For Obama to stop pursuing his agenda through regulation because he and the Democratic leadership can't have what they want through legislation. This is neither compromise nor democratic.
For Dee to stop supporting illegal aliens and begin supporting her fellow citizens.
For English to be enacted as the Official Language of the U.S. to be used for all government proceedings and publications.
For a true fluency in English requirement for citizenship -- eliminating the need for multi-lingual ballots.
For continued improvement in the economy.
For the incoming crop of TEA Party-backed GOP freshmen in Congress to act on the principles that elected them.
For Obama to recognize the significance of the last election and work with the new members of Congress to actualize the wishes of the voting public.
For a regular policy review to determine if our presence in Afghanistan is achieving its objectives.
For Congress to do an extensive re-write of Obamacare to eliminate extraneous provisions, improve cost controls, require extensive documentation to prove eligibility, and weed out illegal aliens.
For an end to sanctuary cities.
For austerity measures and a balanced budget amendment for all 50 states and the federal government.
For President Obama to: (1)declare that the Guantanamo detention center will remain open and, (2) put accused terrorists on trial before military tribunals.
For a gross simplification of the tax code so that every taxpayer is able to prepare his or her own tax return without assistance.
For construction of new mosques in the United States to be suspended until the Muslims renounce Sharia Law as it conflicts with human rights, the U.S. Constitution and related laws.
For performance-based school funding and teachers salaries.
For Congress to buck progressive and liberal orthodoxy to do the right thing.
For a GOP-sponsored complete rewrite of the deeply flawed DREAM Act to: (1) require a 4 year enlistment in the armed forces as the minimum eligibility requirement; (2) notwithstanding other provisions of law to permanently bar applicants from sponsoring others for residency or citizenship; (3) provide severe penalties for fraud; (4) insist on 4 forms of notarized documentation to support an applicant’s eligibility; (5) provide for regular audits to identify fraudulent applications; (6) provide funds for enforcement; (7) narrowly define eligibility to those who were less than 16 years old when they were brought here illegally with a cutoff date of the date of introduction of the first previous DREAM Act; and (8) limit the application period to no more than six months on a one time basis.
For true immigration reform to: (1) reduce legal immigration to no more than 200,000 annually focused on those who are most likely to help the U.S. remain competitive in the global economy; (2) eliminate chain immigrations except for the minor children and spouses of citizens; (3) deny birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens, tourists, temporary migrant farm workers, and other visitors; (4) adopt Arizona’s SB 1070 as the norm for state enforcement in all 50 states; (5) identify, apprehend, detain and deport illegal aliens using mandatory E-Verify as the primary tool; (6) compensate detention center operators on the basis of throughput rather than detainee days; (7) enforce high standards for detention centers; (8) classify all deportations, including self-deportations, as “involuntary” with stiff jail sentences for repeat offenders; and (8) buttress improvements in staffing, infrastructure, and the rules of engagement at the border with vigorous and continuous internal enforcement
For a “Wanted Dead or Alive” approach to drug lords and members of drug cartels.
For a new Official Secrets Act patterned after Great Britain’s.
For a reduction in the national debt to no more than 30% of GDP and a balanced budget by freezing all government spending at the 2008 level.
For high tax rates on the super rich but not on their legitimate businesses except for investment bankers and hedge fund managers.
For a removal of the ceiling on social security taxable earnings while maintaining the current benefit maximum as adjusted annually for inflation.
For an end to all foreign aid until the national debt is no more than 30% of GDP.
For a restoration of the value of the dollar and its status as the world currency.
For a return of manufacturing jobs to the U.S. by providing business incentives.
For an end to tax-exempt status for foundations that spend any of their funds outside of the U.S.
For an elimination of all foreign aid and contributions to the UN.
For a repeal of NAFTA.
For an end to the talk about a North American Union.
For tractor trailers unhitched at the border and re-hitched to American tractors.
For a gross reduction in cross-border pedestrian and vehicular traffic. If you work in the U.S. and you are a citizen of the U.S. you must live here and pay taxes here. No cross-border work commutes.
For an end to busing foreign children to American schools. Schools and hospitals must verify the citizenship of thosethey admit.
For a series of triage and obstetric hospitals south and north of the borders with construction jointly funded by the U.S. and its neighbors but with staffing operating funding to be provided by the countries in which the hospitals are located.
For illegal aliens who are in need of medicare to be transported to one of the above hospitals as soon as their conditions have been stabilized.
For bi-lateral negotiations to enable cross-border hot pursuit of gun and drug runners and dealers and the use of lethal force if they open fire or fail to stop as ordered.
For a new alien and sedition act that makes all forms of support of illegal aliens acts of gross disloyalty subject to such penalties as the law provides.
Friday, December 31, 2010
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Dee Perez-Scott does it again!
In response to the musings of a reporter about likely GOP proposals in the new Congress, Dee has gone off the deep end.
Her lack of loyalty to the U.S is clearly illustrated by her vociferous objection to the following list of potential 2011 Congressional initiatives which are designed to solve the illegal alien problem:
1. Changing the 14th Amendment, ending Birthright Citizenship
2. Mandatory e-Verify
3. Official English
4. End to Sanctuary Cities
She clearly has no interest in being a part of solution and prefers to remain a part of the problem. She has never overcome her Mexican heritage to become a true American in every sense of the word. The above measures are essential to the preservation of the America we know and love. Her loyalty lies elsewhere and obviously prefers a Mexico Norte to today's America. It is indeed sad that an American citizen can take such a perverted view of the obligations of citizenship. If there was a way to deport citizens with this lack of loyalty, Dee would be the first to go.
Dee asks how an illegal alien birth would be defined if a change in the interpretation of the 14th Amendment occurs. Most would agree that if one of the parents is a citizen that should permit the child to enjoy the citizenship of either parent. Some insist, not unreasonably, that the citizenship of the child should be that of the mother. This is simply a way of recognizing the close connection between mother and child not a way of discriminating against women. These issues are easily resolved once the basic premise of Jus Soli is denied. Whatever the legislative result, it would be applied equally to all borders and all nationalities.
Obviously, the babies of tourists, visa overstays, temporary farm migrant workers, and any others who are here only temporarily or as visitors should not be awarded birthright citizenship. That loophole is the fundamental flaw in the 14th Amendment.
Dee advanced the absurd notion that denying birthright citizenship to the babies of tourists would ruin tourism!
She also wonders about retroactive application. While the retroactive denial of citizenship to the children of illegal aliens, tourists and others is attractive and would be entirely justified, its inclusion in any bill is highly unlikely.
Pro-America remains committed to the Rule of Law but, nevertheless, favors immigration reform, just not the reform supported by La Raza and Dee and their ilk. The difference between the Pro-Americans and the Pro-illegals is that the former honors the rule of law as it is while the latter supports those who have violated or are violating the existing laws. Dee erroneously equates Pro-America’s desire for real reform to the actual violation of the law. But that is the stock-in-trade of the Pro-Illegals not the Pro-Americans. Let’s make it simple for Dee to understand the difference. Here is a simple analogy. If I didn’t like stop signs and was trying to get the law changed, I would continue to honor the stop signs until the change is becomes law. Dee would not. She would ignore the stop signs while she agitates for change. I honor the rule of law; she does not as illustrated by this analogy. This is an exact analogy with regard to illegal aliens.
Real reform would reduce legal immigration to not more than 200,000 each year focused on those most likely to help America remain competitive in the world economy and recover from the largest fiscal catastrophe in its history.
Chain immigrations and the sponsorship of foreign nationals should be ended in any reform bill. The objective should be tax and immigration policies that will stabilize our population rather than allowing it to increase without bounds.
Her lack of loyalty to the U.S is clearly illustrated by her vociferous objection to the following list of potential 2011 Congressional initiatives which are designed to solve the illegal alien problem:
1. Changing the 14th Amendment, ending Birthright Citizenship
2. Mandatory e-Verify
3. Official English
4. End to Sanctuary Cities
She clearly has no interest in being a part of solution and prefers to remain a part of the problem. She has never overcome her Mexican heritage to become a true American in every sense of the word. The above measures are essential to the preservation of the America we know and love. Her loyalty lies elsewhere and obviously prefers a Mexico Norte to today's America. It is indeed sad that an American citizen can take such a perverted view of the obligations of citizenship. If there was a way to deport citizens with this lack of loyalty, Dee would be the first to go.
Dee asks how an illegal alien birth would be defined if a change in the interpretation of the 14th Amendment occurs. Most would agree that if one of the parents is a citizen that should permit the child to enjoy the citizenship of either parent. Some insist, not unreasonably, that the citizenship of the child should be that of the mother. This is simply a way of recognizing the close connection between mother and child not a way of discriminating against women. These issues are easily resolved once the basic premise of Jus Soli is denied. Whatever the legislative result, it would be applied equally to all borders and all nationalities.
Obviously, the babies of tourists, visa overstays, temporary farm migrant workers, and any others who are here only temporarily or as visitors should not be awarded birthright citizenship. That loophole is the fundamental flaw in the 14th Amendment.
Dee advanced the absurd notion that denying birthright citizenship to the babies of tourists would ruin tourism!
She also wonders about retroactive application. While the retroactive denial of citizenship to the children of illegal aliens, tourists and others is attractive and would be entirely justified, its inclusion in any bill is highly unlikely.
Pro-America remains committed to the Rule of Law but, nevertheless, favors immigration reform, just not the reform supported by La Raza and Dee and their ilk. The difference between the Pro-Americans and the Pro-illegals is that the former honors the rule of law as it is while the latter supports those who have violated or are violating the existing laws. Dee erroneously equates Pro-America’s desire for real reform to the actual violation of the law. But that is the stock-in-trade of the Pro-Illegals not the Pro-Americans. Let’s make it simple for Dee to understand the difference. Here is a simple analogy. If I didn’t like stop signs and was trying to get the law changed, I would continue to honor the stop signs until the change is becomes law. Dee would not. She would ignore the stop signs while she agitates for change. I honor the rule of law; she does not as illustrated by this analogy. This is an exact analogy with regard to illegal aliens.
Real reform would reduce legal immigration to not more than 200,000 each year focused on those most likely to help America remain competitive in the world economy and recover from the largest fiscal catastrophe in its history.
Chain immigrations and the sponsorship of foreign nationals should be ended in any reform bill. The objective should be tax and immigration policies that will stabilize our population rather than allowing it to increase without bounds.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
New Congress will take a Different Line on Immigration
The end of the year means a turnover of House control from the Democrats to the Republicans and, with it, Congress' approach to immigration.
In a matter of weeks, the failed efforts in Congress to grant amnesty to young,and not so young, illegal immigrants will come to an end and the debate will begin on whether children born to parents who are in the country illegally should continue to enjoy automatic U.S. citizenship. This debate is also likely to encompass children born to tourists and others who are only in the U.S. temporarily as guests or visitors.
This effort should resonate with the GOP faithful who helped swing the House in Republicans' favor as well as others who see Jus Soli as an anachronism while the U.S. is under duress from millions of illegal aliens. In its endeavor to grab a large enough share of the growing Latino vote to win the White House and the Senate majority in 2012, the GOP will need to vastly improve and increase its outreach to Latinos. It needs to sharpen its message to show that these immigration reforms are in the long term interests of all citizens and legal residents and consistent with the practices in many other developed countries.
Legislation to test interpretations of the 14th Amendment as granting citizenship to children of illegal immigrants, tourists and other transients will emerge early next session. That is likely to be followed by attempts to require all employers, public and private, to use E-Verify, a web-based system, to check the work status of both current employees and potential new hires to determine if they are in the U.S. legally.
There could be proposed curbs on federal spending in santuary cities that don't do enough to identify people who are in the country illegally and facilitate their removal. Another measure would reduce the number of legal immigrants to more like 200,000 per year focused on those mostly likely to help the U.S. remain competitive in the world economy. IntransigentDemocrats ended the year still failing to grasp the essentials of the wishes of the American people with regard to immigration reform. Under their leadership the deeply-flawed DREAM Act and other amnesty measures have contined to fall short of the number of votes necessary for passage in either the House or the Senate or both. The Dream Act, which would have given hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants a chance at legal status, failed to include penalties for the submittal of fraudulent applications and adequate protections against wholesale abuse.
House Republicans will try to fill the immigration reform vacuum left by Democrats with legislation designed to send illegal immigrants packing and deter others from trying to come to the U.S. This is what the Congress should have been doing for a long time instead of attempting to reward illegal aliens for violating U.S. borders and sovereignty.
Democrats, who will still control the Senate, will be playing defense against the long overdue immigration enforcement measures, mindful of their need to keep on good footing with Hispanic voters. But a slimmer majority and an eye on 2012 may prevent Senate Democrats from bringing to the floor any sweeping immigration bill, or even a limited one that hints at providing legal status to people in the country illegally.
President Barack Obama could be a wild card.
He'll have at his disposal his veto power should a bill denying citizenship to children of illegal immigrants make it to his desk. But Obama also has made cracking down on employers a key part of his administration's immigration enforcement tactics. He has, nevertheless, demonstrated a certain obtuseness about the role of E-Verify in facilitating that crackdown.
Hispanic voters and their allies will look for Obama to broker a deal on immigration as he did on tax cuts and health care. After the Dream Act failed in the Senate this month, Obama said his administration would not give up on the measure. "At a minimum we should be able to get Dream done. So I'm going to go back at it," he said. The GOP is in a position to negotiate more stringent requirements for potential DREAM applicants so that the bill will no longer be seen as a backdoor approach to another major amnesty. The GOP should insist on a minimum of four years of military service for all applicants. All of the loopholes must be closed, the time frame for applications limited to six months from the date of passage, and severe penalties imposed for fraudulent applications detected through regular audits.
The president has taken heavy hits in Spanish-language and ethnic media for failing to keep his promise to address immigration promptly and taking it off the agenda last summer. His administration's continued deportations of immigrants — a record 393,000 in the 2010 fiscal year — have also made tenuous his relationship with Hispanic voters.
John Morton, who oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said in a recent conference call that there are no plans to change the agency's enforcement tactics, which are focused on immigrants who commit crimes but also have led to detaining and deporting many immigrants who have not committed crimes. A change in that policy to broaden its scope could be part of any deal brokered by Obama with the GOP. The borders will never be secure in the absence of vigorous and continuous internal enforcement designed to identify, apprehend, detain and quickly deport involuntarily all illegals.
The agency also will continue to expand Secure Communities, the program that allows immigration officials to check fingerprints of all people booked into jail to see if they are in the country illegally. Both illegal immigrants and residents can end up being deported under the program, which the Homeland Security Department hopes to expand nationwide by 2013. Of course, some other measures are needed beyond mere deportation. Repeat border violators must do hard time for at least two years for the first repeat violation and five years for the next.
Many of those attending a recent gathering of conservative Hispanics in Washington warned that another round of tough laws surrounded by ugly anti-immigrant discussions could doom the GOP's 2012 chances. But there is no need for these discussions to be perceived as anti-immigrant. They must be characterized as pro-America measures designed to maintain the quality of life and standard of living of citizens and permanent residents. The emphasis needs to be on our finite natural resources like water, arable land, and minerals so that all can see the need for population stabilization through reduced legal immgration and secure borders. The alternative must be shown as a declining standard of living and quality of life as more people compete for those finite natural resources as well as jobs. The more there are of us, the less there will be for each of us of those finite natural resources. Surely, that can be an argument that will resonate with Hispanic citizens.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a possible 2012 presidential candidate, cited Meg Whitman's failed gubernatorial bid in California despite her high spending. When 22 percent of the electorate is Latino, candidates can't win without a vigorous presence in the Hispanic community and a "message that is understandable and involves respect," Gingrich said. Even so, Gingrich was unwilling to call on his fellow Republican senators to drop their opposition to the DREAM Act, saying the legislation should not have been considered without giving lawmakers a chance to amend it. And he is certainly right about that. The deeply-flawed DREAM Act needs major changes before it is brought to a vote. A modified bill can be written that will be, at least minimally, acceptable to the both the GOP and Democrats.
The next Congress will be populated with many newcomers elected on a platform of tougher immigration enforcement. They'll have ready ears in Republican Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who will chair the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Steve King of Iowa, who is expected to chair the committee's immigration subcommittee.
That's a recipe for more measures aimed at immigration enforcement, including requiring businesses to use E-Verify rather than just eyeballing paper documents to check workers' citizenship and legal residency status. E-Verify is a quick and efficient way of determining the work status of employees. Any objections to this system have nothing to do with its effectiveness; instead it has to do with the desire of employers to continue to hire illegal aliens at substandard wages.
"I've already told the business community it's going to happen," said Beto Cardenas, executive counsel to Americans for Immigration Reform, a coalition of business leaders who support overhauling immigration laws. Changes to immigration law contained in appropriations and authorization bills, where immigration enforcement hawks are likely to tuck some measures, would also be tough to reject.
But more controversial measures such as attempts to deny citizenship to children of people who are in the U.S. illegally could be tempered by GOP leaders aware of the need to curry more favor with Hispanic voters. Nevertheless, the applicability of the 14th Amendment to the children of illegal aliens, tourists, temporary migrant farm workers, and others who are in the U.S. temporarily is due to be tested and everyone should support that effort to once and for all settle this issue.
Substantially adapted and paraphrased from an article by SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press – Mon Dec 27, 3:23 am ET
WASHINGTON –
In a matter of weeks, the failed efforts in Congress to grant amnesty to young,and not so young, illegal immigrants will come to an end and the debate will begin on whether children born to parents who are in the country illegally should continue to enjoy automatic U.S. citizenship. This debate is also likely to encompass children born to tourists and others who are only in the U.S. temporarily as guests or visitors.
This effort should resonate with the GOP faithful who helped swing the House in Republicans' favor as well as others who see Jus Soli as an anachronism while the U.S. is under duress from millions of illegal aliens. In its endeavor to grab a large enough share of the growing Latino vote to win the White House and the Senate majority in 2012, the GOP will need to vastly improve and increase its outreach to Latinos. It needs to sharpen its message to show that these immigration reforms are in the long term interests of all citizens and legal residents and consistent with the practices in many other developed countries.
Legislation to test interpretations of the 14th Amendment as granting citizenship to children of illegal immigrants, tourists and other transients will emerge early next session. That is likely to be followed by attempts to require all employers, public and private, to use E-Verify, a web-based system, to check the work status of both current employees and potential new hires to determine if they are in the U.S. legally.
There could be proposed curbs on federal spending in santuary cities that don't do enough to identify people who are in the country illegally and facilitate their removal. Another measure would reduce the number of legal immigrants to more like 200,000 per year focused on those mostly likely to help the U.S. remain competitive in the world economy. IntransigentDemocrats ended the year still failing to grasp the essentials of the wishes of the American people with regard to immigration reform. Under their leadership the deeply-flawed DREAM Act and other amnesty measures have contined to fall short of the number of votes necessary for passage in either the House or the Senate or both. The Dream Act, which would have given hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants a chance at legal status, failed to include penalties for the submittal of fraudulent applications and adequate protections against wholesale abuse.
House Republicans will try to fill the immigration reform vacuum left by Democrats with legislation designed to send illegal immigrants packing and deter others from trying to come to the U.S. This is what the Congress should have been doing for a long time instead of attempting to reward illegal aliens for violating U.S. borders and sovereignty.
Democrats, who will still control the Senate, will be playing defense against the long overdue immigration enforcement measures, mindful of their need to keep on good footing with Hispanic voters. But a slimmer majority and an eye on 2012 may prevent Senate Democrats from bringing to the floor any sweeping immigration bill, or even a limited one that hints at providing legal status to people in the country illegally.
President Barack Obama could be a wild card.
He'll have at his disposal his veto power should a bill denying citizenship to children of illegal immigrants make it to his desk. But Obama also has made cracking down on employers a key part of his administration's immigration enforcement tactics. He has, nevertheless, demonstrated a certain obtuseness about the role of E-Verify in facilitating that crackdown.
Hispanic voters and their allies will look for Obama to broker a deal on immigration as he did on tax cuts and health care. After the Dream Act failed in the Senate this month, Obama said his administration would not give up on the measure. "At a minimum we should be able to get Dream done. So I'm going to go back at it," he said. The GOP is in a position to negotiate more stringent requirements for potential DREAM applicants so that the bill will no longer be seen as a backdoor approach to another major amnesty. The GOP should insist on a minimum of four years of military service for all applicants. All of the loopholes must be closed, the time frame for applications limited to six months from the date of passage, and severe penalties imposed for fraudulent applications detected through regular audits.
The president has taken heavy hits in Spanish-language and ethnic media for failing to keep his promise to address immigration promptly and taking it off the agenda last summer. His administration's continued deportations of immigrants — a record 393,000 in the 2010 fiscal year — have also made tenuous his relationship with Hispanic voters.
John Morton, who oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said in a recent conference call that there are no plans to change the agency's enforcement tactics, which are focused on immigrants who commit crimes but also have led to detaining and deporting many immigrants who have not committed crimes. A change in that policy to broaden its scope could be part of any deal brokered by Obama with the GOP. The borders will never be secure in the absence of vigorous and continuous internal enforcement designed to identify, apprehend, detain and quickly deport involuntarily all illegals.
The agency also will continue to expand Secure Communities, the program that allows immigration officials to check fingerprints of all people booked into jail to see if they are in the country illegally. Both illegal immigrants and residents can end up being deported under the program, which the Homeland Security Department hopes to expand nationwide by 2013. Of course, some other measures are needed beyond mere deportation. Repeat border violators must do hard time for at least two years for the first repeat violation and five years for the next.
Many of those attending a recent gathering of conservative Hispanics in Washington warned that another round of tough laws surrounded by ugly anti-immigrant discussions could doom the GOP's 2012 chances. But there is no need for these discussions to be perceived as anti-immigrant. They must be characterized as pro-America measures designed to maintain the quality of life and standard of living of citizens and permanent residents. The emphasis needs to be on our finite natural resources like water, arable land, and minerals so that all can see the need for population stabilization through reduced legal immgration and secure borders. The alternative must be shown as a declining standard of living and quality of life as more people compete for those finite natural resources as well as jobs. The more there are of us, the less there will be for each of us of those finite natural resources. Surely, that can be an argument that will resonate with Hispanic citizens.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a possible 2012 presidential candidate, cited Meg Whitman's failed gubernatorial bid in California despite her high spending. When 22 percent of the electorate is Latino, candidates can't win without a vigorous presence in the Hispanic community and a "message that is understandable and involves respect," Gingrich said. Even so, Gingrich was unwilling to call on his fellow Republican senators to drop their opposition to the DREAM Act, saying the legislation should not have been considered without giving lawmakers a chance to amend it. And he is certainly right about that. The deeply-flawed DREAM Act needs major changes before it is brought to a vote. A modified bill can be written that will be, at least minimally, acceptable to the both the GOP and Democrats.
The next Congress will be populated with many newcomers elected on a platform of tougher immigration enforcement. They'll have ready ears in Republican Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who will chair the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Steve King of Iowa, who is expected to chair the committee's immigration subcommittee.
That's a recipe for more measures aimed at immigration enforcement, including requiring businesses to use E-Verify rather than just eyeballing paper documents to check workers' citizenship and legal residency status. E-Verify is a quick and efficient way of determining the work status of employees. Any objections to this system have nothing to do with its effectiveness; instead it has to do with the desire of employers to continue to hire illegal aliens at substandard wages.
"I've already told the business community it's going to happen," said Beto Cardenas, executive counsel to Americans for Immigration Reform, a coalition of business leaders who support overhauling immigration laws. Changes to immigration law contained in appropriations and authorization bills, where immigration enforcement hawks are likely to tuck some measures, would also be tough to reject.
But more controversial measures such as attempts to deny citizenship to children of people who are in the U.S. illegally could be tempered by GOP leaders aware of the need to curry more favor with Hispanic voters. Nevertheless, the applicability of the 14th Amendment to the children of illegal aliens, tourists, temporary migrant farm workers, and others who are in the U.S. temporarily is due to be tested and everyone should support that effort to once and for all settle this issue.
Substantially adapted and paraphrased from an article by SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press – Mon Dec 27, 3:23 am ET
WASHINGTON –
Monday, December 27, 2010
Dee Perez-Scott
Recently Dee asked if I read my own posts. And, of course I do and I just re-read my last one on her site again but not with the same jaundiced view that she reads them. Perhaps it is she who should re-read them and then just take them at face value without her usual negative spin. Is it any wonder we have so much difficulty in agreeing on anything when Dee insists on twisting every word that I and others post on her site solely on the basis that she disagrees with them. The following is an attempt to help Dee overcome her cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is the uncomfortable feeling Dee gets when she encounters and holds conflicting ideas or knowledge simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. So when Dee encounters such conflicting ideas she must either change her attitudes, beliefs, and actions or twist the ideas that are in conflict with hers to fit her attitudes and beliefs she also likes to reduce her dissonance by justifying, blaming, spinning and denying. It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology and is clearly apparent in the great lengths Dee goes to deny, spin, twist, and distort the posts of others to fit her own predilections without giving them any positive consideration. This leads to gross misinterpretations and misunderstandings.
Dee desperately needs to take a course in empathetic listening and reading. It would be a big help to her in relieving her cognitive dissonance.
Dee wrote, "The Republican agenda! They want to END Social Security, END Medicare, END Freedom of Religion, End Freedom of Choice, End Freedom of Sexual Preference, End Unemployment Compensation, and End Public Education."
If this was the true Republican agenda, there would not be enough Republicans to make a difference or worry about.
(Moreover, if this is the true Republican agenda, how do you explain the fact that there are so many of us? How many politicians does Dee think could run for office successfully on the platform she identifies? How many adherents could be attracted to a party with that agenda?)
I wrote, “Many Conservative Republicans are hung up on their opposition to abortion and same sex marriage. I believe there is significant merit in their position but my Republicanism does not revolve around those two litmus tests.”
(What I am saying is that my support for candidates does not hinge on whether the candidate can pass those two tests.
Population stabilization, border security in depth, and fiscal responsibility are the critical issues to me.
(I won’t support any candidate who is not strong on all three.)
Public Education will always exist but Republicans favor a second alternative because the public schools are failing despite the tons of money we put into them.
(Dee’s business experience should have taught her that a little competition can result in improved performance. Public education system needs more competition to give it an incentive to improve.)
The other so-called freedoms Dee’s list are not in the Bill of Rights or anywhere else in the Constitution. That doesn't necessarily make them bad ideas, just a little less sacrosanct then Dee makes them. The only threat to the Freedom of Religion comes from the Left, the ACLU and from those who don't comprehend what a Muslim America would be like under Sharia Law -- women in particular.
(Freedom of religion in my mind does not include practices that are contrary to human rights and civil law. In spite of some very damning evidence to the contrary, some people still want to believe that Islam is a benign religion that should be welcomed in the U.S. I suspect those who support Islam and Sharia law have never had to live under its strictures, have never had to witness a stoning or the cutting off of the hand of a thief. We can be complacent about Islam because we consider any possibility of the imposition of Sharia to be extremely remote. Yet, those conversant with Islam have made clear its long range goals. Soon we will be hearing more about efforts to impose Sharia law in the Muslim communities in America. It seems unreasonable to have one set of laws for Muslims and another for everyone else. Religious law should never supersede civil law in a democracy even in the narrowest of contexts).()
Re: Social Security. The GOP seems to be the only party that recognizes the long term unfunded liabilities of the trust fund. The use of private accounts for younger workers is one approach the GOP has suggested. Personally, I believe that the ceiling on taxable wages should be removed with the maximum benefit left at the present level as adjusted annually for inflation. This would be a huge tax increase for those earning over the current ceiling so probably would have to be phased in over 5 years. The taxable base for those who are still working, as opposed to those who are already retired, should include their compensation from stock options, interest, dividends, bonuses, etc. to the extent that they have not been previously taxed because those income streams may be substitutes for wages subject to the social security tax.
(Does that sound like ending social security and Medicare? Hell, no! I, as a Republican, am interested foremost in preserving them by assuring their solvency for our children. How any rational person could read my comment to be a suggestion that we should do away with either program is unfathomable. If there are Republicans or Democrats who want to do so, they will never get elected and can be discounted entirely as irrelevant.)
Freedom of choice or pro-abortion ideas should be anathema to religious Latinos. Many Catholics make common cause with the GOP on this issue.
(This is not of paramount importance to me but should be to Catholics and others who object to the disposal of viable fetuses. I do believe that abortion should not be considered a primary method of family planning or birth control.)
Sexual preference: I say let the combat arms of the military decide regarding “don't ask, don't tell” what is acceptable in combat situations not politicians who sit comfortably in their townhouses in Washington.
(Nevertheless, the die is cast, and eventually gays will be able to serve openly in the armed forces as soon as the DOD can figure out the logistics and the rules.)
Unemployment compensation is a good thing but there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. When our policies encourage indolence instead of the willingness to accept any kind of work those policies will be counterproductive in the long run.
(i)(Maybe a few more people should read or view the Grapes of Wrath again so they can come down off their high horses and take whatever work is available until they can do better instead of insisting on another increase in the national debt and budget deficit. The question we should all be asking ourselves is, “What conditions would we impose if the money was coming directly out of our personal wallets -- because it is?)
Dee desperately needs to take a course in empathetic listening and reading. It would be a big help to her in relieving her cognitive dissonance.
Dee wrote, "The Republican agenda! They want to END Social Security, END Medicare, END Freedom of Religion, End Freedom of Choice, End Freedom of Sexual Preference, End Unemployment Compensation, and End Public Education."
If this was the true Republican agenda, there would not be enough Republicans to make a difference or worry about.
(Moreover, if this is the true Republican agenda, how do you explain the fact that there are so many of us? How many politicians does Dee think could run for office successfully on the platform she identifies? How many adherents could be attracted to a party with that agenda?)
I wrote, “Many Conservative Republicans are hung up on their opposition to abortion and same sex marriage. I believe there is significant merit in their position but my Republicanism does not revolve around those two litmus tests.”
(What I am saying is that my support for candidates does not hinge on whether the candidate can pass those two tests.
Population stabilization, border security in depth, and fiscal responsibility are the critical issues to me.
(I won’t support any candidate who is not strong on all three.)
Public Education will always exist but Republicans favor a second alternative because the public schools are failing despite the tons of money we put into them.
(Dee’s business experience should have taught her that a little competition can result in improved performance. Public education system needs more competition to give it an incentive to improve.)
The other so-called freedoms Dee’s list are not in the Bill of Rights or anywhere else in the Constitution. That doesn't necessarily make them bad ideas, just a little less sacrosanct then Dee makes them. The only threat to the Freedom of Religion comes from the Left, the ACLU and from those who don't comprehend what a Muslim America would be like under Sharia Law -- women in particular.
(Freedom of religion in my mind does not include practices that are contrary to human rights and civil law. In spite of some very damning evidence to the contrary, some people still want to believe that Islam is a benign religion that should be welcomed in the U.S. I suspect those who support Islam and Sharia law have never had to live under its strictures, have never had to witness a stoning or the cutting off of the hand of a thief. We can be complacent about Islam because we consider any possibility of the imposition of Sharia to be extremely remote. Yet, those conversant with Islam have made clear its long range goals. Soon we will be hearing more about efforts to impose Sharia law in the Muslim communities in America. It seems unreasonable to have one set of laws for Muslims and another for everyone else. Religious law should never supersede civil law in a democracy even in the narrowest of contexts).()
Re: Social Security. The GOP seems to be the only party that recognizes the long term unfunded liabilities of the trust fund. The use of private accounts for younger workers is one approach the GOP has suggested. Personally, I believe that the ceiling on taxable wages should be removed with the maximum benefit left at the present level as adjusted annually for inflation. This would be a huge tax increase for those earning over the current ceiling so probably would have to be phased in over 5 years. The taxable base for those who are still working, as opposed to those who are already retired, should include their compensation from stock options, interest, dividends, bonuses, etc. to the extent that they have not been previously taxed because those income streams may be substitutes for wages subject to the social security tax.
(Does that sound like ending social security and Medicare? Hell, no! I, as a Republican, am interested foremost in preserving them by assuring their solvency for our children. How any rational person could read my comment to be a suggestion that we should do away with either program is unfathomable. If there are Republicans or Democrats who want to do so, they will never get elected and can be discounted entirely as irrelevant.)
Freedom of choice or pro-abortion ideas should be anathema to religious Latinos. Many Catholics make common cause with the GOP on this issue.
(This is not of paramount importance to me but should be to Catholics and others who object to the disposal of viable fetuses. I do believe that abortion should not be considered a primary method of family planning or birth control.)
Sexual preference: I say let the combat arms of the military decide regarding “don't ask, don't tell” what is acceptable in combat situations not politicians who sit comfortably in their townhouses in Washington.
(Nevertheless, the die is cast, and eventually gays will be able to serve openly in the armed forces as soon as the DOD can figure out the logistics and the rules.)
Unemployment compensation is a good thing but there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. When our policies encourage indolence instead of the willingness to accept any kind of work those policies will be counterproductive in the long run.
(i)(Maybe a few more people should read or view the Grapes of Wrath again so they can come down off their high horses and take whatever work is available until they can do better instead of insisting on another increase in the national debt and budget deficit. The question we should all be asking ourselves is, “What conditions would we impose if the money was coming directly out of our personal wallets -- because it is?)
Monday, December 20, 2010
Lame Duck Demos and RINOS Fail
December18,2010, in a procedural vote requiring 60 votes to advance the legislation, the U.S. Senate voted for the DREAM Act by a 55-41 margin, effectively defeating a deeply flawed bill fraught with loopholes and opportunities for fraud. Once again, against all odds, the American people have prevailed to repeat in a loud voice, “We don’t reward illegal behavior. We will continue to do everything we can to discourage other illegal alien parents from dragging their children across the border in violation of U.S immigration laws.”
In a last gasp attempt to ram the DREAM Act through the Congress, the lame duck Democrats and a handful of RINOs failed once again. The American people need to take note of those who voted for the DREAM Act and make sure they never again grace the halls of Congress. Americans should remember those who voted against debate cloture for their courage and make sure they are re-elected again and again. We must support every one of the senators who voted against cloture.
Many in the House will be gone when the new Congress takes its seat in the New Year. Any vote on amnesty bills like this will not even be close in the next session. Although the majority of the Congress favored the DREAM Act this time, the “yes” votes were cast mostly by those who were repudiated in record numbers during the last election.
There is nothing to substantiate the claim that the best and the brightest of the Latino community are being denied an education or the opportunity to serve their own countries in Latin America. By all indications, those countries could use a great deal of help from their displaced and talented youth who may have learned something about what it takes to make a great country during their illegal stay in America. Why aren’t those countries offering full scholarships to the best and the brightest among the illegals so they can return to earn a degree in Mexico City or elsewhere in Latin America? Their DREAMS can come true in their homelands. When their homelands will not accept that obligation, why is America expected to do so?
The Hispanic community in this country, on that issue is behaving unconscionably. It's behaving traitorously. It is behaving counter to its own enlightened best interests. They are encouraging a devolution of America into Mexico Norte. If that would be a good thing, why are so many streaming across the border from the South
illegally?
If Hispanics are really serious about helping these illegal aliens, they should be advocating for closing the loopholes and including significant protections against fraud in the bill. Here are a few of the many improvements that are needed in a new narrowly drawn bill to enable more favorable consideration:
1. Permanently prohibit DREAM students from sponsoring any other relatives for permanent residency, especially the parents who brought them here illegally in the first place.
2. Require a minimum four year enlistment in the armed forces as a pre-condition for all applicants. College can come later as it did for many WWII and Korean War Vets.
3. Provide for regular audits to ascertain whether fraudulent applications and/or other documentation are being presented and accepted.
4. Require at least four notarized documents, under penalty of perjury, proving that the applicant meets all the requirements of the Act to include a transcript of grades and the results of an IQ test. All applicants must be fingerprinted, photographed and DNAed to weed out criminals.
5. Provide for severe penalties including immediate deportation without recourse for anyone who submits a fraudulent application.
6. Permanent residency automatically revoked for anyone who commits a felony or who has committed a felony before the application was submitted.
7. Require the parents of applicants to register as illegal aliens before an application can be accepted.
8. Make applicants ineligible for taxpayer-supported financial aid. Let La Raza provide a fund for “best and brightest” scholarships.
9. Provide for full enforcement of the above provisions. To the extent they are not, the program becomes null and void and automatically sunsets.
10. Reduce the legal immigration quotas from Latin America by the number of DREAM students whose applications are accepted.
Where do we go from here? We will consolidate our gains. We will continue to educate the American people of the grave threat of Mexico Norte to their national character, sovereignty,culture, language, ideals, government, economy, taxes, degree of poverty, medical care costs, Medicaid and Medicare and the rule of law. We will continue to build an ever more powerful anti-illegal, rule of law movement. We will continue to speak up and speak out for secure borders, e-verification, and expeditious repatriation of illegal aliens. We will not permit America to become Mexico Norte with all of the ills of the original – joblessness, poverty, disease, oligarchy, lawlessness, drug lords, smugglers and other criminals. We will get stronger every day. We have won this battle against all odds and now it is up to us to win the war by consolidating our gains and making sure the word amnesty is never again mentioned for the illegal aliens. The greatest injustice is the violation of our borders without sure and immediate justice in the form of expulsion. The parents demonstrated their cowardice by invading another sovereign nation, sneaking across the border to have their anchor babies, and so-called DREAM students. We cannot and will not reward them for that behavior. We will not negotiate with illegal aliens.
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Deeply Flawed DREAM Act Fails
The Senate failed to get the necessary 60 votes for debate cloture on the so-called DREAM Amnesty Act. This deeply flawed Act is dead for the current Congress. Some of the changes that would make it more palatable in the future are as follows:
1. Permanently prohibit DREAM students from sponsoring any other relatives for permanent residency, especially the parents who brought them here illegally in the first place.
2. Require a minimum four enlistment in the armed forces as a pre-condition for all applicants.
3. Provide for regular audits of applications to verify that they are not fraudulent.
4. Require at least three notarized documents proving that the applicant meets all the requirements of the Act.
5. Provide for severe penalties including immediate deportation without recourse for anyone who submits a fraudulent application.
6. Permanent residency automatically revoked for anyone who commits a felony or who has committed a felony before the application was submitted.
7. Require the parents of applicants to register as illegal aliens before an application can be accepted.
8. Make applicants ineligible for taxpayer-supported financial aid. Let La Raza fund their scholarsips.
9. Provide for full enforcement of the above provisions. To the extent they are not, the program becomes null and void.
1. Permanently prohibit DREAM students from sponsoring any other relatives for permanent residency, especially the parents who brought them here illegally in the first place.
2. Require a minimum four enlistment in the armed forces as a pre-condition for all applicants.
3. Provide for regular audits of applications to verify that they are not fraudulent.
4. Require at least three notarized documents proving that the applicant meets all the requirements of the Act.
5. Provide for severe penalties including immediate deportation without recourse for anyone who submits a fraudulent application.
6. Permanent residency automatically revoked for anyone who commits a felony or who has committed a felony before the application was submitted.
7. Require the parents of applicants to register as illegal aliens before an application can be accepted.
8. Make applicants ineligible for taxpayer-supported financial aid. Let La Raza fund their scholarsips.
9. Provide for full enforcement of the above provisions. To the extent they are not, the program becomes null and void.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Sunday, December 12, 2010
The Fix
The Fix
There recently was an article in the St. Petersburg, Fl. Times. The Business Section asked readers for ideas on: "How Would You Fix the Economy?" I think this guy nailed it!
Dear Mr. President,
Please find below my suggestion for fixingAmerica's economy. Instead of giving billions of dollars to companies that will squander the money on lavish parties and unearned bonuses, use the following plan.
You can call it the "Patriotic Retirement Plan":
There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force. Pay them $1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:
1) They MUST retire. Forty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.
2) They MUST buy a new AMERICAN Car. Forty million cars ordered - Auto Industry fixed.
3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage - Housing Crisis fixed.
It can't get any easier than that!!
P.S. If more money is needed, have all members in Congress pay their taxes...
Send illegal aliens home.
Mr. President, while you're at it, make Congress retire on Social Security and Medicare. I'll bet both programs would be fixed pronto!
If you think this would work, please forward to everyone you know.
If not, please disregard.
There recently was an article in the St. Petersburg, Fl. Times. The Business Section asked readers for ideas on: "How Would You Fix the Economy?" I think this guy nailed it!
Dear Mr. President,
Please find below my suggestion for fixingAmerica's economy. Instead of giving billions of dollars to companies that will squander the money on lavish parties and unearned bonuses, use the following plan.
You can call it the "Patriotic Retirement Plan":
There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force. Pay them $1 million apiece severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:
1) They MUST retire. Forty million job openings - Unemployment fixed.
2) They MUST buy a new AMERICAN Car. Forty million cars ordered - Auto Industry fixed.
3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage - Housing Crisis fixed.
It can't get any easier than that!!
P.S. If more money is needed, have all members in Congress pay their taxes...
Send illegal aliens home.
Mr. President, while you're at it, make Congress retire on Social Security and Medicare. I'll bet both programs would be fixed pronto!
If you think this would work, please forward to everyone you know.
If not, please disregard.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Friday, December 10, 2010
The Liberal Flaw
"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state lives at the expense of everyone." ~ Frederic Bastiat
Monday, December 6, 2010
ICE Scams Deportation Figures
ICE Breaks Deportation Record -- Sort Of
Monday, 06 Dec 2010 09:07 AM
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) directed immigration officers to bypass immigration courts and deportation hearings in an all-out effort to surpass the agency's tally of deportations last year. Reportedly, immigration officers prompted eligible foreign nationals to accept a quick pass to their countries without a negative mark on their immigration record, according to a Washington Post report.
Known in the agency jargon as "voluntary return," the option may have allowed hundreds of immigrants to exit the country — without a stopoff in front of an immigration judge.
Significantly, such a voluntary return doesn't bar a foreigner from again applying for legal residence or travel to the United States.All-in-all in reaching the record 392,862 deportations, ICE included more than 19,000 immigrants who had exited the previous fiscal year and also gained stats from operating a Mexican repatriation program five weeks longer.
This latter repatriation initiative alone allowed ICE to tally at least 6,500 exits that, without the program, would normally have been credited to the U.S. Border Patrol.
Monday, 06 Dec 2010 09:07 AM
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) directed immigration officers to bypass immigration courts and deportation hearings in an all-out effort to surpass the agency's tally of deportations last year. Reportedly, immigration officers prompted eligible foreign nationals to accept a quick pass to their countries without a negative mark on their immigration record, according to a Washington Post report.
Known in the agency jargon as "voluntary return," the option may have allowed hundreds of immigrants to exit the country — without a stopoff in front of an immigration judge.
Significantly, such a voluntary return doesn't bar a foreigner from again applying for legal residence or travel to the United States.All-in-all in reaching the record 392,862 deportations, ICE included more than 19,000 immigrants who had exited the previous fiscal year and also gained stats from operating a Mexican repatriation program five weeks longer.
This latter repatriation initiative alone allowed ICE to tally at least 6,500 exits that, without the program, would normally have been credited to the U.S. Border Patrol.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
End 'Anchor Baby' Citizenship for Illegals!
We need to "plug up" one of the biggest holes in American national security -- a hole that has led to millions of illegal immigrants being granted the "right" to stay in this country, even though they broke the law to get here.That "hole" is called "birthright citizenship" for so-called "anchor babies" (children born in U.S. hospitals to illegal immigrant parents). A bill has been re-introduced to STOP it. Let Congress know you want them to support this bill.
Support Arizona's Law Against Illegal Immigration!
Tell Congress & Governors to SUPPORT Arizona's Law Against Illegal Immigration!
The federal government has FAILED in its duty to put a STOP to the illegal immigration INVASION at our southern border; so, the people of Arizona have "stepped up to the plate" and done it themselves! Take action right away to DEMAND that Congress and Governors SUPPORT the new law against illegal immigration recently passed by Arizona, and to ENCOURAGE every single State to pass the same law!
The federal government has FAILED in its duty to put a STOP to the illegal immigration INVASION at our southern border; so, the people of Arizona have "stepped up to the plate" and done it themselves! Take action right away to DEMAND that Congress and Governors SUPPORT the new law against illegal immigration recently passed by Arizona, and to ENCOURAGE every single State to pass the same law!
Tell Congress to REJECT Amnesty for Illegal Aliens!
Nancy Pelosi has called the CURRENT Congress back for a "lame duck" session this week -- and high on her agenda of bills to pass before the Republicans take over is the bill implementing mass legalization of potentially MILLIONS of illegal aliens through the appropriately-named DREAM Act. Don't let the supporters of AMNESTY get away with this last-ditch attempt to violate the will of the PEOPLE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)