Working for logical immigation reform based on a stable population, a recognition of the finite nature of our natural resources and the adverse impact of continued growth on our quality of life, standard of living, national interest, character, language, sovereignty and the rule of law. Pushing back and countering the disloyal elements in American society and the anti-American rhetoric of the leftwing illegal alien lobbies. In a debate, when your opponents turn to name calling, it's a good sign you've already won.

Friday, April 29, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott: Read this letter to President Obama

Dear Mr. President,

Nearly three years after your inauguration, many illegal alien and other immigrant families are still attempting to blame their family separation plight on “our broken immigration system.” Whether our immigration system is broken or not is a matter of opinion. Those who have entered and remain in this country illegally want to be able to quickly achieve legal residency status. They think the immigration system is broken because it does not enable them to do so. Apparently they haven’t considered the fact that an immigration system has many purposes one of which is to grant legal residency status only to those who have entered this country legally.

It is grossly unfair to grant special immigration status to any adult relatives of legal residents or citizens. As adults, relatives should have to compete on a level playing field with all other applicants. We neither need to nor should we grant precedence to adults who happen to have someone who managed to get his or her foot in the immigration door. That precedence should be reserved for the spouses and minor children of legal residents or citizens. Eliminating all of those adult relatives seeking a special immigration status from the waiting list should alleviate much of the immigration backlog. That would enable the system to focus on those applicants who have the skills and advanced education necessary to keep America competitive in the global economy.

Illegal aliens, who have children born in this country, use the “family separation argument” in their appeals against deportation. They never mention the alternative which is to take their minor children, regardless of citizenship, with them. It is incredible that they would even think in terms of abandoning their minor children in the U.S. Families are never torn apart except by the overt actions of their members. Those who claim that they have been thwarted by the immigration system in their quest for legal residency status and their ability to maintain family unity are being disingenuous. This situation is prime facie evidence that that the immigration system is, in fact, working well. A system that allows illegals to stay and work with impunity without the threat of deportation and that grants them and their families a pathway to citizenship would be a broken system.

As a candidate you promised illegal aliens and their fellow-travelers that you would promote comprehensive immigration reform. More recently, as President, you made a speech in which you talked about “that illusive middle ground” on immigration reform. However, at the same time you seem to have set a pre-condition of amnesty for all illegals of good character. This seems like an oxymoron since the character of these illegal aliens has already been established by their utter disregard for the rule of law. Moreover, any setting precondition is hardly a basis for finding middle ground.

Although the validity of some these numbers is questionable, last year, it was reported that under your direction, ICE deported 392,862 illegal aliens - a record high. In 2009, your administration deported 387,790 people. These numbers do not mean much if the deportees can easily return in a matter of hours or days or have served no time for their illegal entry and presence in the U.S. We understand that 95% of those who try to enter our country illegally are ultimately successful. That does not speak well for current policies which amount to a variation of the discredited “catch-and-release” policy. Deportation without a significant penalty can be a form of de facto amnesty as the voluntary deportees return time and again and are allowed to leave voluntarily to avoid being considered felons.

Thanks to the Republican control of the Peoples’ House, mass amnesty for illegals is off the table. This provides an opportunity to double or triple the number of involuntary deportations. We call on you to not listen to the siren voices of those mentioned in the next paragraph and, who want you to use your executive authority to bypass our elected representatives and unilaterally undermine the immigration laws. We understand from recent news that you have in fact agreed to avoid any such egregious action.

On April 13, 2011 twenty-two senators sent you a letter asking you to use your "prosecutorial discretion" to put an end to the deportation of illegal alien students. Congressman Luis Gutierrez (D, IL-4), chair of the immigration task force of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, goes further, calling on you in a nationwide tour to “stop the deportations of the families of U.S. citizens, [and] young people who should have been legalized via the DREAM Act…”

We are unalterably opposed to any such actions. They are simply asking you to reward the illegal entry and presence of illegal aliens and create a whole new incentive for more border violations. The Hispanic Caucus seems to be arguing that no one should be deported if a baby can be delivered on U.S. soil. A woman finding herself pregnant could simply plan ahead to make sure that baby will be delivered in the U.S. rather the country of the origin. That doesn’t sound like the kind of policy anyone should endorse. The DREAM Act should remain defunct until its many flaws are remedied. Otherwise, it represents just a back door amnesty proposal that could affect millions of illegal aliens. We must require all of those so-called students serve a 4 year enlistment in the armed forces before they can be considered for DREAM-like special consideration. That is the only way they can be adequately show their love for this country.

While, as the chief executive of the United States, you may have some limited authority to direct ICE to stop the detention and deportation of anyone you choose, this is not the way a democracy is supposed to work. There is no justification for interfering with ICE activities. You saw the adverse reaction of many when decided one morning that there was genocide in Libya and decided on your own to help the civilians being killed and persecuted by Dictator Khadafy. You didn't ask the Congress. You didn't hold a meeting. You use whatever discretion you thought you had. Many disagreed and your stock went down in the approval ratings.

Fortunately there is bipartisan opposition to the type of immigration reform represented by the past failed bills. The instant-citizen children of illegal aliens are quite properly referred to as “anchor babies” because they can eventually sponsor other members of the family. They anchor their families to the U.S. The term anchor babies in no way dehumanizes the children to which it refers. That is just left wing hyperbole. If we don’t stop that nonsense, we will soon become a nation of PC euphemisms. Instead, let’s make our freedom of speech a reality in every way. “The emperor has no clothes” should be the order of the day.

Despite the claims to the contrary, illegal aliens know by word of mouth that if they can deliver a baby on American soil that child will be an instant-citizen and be entitled to all of the welfare and other benefits available to citizens. All one has to do is visit a vital records office where birth certificates are issued to be convinced of that. Those offices are crowded with people barely out of the delivery room so they can get their hands on that precious piece of paper for their babies. There is nothing repugnant about the mention of these obvious facts. These children are "anchors" in every sense of the word and all of the illegals know it and are counting on it.

President Obama, we ask you to make sure parents under a removal order or otherwise understand their responsibility for the care of their minor children, regardless of their citizenship. If they want to maintain their family integrity, they can do so by taking their minor children with them. Modern communications will enable them to keep in touch with adult relatives on either side of the border. This action in no way threatens the citizenship status of those children. Please give us hope that all of the laws of our nation, which we believe to be fundamentally just and fair, are and will be fully enforced by the executive branch. It is not ICE that is tearing families apart. If it happens, it is solely the responsibility or irresponsibility of the parents.



Thursday, April 28, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott sees Brewer as heroine!

"Jan Brewer to Birthers: Shut Up! You Guys are Losers!" Suddenly Dee Perez-Scott has shifted her position from Jan Brewer as "La Bruja" to Jan Brewer the heroine. Which is it? In Dee's schizoid world the validity of everything depends not on the evidence but rather on whether it accords with Dee's biased views.

Brewer has simply confirmed that she is an idiot and should never have been re-elected. She doesn't have the intellect of a fence post, just the kind of person that fits with Dee's scheme of things.

All of this blather tends to overlook that we are talking about the highest and most powerful office in the land. If anything, we should be going to extremes to assure the bona fides of candidates for that office. Moreover, now that we have someone of questionable qualifications in the office, no questions or doubts should be off limits.

While the so-called long form certificate of live birth finally disclosed by Obama seems to put the matter to rest, one has to wonder about two things: why did it take so long for him to make this document public and why hasn't the investigation focused on Kenya to the same degree it did on the Hawaiian end of the controversy. I saw nothing in the investigation to suggest the documents floating around the internet showing Obama was born in Kenya as being of any less validity than the document produced by Hawaii. What does one do in a case like that where two countries produce equal evidence the birth of Obama? Prove that the attached documents are bogus by investigating them at the source and I will shut up on this issue. A half-assed investigation focused only on Hawaii won't do. Every one should agree with that because of the importance of the office of the presidency.

Here's the other half of the story that needs to be investigated.
General Hospital, Mombasa, Kenya where Obama was born a few hours later at 7:21 pm on August 4, 1961(what a sad day for the USA!). Four days later his mother flew to Hawaii and registered his birth in Honolulu as a certificate of live birth

Friday, April 22, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott makes an unwarranted plea to Obama

As far as left wing CIR is concerned, President Obama is at a crossroads right now. Dee Perez-Scott thinks he has within his powers the ability to order waivers to legalize students who were brought here as children, provide them waivers to complete their education and allow them to get in line and apply for citizenship. She says, "This is not too much to ask!" However, Obama has already exceeded his charter as head of the Executive Department of government by ignoring the Constitution, usurping the authority of Congress, and ignoring subpoenas in true keeping with the Chicago Code.

Mr. President! Listen to "We the People" not the siren voices of the illegal aliens, their supporters, the immigration lawyers and their ilk. We can find a compromise to allow the talented children of illegal aliens to participate fully in American society after they have earned that privilege by serving a minimum of a four year enlistment in the armed forces and by meeting certain other criteria that are missing in the so-called DREAM Act. The nightmare act has been extinguished. It's time to move on to fix all the loopholes in that bill and strengthen its requirements and enforcement mechanisms.

Like many before them who have had to postpone their lives and their educations to serve our country, these illegal aliens need to understand that there is a price that they must pay for their parents' illegal acts. They should not just get a "get out of jail free" pass as though nothing had happened. Many Americans have paid the price of a four year enlistment to support their country. This is not too much to ask of those who are here illegally. Four years will enable them to become more mature and learn more about our great nation and the sacrifices that are sometimes necessary. They will be better students and better citizen-material after their service. Do not use any extra-legal powers you think you have to thwart the will of the people and their legal representatives.

Dee Perez-Scott believes those fake deportation stats

Some Latino leaders point to the fact that under the Obama administration, immigration authorities have carried out record numbers of deportations, with nearly 400,000 immigrants removed in each of the last two years, which is higher than under the Bush Administration. The deportations are drawing increasingly irate protests from Latino communities. But the fact of the matter is that statistics that show larger numbers of illegal aliens being removed are largely damn lies concocted by the Obama Administration to show their new policies are working when in fact they have undermined border security and agent morale.

Republicans in Congress, more correctly, say that the administration has not done enough to remove illegal aliens and that the Administration policies have weakened law enforcement. and They oppose ANY action by President Obama that would offer a “stealth amnesty.” President Obama “should not selectively enforce the law,” said Elton Gallegly, Republican of California, who is chairman of the House Judiciary immigration subcommittee. “Amnesty — whether universal or selective — only encourages illegal immigration.” The president claims to be looking for that "elusive middle ground" on immigration reform but refuses to abandon his pre-condition of a blanket mass amnesty.

Dee Perez-Scott wants amnesty for illegals

Some Hispanic lawmakers, in the most ambitious requests, have said the President should halt deportations of illegal immigrants whose children are American citizens. An estimated four million young citizens have at least one parent who is an illegal immigrant.

Dee Perez-Scott wants waiver for illegal aliens

Some religious and left wing civil rights groups have also asked Mr. Obama to expand waivers that would make it easier for undocumented immigrants who are immediate relatives of American citizens to fix their legal status without having to leave the United States. Adult relatives of American citizens should have no more rights that those who have not such relatives. The playing field needs to be leveled by providing equal opportunities to all applicants but with a focus on those applicants who have the skills and advanced education needed by America to remain competitive in the global market rather than those who will become a burden on a budget already under duress or who will require extensive social services.

Netroots Nation Speakers for 2009

Dee Perez-Scott, (disloyal Mexican-American)

"From Migrant Worker in Michigan to Business Woman in Texas, Dee has supported Immigrant and Minority rights volunteering in the community, reading to children and advocating Education in order to achieve the American Dream. Dee's Blog is: Immigration Talk with a Mexican American. She also writes for: The Sanctuary, Citizen Orange and The Peace Tree."

More appropriately her vitae should have disclosed that ethnocentrist Dee Perez-Scott uses a photo of a movie star on her blog rather than her own photo shown here, gives precedence to the wishes of illegal aliens instead of those of her fellow Americans, at heart she is still a Mexican, excludes from her blog all comments which do not accord with her own beliefs, like other left wingers, has little regard for the freedom of speech of those of a different philosophical persuasion, free with her hatred and criticism of others, and instead of promoting the American dream she advocates policies that will destroy that dream.

"ALL SESSIONS: Four Perspectives from the Social Change Blogosphere: Case Studies from Civil Rights/Pro-Migrant Bloggers"

Dee Perez-Scott: An opportunity to compromise

Latinos want the President to use what they see as his authority under current immigration law, to defer deportations of students who are eligible for legal status under the Dream Act. Since the so-called DREAM Act does not exist, their position is largely indefensible.

Immigration reform is doable but it is just rather difficult when the Democrats and the President have been unwilling to compromise on the mass legalization of illegal aliens. While one can sympathize with desire of the children of illegal aliens to remain in the U.S., they must be required to earn that privilege. A few revisions to the nightmare, foot-in-the-door, act might make it acceptable to a sufficient number of Congressmen and loyal American citizens to enable its passage. The minimum changes necessary are:
1. Applicants must present proof that they have served a minimum of a four year enlistment in the armed forces.
2. Applicants who present any fraudulent documents with their applications will be deported immediately without recourse.
3. Applicants must freely admit that they entered and are present in the U.S. illegally.
4. They must agree to abide by all laws of the U.S. in the future.
5. Applicants should be permanently barred from sponsoring any other family members for legal residency.
6. Applications will be audited monthly to determine the extent of any fraud. If fraud is widespread, the program will be terminated immediately.
7. The window for applications will be narrowed to a six month period starting on the date of the passage of the act.
8. Applicants must present four different forms of non-fraudulent documentation to prove their eligibility for the program.

Dee Perez-Scott likes Obama's CIR

Latinos and Democrats praised President Obama for his attempts to try and jump-start passing a CIR bill. The bill would:
1. Secure the Border
2. Punish Exploitive Employers
3. Provide a Pathway of Citizenship for the 11M here that are Crime Free and contributing to Society.
The Liberal CIR (LCIR) proposals are nothing more than amnesty warmed-over.
Republicans and other loyal Americans are entirely correct in opposing those proposals. Although most of us want secure borders, this Administration’s has been singularly ineffective in accomplishing that goal. It has wasted its resources on misguided policies. In particular, its ill-advised redeployment of ICE and border patrol agents has seriously undermined their morale has been an abject failure in securing the borders. The President's proposals face an uphill battle with the Republicans and their loyal Americans supporters. These proposals, if they ever see the light of day, will be dead on arrival.
A different set of proposals might have a chance if there was some assurance that the president would be held fully accountable for their implementation. Any failure to do so should be defined as an impeachable offense. This alternative set of conservative comprehensive immigration reform (CCIR) proposals includes:
1. E-verification across the board for all employers and all employees.
2. A rigid set of criteria for immigration decisions for use by locally appointed Justices of the Peace sworn in as agents of the federal government.
3. The apprehension, detention and expeditious repatriation annually of a number of illegal aliens sufficient to send the message that if you enter this country or remain here illegally, you will be caught and deported at your own expense.
4. Require that all immigration decisions be made with 24 hours of the detainee’s arrival at a detention facility with only one week for appeal.
5. Sentence all those under a removal order to a minimum of six months’ work on border infrastructure before they are deported with the admonition that if they return without the proper authorization, they will do hard time. (No catch-and-release internally or at the border.)

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott

Here she is! The chubby Dee Perez-Scott! The Face of Ethnocentric HATE! The Face of Vile Racism against el gapacho (pejorative Spanish slang for an American,especially a white American, similar to el gringo). This mendacious Grandmother who indulges in racial hatred! As proof..... above are some of her rants and images: She hides behind her grandmotherly smile. This vile woman refuses to apologize for the racist tirades on her blog. VIEW THE FACE OF THE GRANDMOTHER.. THE FACE OF RACIST Ethnocentric HATE!!!

Dee Perez-Scott: Monkey Business for our Time

If you start with a cage containing five monkeys and inside the cage, hang a banana on a string from the top and then you place a set of stairs under the banana, before long a monkey will go to the stairs and climb toward the banana.
As soon as he touches the stairs, you spray all the other monkeys with cold water. After a while another monkey makes an attempt with same result... all the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water. Pretty soon when another monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will try to prevent it.
Now, put the cold water away.
Remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one. The new monkey sees the banana and attempts to climb the stairs.
To his shock, all of the other monkeys beat the crap out of him. After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs he will be assaulted.
Next, remove another of the original five monkeys, replacing it with a new one. The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment... with enthusiasm.
Then, replace a third original monkey with a new one, followed by a fourth, then the fifth. Every time the newest monkey takes to the stairs he is attacked. Most of the monkeys that are beating him up have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs. Neither do they know why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey.
Finally, having replaced all of the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys will have ever been sprayed with cold water. Nevertheless, none of the monkeys will try to climb the stairway for the banana.
Why, you ask? Because in their minds... that is the way it has always been!
This, my friends, is how Congress operates... and is why, from time to time,
all of the monkeys need to be REPLACED AT THE SAME TIME and the sooner the quicker.

Monday, April 18, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott blows another gasket

A recent cartoon or caricature depicted Obama with chimpanzee parents in an apparent attempt to explain why he has refused to make his long form birth certificate available for extensive public and professional review, i.e. he doesn't have one. Dee Perez-Scott, the savior of all non-Republican beleaguered politicians, launched another tirade against this evidence of "racism." She apparently has forgotten about the above caricature which depicted our beloved Lincoln as a monkey holding the Emancipation Proclamation. So much for balance and fairness.

Saturday, April 16, 2011

Dee Perez Scott: What the hell is wrong???

Things are very wrong and with no leadership there is a dismal future!!!!!

What the HELL's wrong???


1- Calif's 20 Billion Dollar Budget Deficit

2- The Calif Supreme Court ruling that ILLEGALS can attend college and get benefits.

Why don't they just deport them when they arrive to register?

3- Last year they ran an article on the yearly costs to Calif Tax payers from Illegals
using Hospital Emergency Rooms for their general health care -

At just one hospital the cost to tax payers totaled over 25 million a year

Someone please tell me what the HELL's wrong with all the people that run this country!!!!!!

We're "broke" & can't help our own Seniors, Veterans, Orphans, Homeless etc.,???????????

In the last months we have provided aid to Haiti, Chile, and Turkey . And now Pakistan .....home of bin Laden. Literally, BILLIONS of DOLLARS!!!

Our retired seniors living on a 'fixed income' receive no aid nor do they get any breaks while our government and religious organizations pour Hundreds of Billions of $$$$$$'s and Tons of Food to Foreign Countries!

They call Social Security and Medicare a entitlement even though most of us have been paying for it all our working lives and now when its time for us to collect, the government is running out of money. Why did the government borrow from it in the first place?
We have hundreds of adoptable children who are shoved aside to make room for the adoption of foreign orphans.

AMERICA: a country where we have homeless without shelter, children going to bed hungry, elderly going without 'needed' meds, and mentally ill without treatment -etc,etc.

They have a 'Benefit' for the people of Haiti on 12 TV stations, ships and planes lining up with food, water, tents clothes, bedding, doctors and medical supplies.

Imagine if the *GOVERNMENT* gave 'US' the same support they give to other countries..

Sad isn't it?

Friday, April 15, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott distorts the truth about the cost of Obamacare

In a report released today, the CBO finally admitted the obvious: Obamacare costs over a trillion dollars.

This revised estimate comes too little, too late. Obamacare passed months ago partly because of the CBO’s erroneous original estimate of $788 billion.


From the beginning, Obamacrats have been lying about the true cost of Obamacare.

When Obamacrats were spinning the lie that Obamacare cost under a trillion dollars – “Look, at the CBO score!” The big lie was exposed many times. Even a past CBO director pointed out that Obamacare’s false CBO score arose from Obama-Pelousi-Reid accounting tricks, including taxing now for services rendered later and moving costly sections of the bill to other pieces of legislation.

Monday, April 11, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott: More Hyperbole and Distortions

Monday, April 11, 2011
Dee Perez-Scott uses hyperbole to criticize Rep. Ryan's Budget Proposal
Dee Perez-Scott predictably criticizes Rep. Ryan’s Budget Proposal without offering any alternative way of solving the fiscal crisis. She says Ryan’s budget:
- Stacks the Deck with a (false) scary-looking graph
- Concocts "made up" scenarios
- 5.8 Trillion Dollars in Tax Cuts for the Rich - Obliterates Medicare! (Make the Old / Sick use worthless Vouchers instead!)
- IGNORES CBO Estimates.

She uses the far left Washington Post as a fact checker which states:
“First off, Ryan stacks the deck a bit. His budget presentation shows a scary-looking graph depicting an ocean of red stretching long into the future.” The graph is titled, ‘We are in a Spending-Driven Debt Crisis’ and says it is based on ‘CBO’s Alternative Fiscal Scenario.’ But then when you look at one of the papers from the Congressional Budget Office, it turns out that the scary scenario is also based on taxes being too low". A legitimate journalist would never write such an unsupported left wing and subjective opinion in an article that is supposed to be about checking the facts. How did the editor let a vague reference to "one of the [CBO] papers" to get into print. Moreover, what is the opinion that taxes are too low doing in a fact check article. These errors and opinions destroy the credibility of the writer.

Which one of the CBO’s papers is the Post talking about with this vague reference to “one of its papers?” Failing to document this claim, indicates that the Post writer doesn't really know what he's talking about. The Post, by allowing this drivel to be published has apparently taken the position that taxes should be higher so the government can keep spending like a drunken sailor.

The Post article continued, "The CBO paper assumes, among other things, that the Bush-era tax cuts are extended forever and the alternative minimum tax (AMT) is indexed for inflation." The former is nothing new. That has always been the GOP position. The AMT, and all other aspects of the tax code including capital gains and dividends, should have been indexed from the beginning. Without indexation, the code becomes a sneaky way of raising taxes, through bracket creep, without a vote of the Congress and without any accountability to the voters. Some items in the IRS code are already indexed so why not index them all. In fact, indexation might have served as a restraint on spending had it been in place all of these years.

Ryan correctly claims that his proposal has the imprimatur of the CBO. The budget document declares: “According to the Congressional Budget Office, this budget charts a path to complete balance. By 2040, the CBO estimates that this budget will produce annual surpluses and begin paying down the national debt.”

The Post wrote, "This seriously overstates the case. Yes, CBO has produced a letter based on its model and the various data, plans and scenarios provided by Ryan’s staff." That, of course, is all that Ryan is saying. The CBO uses its model to evaluate certain assumptions or scenarios provided by the requesting agency or Congressman. One is free to question those assumptions but not the CBO’s results.

Using favorable but unrealistic assumptions is exactly what the Obama Administration did to try to make Obamacare more palatable to the public. Just as the cost estimates associated with the Obama health-care law reflected the assumptions provided by the White House, the cost estimates for Rep. Ryan's budget proposals reflect the assumptions and scenarios provided by the Peoples’ House of Representatives. And, as in the case of Obamacare, there’s a major caveat emptor: Ryan's and Obama long-term scenarios are all subject to pressures over the long term that would make them difficult to sustain. It is unlikely that all of the assumptions for Obamacare or future budgets will hold up in the long term.

The CBO said that although debt would shrink relative to the size of the economy, Medicare beneficiaries “would bear a much larger share of their health-care costs than they would under the current program,” payments to doctors would shrink dramatically, states would have to pay substantially more for Medicaid and spending for programs other than Social Security and health programs “would be reduced far below historical levels relative to GDP.” The Post writer didn’t see fit to document this claim. The Department of Defense Budget has been very large starting with WW II and several new departments like Energy, Education, and Homeland Security have been added. The Post's statement is simply not credible without supporting evidence. What were the annual ratios of other programs expenditures to GDP?

Since Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security did not even exist at the beginning of the 20th century, it is extremely likely that the cost of these programs in the future would be far above historical levels relative to GDP. Before 1937 and even later they would probably have been close to zero. Where are the statistics to support the Post's article?

Overall, of course, Ryan's budget would reduce spending the historical level except for the WW II years. Although Ryan relies on the CBO to vouch for his plan, he appears to ignore CBO estimates that a repeal of the health-care law would lead to an increase in the deficit. The CBO estimates on the deficit arising from Obamacare have been all over the landscape. Some have shown the deficit increasing. I suspect just like the CBO's deficit predictions for Obamacare fall apart when extended far into the future when many things will have changed in the interim. And wasn’t it the CBO that provided estimates of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security long term solvency?

A report from the conservative but highly professional Heritage Foundation indicates that the Ryan’s budget would result in a gusher of jobs. When pundits criticize analyses and estimates made by think tanks, they need to include the professional credentials of the organization's key fellows and associates and how they developed their estimates.

The Ryan budget plan relies on assumptions and scenarios that some may wish to question but they are not unlike the kinds of assumptions and scenarios at the center of the Obamacare debate. Ryan’s ideas are bold and everyone, except the willfully ignorant, understands that this is an opening gambit, a set of ideas that will be ultimately debated at length by Congress as they should be.

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott: Can't Read and Can't Comprehend a Budget

Dingy Harry Reid said, "Republicans want to shut down the government because they think there's nothing more important than keeping women from getting cancer screenings." That is a blatant and outright lie! That has never been the Republican position. They are just trying to get the Democrat’s attention. The above graph shows America’s future if the Democrats don’t get real and Dee Perez-Scott doesn't shut up. Where is the Democrat’s proposal to cut the remaining $62 billion from this year’s budget to meet the goals set by the People’s House earlier this year?

Contrary to Dee’s lies about the 2012 budget submitted by Rep. Paul Ryan, Chairman of the People's House Budget Committee, “it is the president's recent budget proposal that would accelerate America's descent into a debt crisis. It doubles debt held by the public by the end of his first term and triples it by 2021. It imposes $1.5 trillion in new taxes, with spending that never falls below 23% of the economy. The President’s budget permanently enlarges the size of government. It offers no reforms to save government health and retirement programs, and no leadership.”

“The Republicans’ budget, which they call The Path to Prosperity, is very different. For starters, it cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from the president's budget over the next 10 years, reduces the debt as a percentage of the economy, and puts the nation on a path to actually pay off our national debt. That proposal also brings federal spending to below 20% of gross domestic product (GDP), consistent with the postwar average, and reduces deficits by $4.4 trillion.”

“A study just released by the Heritage Center for Data Analysis projects that The Path to Prosperity will help create nearly one million new private-sector jobs next year, bring the unemployment rate down, consolidate dozens of duplicative job-training programs into more accessible, accountable career scholarships that will better serve people looking for work.”

It will strengthen and improve welfare programs for those who need them and eliminates welfare for those who don't. The Republican budget targets corporate welfare, starting by ending the conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that is costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. It gets rid of the permanent Wall Street bailout authority that Congress created last year. And it rolls back expensive handouts for uncompetitive sources of energy, calling instead for a free and open marketplace for energy development, innovation and exploration.

This budget's reforms will protect health and retirement security. This starts with saving Medicare. The open-ended, blank-check nature of the Medicare subsidy threatens the solvency of this critical program and creates inexcusable levels of waste. This budget takes action where others have ducked. But because government should not force people to reorganize their lives, its reforms will not affect those in or near retirement in any way.” That is a far cry from Dee Perez-Scott’s lies like accusing the Republicans of proposing more “ cuts for the Rich while dumping Medicare for the elderly (another outright lie) and Medicaid for the poor.” Dee has never been able to comprehend the need to make businesses competitive with competitive tax rates so they can create more jobs. It is just beyond the capacity of her small brain.

According to the WSJ report on the Ryan budget, “starting in 2022, new Medicare beneficiaries will be enrolled in the same kind of health-care program that members of Congress enjoy. Future Medicare recipients will be able to choose a plan that works best for them from a list of guaranteed coverage options. This is not a voucher program but rather a premium-support model. A Medicare premium-support payment would be paid, by Medicare, to the plan chosen by the beneficiary, subsidizing its cost.”
“In addition, Medicare will provide increased assistance for lower-¬income beneficiaries and those with greater health risks. Reform that empowers individuals—with more help for the poor and the sick—will guarantee that Medicare can fulfill the promise of health security for America's seniors.

We all know that Social Security must be reformed to prevent severe cuts to future benefits. This budget forces policy makers to work together to enact common-sense reforms. The goal of this proposal is to save Social Security for current retirees and strengthen it for future generations by building upon ideas offered by the president's bipartisan fiscal commission.

“This budget recognizes that it is not enough to change how much government spends. We must also change how government spends. It proposes budget-process reforms—including real, enforceable caps on spending—to make sure government spends and taxes only as much as it needs to fulfill its constitutionally prescribed roles.” It proposed to prevent adding all those unfunded goodies liberals want to reward those who feed at the public trough and keep returning them to office.

In the area of tax reform “this budget would focus on growth by reforming the nation's outdated tax code, consolidating brackets, lowering tax rates, and assuming top individual and corporate rates of 25%. It maintains a revenue-neutral approach by clearing out a burdensome tangle of deductions and loopholes that distort economic activity and leave some corporations paying no income taxes at all.” This is another challenge for Dee Perez-Scott to understand.

This is America's moment to advance a plan for prosperity. Our budget offers the nation a model of government that is guided by the timeless principles of the American idea: free-market democracy, open competition, a robust private sector bound by rules of honesty and fairness, a secure safety net, and equal opportunity for all under a limited constitutional government of popular consent.

We need to “reform government so that people don't have to reorient their lives for less. We can grow our economy, promote opportunity, and encourage upward mobility. This budget is the new House majority's answer to history's call. It is now up to all of us to keep America exceptional.” Too bad Dee is not willing to help in this endeavor!

Dee Perez-Scott: Obama & Napo collude to undermine border enforcement

According to recent news reports, local law enforcement including border sheriffs in Arizona, ICE and US Border Patrol have been ordered underreport or manipulate their statistics of illegal aliens entering the United States, or arrested coming into the nation!

This allegation comes on the heels of an independent federal audit which found that less than 10% of the United States/Mexican border was “secure” despite repeated assertions by Secretary of Homeland (IN)Security that the border was more secure now under Obama’s watch than at any time in recent history.

Cochise County (AZ) Sheriff Larry Dever warned that “a supervisor with the U.S. Border Patrol told him as recently as this month that the federal agency’s office on Arizona's southern border was under orders to keep apprehension numbers down.”

In other words, Barack Obama and Janet Napolitano can make the case that the border is secure if no illegal aliens are being arrested.

But does that mean no illegal aliens are coming across the border into the United States?


Quite the opposite, in fact, as word quickly spreads through border communities and pro-amnesty networks that the Obama Administration is doing everything it can to subvert the law enforcement and border security process – and to welcome into the U.S. as many illegal aliens as possible!

According to Dever, the ICE supervisor complained of the latest Obama scheme: “I had to go back to my guys and tell them not to catch anybody, that their job is to chase people away… They were not to catch anyone, arrest anyone.”

An article from Barack Obama’s speech last week shows that he finally came clean on his true views on illegal immigration.

Mr. Obama believes: (1) coming to the United States illegally is not a crime; (2) coming to the United States illegally should not be punished; (3) if you stay illegally in the United States but commit no further crimes, you should be welcomed with open arms and given everyone opportunity afforded American citizens.

Mr. Obama didn’t dare mention the rule of law. Mr. Obama didn’t bother to think about the consequences of his actions – or the devastating impact his words are likely to have. And Mr. Obama certainly doesn’t care about anything beyond his own re-election, because that’s exactly what this is all about.

Friday, April 8, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott: Achievement in Learning English

Several factors correlate with English ability. Wealthy countries do better overall. But smaller wealthy countries do better still: the larger the number of speakers of a country’s main language, the worse that country tends to be at English. This is one reason Scandinavians do so well: what use is Swedish outside Sweden? It may also explain why Spain was the worst performer in Western Europe, and why Latin America was the worst-performing region: Spanish’s role as an international language in a big region dampens incentives to learn English. Similarly, the more Spanish-speaking Hispanics in the U.S., the less incentive there is to learn English, despite all those who try to convince us otherwise.

Teaching plays a role, too. Starting young, while it seems a good idea, may not pay off: children between eight and 12 learn foreign languages faster than younger ones, so each class hour on English is better spent on a 10-year-old than on a six-year-old. Between 1984 and 2000, the study's authors say, the Netherlands and Denmark began English-teaching between 10 and 12, while Spain and Italy began between eight and 11, with considerably worse results. Poor methods, particularly the rote learning seen in Japan, can be responsible for poor results despite strenuous efforts.

Finally, one surprising result is that China and India are next to each other (29th and 30th of 44) in the rankings, despite India’s reputation as more Anglophone. The Chinese have made a broad push for English (they're "practically obsessed with it”). But efforts like this take time to marinade through entire economies, and so may have avoided notice by outsiders. India, by contrast, has long had well-known Anglophone elites, but this is a narrow slice of the population in a country considerably poorer and less educated than China. English has helped India out-compete China in services, while China has excelled in manufacturing. But if China keeps up the push for English, the subcontinental neighbour's advantage may not last.

Dee Perez-Scott: Errs in citing an illegal alien example

ATLANTA - It's a controversial issue that's currently being debated in Georgia - illegal immigration. In the end, hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants in the state alone could be affected. One man, who admits to being an illegal alien for more than 20 years, is sharing his story. In 1986, a young Fernando Briceno came to America from Ecuador to play for his country in table tennis. After the tournament in Miami he took a trip to New York and says he fell in love. "I fell in love with the city. You cannot blame a teenager to fall in love with New York City," said Fernando Briceno. However, you can blame him for not understanding the concept of the rule of law.
After a second trip to the states that he began a secret life-- overstaying his visa and becoming an illegal alien He says he didn't realize what he had done until after obtaining employment. Clearly he was ignorant or willfully ignorant. If you plan to go to another country, you better know what their laws are regarding visas and illegal aliens.

"When I went to get my first paycheck, my boss referred to me as an illegal alien. In my mind I was thinking illegal is Al Capone. Alien, I had just seen the movie with Sigourney Weaver. I was confused what it was. I had to ask a couple of friends what it was," said Briceno. No need to ask anyone. That’s why we have dictionaries. “Alien”: owing allegiance to another country; a foreigner. “Illegal: not legal, contrary to law as in one who enters a country illegally or without proper documentation.” The meaning is absolutely clear. Capone and others of his ilk are referred to as criminals or members of organized crime.

Even with no green card, Briceno held several jobs - including a translator for the Drug Enforcement Agency. "The little English that I do know, I learned on my own - closed captions, reading newspapers," said Briceno. How does one serve as a translator when by his own admission he knew little English? Now Briceno has written a book, "Confessions of an Illegal Immigrant," he says to debunk the myths about illegals. He shouldn’t have wasted his time because there is no way to debunk that which is true, at least insofar as their legal and work status is concerned.

And while he supports immigration reform, he is against Georgia House Bill 87. The bill authorizes state and local police to verify the immigration status of suspected criminals and requires employers to do the same for prospective new hires. "We are not criminals. If you consider a crime working, then you need to re-think your whole life. Because working is what makes you who you are," said Briceno. He is of course wrong about that. A common criminal could use his argument to defend his life of crime. Working is not what makes you what you are. Your behavior, character and conformance to the rule of law are just a few of the many things that make you who you are. The crime is entering the U.S. illegally and remaining here and using subterfuges to gain employment. He never should have been granted legal residency. This is one of the many loopholes in the law that real immigration reform would correct. He tacitly admits that by being a proponent of measures to keep others from doing what he did.

Briceno is now a legal U.S. resident living in Atlanta. He proposes making the green card process easier for those illegal immigrants already living here and a national ID to discourage more from coming. But he says the American dream is concept that everyone is trying to materialize. "If you could find some people in the world that could say no, I don't want freedom, no I don't want liberty, no I don't want to pursue happiness, where are you going to find people like that?" This contradicts his willingness to discourage more illegal aliens from coming. Of course, everyone wants freedom and the right to pursue happiness. Their problem is they are unwilling to work for it in their own country. The question is how many of those who are yearning to be free can or should the U.S. accommodate? Obviously, there is a limit. Our population has increased six fold since the peak immigration in the late 1880s, from 50 million to 300 million. Isn’t that enough? Shouldn’t we be sending a clear message to those like Briceno that if you come here without the proper documentation you will be apprehended and deported with the admonition that if you return, you will do hard time as a repeat offender.

How long will it take before it sinks into the consciousness of people like Briceno that the more there are of us the less there is for each of us and that illegal aliens are merely recreating here the very conditions that led them to leave their homelands: over population, abject poverty, corruption, crime, drugs, gangs, disease, and joblessness. We already have too much of that. We don’t need any more.

Briceno tacitly acknowledges this when he says we need “…a national ID to discourage more from coming.” He has become a latter day nativist! I give him credit for that enlightened point of view so lacking in the Left Wing open-door, amnesty crowd. But what he has yet to realize is that expeditious apprehension and deportation will work even better than a national ID.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott is talking thru her Hat, Again!

Many pundits believe that President Obama is losing the Hispanic vote because he has not fulfilled his promise to get the Left Wing version of comprehensive immigration reform (LWCIR) passed. Indeed many leading advocates of immigration reform are upset that real immigration reform has not progressed. In a recent letter to the President in response to his earlier note, I have pointed out that adopting a unilateral position on immigration reform was and is a serious error. At the same time as he has been stressing the need to develop coalitions to deal with international problems like those posed by Libya, he has taken a unilateral position in favor of amnesty. This position is totally at odds with the idea of building a coalition or broad consensus on how to proceed. That consensus is unlikely to be achieved as long as unilateral proposals and promises of mass amnesty for illegal aliens are on the table.

Written in the late 1800s when immigration was nearing its peak and the U.S. population was only about 50 million, Emma Lazarus’s famous sonnet mounted on the base of the Statue of Liberty was an expression of her empathy for those who had fled the anti-Semitic Pogroms in Eastern Europe. The sonnet is a poignant reminder of our immigrant past but the operative word in that phrase is the word “past.”

Our population has now increased six-fold. No one can deny that conditions are dramatically different today than they were in the late 1800s. There are many things in our past: child labor, prohibition, lack of women’s suffrage, Jim Crow laws, and segregation. Few thinking Americans want to go back to that “past” yet some continue to cling to the idea of “our immigrant past” without a second thought about its appropriateness as a model for the fully-settled and fully-developed America of today with a population of more than 300 million people.

Our immigrant past of the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries should not be our guide for the future. Times, society and the availability of natural resources have changed dramatically and our policies should have changed with them.

Leftist Dee Perez-Scott is talking through her hat in her recent post. She fails miserably to convince anyone, least of all Obama, on how "to get the Hispanic vote." Contrary to statements by Dee Perez-Scott, it is actually quite easy to understand why enlightened Hispanics should vote Republican in 2012. What may seem like immigration restrictionism to the ignorant and willfully ignorant is in fact an effort to preserve and even improve the quality of life and standard of living for all of us. That cannot be done if we allow our population to balloon sixfold again from the present 0.3 billion people to 1.8 billion as it did in the sixfold increase from the late 1800s to today. Anyone who believes such an increase would be a good thing needs to spend a few years living in working in India or China to see first hand what that would be like. Reduced legal immigration quotas and secure borders are essential to the stabilization of our population and the preservation of the America we know and love.

Bills like Arizona’s SB1070 and similar measures enacted by many other states and local governments have the same objective, to help us get control of our borders so we can control our runaway population growth and make the most of our finite natural resources. Although Left Wingers, like Dee Perez-Scott, like to portray these measures as "racial profiling bills" that is clearly not their intent and they know it. Rather these bills have the same objective as the immigration reduction proposals: to preserve a way of life for all of us regardless of race or ethnicity. That can’t be done if the Left Wing open-door and amnesty lobbies have their way. It's easy for the Left Wingers who are blinded by their own rhetoric to mis-characterize positive immigration reform measures. No matter what they say, racial profiling per se is not the purpose and need not be the result of these bills.

Hispanics and others who take the time to study and understand the adverse long term consequences of another mass amnesty and an open-door policy will be convinced there are other alternatives that will serve our country better.

The Left Wingers also like to criticize the opponents of birthright citizenship but never bother to mention the long list of the countries where that right does not exist. Nor do they mention that U.S. birthright citizenship is a major inducement to illegal entry into the U.S. and the consequent excessive population growth. It follows that if one values our current standard of living, quality of life, natural resources, and freedom, one must be opposed to birthright citizenship.

Most people know the genesis of birthright citizenship. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution gave full citizenship to the ex-slaves who had been forcibly uprooted from their homes in Africa and their children. If it had not been for slavery, there would have been no birthright citizenship amendment. Unless the flawed interpretation of the 14th Amendment is quickly corrected, our country will be doomed to natural resource shortages, increasing poverty, steadily increasing welfare costs and a general decline in all of the things we value.

A common language is the glue that holds multi-cultural societies together. The advocates of Official English strongly believe in that proposition. They have no wish to denigrate any other language. Spanish is a beautiful language well-preserved in many other countries. Official English merely means that all government proceedings, ballots, documents, publications and interactions with the public will be in English. There is no intent to ban the study of foreign languages in any way or their use in private or non-official communications. The Official English advocates' position and mine is that we should not be wasting money on official documents and proceedings in many languages when a single language will serve our country better and when eligibility for citizenship requires a knowledge of English. A common language is the basic unifying force in our society and enables us to communicate with each other in a civilized manner.

Extreme Left Wing groups, like "Move On", are funded by the likes of the notorious George Soros and others with deep pockets. They have been working hard to destroy family values, denigrate Christianity, and obliterate the form of limited capitalism and lassez faire that built this country to its greatness. This incessant attack should convince Hispanics that enough is enough and it is time to vote for the Party that supports rather than denigrates these important values.

Republicans have a great deal of work to do to obtain a large share of the Hispanic vote. They have to be able to articulate all of the reasons why it is in the enlightened best interests of Hispanics to vote Republican. We need their help and understanding to achieve policies that will lead to a stabilization of our population before it is too late. Latinos have many of the same values as Republicans. These values include: Christianity, personal responsibility, fiscal responsibility, traditional families, and marriage as between a man and a woman.

One of the bright stars among Hispanic Republicans, Senator Marco Rubio, has now recognized the need for measures like SB1070 to fill the vacuum left by the federal government when it abdicated its responsibility to secure our borders and expel illegal aliens. Rubio is not against immigration reform. Some act as if there is only one set of changes that qualify as immigration reform. Left Wing nuts like to promote their version of immigration reform without giving a thought to how those reforms will affect the U.S. They are either totally unenlightened or treasonous. They are the disloyal, open-door, amnesty crowd and their ilk. It is they who have been brainwashing the Hispanic young, saying not a word about what the future holds for them if they listen to these siren voices of the Left. Attacks against popular Latino Republican politicians like Rubio are the stock in trade of the Left Wing. Latinos who love this country should be taking advantage of the wonderful opportunities in the Republican Party to help stop all the forces bent on America's destruction through their Leftist rhetoric, policies and tunnel vision. They should be proud of one of their own who has achieved this exalted office.

"Somos Republicanos" and similar Latino Republican organizations have not gained traction among the party faithful because they have espoused doctrines that are not in the mainstream of Republicanism. To gain influence in the Party they need to understand the reasons why Left Wing immigration reforms are not in the best interests of the United States or any of its citizens. They need to understand why bills like SB1070 are necessary and how the potential for racial profiling under that and related bills can easily be avoided. Nevertheless, it is important to point out that if one is looking for male professional baseball player, it is not likely he will be found among the members of the local women's clubs.

To join the mainstream of the Party it is also necessary to avoid extremist rhetoric and and immigrant bashing. Hispanics need to understand and accept that Republicans want to preserve the America we know and love and defend it against all Left Wing threats like the open-door/amnesty proposals.

Gays are a part of the fabric of the U.S. One can be for marriage between a man and a woman as fundamental to our society without being critical of those who choose a different lifestyle. Some Hispanic Republicans have done long-term work for the Party. Some helped George Bush into power. Some have developed a keen understanding of key political issues like the adverse consequences of Left Wing immigration reform proposals. They may also have begun to understand the need for state action to fill the federal vacuum on border security. These "Somos-like" groups are welcome in the Party and can continue to do much good by convincing Latinos that it is in their own enlightened best interests to join the Party and vote for Republicans.

President Obama: Some like, those who characterize themselves as "True American Latinos" rather than just "Americans or true Americans", may support you in the next election. Your silver-tongued oratory still has the power to sway the ignorant and the willfully ignorant and the unenlightened masses. But many have now begun to recognize your Leftist agenda for what it is, a page out of the Alinskyite play book, and will turn in another direction. They recognize that you have compromised internal immigration enforcement and reduced the deportation of illegal aliens sacrificing America's future. You have stopped the effective workplace ICE raids and moved to target and prosecute abusive employers but you have failed to implement mandatory E-verification which is essential to the identification of both miscreant employers and illegal aliens. While you have targeted criminals and gangs you have neglected the vast majority of the illegals and the communities in which the criminals and other illegal aliens find sanctuary.

From the perspective of the people in Ciudad Juarez your partnership with Mexico in border security and targeting the drug cartels has produced few results. Drugs and weapons still flow freely across the border. Murders continue to mount in the border towns. Border Patrol agents are being bribed with millions of dollars of drug money to allow drugs to flow through their checkpoints to the U.S. and weapons to flow in the other direction. The police are being infiltrated with members of the cartels willing to do their bidding. Mexico has shown no stomach for curbing illegal alien traffic into the U.S. They persist in dumping their poor into our backyard. With friends like that, who needs enemies.

Here are some steps a coalition with Republicans could accomplish now:
1. The Dream Act is a bad bill fraught with loopholes. Ask the Republican leadership what changes are necessary to tighten up the bill, avoid wholesale fraud, further limit its applicability, and to require a minimum if a four year enlistment in the armed forces to become eligible for consideration. Make sure this is done with the vote of the entire Congress not through some closed-door parliamentary maneuver. Tell the American people all of the changes that the Republicans proposed to strengthen the bill and enable its passage.

2. Ease the Backlog in the Immigration Courts. Do whatever is necessary to create a rigid set of criteria for immigration decisions for use by state-sanctioned immigration justices of the peace (JoPs). This will relieve the burden on the immigration courts. Difficult cases related to political asylum would always be handled by the courts. The basic criterion for the JoP decisions should be: if you are in this country without proper documentation, that will be considered prima facie evidence that you are an illegal alien. Accordingly, you will be sentenced immediately to six months working on border infrastructure and then deported with the admonition that if you return, you will do hard time as a repeat offender. You will have only one week for an appeal. Family separation will not be an acceptable basis for an appeal. If you cannot produce authentic documents in that time you will be transported directly to the border to begin your sentence. We will charge you and your former employer for the cost of your apprehension and deportation.

If 40% of the 12M are Visa Overstays, their cases are equally clear. They have flaunted the law and need to be subject to immediate justice administered by the JoPs. This will remove the backlog in short order and assure that those who flaunt the law will never have a pathway to citizenship.

3. Have Eric Holder drop the case against Arizona’s SB1070. That was an unpopular move on the part of your administration and showed your true colors on border security. Instead, find a way to facilitate state immigration enforcement to supplement the efforts of ICE and the border patrol. Stop catch-and-release. Whether an illegal is caught at the border crossings or internally, sentence them immediately to six months working on border infrastructure. If you just send them back across the border, they’ll try again and again with an ultimate 95% probability of success.

If the Government Shuts Down on April 8th, BLAME THE RECALCITRANT DEMOCRATS! They are quibbling over a minuscule portion of the multi-trillion dollar deficit.