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.
Showing posts with label amnesty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label amnesty. Show all posts

Thursday, December 26, 2013

The American Tribe

Leading Evangelicals Show that Bible Has Been Misinterpreted


By James Robb, Tuesday, December 24, 2013, 9:08 AM EST - posted on NumbersUSA
  This is the time of year when many pro-amnesty advocates in the pulpit and the press misuse the Bible to try to try to advance their cause. This year, churchgoers are fortunate to have access to a much different explanation of scripture, thanks to the emergence of a group called Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration and to a fascinating panel recently sponsored by the Heritage Foundation to inform congressional staffers and the media.
Kelly Monroe Kullberg, who has organized Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration, is a highly respected evangelical leader. She founded the Veritas Forum at Harvard University in the 1990s, which has since grown into a world-wide movement. Her critique of the sloppy handling of Scripture used by some clergy is irenic yet wide-ranging. At the Heritage panel, she said:
God loves us all. God invites us all to be citizens in his kingdom. He places us in families, tribes and nations, and gives us biblical wisdom about shaping a thriving culture. Like gardening, growing a culture requires discernment and vision. But nowhere in Scripture do we see blanket asylum, blanket amnesty, blanket immigration. We see wise welcome to a well-meaning Ruth or Rahab (the sojourner or 'ger' in Hebrew is something like a convert and comes lawfully, as blessing), and we also at times find a Nehemiah leading his nation in the building of walls to cultivate the good and to be set apart from the ways of the 'foreigner' (the 'nekhar' or 'zar') who does not respect the laws, customs and values of the country visited -- who does not intend to advance cultural flourishing.
Mark Tooley, the president of Washington's Institute on Religion and Democracy (on whose board I serve), has been warning his fellow evangelical leaders against a one-sided approach on immigration. His remarks at the Heritage panel included this:
Christians also should be cautioned against sweeping 'comprehensive' legislative solutions to deep, pervasive political problems. Solutions to most political challenges are more typically incremental. And in our fallen world, reputed solutions, even when implemented relatively effectively, usually create new problems demanding attention. And in this particular debate we should avoid rhetoric that romanticizes immigrants no less than avoiding demonization.
Immigrants, legal and illegal, are frail humans like us all, a combination of virtues and vices. Their presence among us brings both gifts and troubles. Our prisons are full of tens of thousands of immigrants, legal and illegal, who have committed heinous crimes. There are also, of course, millions who work hard, are faithful to their families, and love their new country. Likewise, many immigrants, even while working hard, ultimately draw government benefits and services that outstrip their financial contributions, making their presence in America an additional fiscal stress upon our already fraying and probably unsustainable entitlement state. The mass legalization of 11 million illegal immigrants, as presently construed, would likely add to that stress.
Dr. James K. Hoffmeier, a professor at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, is an expert in ancient Hebrew and ancient near-east society. He takes a dim view of current Evangelical leaders who misuse Scripture for political ends. At the Heritage panel, Hoffmeier made the following points (as reported by The Christian Post):
Three different Hebrew words are translated as "foreigner" or "sojourner," Hoffmeier explained, but the most common one, by far, is ger, which appears 160 times. Under biblical law, a ger was legally recognized and entitled to certain rights, responsibilities and social benefits. They could participate in community worship. They were expected to observe kosher dietary laws. And, they could not be charged interest.
"People who are using scripture for the undocumented immigrant are trying to credit the non-legal resident with the same rights the biblical law calls for a legal foreign resident," he said.
Hoffmeier strongly rebuked open borders evangelicals for misusing the "sanctuary cities" passages found in Scripture. He stated that in ancient Israel, sanctuary cities were places where accused criminals could flee to get a fair trial. In effect, they were a change of venue. "Sanctuary" never meant escaping the law, Hoffmeier said. He said that using the sanctuary cities concept to help illegal aliens cancel out immigration penalties is completely against the "spirit and letter" of the texts.
Another evangelical speaking up against misuse of Bible passages on immigration is Dr. Carol Swain, professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt Law School. At the Heritage Foundation event, Swain claimed that Evangelicals had been "manipulated" by pro-amnesty proponents who seek to overturn the law for political and economic advantage. Swain, who is black, spoke forcefully about the effect mass immigration has on minorities and white workers:
The losers tend to be low-skill, low-wage Americans. Our greatest obligation is to the people already here [legally].
Kullberg makes a strong case for a more reasoned, balanced approach on immigration than many Evangelical leaders have ever voiced:
We're for wise immigration. We're for kindness to citizens as well as kindness to guests. Immigration is a beautiful idea. As a younger missionary in several Central American nations, I never understood the need for rules and fences. The problem is that we're considering an influx of perhaps 30- or 40,000,000 new citizens in just ten years, into a near-bankrupt welfare state living on borrowed money -- America. There aren't enough jobs.
At the Heritage panel, Tooley of IRD made this remark that struck me as summing up the situation:
There are sincere people of faith on many sides of this debate. Quoting scripture and citing religious principles in support of a political argument can be fine if done with some humility and recognition that on most political issues none of us can claim to know God's will with absolute certainty.
JIM ROBB is Vice President, Operations for NumbersUSA 

Wednesday, June 26, 2013

Here's $4.2 Billion to Apply to the National Debt

To make a long story short, the Internal Revenue Service is responsible for assigning Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs). ITINs are issued to those who are unauthorized to work in the U.S. However, a 2011 report from the Treasury Inspector General (TIG) showed that in 2010, $4.2 billion in tax credits nationwide were paid to those same people through the Child Tax Credit; those who eligible for this credit can receive up to $1,000 in tax credits per child. So, a person who is not authorized to work in the U.S. is nevertheless able to obtain a refund check from the American taxpayer, via the IRS.

Fast forward to 2013.

The TIG completed a report in 2012 that outlines problems with the IRS’s review of ITIN applications. Among the many problems, TIG found that IRS personnel are inadequately trained to identify false or questionable documentation and identify patterns involving fraudulent tax refund claims. Additionally, a Questionable Identification Detection Team formed that would have properly handled fraudulent tax returns has been disbanded. Since the elimination of the team, the IRS’s management does not use application information to identify potential fraudulent schemes.

The TIG audited the IRS’s data system to understand how to solve this problem. When the TIG analyzed the number of times the same mailing address was used on an ITIN application, it found that 154 mailing addresses were used 1,000 or more times on ITIN applications.

For example, 123456 Peachtree Street, Atlanta GA 30312 was listed as the contact address on 1,000 or more ITIN applications submitted to the IRS. Since we are using Atlanta as an example, from 2006-2011, 12,345 ITINs were granted to individuals using a single addresses. In 2011, at only four addresses in Atlanta, 41,272 tax refunds were issued that totaled over $54 million. Each refund averaged $1,308.

While over 20 million Americans and legal immigrants struggle with unemployment or underemployment, the IRS sends refund checks to those ineligible to work in the U.S.

Monday, June 10, 2013

Vote Against Cloture on Amnesty Bill

Tell your Senators Deceptions Will Not Be Tolerated. Filibuster The Gang-Of-Eight Amnesty Bill!

 



In a matter of hours, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will bring the Gang-of-Eight Amnesty bill to the floor of the Senate. It will take only 41 votes to deny him cloture and kill this Amnesty bill. Tell your senators that the American people expect them to vote against cloture or any motion to proceed.  You must do this today to have any effect!  Phone, fax or email your senators now.

Here's what your senators need to hear:
"I am are going to be blunt. You may be thinking that you can vote in favor of  cloture and then vote against the legislation after it hits the floor.  The American people will not be fooled by this deception.  You need  to vote "no" on any motion to proceed.

If you vote "yes" on cloture, you won't get away with telling the American people that you opposed Amnesty.  Disabuse yourself of that ridiculous notion right now.

Put another way, a vote in opposition to filibustering the Gang-of-Eight amnesty bill will be viewed as a vote in favor of Amnesty... PERIOD!

This Gang-of-Eight Amnesty bill can't be fixed and it should not be debated. The sooner you kill this fraudulent immigration legislation, the sooner you can enact real immigration reform. Kill it now!  Vote "no" on cloture or any motion to proceed.

Saturday, June 23, 2012

Dee Perez-Scott: DREAM Amnesty


Dee Perez-Scott, as she calls herself on her un-American blog, is a zealous supporter of all illegal aliens and the Administration which continues to flaunt the law with selective enforcement. However, that name is as phony as her blog photo.  She substituted the photo of a movie star for her own photo.  She must be ashamed of her pudgy body.  In her latest rant about the illegal DREAM amnesty she says that Romney is pandering to the Hispanics but then insults Sarah Palin because she said the same thing about Obama.  This is just another example of Perez-Scott’s confused thinking.  Her rhetoric indicates that if Palin is nutty then that makes Obama equally nutty.

Politicians always pander to voting blocs as a necessary evil to getting elected.  When we look at the facts in this case, it is obvious that Obama’s action on DREAM was an overt manifestation of his pandering to Hispanics.  Why else would he announce this new policy only a few months before the election?  He wants their votes, every one of them, legal or illegal.  The Congress turned down the DREAM Act and Obama has the effrontery to ignore that fact and proceed on this own.  Obviously, he believes in government by fiat – in a word dictatorship.   First he ignores the laws he doesn’t like then when the Congress says no, he ignores that and proceeds via executive order.  Obama says send me the DREAM bill and I will sign it.  Sorry Obama but that’s not the way it works.  You may propose anything but Congress disposes.

Asked whether he would reverse the Obama DREAM amnesty executive order, or whatever Obamae is calling it these days, Romney made a mistake in not being more forthright on this issue.  He should have said, “Yes, I will rescind this order on the basis that it is an illegal usurpation of the role of Congress.  If the Congress sends me a bill that is fair to legal immigrants and provides some form of relief for illegal aliens brought to this country as young children by their parents, I will sign it.   However, I will insist that every DREAM applicant must have served in the Armed Forces for not less than 4 years.  During that time they will be able to earn money to help them pay for a college education.  Hopefully, that experience will deepen their love for this country, remove any stigma associated with their illegal status, and mature them in a way that later will enable them to be more successful in college.”
My own thoughts on this matter are in accord with the following paraphrase of a comment on another blog by a poster known only as v.  He says that we need to keep in mind that these illegals are not our children…they are Foreign Nationals born to two illegal aliens….born using the US welfare system and still continuing to suck up US taxpayer dollars! They refuse to speak English…even though we pay thousands more to educate an illegal alien than we pay to educate a US citizen…they are disruptive in class…are gang members…allow their children to tear up merchandise in stores……. In no way are they an asset to the US!  (end if my paraphrase of v's comment)

They speak their native language as well as their parents and could be a real asset in their homelands. Their exposure to the American republic and its ideas might enable them to change the governments and economies in their homelands for the better.  They have been parasites on the American economy for too long.  It is time for them to give back by leaving forthwith to seek their fortunes in their homelands.  If they are indeed among the best and the brightest of the illegals, that should not be a problem.

The problem or question that all Hispanics and others should ponder is: Will an America with 600 million people have the same standard of living and quality of life as an America with 300 million or less.  Those who choose to put their heads in the sand will be responsible for recreating the very conditions that caused them or their parents to flee their homelands.  This is what the pro-immigration propagandists are unlikely to mention.

v. continues, Rubio has shown that he represents the Interest of Foreign Nationals and Illegal Aliens….He has chosen to ignore what is in the best interest of legal US citizens! Most of us have been here for hundreds of years and we are being ignored! It’s time to take our country back…..No one has the right to enterr the US unless we invite them.  Obama has no authority to do this in violation of immigration laws. And it’s Time to remove the welcome mat! We have allowed too many Foreign Nationals into the US in too short a time. Approximately 7 Million since Obama took Office…they took my job and my friends next it will be yours or your Childs JOB!

Monday, August 22, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott: Misguided Liberal




This was never given as a commencement address. It was read on Neal Boortz's radio program and in his book. It is a liberal's nightmare. Enjoy.


"I am honored by the invitation to address you on this august occasion. It's about time. Be warned, however, that I am not here to impress you; you'll have enough smoke blown up your bloomers today. And you can bet your tassels I'm not here to impress the faculty and administration. You may not like much of what I have to say, and that's fine. You will remember it though. Especially after about 10 years out there in the real world. This, it goes without saying, does not apply to those of you who will seek your careers and your fortunes as government employees.

This gowned gaggle behind me is your faculty. You've heard the old saying that those who can - do. Those who can't - teach. That sounds deliciously insensitive. But there is often raw truth in insensitivity, just as you often find feel-good falsehoods and lies in compassion. Say good-bye to your faculty because now you are getting ready to go out there and do. These folks behind me are going to stay right here and teach.

By the way, just because you are leaving this place with a diploma doesn't mean the learning is over. When an FAA flight examiner handed me my private pilot's license many years ago, he said, 'Here, this is your ticket to learn.' The same can be said for your diploma. Believe me, the learning has just begun.

Now, I realize that most of you consider yourselves Liberals. In fact, you are probably very proud of your liberal views. You care so much. You feel so much. You want to help so much. After all, you're a compassionate and caring person, aren't you now? Well, isn't that just so extraordinarily special. Now, at this age, is as good a time as any to be a liberal; as good a time as any to know absolutely everything. You have plenty of time, starting tomorrow, for the truth to set in.

Over the next few years, as you begin to feel the cold breath of reality down your neck, things are going to start changing pretty fast... including your own assessment of just how much you really know.

So here are the first assignments for your initial class in reality: Pay attention to the news, read newspapers, and listen to the words and phrases that proud Liberals use to promote their causes. Then, compare the words of the left to the words and phrases you hear from those evil, heartless, greedy conservatives. From the Left you will hear "I feel." From the Right you will hear "I think." From the Liberals you will hear references to groups -- The Blacks, the Poor, The Rich, The Disadvantaged, The Less Fortunate. From the Right you will hear references to individuals. On the Left you hear talk of group rights; on the Right, individual rights.

That about sums it up, really: Liberals feel. Liberals care. They are pack animals whose identity is tied up in group dynamics. Conservatives think -- and, setting aside the theocracy crowd, their identity is centered on the individual.

Liberals feel their favored groups have enforceable rights to the property and services of productive individuals. Conservatives, I among them I might add, think that individuals have the right to protect their lives and their property from the plunder of the masses.

In college you developed a group mentality, but if you look closely at your diplomas you will see that they have your individual names on them. Not the name of your school mascot, or of your fraternity or sorority, but your name. Your group identity is going away. Your recognition and appreciation of your individual identity starts now.

If, by the time you reach the age of 30 you do not consider yourself to be a conservative, rush right back here as quickly as you can and apply for a faculty position. These people will welcome you with open arms. They will welcome you, that is, so long as you haven't developed an individual identity. Once again you will have to be willing to sign on to the group mentality you embraced during the past four years.

Something is going to happen soon that is going to really open your eyes. You're going to actually get a full time job!

You're also going to get a lifelong work partner. This partner isn't going to help you do your job. This partner is just going to sit back and wait for payday. This partner doesn't want to share in your effort, but in your earnings.

Your new lifelong partner is actually an agent; an agent representing a strange and diverse group of people; an agent for every teenager with an illegitimate child; an agent for a research scientist who wanted to make some cash answering the age-old question of why monkeys grind their teeth. An agent for some poor demented hippie who considers herself to be a meaningful and talented artist, but who just can't manage to sell any of her artwork on the open market.

Your new partner is an agent for every person with limited, if any, job skills, but who wanted a job at City Hall. An agent for tin-horn dictators in fancy military uniforms grasping for American foreign aid. An agent for multi-million dollar companies who want someone else to pay for their overseas advertising. An agent for everybody who wants to use the unimaginable power of this agent's for their personal enrichment and benefit..

That agent is our wonderful, caring, compassionate, oppressive government. Believe me, you will be awed by the unimaginable power this agent has. Power that you do not have. A power that no individual has, or will have. This agent has the legal power to use force, deadly force to accomplish its goals.

You have no choice here.. Your new friend is just going to walk up to you, introduce itself rather gruffly, hand you a few forms to fill out, and move right on in. Say hello to your own personal one-ton gorilla. It will sleep anywhere it wants to.

Now, let me tell you, this agent is not cheap. As you become successful it will seize about 40% of everything you earn. And no, I'm sorry, there just isn't any way you can fire this agent of plunder, and you can't decrease its share of your income. That power rests with him, not you.

So, here I am saying negative things to you about government. Well, be clear on this: It is not wrong to distrust government. It is not wrong to fear government. In certain cases it is not even wrong to despise government for government is inherently evil. Yes ... a necessary evil, but dangerous nonetheless...somewhat like a drug. Just as a drug that in the proper dosage can save your life, an overdose of government can be fatal.

Now let's address a few things that have been crammed into your minds at this university. There are some ideas you need to expunge as soon as possible. These ideas may work well in academic environment, but they fail miserably out there in the real world.

First is that favorite buzz word of the media and academia: Diversity! You have been taught that the real value of any group of people - be it a social group, an employee group, a management group, whatever - is based on diversity. This is a favored liberal ideal because diversity is based not on an individual's abilities or character, but on a person's identity and status as a member of a group. Yes, it's that liberal group identity thing again.

Within the great diversity movement group identification - be it racial, gender based, or some other minority status - means more than the individual's integrity, character or other qualifications.

Brace yourself. You are about to move from this academic atmosphere where diversity rules, to a workplace and a culture where individual achievement and excellence actually count. No matter what your professors have taught you over the last four years, you are about to learn that diversity is absolutely no replacement for excellence, ability, and individual hard work. From this day on every single time you hear the word "diversity" you can rest assured that there is someone close by who is determined to rob you of every vestige of individuality you possess.

We also need to address this thing you seem to have about "rights." We have witnessed an obscene explosion of so-called "rights" in the last few decades, usually emanating from college campuses.

You know the mantra: You have the right to a job. The right to a place to live. The right to a living wage. The right to health care. The right to an education. You probably even have your own pet right - the right to a Beemer for instance, or the right to have someone else provide for that child you plan on downloading in a year or so.

Forget it. Forget those rights! I'll tell you what your rights are. You have a right to live free, and to the results of 60% -75% of your labor. I'll also tell you have no right to any portion of the life or labor of another.

You may, for instance, think that you have a right to health care. After all, Hillary said so, didn't she? But you cannot receive healthcare unless some doctor or health practitioner surrenders some of his time - his life - to you. He may be willing to do this for compensation, but that's his choice. You have no "right" to his time or property. You have no right to his or any other person's life or to any portion thereof.

You may also think you have some "right" to a job; a job with a living wage, whatever that is. Do you mean to tell me that you have a right to force your services on another person, and then the right to demand that this person compensate you with their money? Sorry, forget it. I am sure you would scream if some urban outdoorsmen (that would be "homeless person" for those of you who don't want to give these less fortunate people a romantic and adventurous title) came to you and demanded his job and your money.

The people who have been telling you about all the rights you have are simply exercising one of theirs - the right to be imbeciles. Their being imbeciles didn't cost anyone else either property or time. It's their right, and they exercise it brilliantly.

By the way, did you catch my use of the phrase "less fortunate" a bit ago when I was talking about the urban outdoorsmen? That phrase is a favorite of the Left. Think about it, and you'll understand why.

To imply that one person is homeless, destitute, dirty, drunk, spaced out on drugs, unemployable, and generally miserable because he is "less fortunate" is to imply that a successful person - one with a job, a home and a future - is in that position because he or she was "fortunate." The dictionary says that fortunate means "having derived good from an unexpected place." There is nothing unexpected about deriving good from hard work. There is also nothing unexpected about deriving misery from choosing drugs, alcohol, and the street.

If the Liberal Left can create the common perception that success and failure are simple matters of "fortune" or "luck," then it is easy to promote and justify their various income redistribution schemes. After all, we are just evening out the odds a little bit. This "success equals luck" idea the liberals like to push is seen everywhere. Former Democratic presidential candidate Richard Gephardt refers to high-achievers as "people who have won life's lottery." He wants you to believe they are making the big bucks because they are lucky. It's not luck, my friends. It's choice. One of the greatest lessons I ever learned was in a book by Og Mandino, entitled, "The Greatest Secret in the World." The lesson? Very simple: "Use wisely your power of choice."

That bum sitting on a heating grate, smelling like a wharf rat? He's there by choice. He is there because of the sum total of the choices he has made in his life. This truism is absolutely the hardest thing for some people to accept, especially those who consider themselves to be victims of something or other - victims of discrimination, bad luck, the system, capitalism, whatever. After all, nobody really wants to accept the blame for his or her position in life. Not when it is so much easier to point and say, "Look! He did this to me!" than it is to look into a mirror and say, "You did this to me!"

The key to accepting responsibility for your life is to accept the fact that your choices, every one of them, are leading you inexorably to either success or failure, however you define those terms.

Some of the choices are obvious: Whether or not to stay in school. Whether or not to get pregnant. Whether or not to hit the bottle. Whether or not to keep this job you hate until you get another, better-paying job. Whether or not to save some of your money or saddle yourself with huge payments for that new car.

Some of the choices are seemingly insignificant: Whom to go to the movies with. Whose car to ride home in. Whether to watch the tube tonight, or read a book on investing. But, and you can be sure of this, each choice counts. Each choice is a building block - some large, some small. But each one is a part of the structure of your life. If you make the right choices, or if you make more right choices than wrong ones, something absolutely terrible may happen to you. Something unthinkable. You, my friend, could become one of the hated, the evil, the ugly, the feared, the filthy, the successful, the rich.

The rich basically serve two purposes in this country. First, they provide the investments, the investment capital, and the brains for the formation of new businesses. Businesses that hire people. Businesses that send millions of paychecks home each week to the un-rich.

Second, the rich are a wonderful object of ridicule, distrust, and hatred. Few things are more valuable to a politician than the envy most Americans feel for the evil rich.

Envy is a powerful emotion.. Even more powerful than the emotional minefield that surrounded Bill Clinton when he reviewed his last batch of White House interns. Politicians use envy to get votes and power. And they keep that power by promising the envious that the envied will be punished: "The rich will pay their fair share of taxes if I have anything to do with it." The truth is that the top 10% of income earners in this country pays almost 50% of all income taxes collected. I shudder to think what these job producers would be paying if our tax system were any more "fair."

You have heard, no doubt, that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Interestingly enough, our government's own numbers show that many of the poor actually get richer, and that quite a few of the rich actually get poorer. But for the rich who do actually get richer, and the poor who remain poor, there's an explanation, a reason. The rich, you see, keep doing the things that make them rich; while the poor keep doing the things that make them poor.

Speaking of the poor, during your adult life you are going to hear an endless string of politicians bemoaning the plight of the poor. So, you need to know that under our government's definition of "poor" you can have a $5 million net worth, a $300,000 home and a new $90,000 Mercedes, all completely paid for. You can also have a maid, cook, and valet, and a million in your checking account, and you can still be officially defined by our government as "living in poverty." Now there's something you haven't seen on the evening news.

How does the government pull this one off? Very simple, really. To determine whether or not some poor soul is "living in poverty," the government measures one thing -- just one thing. Income.

It doesn't matter one bit how much you have, how much you own, how many cars you drive or how big they are, whether or not your pool is heated, whether you winter in Aspen and spend the summers in the Bahamas, or how much is in your savings account. It only matters how much income you claim in that particular year. This means that if you take a one-year leave of absence from your high-paying job and decide to live off the money in your savings and checking accounts while you write the next great American novel, the government says you are 'living in poverty."

This isn't exactly what you had in mind when you heard these gloomy statistics, is it? Do you need more convincing? Try this. The government's own statistics show that people who are said to be "living in poverty" spend more than $1.50 for each dollar of income they claim. Something is a bit fishy here. Just remember all this the next time Charles Gibson tells you about some hideous new poverty statistics.

Why has the government concocted this phony poverty scam? Because the government needs an excuse to grow and to expand its social welfare programs, which translates into an expansion of its power. If the government can convince you, in all your compassion, that the number of "poor" is increasing, it will have all the excuse it needs to sway an electorate suffering from the advanced stages of Obsessive-Compulsive Compassion Disorder.

I'm about to be stoned by the faculty here. They've already changed their minds about that honorary degree I was going to get. That's OK, though. I still have my PhD in Insensitivity from the Neal Boortz Institute for Insensitivity Training. I learned that, in short, sensitivity sucks. It's a trap. Think about it - the truth knows no sensitivity. Life can be insensitive. Wallow too much in sensitivity and you'll be unable to deal with life, or the truth, so get over it.

Now, before the dean has me shackled and hauled off, I have a few random thoughts.

* You need to register to vote, unless you are on welfare. If you are living off the efforts of others, please do us the favor of sitting down and shutting up until you are on your own again.

* When you do vote, your votes for the House and the Senate are more important than your vote for President. The House controls the purse strings, so concentrate your awareness there.

* Liars cannot be trusted, even when the liar is the President of the country. If someone can't deal honestly with you, send them packing.

* Don't bow to the temptation to use the government as an instrument of plunder. If it is wrong for you to take money from someone else who earned it -- to take their money by force for your own needs -- then it is certainly just as wrong for you to demand that the government step forward and do this dirty work for you.

* Don't look in other people's pockets. You have no business there. What they earn is theirs. What you earn is yours. Keep it that way.. Nobody owes you anything, except to respect your privacy and your rights, and leave you alone.

* Speaking of earning, the revered 40-hour workweek is for losers. Forty hours should be considered the minimum, not the maximum. You don't see highly successful people clocking out of the office every afternoon at five. The losers are the ones caught up in that afternoon rush hour. The winners drive home in the dark.

* Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection.

* Finally (and aren't you glad to hear that word), as Og Mandino wrote,

1. Proclaim your rarity. Each of you is a rare and unique human being.

2. Use wisely your power of choice.

3. Go the extra mile .. drive home in the dark.

Oh, and put off buying a television set as long as you can. Now, if you have any idea at all what's good for you, you will get the hell out of here and never come back.
Class dismissed



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Friday, June 10, 2011

Dee Perez-Scott: Disloyal Amnesty Enthusiast


Stop Obama's Left Wing Amnesty Scheme
Stand with BAN Amnesty Now

Dee Perez-Scott, when it comes to issues like AMNESTY and BORDER SECURITY, there are no gray areas – there are only right and wrong. And President Obama and his pro-Amnesty establishment in Washington are working very hard to take America in the wrong direction. Tragically, more than 9,000 Americans are killed every year by illegal aliens. That’s three times as many as were killed in the 9/11 terrorist attacks and yet we have spent trillions of dollars on fruitless wars to avenge 9/11 but relatively much smaller amounts on protecting our sovereignty and securing our borders. While improvements in border staffing, infrastructure, and the rules of engagement are important, the sine qua non of in depth border security is the mandatory implementation of E-verify across the board coupled with continuous, vigorous internal enforcement. These obvious solutions appear to be anathema to Obama which shows how little interest he really has in securing the borders.


The tragedy of killing of Americans by illegal aliens keeps happening, year after year and Obama has responded by sending too few National Guardsmen to the US Border – and then handcuffing them by ordering them specifically NOT to interfere with illegal aliens crossing into the U.S.A.! Their only duty is to report what they see to Border Patrol. It doesn’t make any difference if the illegals are narco-terrorists, gun-runners or human traffickers. Obama doesn’t care. All the Guardsmen are allowed to do is REPORT what they see to Border Patrol. The most effective way to use the Guardsmen is to train them and deputize them to perform all of the functions of the Border Patrol. We can’t afford to just have them there as observers with no authority. This is just another way in which government wastes taxpayer funds—by deploying the National Guard and then tying one hand behind their back—creating a façade but not the reality of border security.


Yet, “Napo”, Obama’s grossly ineffective and incompetent Secretary of Homeland (IN)Security calls America’s border “more secure than at any time in memory.” She has a convenient memory. Napo can fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time. She must have overlooked the fact that the number of illegal aliens in the U.S. has swollen from 1 million at the time of the last major amnesty in 1986 to 12 million today, a compound rate of increase of about 9% per year. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to extrapolate that rate to mid century to what might then aptly be called “Mexico Norte.” We will have surrendered without firing a shot. That’s hardly a testimony to secure borders in the past, present or future.

To learn the facts, we need a confidential survey of all Border Patrol agents by a private agency with the results to be released directly to the media and the public without going through the Obama Administration's filter or allowing Napo to spin the results.
Napo’s statement could be considered a colossal joke on the American people – but the stakes are just too high. This isn’t a joke at all. It’s a national tragedy. And the cost being paid is American lives.


The way we can bring change to this terrible situation is to inform more Americans about the true situation on our borders – and how it affects them in every state in our great nation. There is not a single state, city or a community, that hasn’t been impacted by the drugs, guns, violence and DUI mayhem perpetrated by illegal aliens.


Despite more than 12-to-23 million illegals remaining in the United States, Barack Obama has slowed down deportations and implemented a “catch and release” policy. Even when illegal aliens are caught breaking additional laws, unless they’re caught committing a violent crime such as rape or murder, the illegal alien is likely to be set loose, back out on the streets. That amounts to a treasonous and de facto unilateral amnesty. Obama must go at the end of this term if not before.


His actions or inactions make it more important than ever to “BAN AMNESTY NOW”.
The Obama “political mafia” is gearing up to once again try to pass the so-called DREAM Act in Congress…The media are continuing their attacks on “BAN AMNESTY NOW” and its allies… And the disloyal pro-Amnesty Left Wing extremists and their fellow travelers never stop their scheming, looking for ways to enact amnesty for illegal aliens criminally residing in the United States. There is a good reason why Sheriff Joe Arpaio, America’s toughest Sheriff, calls “BAN AMNESTY NOW” “America’s toughest anti-illegal immigration organization, and our best hope for stopping the Obama Amnesty scheme in its tracks!”


We need to stand up to subversive and racist organizations like LA RAZA and to the Obama political mafia. We need to warn Americans about the threat of illegals voting in the 2012 national elections and mobilize hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans to become poll watchers to stop illegals from voting.


Help make America stronger by opposing Amnesty from coast to coast, state to state, city to city, community to community across our great nation! Contribute to “Ban Amnesty Now” by sending your check (payable to “B.A.N.”) to:

Ban Amnesty Now
60 E Rio Salado Parkway, Suite 900
Tempe, AZ 85281
Interact with “Ban Amnesty Now” on the Face book and Twitter.

Friday, April 22, 2011

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.

Netroots Nation Speakers for 2009



Dee Perez-Scott, (disloyal Mexican-American)



http://immigrationmexicanamerican.blogspot.com/


"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"

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.

Saturday, December 4, 2010

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

Monday, November 8, 2010

A Plan to Help Dee Perez-Scott Balance the Texas Budget

Missouri's approach to the problem of illegal immigration appears to
be more advanced, sophisticated, strict and effective than anything to date in Arizona.

Do the loonies in San Francisco, or the White House, appreciate what
Missouri has done? When are our fearless President and his dynamic Attorney General going to take action to require Missouri start accepting illegal immigrants once again?

So, why doesn't Missouri receive attention?

Answer: There are no Mexican illegals in Missouri to demonstrate.

The "Show Me" state has once again showed us how it should be done.

There needs to be more publicity and exposure regarding what Missouri
has done.

In 2007, Missouri placed on the ballot a proposed constitutional
amendment designating English as the official language of Missouri.

In November, 2008, nearly 90% voting in favor! Thus English became
the official language for ALL governmental activity in Missouri.

No individual has the right to demand government services in a language
OTHER than English.

In 2008 a measure was passed that required the Missouri Highway
Patrol and other law enforcement officials to verify the immigration
status of any person arrested, and inform federal authorities if the
person is found to be in Missouri illegally. Missouri law enforcement
offices receive specific training with respect to enforcement of federal
immigration laws.

In Missouri illegal immigrants do NOT have access to taxpayers
benefits such as food stamps and health care through Missouri HealthNET.

In 2009 a measure was passed that ensures Missouri 's public
institutions of higher education do NOT award financial aid to
individuals who are illegally in he United States..

In Missouri all post-secondary institutions of higher education to
annually certify to the Missouri Dept. of Higher Education that they
have NOT knowingly awarded financial aid to students who are unlawfully
present in the United States.

So while Arizona has made national news for its new law, it is
important to remember Missouri has been far more proactive in
addressing this horrific problem.

Missouri has made it clear that illegal immigrants are NOT welcome
in the state and they will certainly NOT receive public benefits at the
expense of Missouri taxpayers.

All the states need to enact the Missouri plan. At least then the Feds couldn't claim that it would result in a hodge-podge of immigration rules with each state's being different from their neighbors'

Here is the link to confirm: Be sure to read the readers comments too.

http://www.ozarkssentinel.com/missouri-ahead-of-the-game-in-dealing-with-illegal-immigrants-p1034.htm


Taken from: "The Ozarks Sentinel" Editorial - Nita Jane Ayres,
May 13, 2010 .

If the link does not work, just type in "The Ozarks Sentinel - Nita Jane
Ayres" in Google.

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Dee Perez-Scott misuses the term "Reconquista"

Dee Perez-Scott, a member of the Reconquista Movement to restore the Southwest to Mexican control, encourages and supports illegal aliens and open borders but is in a consistent state of denial when it comes to the existence of the movement itself. She, in desperation, tries to characterize the groups opposed to the Obama administration as the real reonquistas. But, you see, reconquistas refers to the conquests not those who perpetrate them, the very misuse she took issue with in an earlier post. Maybe a repeat of what I wrote earlier will sink in this time.

•The term Reconquista (in English, "reconquest") was popularized by Mexican writers Carlos Fuentes and Elena Poniatowska to describe the demographic and cultural presence of [illegal alien] Mexicans into the Southwestern United States.
• Reconquista (Mexico), a movement that desires the reconquest of formerly Mexican territory lost to the United States following the Annexation of Texas and the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo
• Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council "They’re afraid we’re going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They’re right. We will take them over. …. We are here to stay."
• Excelsior- The national newspaper of Mexico "The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."
• Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas. ----- "We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population. ….. I love it. They are shitting in their pants with fear. I love it."
• Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party
"Remember 187 (proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non citizens) was the last gasp of white America in California."
• Gloria Molina, Los Angeles County Supervisor
"We are politicizing every single one of these new citizens that are becoming citizens of this
country….I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, "I’m going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back."
• Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Bill Clinton "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn’t like it should leave."
• Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General We are practicing "La Reconquista" in California."
• Professor Fernando Guerra, Loyola Marymount University: "We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos…."

Friday, October 29, 2010

Dee Perez-Scott: Vota Efforts

FACT: The same pro-amnesty criminals working in states like Washington to turn out pro-amnesty voters have been working to register illegalvoters all over the nation! In one Arizona congressional district, morethan 65% of the 3,000+ new voters registrations submitted by Mi FamiliaVota and One Arizona were found to be invalid – many of them to non-citizens. Nothing is more important in protecting the United States today thanprotecting the sanctity of our votes. Sadly, we are not just fightingcriminals from other nations. We are fighting our own president and very determined disloyal individuals in America who want to disenfranchise U.S.Citizens of their votes while enabling illegal aliens to register.

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Dee Perez-Scott Rants Against “Coconuts”

"Coconuts" (brown on the outside and white on the inside) is the pejorative term or racist epithet used by some Hispanics, like Dee Perez-Scott, to describe their more enlightened brethren who actually support the national interest, character, ideals, language, security, quality of life, standard of living, and culture of the U.S. I guess that "Brownies" (brown all the way through) must then be the antonym applicable to those ethnocentrists who give precedence to their particular ethnic group instead of the national interest.
The term “Coconuts” is similar to the pejorative terms “Oreo” or “Uncle Tom” applied to the Blacks who have been successful in leaving the ghetto and the “projects” to become productive members of society. If it leads to success, is “Acting White” really so bad? What’s wrong with emulating those who are successful regardless of their skin color? Think of it as emulating success. Dee claims to have worked for a Fortune 500 company in Dallas, Texas. I wonder, was she thought of by some as being a coconut?
Dee wrote, "Posada is NOT one of US Latinos who are fighting for CIR, but instead a Coconut Republican paid flunkie. This guy is despicable, a racist and hates his own skin!"
Robert wrote: “Exactly how is he a ‘racist’? I was under the impression that a racist is supposed to be someone who has too high a regard for his own skin.
Even though Dee claims to be a grandmotherly type who never indulges in name-calling on her blog, the above sample of her remarks indicates otherwise. Clearly, she has reverted to her typical form of expression in that regard. I wonder if she also uses the terms “Oreo” or “Uncle Tom?”
Dee added, “Posada …receives funds from the Repugs to form this group and attempts to go on Univision with an ad that says "we".. who is he talking to? Other coconuts like himself who have never fought for CIR? He has not fought for CIR. Never. Nope. Never! So how on earth can he say "we" should not vote?!?!
It’s interesting that Dee believes that support of CIR is essential to be a member of her ethnic group. This apparently means, as usual, that if someone, like Posada, disagrees with her point of view, he is wrong and she is right. I guess only Dee is entitled to express an opinion or support a particular political philosophy. Posada obviously was using the pronoun “we” to refer to all those of his persuasion, just as Dee uses it to refer to all those of her persuasion. It is incredible that she does not comprehend these elementary facts about the English language. Or is this just another example of the negative spin she places on everything that she disagrees with? She seems unable to accept that other people have the same rights as she does to favor or disagree with any reform or political movement.
She gives Posada points for his Machiavellian thinking. “It takes both creativity and chutzpah to encourage Latinos to give a boost to candidates who actually oppose the reform they seek.” She obviously has jumped to the conclusion that every Hispanic in Nevada is of a like mind and seeks a reform of immigration rules that will increase their numbers competing for jobs that currently are in short supply in Nevada.
Finally Dee quoted Senator Reid on immigration: "We must not forget that we are a nation founded on and built by immigrants. Our grandparents and great-grandparents came here to pursue the American dream, and we should honor that proud heritage as we work to reform our immigration laws," Reid said. Reid is living in the past. This is the 21st century. America is fully settled, populated, and developed. An immigration policy that was appropriate in the past is not longer relevant.
Many Americans share Candidate Angle’s views on immigration: "Every state should have a sheriff like Joe Arpaio. Go, Arizona, go."

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Dee Perez-Scott misses the Point --- Again!

The Mexican presence, though significant, is part of an even larger upsurge in the general Hispanic population in Texas and elsewhere. Dallas will become a majority Hispanic city well before 2030, when the entire state will have shifted that way. As Dallas County gained 175,000 Hispanic residents (now 35 percent of the population) from 2000 to 2005, 130,000 Anglos moved out. Hispanic illegal aliens now account for 100 percent of the county’s net population growth; in the North Texas region, it’s 40percent.

Each day at Parkland Hospital, some 32 babies of undocumented, foreign-born parents, mostly Mexican, are born into this world of woe and U.S. citizenship. That’s 75 percent of the 16,489 deliveries in fiscal 2006. Medicaid pays the bill—or at least some of it, some of the time. Parkland has to go through Kafkaesque bureaucratic hoops to get the money, as well it should. Federal guidelines limit what the hospital can bill to the government without obtaining documentation from pregnant mothers. One has to wonder how much could be saved if U.S. policy permitted the immediate repatriation of pregnant illegal aliens before they can deliver their instant citizens.

I ask you, "Does that sound like La Reconquista or not?"

It's hard to understand why anyone thinks a benign policy toward illegal aliens and their progeny is in their enlightened, long-term, best interests and those of Texas and the U.S. If the Latino culture is so great, the aliens would have remained in their homelands. Instead they come here and begin immediately to re-create the very conditions that caused them [the illegal aliens] to leave their homelands. Maybe the Democrats and the Mexican-Americans should re-think their support of illegal aliens, porous borders, ineffective enforcement, and amnesty.

Dee's response:
What you ALWAYS forget...you say "leave their homelands"..what a silly silly comments. The majority of Latino citizens in the SW states are like me. We've always been here. Our ancestors have lived here for centuries, much longer than yours. These ARE our homelands!!! We built this country with our hard work ethic, family values and our sweat and blood!


Sorry, Dee, but some of our ancesters were here in the early 1600s in what became the U.S. The number of Hispanics in this country was not nearly enough to have "built this country" as I will demonstrate with population data below.

It's strange how Dee is unable to respond without distorting what has been written by others who disagree with her. Does she have ADD? She knew that I was speaking mostly about the illegal aliens, for example the 4-500,000 in Arizona. I referred to other Hispanics only in the sense that they may wish to reconsider their view of illegals. Also, if the Hispanic citizens were born here and have never been to Mexico except for an occasional trip to a resort, then they need to acquaint themselves with Mexico today to see if that is what they would like to see the U.S. become. As the illegal aliens continue to flood across the border and soak up the funds for Medicaid and other taxpayer-funded social and educational programs, they will begin to re-create here the very conditions that caused them to leave their homelands: poverty, joblessness, oligarchy, corruption, crime, gangs, and drug, human, and weapon smugglers.

Most of those whose ancestors have been here for centuries don't fit in the illegal alien category. However, they should know by now how the conversion of the U.S. into Mexico Norte is hastened by the flood of illegals and how that conversion will adversely affect them personally. Having given this thoughtful consideration, they might want to reconsider the support they provide to illegal aliens and their causes.

Although my ancestors arrived in the U.S. less than 200 years ago, my wife's ancestors were here in the early 1600s. Later, some fought in the Revolutionary War. In terms of building this nation, they were among the first of the builders because they were not only there when the nation was founded but because many gave their lives to enable our great country to come into being and achieve its manifest destiny.

No one would have objected if Dee's statement had been,..."we ,in some small way, helped to build this country..." instead of "...we built this country...".

The census data for the first year and subsequent years in which "Hispanic" was used as a category is a useful resource to see how much or how little they contributed to the building of this country based on their relative numbers.

Even as recent as 1970, Hispanics were only 4.7% of the total U.S. population. How many of them were migrant farm workers is unknown. Therefore, at best, based on their numbers, Hispanics could only claim to have built 4.7% of the incremental changes in America during the year 1970. If we were able to go back farther, we would see even smaller numbers of Hispanics relative to the total population, so claiming that Hispanics built this country is just so much hog wash, if not an outright lie.

In Arizona, the estimates of the 1940 population show Hispanics at 20.4% and the White-Non-Hispanics (WNH) at 65.1% of the population. By 1990 the Hispanics had declined to 18.8% while the WNH had increased to 71.7%. (I assume the Hispanic count includes both citizens and illegal aliens.)

In California, in 1940, the Hispanics were 6.1% of the population and the WNH were 89.6%. In 1990, the population was 25.8% Hispanic and the 57.2% WNH. This is La Reconquista no matter how much Dee protests. Obviously, when Victor Davis Hanson wrote his book, “Mexifornia: A State of Becoming”, he knew what he was talking about. At 25.8% Hispanic, Mexifornia is a microcosm of what we can expect when the entire U.S. approaches that percentage in 2050. Mexico Norte will then be an appropriate name for the U.S. in 2050. Mexifornia is therefore a good case study of what 2050 Mexico Norte will be like.

Here's the quote from my post with appropriate emphases so no one can miss it the point this time. This would not have been necessary if Dee had not chosen to deliberately distort and misinterpret my words.

"
It's hard to understand why anyone thinks a benign policy toward illegal aliens and their progeny is in the long term best interests of either Texas or the U.S. If the Latino culture is so great, the aliens would have remained in their homelands where it is already exists. Instead they come here and begin immediately to re-create the very conditions that caused them to leave their homelands.


Everyone should be able to see that at some point more becomes less -- the more there are of us: Hispanics, Anglos, Blacks, and others, the less there will be for each of us and the more our country will resemble impoverished and overpopulated countries like Mexico. It's a mystery to me why that is so hard for some to understand and accept.

Dee Wrote:
Our ancestors have lived here for centuries, much longer than yours. These ARE our homelands!!!

I remarked, "Spoken like a true Reconquista [Reconquistadoro]! Good luck with that!"

I asked, "Do you really want to return to being a part of Mexico? Is that the culture, the economy, the mores, the disregard for the rule of law, etc. you want to be emulated and re-created in Texas?"

Dee did not answer that question.

Instead of building America, the influx of illegal aliens from south of the border more likely will end up destroying it.

The demographics in Texas are much the same as Arizona and California. Its Hispanic population increased from 12% in 1940 to 25.5% by 1990. So it may well be that some of the ancestors of that 12% were here centuries ago but certainly not the ancestors of all of them. Some of those ancestors must have been in Mexico or points south at one time in the past, so any claim that Hispanics built even the border states is totally off base and greatly exaggerated.

I Travel for JOOLS added...

I read that Mexico is building a fence across their southern border. I almost laughed out loud. At the same time, they chastise the U.S. for our feeble attempt at a fence. Now today I read several mayors from Mexican states are upset that we are deporting Mexican national criminals because those same criminals are committing heinous crimes in Mexico.

Maybe the fat cat richest man in the world who is Mexican could do something for his own country. Or maybe Mexico could exploit its own rich resources to better the living conditions for its own people. And maybe the Mexican government could spend a little money to educate its own citizens so they could get decent jobs and live a happy life in their own homeland.

But, no, Mexico doesn't do any of those things so their people flee here and expect the U.S. taxpayer to pick up the tab for their medical care, their education, their foodstamps, and their public housing. That illegal maid who was crying on national tv saying Whitman abused her even though she was paid a handsome wage of $23 an hour!!" Is it any wonder that unhypenated Americans are upset...


Dee wrote
The estimated Hispanic Citizen population of the United States as of July 1, 2009, was 48.4M; today, it is closer to 50M, making people of Hispanic origin the nation's largest ethnic or race minority. Hispanics constitute 16 percent of the nation's total population. In addition, there are approximately 4 million residents of Puerto Rico, a Caribbean U.S. territory. The US has 97 men for every 100women. However, there are 107 Hispanic men for every 100 Hispanic women.

Many celebrations are being held across the country in honor of Hispanic Heritage Month. This year, the theme of these very American celebrations is to celebrate Hispanic Heritage, Diversity, Integrity and Military Honor.


I don't know what the significance of the male to female ratio is unless it means that some Hispanic men, in the end, will be looking for Anglo, Black or Asiatic mates. I highlighted the words diversity and integrity because the influx of Hispanics in the numbers cited is reducing diversity in the U.S. It is becoming more Hispanic and that does not equate to more diversity. Hispanics and their progeny account for as many immigrants as those from the next ten countries combined.

Integrity means fidelity to moral principles like the rule of law. Therefore, there is little reason for illegal aliens to celebrate integrity since most of them are of Hispanic origins and who have ignored the rule of law. I question their personal integrity and that of their fellow travelers and supporters.

Dee said...
I doubt you UNDERSTAND the term reconquista. How dare you name call. It is repugnant and stupid.


Well, actually I do understand that term. It is an accurate description of illegal aliens and those who support them. Dee may consider the term reconquista "repugnant and stupid"because it is too close to the truth or perhaps she is calling me personally repugnant and stupid. I will make note of those words so I can remind her next time when she says she never calls people names. When she wrote that using the term "Reconquista" is stupid and repugnant name calling, it is rather obvious that she meant that admonition in a very personal way, a form of indirect name calling in and of itself.

Reconquista means "reconquest". Perhaps the word "Reconquistadoros" is more appropriate for those whose purpose is to aid and abet the reconquest of the Southwest by defending and supporting the causes of illegal aliens and standing in the way of the most effective deterrents.

Dee wrote,
As my bio states, my family has roots IN Texas prior to it becoming a state. We've been Tejanos and we became American. Our family worked hard to help Nation Build this country, serving in the military, defending this great nation of ours in War and in Peace. It is too bad people like you see Color First and DO NOT respect minorities as True Americans.


Ah, Dee, that is where you are wrong and have always been wrong. Whatever I write or have written has nothing to do with a lack of respect for minorities. I judge each individual according to his or her individual merits. That judgment has often hinged on his or her support of national boundaries, sovereignty, and the rule of law. Then there are fellow travelers who aid and abet the entry and presence of illegal aliens in the U.S. In that regard, I make no distinction based on color or minority status. If Dee thinks otherwise that is unfortunately her biases coming through loud and clear. All I ask is that Dee read my posts very carefully and draw no conclusions except those which are explicitly stated. If I have made a typo or other mistake, I am quite willing to admit them. If Dee disagrees with me, that's okay but she shouldn't expect me to agree with her position regarding illegal aliens. I regard that as a sign of disloyalty. Dee has failed time and again to properly assess the long term adverse impact on the U.S. of illegal aliens and those who support them. We need to authorize the use of the most effective measures to apprehend and repatriate illegal aliens and create the necessary deterrents to future border violations.
If she is a loyal American as she claims, why is that so hard for her to endorse?

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

La Reconquista

The term Reconquista (in English, "reconquest") was popularized by Mexican writers Carlos Fuentes and Elena Poniatowska to describe the demographic and cultural presence and movement of Mexicans, especially illegal aliens, into the Southwestern United States.

Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico, "The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."

Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Governor Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton, said
"California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave."


Let's call it Mexifornia!

Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General, said "We are practicing 'La
Reconquista' in California."

It's clear that those who actively encourage and defend the illegal aliens Mexican invasion of the Southwest are in fact, supporting, encouraging and defending La Reconqista Ths same can be said about those who favor amnesty as the principal element of comprehensive immigration reform.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

No New Amnesty!

History demonstrates that another amnesty will encourage more desperate people to come here illegally. It happened after the 1986 amnesty. In that instance, 3 million people were legalized on the premise that there would be robust immigration enforcement to stop more people from coming, according to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy. The U.S. administration failed to provide this promised enforcement and millions more came here illegally; and still coming.

Rector stated" Current immigration practices, both legal and illegal, operate like a system of trans-national welfare outreach bringing millions of fiscally dependent individuals into the U.S. This policy needs to be changed. U.S. immigration policy should encourage high-skill immigration and strictly limit low-skill immigration. In general, government policy should limit immigration to those who will be net fiscal contributors, avoiding those who will increase poverty and impose new costs on overburdened U.S. taxpayers."

Means-tested programs are typically termed welfare programs. Unlike direct benefits, means-tested programs are available only to households below specific income thresholds. Means-tested welfare programs provide cash, food, housing, medical care, and social services to poor and low-income persons. For example, children in illegal immigrant households are eligible for and do receive public education. We all know by now nobody asks for immigration status at the emergency room, whereas Americans must supply a driver’s license and SS #. So then debt collection companies can hunt YOU unmercifully for payment, while illegal aliens walk out never to be seen again.


The Us Border Patrol estimates that an average of 10,000 illegal aliens cross the border every day - over 3 million per year. A third will be caught and many of them immediately will turn around and try again. About half of those remaining will become permanent (ILLEGAL) U.S. residents.

Illegal aliens have cost billions of taxpayer-funded dollars for medical services. Dozens of hospitals in Texas, New Mexico Arizona, and California, have been forced to close or face insolvency since federally-mandated programs requiring free emergency room services to illegal aliens. Taxpayers pay half-a-billion dollars per year incarcerating illegal alien criminals.

In just the state of California in relating to birthright citizenship FAIR estimates "there are currently between 287,000 and 363,000 children born to illegal aliens each year. This figure is based on the crude birth rate of the total foreign-born population (33 births per 1000) and the size of the illegal alien population (between 8.7 and 11 million). In 1994, California paid for 74,987 deliveries to illegal alien mothers, at a total cost of $215.2 million (an average of $2,842 per delivery). Illegal alien mothers accounted for 36 percent of all Medi-Cal funded births in California that year."

EVERY INCUMBENT, CAREER POLITICIAN WHO HAS A BAD IMMIGRATION RECORD, BEGINNING WITH SEN. HARRY REID AND HIS CZARS MUST BE REMOVED FROM THEIR SEAT IN WASHINGTON. THE ASYLUM IN WASHINGTON NEEDS A CHANGE OF GUARDS? JOIN NUMBERSUSA AND AID IN FIGHTING AGAINST AMNESTY OR BENEFITS FROM THIS INVASION. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! Tell your Representative in Washington at 202-224-3121 and State level officials. Remember illegal aliens could have voted in the midterm elections? The Obama administration has shown its true colors, that illegal immigration is a great way to collect votes in the future by pacifying large minority groups.

--Brittanicus

Monday, August 16, 2010

Dee Perez-Scott -- Her Continuing Diatribe



Dee Perez-Scott is continuing her misguided diatribe against the Right with falsehoods and hyperbole. She says that they view their Latino opponents as,"ethno-centric Latinos foaming with rage and frenzy demanding open borders." That may not apply to all of the demonstrators in the streets of Phoenix but it certainly applies to Dee Perez-Scott herself. She has been in a rage and frenzy for some time, becoming even more vitriolic and radical since SB1070 was passed by the legislature in Arizona. She has become unhinged and no longer is interested in compromise solutions to the illegal alien problem. She may not be overtly demanding open borders but her oppostion to internal enforcement is tantamount to the same thing. If border jumpers believe they will be home free if they can escape the immediate environs of the border, they will keep coming -- a form of de facto open borders. That is Dee's agenda.

She then accuses the Right of pursuing a policy of ethnic cleansing. This is an outrageous lie designed to further foment the hate, rage and frenzy in her followers.

She accuses the Right of lying to
push its agenda
at the same time as she blatantly lies to push her own agenda. She writes about ethnic cleansing knowing full well only extreme elements on both the Left and the Right ever mention or advocate anything close to that. She also knows that the probability of sending all White people back to Europe and other citizens back to their homelands is zero and none. It doesn't matter what extreme elements say or write or do, it will never happen. And what is worse, she knows that!

She accuses the Right of having an ANTI-Latino agenda:
. Changing the 14th amendment (birthright citizenship)

Fact: Among all the developed countries, only the U.S. and Canada still allow Jus Soli or birthright citizenship. The 14th Amendment needs to be changed not as part of an anti-Latino agenda but because it continues to be abused by the large numbers of illegal aliens and tourists to have their instant citizen babies on U.S. soil. The Constitution has been amended 27 times so changes of this sort are not unusual. Some Constitutional scholars agree that it may not even be necessary to change the Amendment itself but to just bring it up to date with current social conditions by changing the implementing law. "It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement [i.e. instant citizenship] to illegal entry.”

. Official English (no more Spanish in govt or voting documents)

Fact: She mentions only the Spanish language here to add fuel to her anti-Latino accusation. Ballots and other government proceedings, documents, and publications are conducted or printed in several languages. More than 100 different languages are spoken in the U.S. and Executive Order 13166 requires that documents and services be made available in all of them, not just in Spanish as Dee insinuates in her diatribe about an anti-Latino agenda. This practice is unheard of in other countries. Those with any sense on this issue are merely saying, "Let's stop all of the unnecessary spending on multi-lingual materials and require true fluency in English for citizenship." That would eliminate the need for multi-lingual ballots and most of the other services and publications. Public Interpreters could be provided for those who cannot afford one or who has no family member who can perform this function. For all others interpreters and translations would be a billable service.

. Reduce Immigration quotas from non-white countries

Fact: Dee again indulges in gross lies about immigration quotas. At one time, the quotas were designed to reflect the existing racial, ethnic, or country of origin mix in the general population. It is not clear what the current policy is. Whatever it is,it is leading to an acceleration of the Latino proportion of the population. Counting legal immigrants, illegal aliens and their progeny, Mexico by itself produces as many immigrants as the next ten countries combined. Does that seem fair to all the others who are denied admission.

Some argue that our country is fully settled and developed and therefore we have no need for more immigrants of any kind. Others believe the overall quota should be reduced to no more than 200,000 per year in all categories but focused on those who have the greatest potential for helping us to maintain our competitiveness in the global marketplace. The U.S. produces far to few engineers, physical scientists, and mathematicians than the other countries with whom we must compete. Any quotas for new immigrants should be based on that need.

If a reduction in overall legal immigration quotas falls hardest on Latinos, that is because they are by far the greatest number of involved. Legal immigrant quotas for all countries should be reduced by the best estimate that can be made of the number of illegals that arrive from those countries every year. If the reduced overall quota would admit 100,000 new immigrants from the south but the annual estimate of illegal entries is 500,000, legal immigration from Latin America should be suspended. The same rationale would be applied to all quotas and applicants, regardless of race, color, ethnicity or national origin.


. Mass Deportation of the 12M here plus their children

Fact: There is no mainstream proposal for the mass deportation of illegal aliens even though that is logistically feasible and Dee knows that. This is just another example of Dee's lies and divisive hyperbole.

If there were to be a process for repatriating large numbers but not all illegals it would have to be a slow, systematic process to sort out those who are surplus to our economy and who have displaced American workers. Everyone knows some amount of foreign labor is necessary to support the American economy, especially agricultural labor. At one time in the past, Dee agreed with a proposal that would require employers to re-advertise all of the jobs currently held by illegal aliens, [identifiable through E-Verification], offering a living wage and a hiring preference for citizens. Foreign workers who survive this test would then be offered a green card if they can also pass a background check and a medical exam. This process is a far cry from the mass deportation hysteria Dee promotes at every opportunity in her hate-filled tirades.

Citizen children of illegal aliens cannot be deported. However, what responsible parent under a removal order would abandon their minor children? The most humane policy is for minor children, regardless of citizenship, to accompany their parents under a removal order. These children undoubtedly already speak the mother tongue of their homelands because that was how the parents talk to them. As citizens, when these children reach their majority, they are free to return to the U.S. legally and even sponsor their parents. Abandoning minor children should be considered child abuse.


An Ethnocentric Mexican-American, Dee is unable to view these issues objectively. She shows no appreciation for the fact that reducing legal immigration and the number of illegal aliens in the U.S. is in her, and the Hispanics' enlightened best interests. The more there are of us, the less there will be for each of us including the Hispanics, especially water, arable land, food, timber, and minerals.