are points to agree with in his writing as well as to disagree with. Starting with, “many Republicans say immigration policy divides their party.” Welcome to America! I am not altogether certain that if we picked two or three people off the street at random, there would not be some kind of argument from someone.
For most people around me it sums out at the entitlements that are unequally distributed. Another matter that has come up is that these particular illegal immigrants are indeed more insecure than the politicians about their very freedom.
The most gigantic concern seems to be in the areas of perception and what are they doing about their plight? By perception I mean these illegals no matter where they are from are feeling a manifold pressure on them now. Not knowing where, when, or if they should purchase a house or other tangible widgets must be discouraging.
The other point stated about their plight is in reference to how they have been acting since their arrival to the U.S. Just because someone has traveled in unpleasant topography with scourging temperatures – does not earn them a bloody thing. Period. It is not as, one leaves home on an adventure to be rewarded for their efforts.
Many Republicans see in immigrants only future Democratic votes. This descent into Democratic-style identity politics is unworthy of Republicans, and unrealistic. U.S. history tells a consistent story — the party identified with prosperity, and hence opportunity, prospers.
I must agree with the two following points, that as an upstanding citizen in this nation it is one thing to exclaim these and it is quite another to make action plans to prevent them from happening. Those two are, “Many Republicans have understandable cultural concerns, worrying that immigrants from this hemisphere do not experience the ‘psychological guillotine’ that severed trans-Atlantic immigrants from prior allegiances.
And secondly, “Many Republicans rightly say that control of borders is an essential ingredient of national sovereignty. But net immigration from Mexico has recently been approximately zero. Border Patrol spending, which quadrupled in the 1990s, tripled in the 2000s. With illegal entries near a 40-year low, and a 2012 Government Accountability Office assessment that border security was then 84 percent effective, will a “border surge” of $30 billion more for the further militarization (actually, the
East Germanization) of the 1,969 miles assuage remaining worries?
Dear Mr. Will:
The statistical data you used in your argument with the Republicans and immigration control, especially in the last paragraph written, what has been the costs? Mexico immigration is at zero; Border Patrol spending of the 1990s and 2000s has quadrupled along with the GAO reporting that 84 percent of control along the southern border has been effective – rubbish sir, balderdash! Account for our readers sir how there are somewhere between 11 and 30 million illegals in our nation.