Illegals Made Legal by EO Will Always Be 2nd Class Frauds!

By John W. Lillpop


In their zeal to grow the Democrat Party into a perpetual progressive majority, liberal politicians are anxiously striving to secure amnesty, including full citizenship, for tens of millions of foreign illegal aliens, most of whom are completely unknown as to criminal backgrounds, medical history, financial and credit worthiness, possible links to terrorism, national allegiance and loyalty, and acceptance of American cultural values and Democratic principles.

Liberals have chosen to forfeit the rule of law, the US Constitution, and established American language, culture, and heritage, in exchange for millions of impoverished foreigners who, if things go according to plan, will ultimately be compelled to vote for more and bigger government, unrestrained  spending, redistribution of wealth and universal entitlements based on extracting higher and higher taxes from the rich; all of which will be executed by elitists expert in socialist tyranny, but without a “smidgen” of American patriotism.

Liberals are fully aware of the fact that “we the people” do not support proposed immigration reforms which would unfairly bestow citizenship on tens of millions of illegals who would radically transform the social and political culture of our blessed America.

Thus, knowing that the fundamental transformation of America from a capitalist, free-market society into a socialist nanny state cannot be accomplished in accordance with the US Constitution, illegal alien advocates are urging President Barack Obama to ignore the Constitution, the rule of law, and the US Congress, and to act unilaterally by issuing an Executive Order(s) to make that which is illegal suddenly legal and to render meaningless the concept of equal power among government branches and to further render irrelevant the notion of “government by, for, and of the people.”

Should the President actually engage in such abhorrent behavior, and should said abomination not be reversed in the halls of Congress or before the US Supreme Court, Barack Hussein Obama will have forever blighted the name and reputation of all who were gifted with citizenship as a result of his unchecked political greed and corruption.

Illegal aliens made legal by EOs signed by Obama will always known as 2nd-class frauds!

Highly-Vaunted Illegal Alien “Love” Actually Harms Children!

By John W. Lillpop

In the most outrageous argument ever advanced in support of illegal invasions of the US by foreign aliens, presidential aspirant Jeb Bush tried to sprinkle fairy dust on the criminal act of defying US borders and immigration laws by claiming that such acts were, in fact, acts of “love.”

According to the allegedly intelligent Bush, violations by illegal aliens must be countenanced because the aliens invade out of a burning love for children and other family members.

Mind you, the illegal tsunami from south of our borders is not driven by greed, that is, a quest for free education, food stamps, welfare cash, free health care, housing, and other benefits which are intended for US citizens, but which are hijacked by altogether too many invading illegals!

Bush also fails to take into account the economic harm that illegals inflict on the ability of low-income American citizen families to secure and hold gainful employment.  He also ignores the fact that illegals often abandon “beloved” family members in the third-world nations of origin.

As reported at the reference, the lust of the Obama Administration to grow the base of the Democrat Party, combined with the greed of illegal aliens for American booty, has made American policy anything but “humane.”

As reported, in part:

The number of minor children crossing or attempting to cross the U.S. southern border unaccompanied by a parent or other adult relative has exploded from 6,560 in 2011 to an estimated 60,000 for fiscal year 2014. Border patrol agents in South Texas reported over 1,000 such children were apprehended by officials earlier this month, including a 3-year-old boy from Honduras.
As a government official from Ecuador told The New York Times, one of the main reasons is a belief held by many in Central America and Mexico that some sort of immigration reform will be passed that allows anyone who can get into the United States illegally to be able to stay.
In other words, the prospect of amnesty is encouraging more illegal immigration – and in this case, the human trafficking of children. Often raised by their grandparents or other relatives because their parents have already come to the U.S. illegally, these children are traveling alone or with human smugglers, called coyotes, who are paid to get them across the border.
And what happens once they’re here? According to the Department of Health and Human Services, by law, the U.S. government must assume custody of “unaccompanied alien children” apprehended by law enforcement who file claims to remain in the United States. The government then contracts with state-licensed facilities to care for the children until it can place them with sponsors.
According to a judge in Texas who has reviewed numerous such cases, the U.S. government is guilty of encouraging this illegal behavior.
The judge said:
By fostering an atmosphere whereby illegal aliens are encouraged to pay human smugglers for further services, the Government is not only allowing them to fund the illegal and evil activities of these cartels, but is also inspiring them to do so.
Interestingly, one of the reasons given for children attempting to cross the border into the U.S. is that they are trying to escape crime and gang violence in their home countries. Yet the Obama administration’s immigration policies are actually releasing criminals back into the very communities where these children are likely to find themselves in America.”

So, Jeb Bush, just where in the hell is the “love” that is supposed to justify the invasion of ten of millions of low-skilled, non-English speakers into America?

Phooey!



http://blog.heritage.org/2014/05/27/smallest-victims-obamas-immigration-policy/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morni

Latest Progressive Buffoonery: Concern over “Hurt Feelings” Trumps Excellence!

By John W. Lillpop


Competition and excellence are as American as baseball and apple pie. The idea is that one should take optimum advantage of God-given talents and abilities by striving to be the best possible so as to achieve important goals and objectives.

That notion, so the story goes, will help prepare one for the rigors and challenges of the real world where one’s abilities and performance are carefully scrutinized in order to select the “best candidates” for employment and for promotion and salary opportunities.

Indeed, when employers look to hire, the object is to find the most qualified prospective employee.  Scant little time is spent in HR offices or corporate board rooms fretting over “hurt feelings” or exclusivity discrimination.

The business of professional sports is an excellent example. Baseball scouts search high and low for young players whom can run the fastest, throw the ball the furthest, and whom can hit a baseball with the greatest power and accuracy.

Rarely does a big-league baseball manager take a budding superstar aside and counsel the young man: “Your batting average and home run production is depressing to some of the other players with more average talents.  You should strike out more often, hit with less power, and stop running so damn fast! Do it for the team!”

Likewise, a high-tech team leader in Silicone Valley is unlikely to say the following to “techies”  assigned to develop an innovative, new product line:

“Folks, of course we want to be # 1 in sales, quality, and profit. Still, we have a moral obligation to guard against “hurt feelings” among our competitors. So, when you are inventing gadgets and technological miracles for the future, consider how your innovation will impact the feelings of your counterparts working for competitors!” 

Of course, these are silly, outrageous examples.

Unfortunately, this sort of progressive buffoonery is creeping into our education system.

For instance, concerns about the “exclusive nature” of the annual honors night at Archie R. Cole Middle School in Rhode Island have caused school officials to scrap the tradition.

Instead, students who would normally be recognized at the annual spring tradition will be honored during team-based recognition ceremonies and graduation.

Thus, out of touch liberals at the school have implemented the progressive worship of mediocrity and equality, especially at the expense of excellence.

Parents with children whom attend Archie R. Cole Middle School should move, with haste, to transfer their offspring to  schools that will encourage and reward excellence.

Perhaps equality-driven progressives could level the playing field a bit by having a “Hurt Feelings” awards ceremony for the less accomplished students?  Call it a gathering of "Future Democrats!"

Honoring, or Mocking, Those Whom Died for Our Freedoms and Democratic Ideals?

By John W. Lillpop

Notwithstanding the fact that contemporary celebrations of Memorial Day have more to do with three-day weekends, back yard barbecues, reckless episodes of alcohol abuse, and other frivolities, the original purpose was to set aside a national spiritual holiday to remember and honor the brave American men and women whom sacrificed their very lives in the service of this blessed nation.

Indeed, in the beginning, it was conceived as a day to memorialize and prayerfully thank those dead American men and women whom made the ultimate sacrifice to defend and preserve the liberties and precious freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

No one can deny that horse shoes, watermelon, and fried chicken add spice to the celebratory spirit of Memorial Day.

However, in much the same manner as Christmas is not really about glittery trees, blinking lights, and mistletoe, so it is that the genesis of Memorial Day is really about things spiritual, rather than slothful excuses to overeat, over drink, and otherwise engage in intemperate behavior,

Memorial Day History*


Memorial Day was officially proclaimed on 5 May 1868 by General John Logan, national commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, in his , and was first observed on 30 May 1868, when flowers were placed on the graves of Union and Confederate soldiers at Arlington National Cemetery.

The first state to officially recognize the holiday was New York in 1873. By 1890 it was recognized by all of the northern states. The South refused to acknowledge the day, honoring their dead on separate days until after World War I (when the holiday changed from honoring just those who died fighting in the Civil War to honoring Americans who died fighting in any war).

It is now celebrated in almost every State on the last Monday in May (passed by Congress with the National Holiday Act of 1971 (P.L. 90 - 363) to ensure a three day weekend for Federal holidays), though several southern states have an additional separate day for honoring the Confederate war dead.

Traditional observance of Memorial day has diminished over the years. Many Americans nowadays have forgotten the meaning and traditions of Memorial Day. At many cemeteries, the graves of the fallen are increasingly ignored, neglected. Most people no longer remember the proper flag etiquette for the day. While there are towns and cities that still hold Memorial Day parades, many have not held a parade in decades. Some people think the day is for honoring any and all dead, and not just those fallen in service to our country.

Did Our Brothers and Sisters Die in Vain?

One cannot help but wonder whether the price paid by American men and women in years past are justified given the fact that America is currently run by politicians who simply do not respect traditional American values, traditions, or law.

Some questions to ponder:

1. Our government is run by an administration that ignores Constitutionally-protected freedom of religion by demanding that services which violate the religious beliefs of certain groups be provided by those groups, contrary to Amendment 1 of the US Constitution.

The same Obama administration consistently ignores and circumvents existing immigration law so as to curry favor with illegal aliens whom are being targeted as future Democrats.  This extraordinary violation of the rule of law ignores the will and needs of millions of American citizens, including Veterans, in order to pander to those whom have invaded America.

How many American lives were sacrificed so that our renegade government could ignore basic religious freedoms to 65 million Americans, and ignore our borders and immigration laws for political gain?


2. Our government is run by people who generally oppose the 2nd Amendment, and whom created and implemented a criminal program known as “Fast and Furious,” which caused dangerous weapons to be shipped from the US to drug terrorists in Mexico. Those weapons were used against innocent Americans and Mexicans, including the death of a US Border Patrol agent.

How many brave Americans fought and died so that our government could send weapons to foreign terrorists whom would use said weapons to kill an American law enforcement official in order to taint the 2nd Amendment?


3. In 2011, our President ordered a military attack on the foreign nation of Libya, and did so without Congressional approval, and in violation of the War Powers Act.
How many of those who fought and died for America did so knowing that their sacrifices would empower a defiant president to willfully ignore the provisions of the Constitution and the War Powers Act, thereby circumventing a vital separation of powers principle so vital to our Democracy?


4. The President of the United States, in concert with liberal allies in Congress, passed a law which requires Americans to purchase health insurance regardless of their personal choices. The law, opposed by a majority of Americans, also provides for punitive action by the IRS against those Americans who refuse to comply.

How many American lives were sacrificed so that our renegade government could force unwilling Americans to buy a product-service against their will and threaten to use a federal agency against Americans who do not comply?

5. The President of the United States is an unabashed socialist and outspoken critic of free enterprise and the profit motive, both of which favored by an overwhelming majority of Americans.

This president seeks to divide Americans on the basis of class and wealth, and further proposes to use government power to seize assets from the alleged “rich” and “redistribute” such wealth to people whose political views are more closely aligned with his own.

How many American lives were sacrificed so that our renegade president could wage class war fare and use government to steal wealth rightfully the property of some in order to enrich others?

Conclusion:

Given the cynical, anti-American policies of the Obama Administration, those Americans whom have sacrificed their all for America are, regrettably, being mocked this Memorial Day.

The good news is that our Constitution, battered and abused as it is, is still viable.

Solution?

We the people must remember the American war dead on November 4 and vote to remove those whom refuse to honor the sacrifices made on our behalf.

Do it in memory of the brave men and women who died for our freedoms and liberty!




* http://www.usmemorialday.org/backgrnd.html

Regarding Amnesty for Illegals: What About Negative Impact on African-American Families?

By John W. Lillpop


The obvious, simple-minded fallacy in Jeb Bush’s idiotic claim that illegals who invade America do so out of “Love” and should be given a pass on following the rule of law is this:

Amnesty for illegal aliens will "disproportionately harm lower-skilled African-Americans."  Thus, the logical question, “What about love and employment opportunities for American citizens who just happen to be African-Americans?”

No doubt Jeb Bush has spent very little, if any, time pondering that  question.

However, as reported at the reference, Peter Kirsanow, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has thought intently about the issue and is demanding that members of the Congressional Black Caucus also consider the question seriously.

As reported at the reference:

A member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights advised the Congressional Black Caucus on Tuesday to oppose amnesty legislation backed by President Barack Obama and Democrats because it threatens to further devastate the employment opportunities for black Americans.

Commissioner Peter Kirsanow, in his individual capacity as a member of the eight-member commission, wrote to Rep. Marcia Fudge (R-OH), the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), and said that amnesty would "disproportionately harm lower-skilled African-Americans" whose economic conditions have already gotten worse under America's first black president. 

He asked members of the CBC to "oppose any legislation that would grant any form of work authorization to illegal aliens" and "oppose legislation that would increase the overall number of guest workers admitted to the U.S. each year."

Reports have documented the surplus of labor in the high-tech industry that is depressing wages, and there is also a huge surplus in more lower-skilled jobs.
"The obvious question is whether there are sufficient jobs in the low-skilled labor market for both African-Americans and illegal immigrants," Kirsanow wrote. "The answer is no."

He referenced a 2008 commission hearing in which witnesses testified that illegal immigration "disproportionately impacts the wages and employment opportunities of African-American" males. Scholars noted that 40% of the 18-point decline in the black employment rate from 1960 to 2000 was due to immigration. He noted that illegal immigrants and blacks "often find themselves in competition for the same jobs." 

Kirsanow cited April's unemployment numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which found that the "unemployment rate for all black Americans – not just those with few skills – was 11.6 percent, more than twice the white unemployment rate of 5.3 percent." Furthermore, the unemployment rate for black teens was 36.8 percent, and the "black labor force participation rate has fallen to an historic low of 60.9 percent," while the "black median household income has dropped by nearly $1,500 in the last five years."

"Illegal immigration has a disparate impact on African-American men because these men are disproportionately represented in the low-skilled labor force," he wrote, noting that a 2012 Census report found that "50.9 percent of native-born blacks had not continued their education beyond high school." 

That same report also "found that 75.5 percent of foreign-born Hispanics had not been educated beyond high school," and "foreign-born Hispanics who are in the United States illegally are disproportionately male." And since "African-Americans who have not pursued education beyond high school are also disproportionately male," they will be competing for similar jobs in an economy that "has a glut of low-skilled workers, not a shortage."

These employment difficulties, Kirsanow noted, combined with high incarceration rates, "likely contribute to one of the most serious problems facing the African-American community today: the dearth of intact nuclear families."

"The disintegration of the black family began to accelerate during the 1960s. It is one of the great tragedies of modern America that the disintegration of the African-American family has shown no signs of abating," he wrote. "The dearth of job opportunities gives these men less confidence in their ability to support a family, and gives women reason to fear that these prospective husbands will be only another mouth to feed."

Kirsanow also emphasized that the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act showed that amnesty legislation does not solve the illegal immigration problem, and "it is likely that if illegal immigrants are granted legal status, more people will come to America illegally and will further crowd African-American men (and other low-skilled men and women) out of the workforce."
"Giving amnesty to illegal immigrants would only exacerbate this problem facing low-skilled men, who are disproportionately African-American," Kirsanow wrote.”

Again, the crucial question: Why are the needs of African-American citizens not being fully considered before the federal government proposes action which sanctions the invasion of our sovereign nation by foreign workers, and which significantly diminishes opportunities for prosperity among African- American families?



Reference: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/20/U-S-Civil-Rights-Commissioner-to-CBC-Oppose-Amnesty-Because-It-Hurts-Black-Workers