I don't know about you, but frankly I am not the least happy with the Republican candidates for US President. I wouldn't let any of them take my trash to the street, and yet these individuals are supposed to be the ones to save us from Obama's "Hope and Change". Seriously, are these really the best the Republican Party has to offer? For that matter, are they the best the Conservative Movement can muster?
First off, each one is so obscenely rich as to have no real concept what working class stiffs like most us really have to do to get by. Remember Mitt Romney's off-the-cuff $10,000 dollar bet to Rick Perry? Seriously, like it's walk around pocket change. Perry said he didn't gamble and politely turned the offer down (although he has no problem with allowing illegal immigrants to attend college, and at in-state tuition rates. Sounds like a gamble to me). Cain seemed to me to offer the best choice. I mean, here's this hugely successful businessman who can speak in something other than sound bites and doesn't look like a plastic doll. Then all of a sudden these women come out of the woodwork with a sudden case of "guilt" that only by telling "their story" would sooth. Really? Who asked? Since most these trysts happened years ago, why they suddenly feel the need to go to public confessional?
Let's take Michele Bachmann...please (with apologies to Henny Youngman). Lord knows she tries, and listening to her for more than five minutes is pretty trying on my nerves. She staggers over facts that most 9th graders should know. She means well, but is that what we want in a President, someone who means well? Now I admit I like Hunstman. I don't know why. Maybe I just feel sorry for him. He can't buy attention. His stance on issues aren't bad, but he just hasn't been able to get any traction with the voters (which actually means with the media). The same can be said for Rick Santorum. Here's another guy that is struggling to get any attention whatsoever, although, now that Paul and Newt's stars are fading, he's starting to get a longer look.
Ron Paul knows the Constitution like few do (and fewer still among those in Congress). I agree with Paul's belief that American is nothing like what the Founding Fathers intended (in fact, if they could see us now, they'd pay the damn tea tax and shut up). American was supposed to be economically and socially libertarian, but the cold hard reality of the matter is that were aren't, and we aren't likely to be any time soon either. Our Founding Fathers could not have conceived of the changes that have taken place since 1790. The libertarian framework is ideal for small, mostly agrarian societies, but after 1900, those days would have to an end anyway.
However, our Founding Fathers did intend to have a small federal government with the individual states playing a much stronger role, and in that, Ron Paul is right. It's not that we need necessarily a small federal government as much as we need a more efficient federal government with more power returned to the states as originally intended. Where Paul completely loses me is on his foreign policy issues (though it is completely consistent with his libertarian views). To be brief, Paul wants to disengage from the world.
While I agree that we as Americans, need to put America's interests first, we can't simply walk away and hide in some sort of nationalistic cocoon. We do need to cut back on foreign aid and stop acting as the world's policeman. It's time for Europe to take care of Europe and for Japan to start investing in its own defenses now that Godzilla and Mothra are gone. We need to cut back or close our foreign military bases. We need to accept the fact that not everyone wants to be like Americans (not a single country, despite billions of dollars spent on nation building, has modeled their governments on ours) and that means that we need to get out of the regime-changing business. We should ensure free and fair elections and let it go at that.
As for Perry, there's really nothing else I can say about him, which is a polite as I can be. Mitt Romney is the bride no body wants to marry. Every candidate is compared to him. It's as if the Republicans are running in circle and keep coming back to the homeliest girl/boy in the room. John McCain was able to beat Mitt four years ago because he had the better record. Of course, McCain became McDud and the rest, as they say, is history imperfect. For the record, I strongly suspect Mitt would have likely been able to beat Obama.
Lastly, there is ole Newt Gingrich. Newt was the Speaker of the House during the glory days of Bill Clinton (and despite everything, he's still one of my favorite presidents). Anyone remember the "Contract with America" or the so-called "Republican Revolution"? Not much came of either. The GOP failed on both accounts, and the all powerful, finger-wagging conservative Newt got caught doing what he vilified Clinton for doing. Hypocrite. Since getting booted out of Congress, he's found employment as a lobbyist for Big Business, including the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (which, in case you've forgotten, helped to put us in this economic mess). As a candidate, Newt has more baggage than a wagon train heading West. He is just as out of touch now as he was then.
All of the candidates have their flaws. The question is which, if any, can beat Obama. Personally, I don't think any can. Most candidates have one or two, and occasionally, three chinks in their armor but are otherwise pretty sound. However, it appears that none of the current crop of candidates has any armor to speak of, while the King (or President in this case) after nearly four years, still has no clothes. Politics has become more than ever the game of the super rich (the current net worth of an average member of Congress is now 2 1/2 times that of the average American while salaries of CEOs are 343 times that of a typical worker).
While it looks like Americans are again going to be forced to go to the polls holding their noses, I have to ask you: where are our real leaders America? When are we going to stop accepting mediocrity from both parties and their candidates and wake up from this illusion of choice? We need working and middle class people who understand what its like to live within a budget, cut coupons, and pull double shifts to make ends meet.
2012 Republican Candidates Bios and Issues:
http://2012.republican-candidates.org/
The Net Worth of the Republican Presidential Candidates:
http://247wallst.com/2011/10/04/the-net-worth-of-the-republican-presidential-candidates/
CEOs earn 343 times more than typical workers:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/19/news/economy/ceo_pay/index.htm
And One More Thing...
Finally dear readers, I would like to conclude this edition of Another Opinion, and year with a sincere "thank you" for reading. I know we're not going to agree on everything (frankly, that would be scary for both of us). The purpose of AO from the beginning has been to provoke you to think with honest content. We here at AO pride ourselves on tackling touchy issues form a independent and mostly moderate perspective. Extremism, be it from either the Left or the Right, only builds walls and that's the last thing we need in this world. We desperately need real leaders who focus on issues, not party dogma. We need people willing to stand up and say "enough" without worrying about political correctness. Political correctness in the end only breeds fear of the truth and ultimately silence.
We hope you've enjoyed our occasional book reviews, and that you'll check them out. A special "thank you" to all the publishers for sending us their books as well. It's always a pleasure! We would also like to thank all those who link to AO. We sincerely appreciate it.
As long as there is a need to encourage people to think for themselves, Another Opinion will hopefully be around. May you and yours have a happy and healthy 2012. Until the next issue, remember to stand up; speak out; and always to think for yourself!
Friday, December 30, 2011
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Illegal Immigrants to Vote?
Every once in awhile, something comes along that leaves a political veteran like me lost for words. New Haven (Connecticut) Mayor John DeStafano said recently that he wants illegal immigrants to be able to vote in local elections. Mayor DeStafano, a Democrat, claims that illegals pay taxes, albeit indirectly, through rent and send their children to public schools, so, therefore, they should be entitled to vote. He also claims that this would lead to a more "engaged community". His spokesperson, Elizabeth Blanton, claims that her boss's proposal is "nothing new". She claimed there were several states with similar legislation, but this would only apply to New Haven. Ms. Blanton added that they believed that every adult should be able to “vote in local elections that affect their families and futures”. By implication that would include unregistered adults, open primaries, and those who’ve lost their right to vote for judicial reasons does it not? Even the governor, Dannel Malloy (D) said he was "particularly comfortable" with the suggestion.
One can't help but wonder if the good Mayor was serious or just trying to get his name in the news. No one objects to new immigrants voting. We want new immigrants to participate in the political process. That's part of being an American. In fact, we would dearly love for more people take part in the political process. Maybe we would have fewer crooks and kooks in office. But, we're not talking about new immigrants here are we? We are talking about individuals who, for one reason or another, decided to ignore our laws and tried to jump ahead of thousands who are following the rules. Why, should they be rewarded for breaking the law? The fact is they shouldn't.
First, not only should they not be allowed to vote, they should not be receiving any taxpayer assistance or services, and that includes public job assistance, unemployment, or "free" education for their children, including private translators, which by the way, costs US Taxpayers millions of dollars. As it is, every single taxpayer in the United States pays in some fashion for illegal workers, and that number is in the billions of dollars.
The reality is that there are an estimated 12 million illegals in this country. Rounding them up and shipping them home (again, on our dime) without a practical and enforceable immigration policy is a waste of our time and money. Our so-called "leaders" in Washington as well as in our state capitals and city halls, have chosen for some unfathomable reason to ignore what people like you and I have been saying for years. Perhaps they think we'll forget come election time. Maybe they think they're immune to public opinion. Frankly, I don't know.
What I do know, however, is that we must secure our border even if that means stationing US troops there with instructions to turn illegals back by force if necessary. Simultaneously, we need to erect barriers along the border. We then need to determine which illegal immigrants are here for the purpose of employment only and which ones are here to establish residence. Not all want to be here permanently. Many are simply day workers looking to send money back home to support their families. They are the easiest to deal with. For that, we need a two-prong program.
For individuals here just for the money, its' a simple matter of their employer obtaining a temporary worker permit. The permit could be in the form of a personal ID card complete with a photo, thumb print, home address, name and address of their sponsor/employer. As long as they remain employed; their ID is kept current, there should be no problem. Perhaps the United Farm Workers (UFW) could create a specific union for non-resident migrant workers. This could assist them with such things as transportation, housing and healthcare.
Because they're non-resident, a reduced employment tax could apply to cover healthcare and education for their children. However, each immigrant would be mandated to take English language classes. This would be a win-win for everybody. Farms and other businesses that depend on cheap labor would have their employees while the employer wouldn't have to worry about fines and being shut down. Union rolls would increase as would union dues. Local, state, and federal tax burdens would be reduced since taxes would be withheld. As long as their employment cards are current, they have no fear of deportation.
For those who want to stay here, a similar program could be impended. They would still have to apply for Citizenship in the usual fashion (no one should expect preferential treatment just because they were successful in breaking the law for who knows how many years). However, a program of this type would allow the illegal resident to remain in the country while awaiting a decision on their application. In addition to English languages classes, they would also take Civics classes which include American history and culture. It also provides a mechanism to legally pay taxes. It eliminates the fear of deportation and, again, employers won't have to worry about fines and/or closures. In both cases, individuals would periodically report to an agency like ICE to confirm their status. However, there should a clear and specific caveat.
Failure to comply with the two-prong program would result in serious penalties for employers (as an example, a $10,000 fine for each illegal employed and suspension of their business license for 90 days for the first offense). After that, jail time for the employer---owner(s) and whoever did the hiring up to, and closure of the business for 30 days to one year. For illegals, 30 days jail time followed by deportation. For the second offense, additional jail time and loss of opportunity to participate in the program for one year. After that, jail and suspension time would be increased. Children would be sent to the nearest legal relative either in the US or in their native country. The Constitution should be amended to require that at least one parent must be a US Citizen, thus eliminating “anchor babies”. Harsh I know, but the penalty has to be strong enough to strongly compel participation.
It's not a perfect solution, but it's a workable one, and right now, that's what we need. If you agree, I urge to send this article to your Senator, Congressman, Governor, and the media.
For more on the story, check out this article:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/15/connecticut-gop-blasts-non-citizen-voting-proposal-as-publicity-stunt/
DoD Double Speak
As long as we have a front roll seat at the theater of the absurd, here’s something else I came across I thought you might find interesting. The Department of Defense has decided to reclassify the murders at Ft. Hood Texas by Major Nadal Hasan, a former Army psychiatrist (and now, apparently a patient too). Instead of referring to the event which lead to the deaths of 13 people plus wounding dozens more as a “massacre”, the DoD in its infinite bureaucratic wisdom has decided the event will be known as a case of “workplace violence”. Apparently the DoD is concerned about the opinion of terrorist groups such as al Qaeda. According to Army’s PR department, if the bad guys can claim a propaganda victory over the murder of US personnel on a US base by an Islamic extremist, it only enhances their image in the Arab World. Using this sort of logic, what would the DoD had called the Holocaust? Population Reengineering?
I suppose there’s some logic to their argument. However, to me, murder is murder regardless of who did it or their reasons. Changing our behavior or language to appease the enemy is still a victory in their eyes. The truth is that Nadal Hasan was a mentally ill man who was susceptible to the rants of another insane individual. That doesn’t excuse him, nor does it excuse the Army who ignored all the classic warning signs. The DoD would do better to emphasis the lunacy of Hasan and his actions and all those who follow similar paths of those who hijacked and distorted an otherwise peaceful religion.
Here’s the link to the article:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/06/military-growing-terrorist-target-lawmakers-warn/
Republican Presidential Candidates Stance on Illegal Immigration
Lastly, if you’ve been following the Republican Presidential Candidate debates, and wondered what their positions were toward illegal immigration, check out this article from NumbersUSA. It’s a nice succinct piece outlining each candidate’s stance:
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/action/2012-presidential-hopefuls-immigration-stances.html
One can't help but wonder if the good Mayor was serious or just trying to get his name in the news. No one objects to new immigrants voting. We want new immigrants to participate in the political process. That's part of being an American. In fact, we would dearly love for more people take part in the political process. Maybe we would have fewer crooks and kooks in office. But, we're not talking about new immigrants here are we? We are talking about individuals who, for one reason or another, decided to ignore our laws and tried to jump ahead of thousands who are following the rules. Why, should they be rewarded for breaking the law? The fact is they shouldn't.
First, not only should they not be allowed to vote, they should not be receiving any taxpayer assistance or services, and that includes public job assistance, unemployment, or "free" education for their children, including private translators, which by the way, costs US Taxpayers millions of dollars. As it is, every single taxpayer in the United States pays in some fashion for illegal workers, and that number is in the billions of dollars.
The reality is that there are an estimated 12 million illegals in this country. Rounding them up and shipping them home (again, on our dime) without a practical and enforceable immigration policy is a waste of our time and money. Our so-called "leaders" in Washington as well as in our state capitals and city halls, have chosen for some unfathomable reason to ignore what people like you and I have been saying for years. Perhaps they think we'll forget come election time. Maybe they think they're immune to public opinion. Frankly, I don't know.
What I do know, however, is that we must secure our border even if that means stationing US troops there with instructions to turn illegals back by force if necessary. Simultaneously, we need to erect barriers along the border. We then need to determine which illegal immigrants are here for the purpose of employment only and which ones are here to establish residence. Not all want to be here permanently. Many are simply day workers looking to send money back home to support their families. They are the easiest to deal with. For that, we need a two-prong program.
For individuals here just for the money, its' a simple matter of their employer obtaining a temporary worker permit. The permit could be in the form of a personal ID card complete with a photo, thumb print, home address, name and address of their sponsor/employer. As long as they remain employed; their ID is kept current, there should be no problem. Perhaps the United Farm Workers (UFW) could create a specific union for non-resident migrant workers. This could assist them with such things as transportation, housing and healthcare.
Because they're non-resident, a reduced employment tax could apply to cover healthcare and education for their children. However, each immigrant would be mandated to take English language classes. This would be a win-win for everybody. Farms and other businesses that depend on cheap labor would have their employees while the employer wouldn't have to worry about fines and being shut down. Union rolls would increase as would union dues. Local, state, and federal tax burdens would be reduced since taxes would be withheld. As long as their employment cards are current, they have no fear of deportation.
For those who want to stay here, a similar program could be impended. They would still have to apply for Citizenship in the usual fashion (no one should expect preferential treatment just because they were successful in breaking the law for who knows how many years). However, a program of this type would allow the illegal resident to remain in the country while awaiting a decision on their application. In addition to English languages classes, they would also take Civics classes which include American history and culture. It also provides a mechanism to legally pay taxes. It eliminates the fear of deportation and, again, employers won't have to worry about fines and/or closures. In both cases, individuals would periodically report to an agency like ICE to confirm their status. However, there should a clear and specific caveat.
Failure to comply with the two-prong program would result in serious penalties for employers (as an example, a $10,000 fine for each illegal employed and suspension of their business license for 90 days for the first offense). After that, jail time for the employer---owner(s) and whoever did the hiring up to, and closure of the business for 30 days to one year. For illegals, 30 days jail time followed by deportation. For the second offense, additional jail time and loss of opportunity to participate in the program for one year. After that, jail and suspension time would be increased. Children would be sent to the nearest legal relative either in the US or in their native country. The Constitution should be amended to require that at least one parent must be a US Citizen, thus eliminating “anchor babies”. Harsh I know, but the penalty has to be strong enough to strongly compel participation.
It's not a perfect solution, but it's a workable one, and right now, that's what we need. If you agree, I urge to send this article to your Senator, Congressman, Governor, and the media.
For more on the story, check out this article:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/15/connecticut-gop-blasts-non-citizen-voting-proposal-as-publicity-stunt/
DoD Double Speak
As long as we have a front roll seat at the theater of the absurd, here’s something else I came across I thought you might find interesting. The Department of Defense has decided to reclassify the murders at Ft. Hood Texas by Major Nadal Hasan, a former Army psychiatrist (and now, apparently a patient too). Instead of referring to the event which lead to the deaths of 13 people plus wounding dozens more as a “massacre”, the DoD in its infinite bureaucratic wisdom has decided the event will be known as a case of “workplace violence”. Apparently the DoD is concerned about the opinion of terrorist groups such as al Qaeda. According to Army’s PR department, if the bad guys can claim a propaganda victory over the murder of US personnel on a US base by an Islamic extremist, it only enhances their image in the Arab World. Using this sort of logic, what would the DoD had called the Holocaust? Population Reengineering?
I suppose there’s some logic to their argument. However, to me, murder is murder regardless of who did it or their reasons. Changing our behavior or language to appease the enemy is still a victory in their eyes. The truth is that Nadal Hasan was a mentally ill man who was susceptible to the rants of another insane individual. That doesn’t excuse him, nor does it excuse the Army who ignored all the classic warning signs. The DoD would do better to emphasis the lunacy of Hasan and his actions and all those who follow similar paths of those who hijacked and distorted an otherwise peaceful religion.
Here’s the link to the article:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/06/military-growing-terrorist-target-lawmakers-warn/
Republican Presidential Candidates Stance on Illegal Immigration
Lastly, if you’ve been following the Republican Presidential Candidate debates, and wondered what their positions were toward illegal immigration, check out this article from NumbersUSA. It’s a nice succinct piece outlining each candidate’s stance:
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/action/2012-presidential-hopefuls-immigration-stances.html
Sunday, December 04, 2011
Letters to St.Obama: Kids and Illegal Immigration
I suppose everyone has a wish list this time of year. Some (most) wish for stuff like toys, bikes, or the latest and greatest electronic gadgets while millions of American adults are wishing for jobs and better economy. While President Obama inherited a faltering economy thanks to the mismanagement of President Bush II, as most economists will tell you, six months in and the whole shebang is new game with a brand new deck. Obama's fiscal policies are all his and they've have proven to be disastrous for American business and the American People, but this is not a critique of Obama the Economist and his wish list. Instead, this about a wish list from kids.
Obama has been receiving thousands of letters from kids asking him to stop deporting their mothers, fathers, uncles, thirds cousins once removed. They often write about how painful it is and how alone they are. A touching as this might seem, the letters are not exactly spontaneous. So far, just fewer than 5000 letters have addressed to ole "St. Obama". The letters are part of a campaign engineered by a group by the name of National Domestic Workers Alliance under the slogan "We Belong Together" and other pro-amnesty organizations (you have to wear rose colored glasses to get the full affect).
The timing naturally enough appears to be designed to tug at America's heartstrings since it involves families and children at time of year when we traditionally think about family and friends. Other Latino organizations are getting in on the act in a hope to change public opinion about illegal immigration while Americans are feeling especially generous. Currently over 80% of the population oppose illegal immigration and want to see an immediate end to illegal border crossings. So far, President Obama as well as Congress has been successful in ignoring voters (as was President Bush and Congress previously).
What these kids are asking the President is why their relatives are being deported. While the White House promises to address their questions, what’s not being done by the either the White House or the groups sponsoring the letter writing campaign honest answers with these children. Nowhere did I find mentioned by NDWA or any other organization an open and honest discussion explaining that their relatives broke US laws. Some of the letters claimed that their families were “unfairly being broken” by the deportation or that the deportations were “upsetting” them.
Well, I’m sure that’s true. To reframe their questions for ease of answering, let’s say their relative had committed some crime, was caught and sent to jail. Would that be “unfair”? Should they be released because it was “upsetting” or took away their mother or father? Should government authorities be blamed because someone broke the law and was punished? If the same laws were violated in their native countries, their relatives would literally be sent to prison and not just deported, and the family would literally pay for their upkeep. So, who is actually being fairer to the families and children?
Another issue was raised by the letters. As a result of a parent or other relative they were living with being deported, some children are faced with being placed in foster care. According to Applied Research Center, approximately 5000 children of illegal immigrants are now in foster care at US tax payer expense. How is that the governments fault? If that same individual had been arrested on another crime, that child would have been placed in foster care as well. Are they saying that when a child is faced with the possibility of foster care when their care taker is convicted of a crime, the care taker should be released? I certainly hope not. What about taxpayer money that could be spent elsewhere? As hard as it may be, the person to “blame” if blame is to be assigned is not ICE agents or the government, but as with any crime, with the individual who committed the crime in the first. It’s the same “blame the victim” mentality of the liberal Left. It’s no secret either here in the United States, Mexico, China, or anywhere else that illegal immigration is just that…illegal and subject to legal repercussions, whether that violation takes place in Canada, Peru, Columbia, Mexico, China, Vietnam, or the United States.
According to a recent Rasmussen Poll conducted on May 13, 2011, 51% of Democrats believe our border with Mexico is secured. However, 86% of Republicans and 65% of Independents do not. 61% thought that if the border was secure, we would actually have a lower of poverty in this country, while 59% believe federal aid should be cut off for so-called “sanctuary cities”. In another Rasmussen Poll dated April 26, 2010, 60% of those surveyed said that local police officers should be allowed to verify immigration status.
I’m also enclosing the result of another recent poll. The results aren’t hard to grasp. They say what Americans across the board have been saying for decades…illegal immigration must stop. Washington and in particular, the Obama Administration has been doing everything in power to “backdoor” Congress and the American People. For some undefinable reason, Washington’s arrogance seems almost boundless on this point. There has to be a reason. Perhaps it’s a backroom deal with Corporate America to provide cheap non-unionized Labor. Certainly the influx of low skill workers would have an effect on driving down wages and benefits, especially since some states are offering illegal aliens and/or their children in state tuition and taxpayer based grants (a better deal than many US citizens current get). Perhaps it’s an interparty strategy to bring as many illegals into the US as possible in the hopes that after they’re given legal status, they’ll register as Democrats. If that should occur, America could likely become a defacto mono-party dictatorship instead of the dual party dictatorship we currently have. Well, at least the pretense of having a “choice” at the polls would be dropped.
The letters are a good ploy. While they encourage discussion about illegal immigration, which I believe is a good thing, but they do so hiding behind children. The economy is our most pressing concern in this country, and illegal immigration is tied to it because of the economic impact it has on our already fragile (if not broken) taxpayer based social safety net, education, healthcare, insurance rates, crime, and jobs. The two go hand-in-hand.
Just as a time comes when every parent has set their child down and explain the reality about the Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny, and Santa Claus, we as Americans need to set Obama and Congress down for a frank discussion about illegal immigration and what we will and won’t accept. That time is now.
Thousands of Immigrant Kids Ask Obama to Stop Deportations:
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2011/11/30/thousands-immigrant-kids-ask-obama-to-stop-deportations/?intcmp=obinsite
To read the results of the Rasmussen Poll:
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/facts/public_opinion.html and
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/nationally_60_favor_letting_local_police_stop_and_verify_immigration_status
The Polling Report: CNN Report on Immigration:
http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
Obama has been receiving thousands of letters from kids asking him to stop deporting their mothers, fathers, uncles, thirds cousins once removed. They often write about how painful it is and how alone they are. A touching as this might seem, the letters are not exactly spontaneous. So far, just fewer than 5000 letters have addressed to ole "St. Obama". The letters are part of a campaign engineered by a group by the name of National Domestic Workers Alliance under the slogan "We Belong Together" and other pro-amnesty organizations (you have to wear rose colored glasses to get the full affect).
The timing naturally enough appears to be designed to tug at America's heartstrings since it involves families and children at time of year when we traditionally think about family and friends. Other Latino organizations are getting in on the act in a hope to change public opinion about illegal immigration while Americans are feeling especially generous. Currently over 80% of the population oppose illegal immigration and want to see an immediate end to illegal border crossings. So far, President Obama as well as Congress has been successful in ignoring voters (as was President Bush and Congress previously).
What these kids are asking the President is why their relatives are being deported. While the White House promises to address their questions, what’s not being done by the either the White House or the groups sponsoring the letter writing campaign honest answers with these children. Nowhere did I find mentioned by NDWA or any other organization an open and honest discussion explaining that their relatives broke US laws. Some of the letters claimed that their families were “unfairly being broken” by the deportation or that the deportations were “upsetting” them.
Well, I’m sure that’s true. To reframe their questions for ease of answering, let’s say their relative had committed some crime, was caught and sent to jail. Would that be “unfair”? Should they be released because it was “upsetting” or took away their mother or father? Should government authorities be blamed because someone broke the law and was punished? If the same laws were violated in their native countries, their relatives would literally be sent to prison and not just deported, and the family would literally pay for their upkeep. So, who is actually being fairer to the families and children?
Another issue was raised by the letters. As a result of a parent or other relative they were living with being deported, some children are faced with being placed in foster care. According to Applied Research Center, approximately 5000 children of illegal immigrants are now in foster care at US tax payer expense. How is that the governments fault? If that same individual had been arrested on another crime, that child would have been placed in foster care as well. Are they saying that when a child is faced with the possibility of foster care when their care taker is convicted of a crime, the care taker should be released? I certainly hope not. What about taxpayer money that could be spent elsewhere? As hard as it may be, the person to “blame” if blame is to be assigned is not ICE agents or the government, but as with any crime, with the individual who committed the crime in the first. It’s the same “blame the victim” mentality of the liberal Left. It’s no secret either here in the United States, Mexico, China, or anywhere else that illegal immigration is just that…illegal and subject to legal repercussions, whether that violation takes place in Canada, Peru, Columbia, Mexico, China, Vietnam, or the United States.
According to a recent Rasmussen Poll conducted on May 13, 2011, 51% of Democrats believe our border with Mexico is secured. However, 86% of Republicans and 65% of Independents do not. 61% thought that if the border was secure, we would actually have a lower of poverty in this country, while 59% believe federal aid should be cut off for so-called “sanctuary cities”. In another Rasmussen Poll dated April 26, 2010, 60% of those surveyed said that local police officers should be allowed to verify immigration status.
I’m also enclosing the result of another recent poll. The results aren’t hard to grasp. They say what Americans across the board have been saying for decades…illegal immigration must stop. Washington and in particular, the Obama Administration has been doing everything in power to “backdoor” Congress and the American People. For some undefinable reason, Washington’s arrogance seems almost boundless on this point. There has to be a reason. Perhaps it’s a backroom deal with Corporate America to provide cheap non-unionized Labor. Certainly the influx of low skill workers would have an effect on driving down wages and benefits, especially since some states are offering illegal aliens and/or their children in state tuition and taxpayer based grants (a better deal than many US citizens current get). Perhaps it’s an interparty strategy to bring as many illegals into the US as possible in the hopes that after they’re given legal status, they’ll register as Democrats. If that should occur, America could likely become a defacto mono-party dictatorship instead of the dual party dictatorship we currently have. Well, at least the pretense of having a “choice” at the polls would be dropped.
The letters are a good ploy. While they encourage discussion about illegal immigration, which I believe is a good thing, but they do so hiding behind children. The economy is our most pressing concern in this country, and illegal immigration is tied to it because of the economic impact it has on our already fragile (if not broken) taxpayer based social safety net, education, healthcare, insurance rates, crime, and jobs. The two go hand-in-hand.
Just as a time comes when every parent has set their child down and explain the reality about the Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny, and Santa Claus, we as Americans need to set Obama and Congress down for a frank discussion about illegal immigration and what we will and won’t accept. That time is now.
Thousands of Immigrant Kids Ask Obama to Stop Deportations:
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2011/11/30/thousands-immigrant-kids-ask-obama-to-stop-deportations/?intcmp=obinsite
To read the results of the Rasmussen Poll:
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/facts/public_opinion.html and
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/nationally_60_favor_letting_local_police_stop_and_verify_immigration_status
The Polling Report: CNN Report on Immigration:
http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
