Jb's Blog

views on current events

Archive for the ‘Vote Out the Incumbents’ Category

Immigration Policy

with 6 comments

I am NOT racist. I am NOT violent. I am in favor of legal immigration policy which has been a major contributing factor in making the United States what it is. But…

demands

Folks, we’ve simply GOT to get our national head around the immigration situation in this country. The demands being placed on our society are simply inconceivable (see photo). These demands would be ridiculous even if they were made by legitimate citizens, much more so when they come from those who have invaded our boarders illegally. Granted, these demands are not made by all who advocate for unrestricted immigration or for amnesty, yet they are the logical conclusion to those policies, and they are actually being made, and expected, by many.

Here are a few facts which should be setting off alarm bells:

Based on 2007 Census data, the Center for Immigration Studies reported:

  • The nation’s immigrant population (both legal and illegal) reached a record of 37.9 million in 2007.
  • Immigrants account for 1 in 8 U.S. residents, the highest level in eighty years. In 1970 it was 1 in 21, in 1980 it was 1 in 16, and in 1990 it was 1 in 13.
  • Overall, nearly 1 in 3 immigrants is an illegal alien. Half of Mexican and Central American immigrants and one-third of South American immigrants are illegal.
  • 31 percent of adult immigrants have not completed high school, compared to 8 percent of natives. Since 2000, immigration increased the number of workers without a high school diploma by 14 percent, and all other workers by 3 percent. This means that our growing immigrant population is comprised primarily of unskilled labor, contrasting with earlier immigrant waves in which immigrants were skilled in ways which enabled them to contribute significantly to the benefit of society as a whole.
  • The proportion of immigrant-headed households which draw on at least one major welfare program is 33 percent, compared to 19 percent for native households. In 2004, immigrant households received nearly three dollars in immediate benefits and services for each dollar in taxes they paid. — http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/upload/sr_14.pdf
  • The poverty rate for immigrants and their U.S.-born children under 18 is 17 percent, nearly 50 percent higher than the rate for natives and their children.
  • 34 percent of immigrants lack health insurance, compared to 13 percent of natives. Immigrants and their U.S.-born children account for 71 percent of the increase in the uninsured since 1989. With government run/subsidized healthcare on the way, the implications of this fact are staggering considering the public (taxpayers) will be on the hook for these related healthcare costs.
  • Immigration accounts for virtually all of the national increase in public school enrollment over the last two decades. In 2007, there were 10.8 million school-age children from immigrant families in the United States.
    http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/back1007.pdf
  •  

    The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that

  • 9 percent of the population of Mexico was living in the United States in 2004.
  • 57 percent of all illegal immigrants in the U.S. are Mexican. Another 24 percent are from other Latin American countries.
  • 55 percent of all Mexicans in the U.S. are here illegally.
  • By 2050, Hispanics will be between 29 percent and 32 percent of the nation’s population.
    http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/44.pdf
    http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/cb08ff-15.pdf
  •  

    In 2008, a study from Manhattan Institute reported that the current level of assimilation of all recent immigrant groups is lower than at any time during the great migration in the early twentieth century. Some ethnic groups assimilated better than others, but Mexicans were the least assimilated overall, and assimilate at the slowest rate.
    http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/cr_53.pdf

    The Mexican government promotes the idea of extraterritorial nationalism among its citizens – the concept that Mexican citizens have an indigenous claim to large sections of the southwestern United States. Mexican president Zedillo said (July 23, 1997)

    I have proudly affirmed that the Mexican nation extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders and that Mexican migrants are an important – a very important – part of it. — http://zedillo.presidencia.gob.mx/pages/disc/jul97/23jul97-2.html

    This attitude is shared by Mexican citizens at large. Zogby International reported that 58 percent of Mexicans agree with the statement “The territory of the United States’ southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico.” — Results of poll of U.S., Mexican citizens, United Press International, June 12, 2002 —

    National Council of La Raza (“The Race”) is a popular organization which works tirelessly against the assimilation of Hispanic aliens into American society and for the continuation of illegal Hispanic migration into our country. Here are a few facts about La Raza and its stance on the issues:

  • La Raza views the United States as an irredeemably racist nation.
  • favors racial and ethnic preferences for minorities in the workplace and in higher education.
  • supports open borders and amnesty for ALL illegal aliens.
  • supports the DREAM Act, which is designed to allow illegal aliens to attend college at the reduced tuition rates normally reserved for in-state legal residents.
  • advocates “reform” that would give illegal aliens full access to taxpayer-funded health care services.
  • characterizes any reduction in government assistance to illegal border-crossers as “a disgrace to American values.”
  • supports access to driver’s licenses for illegal aliens.
  • supports voting rights for illegal aliens. ??????
  • opposes the Aviation Transportation and Security Act requiring that all airport baggage screeners be U.S. citizens.
  • opposes the Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal Act, which would empower state and local police to enforce federal immigration laws.
  • opposes the REAL ID Act, which requires that all driver’s license and photo ID applicants be able to verify they are legal residents of the United States, and that the documents they present to prove their identity are genuine.
    http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=473b1006-dea4-4340-b1a2-ac0838de5714
  •  

    Leaders (and supporters) of La Raza have worked their way into the highest levels of our society and our government.

  • Raul Yzaguirre was president and CEO of La Raza for thirty years. Hillary Clinton appointed Yzaguirre as co-chair of her presidential campaign and assigned him to lead her outreach to Hispanics.
  • John McCain was honored by La Raza in 1999. McCain appointed Juan Hernandez as his Hispanic outreach director. In a Nightline interview on ABC News (June 7, 2001), Hernandez, who holds dual citizenship, said,

    I want the third generation, the seventh generation, I want them all to think ‘Mexico first.’ — Nightline Interview, ABC News, June 7, 2001 —

  • President Obama appointed Cecilia Munoz, senior vice president of La Raza, as director of his Office of Intergovernmental Affairs.
  • Given La Raza’s agenda, how can it be in our country’s best interest to be placing their leaders in positions of authority and influence in our society and our government? What does it say about those who make these appointments?

    Unabated immigration from Mexico takes huge amounts of money out of the U.S. economy. In 2006, over 27 percent of Mexico’s labor force was working in the U.S., sending “home” $20 billion in remittances. That equals one-third of the total wage earnings in the formal sector of the Mexican economy and 10 percent of Mexico’s exports.

    How can our country, our society, survive such a continuing stream of aliens who won’t submit to our law (on the proper way to immigrate) who are encouraged above all to avoid assimilation, who make ridiculous demands on the society they are invading (again, refer to the above photo)?

    What do we do about our federal government’s refusal to enforce immigration law, while they continue to push in every way possible to throw our borders wide open and look for new ways to grant amnesty to millions of people who are here illegally?

    We’ve simply GOT to get a handle on this. We’ve got to. To not reign this in is societal suicide.

    Much of the information which inspired me to write this piece came from reading the chapter ‘On Immigration’ from Mark R. Levin’s book Liberty And Tyranny, from observing contemporary news sources, and from simply THINKING.

    Think, people. Think!!!

    Hypocrisy

    with one comment

    hypocrisy |hiˈpäkrisē|
    noun ( pl. -sies)
    the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense.

    Textbook example No. 1
    Former Democrat Presidential Candidate John Kerry, sitting Senator from Massachucetts, gives us a wonderful example of the definition of the word ‘hypocrisy.’ Take a look:

    Senator Kerry, like most good Democrats, is decidedly in favor of popular liberal strategies to increasingly ‘tax the rich’ to make them share even more of the burden off the hard working middle and lower classes. Senator Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz, have inherited great wealth and are definitely in the financial category the Democrats target when they say ‘tax the rich.’ The Kerrys live in Nantucket, Massachusetts.

    Recently the Kerrys took delivery of a new $7 million yacht. There’s nothing wrong with that, and I certainly won’t hold that against them. They’ve inherited great wealth, and it is their right to spend it how ever they see fit. However, it is interesting to note that they took delivery of this new yacht not in Massachusetts where they live, but it was delivered to them and is berthed in Newport, Rhode Island instead. Why, I wonder?

    Although Senator Kerry has not provided an explanation, one very good reason may be that Rhode Island repealed its Boat Sales and Use Tax back in 1993 and has therefore become a haven for luxury yacht owners. Massachusetts, Kerry’s home state, on the other hand (in the effort to force the rich to pay their fair share) imposes a 6.25% Sales Tax and an annual excise tax on yachts. So, by taking delivery and by keeping his new toy berthed in Rhode Island, the good Senator saved approximately $437,500 in sales tax and an annual excise tax of around $70,000.

    I don’t hold it against Senator Kerry for doing the logical thing and using existing statutes in an effort to save some of his inherrited-through-marriage money by avoiding taxes. That’s only prudent. But I definitely will remember this the next time I hear of him or one of his fellow ‘tax the rich!’ Democrats (like Vice President Biden) make the claim that ‘paying more taxes is patriotic,’ or that we need to soak the rich to make them pay their fair share.

    In a statement issued by Senator Kerry after this story broke in the news, he claims that the yacht is currently in Rhode Island only ‘for repairs.’ But if that is true, then why does it have its home port of ‘Newport’ painted on it? Humm…

    And further, why did the Senator, who is on the record supporting policies which would punish companies who outsource jobs to overseas locations, order his luxury yacht from a company which built it in New Zealand instead of from a company employing American workers?

    Textbook example No. 2
    In his award winning prophesy of environmental gloom and doom, Al Gore strongly emphasized as ‘undisputed’ the ‘fact’ that ocean levels are on the rise, and will eventually reclaim huge land masses which are now ocean front lands. Then why, in April this year, did he spend nearly $9 million of his hard earned money on an ocean front villa in Southern California?

    Doesn’t seem very logical, does it? I’m just sayin’ …

    Written by jb

    July 29, 2010 at 10:38 am

    Promises Shomises

    leave a comment »

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall anything in the Health Care Bill about the individual mandate (tax) being limited only to those who earn more than $250K per year.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/health/policy/18health.html?_r=1&ref=politics

    Same here. While this is still just a legislative proposal, don’t lots of peeps making less than $250K hold shares in funds which profit by engaging in currency trading?
    http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-a-budget/109869-currency-tax-a-way-to-invest-in-our-future-rep-stark

    And here, on Cap and Trade. Anyone living in the US who consumes ‘energy’ or products which require energy use in their creation will ‘necessarily‘ see tremendous increases in the cost of everything. There will be no escaping these ‘new tax increases’ even if you make less than $250K.
    http://www.americansolutions.com/energytax/2010/07/punishing-you-for-bps-spill.php

    I’m so sick of politics. And especially tired of political promises. Why don’t we hold politicians responsible for what they promise? Those who continue to allow them to skate on their bold promises have essentially taken that over-used Clinton era mantra and modified it to “it’s only about politics.” Come on, folks: Get your heads out of the sand…

    Written by jb

    July 21, 2010 at 11:30 am

    Thoughts on ‘Obama on Fox’

    leave a comment »

    Hell must have just frozen over. I just witnessed an interview granted by President Obama to Fox News.

    Q:
    What did I learn from it?
    A:
    1). The arrogance of this man appears to be even more astounding than I previously realized. I knew it was significant, but…
    2). He evidently thinks, when dealing with someone who will stand up to him and actually challenge him to just answer a simple damn question, that it’s perfectly acceptable (and presidential) to treat such a person as if they were a little child.
    3). It’s hard to believe that when repeatedly pressed on ‘what’s actually in the bill,’ he couldn’t (or wouldn’t) actually give a concrete answer, and his attempts to respond were evasive at best. Notwithstanding, he’s certainly in favor of this legislation and thinks it is of utmost importance that it be passed, whatever ends up being in it. How do politicians with this kind of outlook ever get elected to any public office higher than dogcatcher?

    What’s the most constructive statement I can make at this point? Vote out the incumbents.

    Written by jb

    March 17, 2010 at 5:27 pm

    Congress Displays Contempt for Our Constitution

    leave a comment »

    Courtesy of Walter E. Williams’ 11.11.2009 post. I think he’s spot-on-target with this, and YES, it worries me.

    At Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Oct. 29th press conference, a CNS News reporter asked, “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?” Speaker Pelosi responded, “Are you serious? Are you serious?” The reporter said, “Yes, yes, I am.” Not responding further, Pelosi shook her head and took a question from another reporter. Later on, Pelosi’s press spokesman Nadeam Elshami told CNSNews.com about its question regarding constitutional authority mandating that individual Americans buy health insurance. “You can put this on the record. That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”

    Speaker Pelosi’s constitutional contempt, perhaps ignorance, is representative of the majority of members of both the House and the Senate. Their comfort in that ignorance and constitutional contempt, and how readily they articulate it, should be worrisome for every single American. It’s not a matter of whether you are for or against Congress’ health care proposals. It’s not a matter of whether you’re liberal or conservative, black or white, male or female, Democrat or Republican or member of any other group. It’s a matter of whether we are going to remain a relatively free people or permit the insidious encroachment on our liberties to continue.

    Where in the U.S. Constitution does it authorize Congress to force Americans to buy health insurance? If Congress gets away with forcing us to buy health insurance, down the line, what else will they force us to buy; or do you naively think they will stop with health insurance? We shouldn’t think that the cure to Congress’ unconstitutional heavy-handedness will end if we only elect Republicans. Republicans have demonstrated nearly as much constitutional contempt as have Democrats. The major difference is the significant escalation of that contempt under today’s Democratically controlled Congress and White House with the massive increase in spending, their proposed legislation and the appointment of tyrannical czars to control our lives. It’s a safe bet that if and when Republicans take over the Congress and White House, they will not give up the massive increase in control over our lives won by the Democrats.

    In each new session of Congress since 1995, John Shadegg, R-Ariz., has introduced the Enumerated Powers Act, a measure “To require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws, and for other purposes.” The highest number of co-sponsors it has ever had in the House of Representatives is 54 and it has never had co-sponsors in the Senate until this year, when 22 senators signed up. The fact that less than 15 percent of the Congress supports such a measure demonstrates the kind of contempt our elected representatives have for the rules of the game — our Constitution.

    Written by jb

    November 26, 2009 at 10:54 pm

    Respect for Congress?

    with 3 comments

    Most Americans have a rather low level of respect for our politicians in Congress. And that’s no surprise. Much of what has fueled this lack of respect is a feeling that those we have sent to Washington to represent us are simply ignoring us, instead.

    Here is a good example of why we have that feeling. A good indication that the feeling is well founded.

    Some time back, I sent a message to my Congressman and my two Senators in Washington. I submitted my message from the submission forms on their own websites, thinking that would be the most reliable way of actually being heard (use the system they have in place, for that purpose). Not long after that, I received responses, and while these generally appeared to be more “form letter” responses than ones which specifically addressed the issues I brought up, I at least felt that my voice had been heard.

    The message I sent dealt with a number of issues I am concerned with, but the key points I addressed were 1). don’t vote on any bill you haven’t read, and 2). stop spending money we simply don’t have. Yesterday, I received another Email message from one of my Senators, Senator Bob Corker. His message began with “Thank you for taking the time to contact my office about S. 688, the Breast Cancer Patient Protection Act. Your input is important to me, and I appreciate the time you took to share your thoughts.” His message went on to tell me how he has “cosponsored three pieces of legislation aimed at helping those with breast cancer,” and “the information you’ve provided in your letter will certainly help my staff and me more effectively look into this issue.” He also explained that he has sent a request to “the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services asking that they provide adequate funds to the National Cancer Institute (NCI).” Uhh.. more money we don’t have.

    Not once in my message did I mention S. 688 (the Breast Cancer Patient Protection Act), or Cancer research or treatment, or government funding for it. While government spending on Cancer treatment and research may very well be a good thing, the bottom line is that I didn’t mention it. Yet here is his message thanking me for contacting him about it. This response certainly does not engender a feeling that my voice has been heard. It also does not increase my level of respect for Congress. What a bunch of of yahoos these guys are, this current group we have in Washington.

    Senator Corker is obviously not listening to me. Not only did he not take note of what I did write him about, but it appears that he has used the submission of my message as an excuse to add my name under a category which he feels needs more public support, even though I never once mentioned (what must apparently be) a pet project of his (since he has cosponsored three bills on it, and requested additional funding for it). It’s no wonder that so many Americans are feeling the need to show up at Town Hall Meetings and yell in order for their voice to be heard.

    What this experience does is to move me even more to the side of feeling that we just need to vote out the incumbents. Unfortunately, Senator Corker won’t be up for reelection until 2012. And I even agree with his stance on a number of issues, but then there’s this question of not respecting the People.

    I sincerely hope that one good outcome of the massive public dissatisfaction with the performance of our current crop of elected representatives will be that in the next election, we will have people running who are sensitive to the fact that the People need to be heard and respected. Give me a candidate who respects the People, and who can genuinely demonstrate a willingness and ability to work across Party lines to get things done, and I’ll vote for that guy, regardless of where he/she stands on individual issues.

    Written by jb

    September 5, 2009 at 1:27 pm