Paychecks Versus Food Stamps

"The lessons of history . . . show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual an moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit". President Franklin Roosevelt, 1935

I tried to think up a catchy title for this post, but decided to stick with the one that came with the video from youtube. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrinch and current Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi have been involved the last couple of days in what one pundit calls a "food fight". Three days ago, Newt pointed out that the Republican party is the party of paychecks and the Democrat Party is the party of food stamps. Which is fundamentally correct; food stamps were a creation of the Democrats and every increase in them has been implemented by the Democrats. Democrats revile business and commerce as being evil and victimizing society. Republicans respect the fact that the top 10% of earners in America, individual and corporate, provide 75% of tax revenue going into the government coffers; to support all those who live on "entitlements". I need to digress; I'm offended by those Democrats, like Juan Williams a couple of nights ago, who always trot out the suggestion that old people give up Social Security and Medicare when the issue of paring down entitlements comes up. Social Security benefits and Medicare benefits are just that; benefits of paying into the system over the years thru payroll tax deduction or self-employment taxes. Entitlements are what is given to non-producers by taking money (taxes) away from the producers in society.

Right now, corporations are in a state of uncertainty because Congress took off to go campaign instead of dealing with the question of extending the Bush tax cuts. The Democrats want to only extend them to people earning less than $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples; and allow tax rates over those amounts to revert to rates up to 55%. Unfortunately, that will throw many small businesses into a much higher tax bracket than they now have, forcing many of them out of business; and it will prevent larger businesses from being able to afford to expand and hire more people. Here are some statistics on small businesses, from the Small Business Administration website: they are 99.7 of ALL employers, they employ 50% of all private sector workers, they pay 44% of the total U.S. private sector wages, they generate 65% of new jobs (in 2008 the Huffington Post put that at 98%, don't know where they got their figure), account for more than 50% of private sector Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and made up 97.5% of all exporters and produced 31% of export value in Fiscal Year 2008. Could it be that pro-business Republicans are onto something? Why would the Democrats want to penalize small businesses by throwing them into a higher tax bracket come January 2011, and forcing a lot of them to close their doors; instead of extending the Bush tax cuts that will allow them to grow and create more jobs resulting in more paychecks. So, basically, yes the Republican Party IS the party of paychecks; and the Democrat Party IS the party of food stamps.

Back when Pelosi was pushing the Stimulus Bill, the Economic Recovery Plan, she claimed it would be the most effect move in stimulating the economy (CNN Money 1/15/09); she called it "the biggest bang for the buck". Now in answer to Newt's paychecks versus food stamps observation, she is saying the same thing about food stamps; they are a sure-fire way to stimulate the economy (CNN 10/6/10) and said "It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance. The biggest bang for the buck".  Her reasoning is that for every $1.00 spent in food stamps, $1.79 goes into producing the food and getting it to the consumer. Hmmmm. $1.79 invested to bring in $1.00 spent. Sounds like a deficit to me. We are at an all time record in food stamps recipients. The number of Americans on food stamps reached 41.8 million in July; the White House estimates it will soon reach 43 million. One in seven people in America. Look around yourself; one out of every seven people you see is probably getting food stamps. This year the administration spent $60 billion in food stamp entitlements. How did we get to this point?

In this morning's Townhall, Pat Buchanan tells us how. When President Lyndon Johnson signed the Food Stamp Act into law in 1964, nobody was starving in America; it was just a Democrat Party hand-out. It was originally funded with $75,000,000 ($75 million) going to 350,000 people in only 40 counties and 3 cities. Then it became a monster that there is no stopping. By the time President Richard Nixon took office in 1969, 3,000,000 (3 million) people were getting food stamps, at a cost to the tax-payers of $270,000,000 ($270 million) per year. Then CBS, that paragon of mainstream media, ran a feature showing what it claimed was a starving infant in "rich" America; in reality it was a premature baby that wasn't strong enough to survive. All the liberals got up in arms, and by the time Nixon left office in 1974, there were 16,000,000 (16 million) people on the food stamp dole, costing tax-payers $4 billion (don't know how many zero's) annually. Last year, FY 2009, the cost to us tax-payers had increased in 35 years by 1,400%, to a staggering $56 billion. Of, by, and thru, the Democrat Party. That's how we got to this point.

President Roosevelt feared that dependence on "relief" would lead to spiritual and moral disintegration which would be destructive to the fiber of America. In the 46 years since the Democrats instituted their "Great Society", society has fallen apart. The "red blood cell" of American culture, the nuclear family is an endangered species. Did y'all know that 40% of all children in America are now born to single mothers. Breaking it down further into ethnic groups, it's a rate of 51% for hispanics and 71% for blacks. And the rest of us are supporting those children of all those men who just walk away. It's become easier for the mothers to turn to Uncle Sugar, than to put the burden where it rightfully belongs; on the shoulders of the men who fathered those children. Since we live what we know, those children that grow up under a "nanny state" for the most part, are highly likely to continue to nurse on the government teat. The Democrats grand idea called the "Great Society" has created a segment of society where several generations base their livelihood on being totally taken care of, all their needs met from cradle to grave, by those of us who have spent our lives working and paying taxes; or by those that create businesses, small or large, that provide jobs for others, paying more than their share in corporate taxes. So, yes, it does boil down to a very simple choice. The integrity and self-respect of earning your own paycheck, or the disdain and cynicism of continuing to expect others to pick up your tab. The Republican Party of paychecks, or the Democrat Party of food stamps. America, the choice is yours.

The $162,000,000 Question

This video shows Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), the 3rd ranking Democrat in the Senate, about a year ago addressing the Senate, and voicing his opinion about the American people. A point of view that seems to be common thru-out the Democrat members of Congress. The snippet is 16 seconds long, but if you can't play the video, here is what Senator Schumer said about you, the American people:
"And let me say this, to all of the chattering class that so much focuses on those little, tiny, yes "porky" amendments - the American people really don't care". Pork? What pork, Chuck? Pelosi promised "no pork in the stimulus package". And when Obama signed it into law he said "It has no earmarks". (city data)

The Spendulus, pardon me, Stimulus Bill ended up costing us tax payers around $820 billion, rather than the $787 billion it was originally estimated at. But then, when you're gouging other people, in this case US, whats a few billion dollars when you're talking close to a trillion dollars anyway. After all, it's not your money you're spending, so why worry about such a niggling little, tiny amount. Right, Chuck? So you don't think the American people cared when you and the Democrats (I can say that because they passed it without a single Republican vote, since they have a majority and can pass just about anything they want to without a single vote from the "party of no") spent $300,000 for a GPS equipped helicopter to hunt for radioactive rabbit droppings in Washington State, or gave $30,000,000, (yes 30 million dollars) for spring training baseball complexes for the Arizona Diamondbacks and Colorado Rockies. What about those of us who aren't sports fans, don't we get a say? And what about the wealthy team owners building their own training complexes? Ever think about that, Chuck? And when you gave Microsoft $11,000,000 ($11 million) to build a bridge between 2 of it's building in Redmond WA, that are separated by a highway, did you think Bill Gates might not have enough money to pay for it himself; or maybe it was the governments fault for having a highway between his 2 building sites? Which came first, the highway or the buildings?

I'm sure those 10 drivers a day on that bridge in Iowa County WI sure appreciated that $430,000 of our money you sent them to have the bridge repaired. And those 20 passengers a day that fly in and out of John Murtha Airport in Johnstown PA really needed that $800,000 "backup" runway. You never know when 2 of the 4 flights a day might try to land at the same time; and gosh, nobody would want them to take turns. I always thought peoples sex lives were their own business, but maybe there was an extremely good reason that the administration had to spen $219,000 to study the sex lives of freshmen (18 year old) women at Syracuse University. Why did you choose Syracuse University as opposed to, say, University of California at Berkeley? That would probably have been more interesting for the dirty old men who really needed to know. And did the Forest Service really need $2,300,000 ($2.3 million) to raise bugs? It looks like all they would need to do is go into the forest and gather some. And I know every American was happy to help those turtles get to the other side of the road in Lake Jackson FL, they really needed that $3,400,000  ($3.4 million) 13-foot tunnel under U.S. 27. And somebody might have surely drowned in that DRY lakebed at Guymon OK if you hadn't put up that $1,150,000 ($1.15 million) guardrail. No, the American people really didn't care about that one.

Here's a few more pork-barrel projects we sure don't care about: $9,380,000 ($9.38 million) to renovate a 100 year old train depot in Lancaster County PA that hasn't been used for 30 years, $2,500,000 ($2.5 million) in stimulus checks sent to the deceased (I'm sure those dead Americans really needed the funds), $6,000,000 ($6 million) for a snow-making machine in Duluth-freezin-MN, $173,834 to weatherize 8 pickup trucks in Madison County IL (how much does antifreeze cost up there, we could send them some from TX, I'd paid the shipping), $20,000 to freeze fish sperm in South Dakota (I'll donate a freezer), $1,500,000 ($1.5 million) for a fence on a bridge in Akron OH to keep people from jumping off it (after they found out about the spending we're not supposed to care about probably), $1,000,000 ($1 million) to study "green" housing for 300 people in Chicago, $356,000 for Indiana University to study whether children notice when somebody has a foreign accent, $148,438 for Washington State University to study the use of marijuana instead of morphine (not California, Chuck?), $462,000 to buy 22 concrete toilets for a National Forest in MO, $3,100,000 ($3.1 million) to turn a barge into a museum to float the Erie Canal in New York, $1,300,000 ($1.3 million) for government art in Maine which includes $30,000 for basketweavers (send them to the local mental hospital, they've got plenty of basketweavers) $20,000 for storytelling and $12,500 for a music festival, and $1,000,000 ($1 million) to replace 100 old bike lockers and build a 250-bike garage in Portland OR.

We've been assured that all the transactions, and how the administration spends every dollar of the money stolen from us tax payers thru the Stimulus Bill, would be "transparently" posted on the Recovery website.
Except that the administration isn't enforcing it's own reporting requirements. There are 352 recipients of stimulus funds that have failed to report in to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) according to the Washington Examiner yesterday. THERE IS $162,000,000 ($162 MILLION) OF OUR MONEY MISSING, AND UNACCOUNTED FOR!  And Chuck Schumer says the American people don't care!
The administration knows who's responsible for the missing money, but they're not saying. However, USA Today newspaper did their own analysis and reports that $103,000,000 ($103 million) went to 100 recipients under the Dept of Agriculture; and that's where part of the missing money went. What the heck are they doing with it that they can't account for it, growing marijuana? The Associated Press characterized the White House stimulus report from a few days ago as saying "remarkably little of the money has gone out fraudulently". I guess when you compare $162,000,000 to almost a trillion dollars, that could be seen as being "remarkably little". I'm one of the "American people", and I sure as heck care. I care that so much of our stolen money, stolen thru Obama's Spendulus Bill, was squandered in such a cavalier manner. And I really, really care that any of it, even such a little, tiny amount as $162,000,000 has gone missing. Show me the money. I'll be watching. And I can see November from my house.

By The Company We Keep

"So maye much be spyed also, by the company and pastyme that a body useth.  For a man is for the moost parte condicioned even lyke unto them that he kepeth company wythe all."
1541 M. Coverdale tr. H. Bullinger's Christian State of Matrimony

This is the earliest version of the adage  "We are known by the company we keep" that I could find. I don't know if it's the original, but 1541 is pretty far back. Actually this version says a lot more than the condensed version it's been whittled down to. We can see much about a body by their associations and actions; and it's true that we are conditioned to be like all those we "keep company with". 

When it came to light that Obama's pastor in Chicago was America-hating Reverend Jeremiah "God &@#^ America" Wright, Obama said that although he sat in a pew in Wright's church for 20 years, was married by Wright, and his daughters were baptized by Wright, he never heard any of the hate-filled vitriolic rhetoric that was customarily spewed by Wright. When it came to light that Obama associated closely with William Ayers, the "unrepentent terrorist" (Ayers says he wished he'd done more bombings and described himself as "guilty as hell, free as a bird") who helped found the Weather Underground and was wanted by the F.B.I. for his involvement in several bombings in the United States, and went into hiding for 20 years, Obama said he was just somebody who lived in the same neighborhood in Chicago. In truth, Obama and Ayers served on the board of the Woods Fund together in Chicago and may have known each other prior to that during their college days in New York. Obama and Ayers were guests in each others homes, yet Obama described him as an acquaintance and a "respected scholar". Ayers hosted a fundraiser for Obama in his home when Obama first went into politics and ran for the Illinois State Senate.

When Obama was asked about his relationship with Palestinian radical Rashid Khalidi, Obama said during a campaign stop in Florida (American Thinker 5/23/08) that he knew Khalidi because he was a teacher at the University of Chicago and their kids went to the same school. He said to "pluck out one person he knew that he'd had a conversation with was a problematic stand to take". Another professor who knew Obama for a dozen years said Obama and Khalidi were friends, they lived in faculty residences, they dined out together a number of times, and the Obama's babysat for the Khalidi's. Khalidi, a former PLO operative, started the Arab American Action Network (AAAN). In 2001, Obama gave AAAN $40,000 thru the Woods Fund. In 2003, the Woods Fund gave AAAN another $35,000. In 2003 Khalidi stepped aside as director of AAAN and Obama was an honored guest at his farewell dinner, caught on video giving a toast and praising Khalidi. Yet Obama described him as an acquaintance and a "respected scholar". Khalidi hosted a fundraiser for Obama when he made a failed bid in 2000 for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.

When Rashid Khalidi passed on the directorship of AAAN in 2003, the man who took over was Hatem Abudayyeh, who had been with the group since 1999. A couple of weeks ago, the F.B.I. raided the homes of Abudayyeh in Minneapolis and Chicago, looking for funding links between him and Hamas and FARC, the military wing of the Columbian Communist Party (Big Government 9/30/10). Here's some background on Abudayyeh from Debbie Schlussel's blog: He's Palestinian; his parents started the first muslim-dominated community center in Chicago (kind of like the planned Ground Zero community center) and are very supportive of Islamic terrorist groups. Abudayyeh has protested many times against Israel, and filmed a documentary in the West Bank denouncing America. And the anti-Israel pro-muslim activity is a family affair. His mother-in-law uses a name that translates to "mother of the jihad fighter" because one of her sons "martyred" himself while in prison for terrorist acts against Israel and the other son is a leader in the Palestinian youth terrorist movement. Debbie Schlussel, working with the F.B.I., assisted in an investigation that proved that Abudayyeh and AAAN were using tax-payer funds to bring muslim women to America so they could have babies (paid for by us) and get birthright citizenship. She called his agency, pretended to be a pregnant illegal alien muslim woman, and was assured they could arrange free medical care and a phony Social Security card. And the activity isn't restricted just to pregnant muslim women; they help all sorts of muslims infiltrate the U.S. illegally. Any terrorists, I wonder?

When asked about his association with Abudayyeh, and he's bound to be, I wonder if Obama will say he's just an acquaintance. To what extent they are involved with each other, I don't know; at the moment it's just speculation. But Abudayyeh has been involved with AAAN since 1999, Obama was a director of the Woods Fund from 1994 thru 2001, during which time Obama was an "associate" of Rashid Khalidi and thru the Woods Fund, gave AAAN $75,000. Obama was an honored guest at the banquet in 2003 where Khalidi passed the baton of AAAN leadership over to Abudayyeh. So, it's safe to say they've at least met. Now the F.B.I. is looking for a funding link between Abudayyeh and AAAN, and Hamas, and FARC. During the time Abudayyeh has been with AAAN, it has received almost a half million in our tax payers dollars ($457,000), part of it while Abudayyeh was under investigation by a federal grand jury. Abudayyeh's explanation is that it was intended for an after-school program for high-risk students to study English as a second language. Yeah, right. It should be interesting what the F.B.I. raid discovers, if we're ever allowed to know; if it's not covered up. Abudayyeh still has links to our government; he was at a briefing at the White House for Arab leaders just this past April. Links to the White House, links to Hamas, links to FARC. Hmmmmm.

International Injustice

I'm sitting here trying to think of a start to this post. I compose as I type (which is why some of my posts might not seem completely cohesive). Through the past 19 months I have gone from stunned disbelief at what the current regime was attempting and getting away with, to anxiety when the destructive (toward my beloved America) actions continued, to feeling like I was up to my neck in scalding water and couldn't get out, finally to resignation that as I"m nearing retirement age I'm having to basically start all over, and now to sometimes feeling like I'm mired in apathy. Is it never going to end? Can we survive 2 more years? Can we win enough seats in Congress next month to stem some of the damage that this regime is hell bent on wreaking on America and it's citizens?

The word that has come to mind so much the last year and a half is "Why?". The subject today, students, is The United States of America versus The State of Arizona. Why on earth is the federal government suing one of  it's states? I mean, we've heard before of individuals and groups suing the government. But for our county's leaders to turn against one of it's states is just beyond comprehension. Yet, not only are they doing it; they are allowing other countries to join in. Kind of like, pile on Arizona. I knew, and I've mentioned before, that Mexico was a co-complainant. Now today I read on Politico that there are actually 10 other countries besides Mexico that the federal government has allowed to join with it in suing the State of Arizona. Total of 11; count 'em - Mexico, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Peru, and Chile'.  Illegals from all those countries have to pass thru Mexico to get to the U.S., and now Mexico is building a wall along it's southern border; yet the U.S. is castigated for wanting to enforce it's border with Mexico.

The Obama administration has allowed 11 foreign countries to join it in suing the State of Arizona. WILL IT NEVER END?. My God, what is he doing to our country? This is like an international gang-rape. With what is supposed to pass as our government standing by and watching. How many other countries do they have standing in the wings that they are going to invite to pile on? Do you think any other country in the world would allow, much less encourage like this, the U.S. to come into it's courts and sue one of its provinces or whatever they call their areas? Hell no, they wouldn't. This should not be happening, and it wouldn't with any other leader in our top office. Or any other Attorney General heading up out Dept of Justice.

I'm with Jan Brewer, Arizona's brave governor. She said "As do many citizens, I find it incredibly offensive that these foreign governments are using our court system to meddle in a domestic legal dispute and to oppose the rule of law. What's even more offensive is that this effort has been supported by the U.S. Department of Justice. American Sovereignty begins in the U.S. Constitution and at the border".  Yes, it is incredibly offensive. And, yes, AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY BEGINS IN OUR CONSTITUTION AND AT OUR BORDER. It is not given to us by the U.N. and their kangaroo international court. No matter what Obama and Holder want or think. (By the way, I said the international court was in Brussels Belgium because I read that somewhere, this article says The Hague Netherlands and that's correct) Governor Brewer has petitioned the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to disallow these foreign governments from taking part in our legal procedings; the hearing is on November 1. So far 11 states (including Texas) and more than 80 members of Congress have filed Amicus Briefs (friend of the court) supporting Governor Brewer and the State of Arizona. If I could file one I would. But foreign countries have no business in our legal system!

There is concern among conservative legal scholars about giving foreign legal systems a voice in American jurisprudence; it looks like Obama and Holder are headed that way. Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy has been the leading proponent of using foreign laws and international laws to interpret the U.S. Constitution. Both of Obama's Supreme Court appointees, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, have said during Senate Confirmation hearings that the U.S. courts should look to and follow international laws when making judicial decisions. There is no doubt in my mind; that is the direction Obama and Holder are trying to push us in. It can only be that; with allowing foreign countries to join our Dept. of Justice in this suit against the State of Arizona, They are trying to make a "mini" international court within the borders of America. What a disgrace and a travesty of our justice system, that it has gotten this far.

It's kind of like; if Hussein can't go to the mountain, he'll bring the mountain to him. We know he intends to eventually, and knowing him sooner than later, start having Americans tried in the International Court. Why else would he amend Executive Order 12425, giving Interpol authority to arrest any American citizen for anything it deems a "crime" and transport them out of the country for appearance before the U.N. International Court? Another "by the way"; I found out EO 12425 originated with Reagan in 1983, but had stringent restrictions in place governing the actions of Interpol within the U.S. Obama amended it to remove all restrictions, and to seal all Interpol records. Just like he did with all his own records. Which means that no person in the U.S. is allowed to see any records of Interpols actions within the U.S. Just like with his own records. And if any American ends up in front of the International Court, we need to all scream our heads off. America is NOT signed up to join the International Court. Clinton tried; he signed the Treaty in January 2001, just before leaving office. BUT, Congress never ratified it. After George was sworn in, he pulled the U. S. out of the International Court Treaty. Not that Obama and Holder will ever let anything like Constitutional legalities stop them.

Have a Few Billion Gumballs

This video is a recently updated version of the one that was done in 1995 by Roy Beck of NumbersUSA, to explain to his son's 7th grade class why mass immigration to the United States will do nothing to alleviate world poverty. It has current figures drawn from the research done by the World Bank. If you don't have audio, you can watch it anyway; it has the text showing at the bottom of the screen. The video is 6 minutes long, but moves along at a good clip so it seems shorter. Here are some of the figures from the World Bank research: The United States has taken in, yearly since 1990, 1 million legal immigrants. The poorest of the poor in the world subsist on less than $2 per day; numbering 3 billion people. Mexico is poor, but not that poor; add in the world population that is at or below the poverty level of Mexico and you have 5.6 billion people (3 billion of the poorest and 2.6 billion at Mexico's level). Our 1 million legal immigrants per year will never even make a dent in that 5.6 billion, which increases by 80 million every year due to the birth rate out-pacing the death rate. And increasing the number of legal immigrants per year into the U.S., even 5 fold, will not alleviate the rampant poverty in those underdeveloped countries. Why? Because the poorest of the poor will never be in a position to immigrate here. Most of our immigrants are from Mexico, because of it's proximity; and they don't always bother to come here legally. Most of the 20 million Mexicans who are here illegally are under-educated and under-skilled and contribute very little to our economy. Of the immigrants who do come here legally, from India, Latin American countries, and the nations of Africa, it is the best and the brightest, the highest educated and the most skillful of their populations. That's their hope of bettering their own countries; and those people are deserting them. We are taking away from those countries the very people who are capable of elevating the quality of life in their home countries; which is something we don't do by increasing our immigration quotas. That only makes matters worse for them.

Since I first became aware of the flux of illegal immigrants coming to the United States of America from Mexico, I have always wondered why they didn't stay there and fight to make their own country better. Just think where Mexico could be today if they had done that; stopped the drug cartels from taking over and killing 28,000 of their countrymen, rid the government of most of the corrupt politicians running Mexico, and helped stabilize Mexico's economy. I said to somebody recently that we need to find a way to help Mexico keep it's people there, with their own people and their own families and loved ones; and not have them leave all they know to come up here and be a burden on us. The reaction: "noooo, we can't do that; Mexico is a sovereign country". Well, what the heck is America, if not a sovereign country, the most generous in the world, which deserves to not have it's law broken by the very act of setting foot over our borders without authorization?  I agree with Roy Beck of NumbersUSA; taking in more people is not the way to go. It will deplete our natural resources, our medical resources, our welfare system, and render us unable to help ourselves, much less any other country in need. We need to help the less fortunate countries THERE, where they stand; and enable their people to prosper in their home countries.

I also get email newsletters from FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform). Did y'all know that Senator Menendez (D-NJ) introduced an amnesty bill late last Wednesday night, just before Congress left town; and plans to try to push it thru a lame duck session when Congress resumes after the November election?  Here's part of what's in the 874 page bill, S.3932: grant amnesty to illegals aliens currently living in the U.S. (estimated at 13 million, could be much more once they start coming out of the woodwork), and permit them to bring spouses, same-sex partners, children and any other relatives from any country. It provides amnesty to illegals who have violated laws or have been previously deported for any reason.  I'm sure Mexico, which now seems to have a say in what America does since Calderon gets to address our Congress and is a co-complainant against the state of Arizona, will love that part since Mexico last week told the U.S. to "make other arrangements" for the violent criminal illegal aliens and don't send them back to Mexico. The amnesty bill will include the DREAM Act, that which was voted down in Congress last week; that would give legality to illegal students or military members up to age 35. It includes, also, AgJOBS which would legalize illegal aliens who HAVE (not who are) worked in the farming industry, and their families. Now, I'm not for splitting up families. When they leave, they can just take their families with them. The bill will pre-empt all state and local laws regarding immigrations, leaving them powerless to enforce any federal laws the Obama administration chooses not to enforce. It mandates FREE legal services to illegal alien detainees, to represent them in deportation or citizenship matters. U. S. citizens don't even get free legal representation, unless you've committed a crime and get a public defender. It gives illegal aliens the right to immediate free medical care; so much for the claim that obamacare won't cover illegal immigrants. And it would set up yet another governmental agency to determing the number of "guest" workers to admit each year; i.e. the number of American workers to displace each year.

We all know that the Obama administration picks and chooses which immigration laws it wants to enforce; by way of trying to pad the voter base of the Democrat Party with hispanics. One example everybody is aware of is that the Obama administration Dept. of Justice is suing the state of Arizona (still have trouble with our federal government siding with a segment of foreign nationals that are 100% criminals, breaking our immigration law by setting even 1 foot over our borders without authorization) for passing and attempting to enforce a state law that is verbatim of a federal law already on the statutes that the Obama administration chooses not to enforce. Also there is the issue of "sanctuary cities" (which people know about unless they have had their heads buried in the sand), which give sanctuary to illegal immigrants, in violation of federal immigration laws, which action the Obama administration chooses to ignore. Now we have the state of California getting into the act, and I wonder if the Obama administration will take a stand on this: after the U.S. Congress failed to pass the DREAM Act granting legality to illegal students and service members, California's State Assembly and Senate decided to pass their own DREAM Act. Hooray for the Governator. Schwarzenegger, the RINO, vetoed it; saying "given the precarious fiscal situation that the state faces, it would not be practical to adopt a new policy that could limit the financial aid available to students that are in California legally, in order to provide that benefit to those stuents who are not".  That was one of my arguments in the post I wrote recently about the DREAM Act; we have so many deserving young Americans who are falling thru the cracks, and are worthy of ALL of our resources to give them the possiblity of a college education; trying to provide that for millions of people who don't even have the right to be in America will take away what we can do for our own young Americans.

And if you don't think that will happen, that trying to financially support millions of illegal immigrants won't hamper what we can do for, what we owe to, our own next generation of Americans, look at what was in the news yesterday; on Fox, of course, but also MSNBC, the Huffington Post, Los Angeles Times, et al: $69 million of California's welfare payments have been spent out of state. The largest chunk of that, $11.8 million, was spent in Las Vegas; but other places the welfare debit cards were used included trips to Hawaii and cruises out of Miami. Considering that California's illegal immigrant population accounts for 90% of the state's growth annually (Snopes says thats incoming plus births to illegals) and that 29% of the illegal immigrants in California are on welfare (tried to verify an email I got in 2007 which cited the L.A. Times, Business Insider used the same figure 10/1/10) it's a safe hunch that a lot of that California welfare money was taken out of the state by illegal immigrants committing welfare fraud. If your house is already full, and you have your own family members to take care of, when somebody comes to you asking for help, and you know that if you give them access to your finances there won't be enough left for your own household; don't you do what you can, within the limits of your own financial resources, after your own family if provided for, to help those asking for assistance so that they can remain in their own homes?  Knowing that if you take in everybody you see that needs a helping hand, you will deplete your resources to the point that you can help nobody; not your own nor those with their hands out. To paraphrase an old axiom: give a man a fish, feed him for a day and he's still dependent and comes right back needing more; teach a man to fish, feed him for life and he can feed others and teach others how to fish. America, focus on what the real need is.

An Acorn Grows in Houston, and Everywhere

"Unfortunately, it is my duty to share with you today that the integrity of the Voter Roll in Harris County, Texas appears to be under an ORGANIZED and SYSTEMIC attack by the group operating under the name Houston Votes. Houston Votes is the voter registration machine of the Texans Together Education Fund. Houston Votes and Texans Together have effectively emerged as our areas' new ACORN organization"
Leo Vasquez, Harris County Voter Registrar, The Cypress Times, 8/24/10

Texas Insider, on 9/27/10 named one man, an SEIU employee, as having turned in 25,000 registrations, of which 23,207 have proven to be fake. He registered 1 woman 6 times in the same day, registered several voters with vacant lots as addresses, registered 40 voters at an 8 bed halfway house, registered non-citizens, and registered the same person 1,597 times with different signatures. And he was just the head of Houston Votes; and an SEIU employee to boot. Another Houston Votes recruiter is a woman who ran an Obama campaign office in Houston; you may have seen pictures of it during the campaign. I remember seeing the picture of her office with an Obama poster, an American flag and a poster of Che Guevara side by side. You might also remember last year, at a townhall meeting of Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee in Houston, a woman that claimed she was a doctor who supported obamacare. Turned out she wasn't really a doctor. Well, the woman who ran the Obama campaign office in Houston took the fake doctor to that townhall, and sat beside her while she spun her lies. She is also a long time activist for Organizing for America, which prior to the 2008 election was known as Organizing for Obama, his official campaign website. Coincidences? I think not. Here's another "coincidence": just days after the charges of fraud against Houston Votes was handed over to the Texas Secretary of State and the Harris County District Attorney's office, the Harris County Election Technology Center was burned to the ground, destroying 10,000 voting machines and causing $40 million in damages.

The Democrats, the Obama campaign, and their supporters SEIU and ACORN, ran the sleaziest, most fraudulent  presidential race in history, in 2008. They wanted to insure that their "man" won, at any cost; even at the cost of their dignity and integrity.  How disgusting. No, it's beyond disgusting. I can't think of a pejorative low enough to describe them. We all know about the voter fraud perpetrated by ACORN; that was a national story. Well, just think of all the smaller, local voter drives, like Houston Votes; whose Board of Directors and Advisory Board is filled with prominent Democrat offices holders, present and past. When I was looking thru the list of backers for last Saturdays left-wing liberal rally in DC, one group on the list was called DC Votes. I wonder how many tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of local groups across the country, were involved in this rampant voter fraud. Voter Registrar Vasquez called it "organized and systemic". I wonder just how organized it really was. I wonder how deep and widespread are the roots of this new "ACORN". What if all the local Votes "chapters" were all under one umbrella, and all doing the same thing? It's entirely possible that the 2008 presidential election, instead of being based on a fair vote by the majority of the citizens, might turn out to have been a well-orchestrated, fraud-fueled bloodless coup.

Cookie Cutter Colleges

I hate to say, "I told you so". Not really. I kind of like pointing out when I predict something that then turns into reality. Remember when it was disclosed that Obama snuck the government takeover of college loans into the obamacare bill? Now, the only way for students to get a college loan is thru Uncle Sugar. I warned everybody, or at least those of you I used to send my email missives to before starting this blog; what the government pays for, eventually the government will want to control. He who pays the piper, calls the tunes. I pointed out that control of ALL college funding in American by the Obama administration would lead to the control of what the colleges could teach, where the student could attend, and what the student could study or major in. Well, the 1st part of that is coming to fruition. And I derive no pleasure from saying "I told you so". I'm really disturbed that it happened so quickly, but then look how much government take-over has been implemented in 19 short months.

If you don't know Arne Duncan, Obama's Secretary of Education, let me tell you about him. There's not really a lot to tell. Most websites I looked at don't mention very much of a personal nature about him. He is from Chicago, home of thugocracy politics, a progressive liberal (naturally), friend and basketball-buddy of Obama (naturally). He was CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of the Chicago school district for 7 years. He is not an educator, he is an administrator. The leftwing liberal rag, that Obama likes to cite, the Huffington Post said on 6/7/10 that Duncan is "nothing but a corporate shill willing to bankrupt public education". Duncan is a "greenie"; he has a "green" agenda that he wants to implement to indoctrinate America's students with. And some of it is outright lies. There is an animated video being shown in elementary schools right now called "The Story of Stuff". You can probably see it on Youtube. I saw it, of course, on Fox News. It is telling our kids that it will soon take the area of 5 planets to hold what America uses and wastes; and that when America runs out of "stuff" it thinks the "stuff" of other countries belongs to America, so it just invades them and takes the "stuff" and destroys those countries. Duncan seems to still buy into the myth that is "anthropoligical (manmade) global warming"; he said on 9/23/10, reported in the Motor City Times and CNS News that we "must teach students about how the climate is changing". I guess he missed the news when it was reported that the U.N. scientists responsible for the man-made global warming hoax admitting to falsifying the data.

Let me digress a moment. Those of you who know me, know that during conversations, I sometimes get off point when I have something to say about another point that might come up in the course of a conversation. I want to talk a little about climate change. It's not manmade - it's GOD made. I am appalled at the arrogance of mere mortals that think they can control what is in God's domain. I just now got thru watching a special on the destruction of the Ancient Egyptian Civilization. I'm fascinated with things of the Biblical time. Anyway, this special just happened to be on, of all channels, the Green Channel. It turns out the extremely advanced ancient Egyptian civilization was destroyed by catastrophic climate change. And you know, the special did not once claim that it was man-made; that the ancient Egyptians did themselves in by their own bad habits. The Egyptians believed that their Pharoahs were living Gods, that could and would protect them from anything that might happen to them. Of course, the climate changed once again, and Egypt recovered, but just not in the same exact way it had once been. There was one big difference, though. Egyptians no longer believed that the Pharoahs were all-powerful living Gods; and the Pharoahs no longer ruled over Egypt. Let this be a lesson, America. Obama is not a living God, no matter how much, or how many, people worship him. He has feet of clay.

Now back to the subject at hand. Arne Duncan, Obama's Secretary of Education, wants all schools that accept federal student aid, which since obamacare was passed is the only way to get student aid, to have a license from a state agency that lists "authorized" institutions. And who would authorize those institutions? Why, the Obama administration, of course. Any college that doesn't follow federal guidlines and get "authorized", won't be allowed to accept student funding. What are the federal guidelines? The rules were sent to Congress in August, and unless Congress, which isn't in DC at the moment, moves to block them by November 1, they will go into effect July 2011. I doubt the Washington Times article mentioned them all, but the Dept. of Education will contrive a federal (uniform) definition of what composes a "credit hour" and require 6,000 colleges to accept it's definition. It will require all state accrediting agencies to police procedures at colleges, to make sure all are complying to the new federal guidelines. Another rule will give Duncan the authority to eliminate "due process"; he will be authorized to bar any college from federal programs without notice, a hearing, or right to appeal. It will encourage special interest groups or "pressure groups" to  get legal mandates requiring colleges to implement their curriculum, teaching methods, faculty qualifications, etc, or lose accredition. It will lead to more non-sensical courses like The Study of Zombies (University of Baltimre), Cyber Feminism (Cornell University) or Queer Musicology (UCLA). It will also lead to more professors who educate our students about nothing useful; like Dr. Marc Lamont Hill, Phd. Yes, he's the one who is often a "guest" on O'Reilly on Fox News, after Fox News fired him. "Dr." Hill is a Professor of Education at Columbia University. What does he education young people about? Hip Hop Culture. That's really going to prepare them for the real world. What a waste of staffing funds, and a waste of college tuition. We're likely to see more of this assinine nonsense in the future.

Mr. Duncan is also going after for-profit colleges. He feels that schools that have profitted and prospered render a disservice to students and taxpayers. He wants all colleges under the control and direction of the federal government, and for-profit colleges still retain some measure of autonomy. He proposes a "gainful employment" rule that cuts off federal funding to for-profit colleges unless 45% of graduates can pay down their loan and that the payments are less than 8% of their annual income. Enrollment has tripled at for-profit colleges over the past decade, and Mr. Duncan wants to force them into the Uncle Sugar fold. Nevermind that they give America more successful graduates than other colleges; with a graduation rate of 65% compared to 44% for not-for-profit colleges. The for-profit colleges also give back to our tax coffers. They get federal student funds, but no state funding; yet they pay federal and state taxes. Just one example, from Forbes Magazine; the Apollo Group, parent of the University of Phoenix, paid $445 million in federal income taxes in 2009. Oh yes, I can see how that's a disservice to taxpayers. How dare they pay so much in taxes.  It appears that for Mr. Duncan, and the entire administration, uniformity and government control is everything. America, get ready for Cookie Cutter Colleges, followed by students being told where they can attend and what they will study. America, wake up and smell the youthful brain cells burning.