Democrats will likely skip the annual task of writing a budget for the U.S. government this year amid lawmakers’ unwillingness to endorse a plan sure to include huge deficits.—Brian Faler
How much are Democrats spending? They don’t want you to know. In fact Democrats are willing to disregard the Constitution rather than reveal before the November elections just how much they are abusing spending.
Brian Faler in his article, “Democrats unlikely to pass budget in Face of Spiraling Deficits” would lead us to believe that keeping a constitutional mandate like presenting an annual budget is equivalent skipping a meal or some menial task like electing to forego cleaning out rain gutters this year. In other words submitting an annual budget is much more than an “annual task” it is law—Constitutional law. (see article)
Even though the media isn’t reporting it—it is a big deal. It’s a huge deal. Besides making a mockery of our constitution Democrats are making a travesty of our electoral process by keeping information from the American people that would help decide which Party would be best to make our economy better.
The U.S. Constitution (Article I, section 9, clause 7) states that "[n]o money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."
Each year, the President of the United States submits his budget request to Congress for the following fiscal year, as required by the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921. Current law (31 U.S.C. § 1105(a)) requires the president to submit a budget no earlier than the first Monday in January, and no later than the first Monday in February. Typically, presidents submit budgets on the first Monday in February.
The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 required the President to submit to Congress an annual budget for the entire federal government.
Instead of proudly displaying what their big government programs are costing Americans. Democrats are hoping that the American people will vote uninformed, about the cost of Democrats running this country like it was Greece, in November’s elections.
They’re hoping that those uninformed votes will translate into votes for Democrats. Congressman John Boehner asks the question, “Where’s the budget,” in this interview. (see 1:09mins video)
Terence P Jeffery in his article “Obama Defeats FDR (in Spending Other People’s Money)” writes, When calculated by the average annual percentage of the Gross Domestic Product that [Barack Obama] will spend during his presidency, Obama is on track to become the biggest-spending president since 1930, the earliest year reported on the OMB’s historical chart of spending as a percentage of GDP. When calculated by the average annual percentage of GDP he will borrow during his presidency, Obama is on track to become the greatest debtor president since Franklin Roosevelt. (see article)
According to Jeffery president Soetoro will outspend and out-borrow the previous administration of George Bush. Bush was routinely pilloried in the media and by Democrats for his spending.
It is unconscionable that in a time of worldwide fiscal crisis Democrats would continue to play politics with the U.S. economy by holding the budget hostage so they won’t look quite as bad to the American people before the November elects.
Democrats have made a multi-trillion dollar debt bed that all of us will have to sleep in, only they prefer the lights out so we, the American people, can’t see the bed. So much for President Soetoro’s empty rhetoric about the disinfectant of Sunlight shining on government making what’s done in the Washington dark exposed to the American people.
And don’t bother to give me that tired “Republicans did it too” line. Republicans were voted out of power in 2006 for their indiscretions remember that? This administration and this Congress promised to be the most ethical, the most transparent government in the history of America remember that?
If now they wish to say, Hey we are no better than Republicans, then by all means say it. Why don’t Democrats use that line as a slogan for the November elections? Keep Democrats in power, we’re not submitting a budget and we’re no better than the Republicans!
Not that catchy but for once it would be something honest coming from a Democrat.
Sorry that is not the sign of the Cross Ms. Pelosi
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she has told Catholic cardinals, archbishops and bishops that she wants them to speak from the pulpit for immigration reform and tell Catholics who oppose it that reform “is a manifestation of our living the gospels.” -- Nicholas Ballasy
“Hail Nancy full of disgrace the Catholic Church is not with you, Amen.”
According to the Pope Nancy Pelosi shouldn’t be receiving communion which means that she is not in good standing with the church. Last year the Pope issued an edict that any Catholic who supported abortion should not receive Holy Communion. I’m certain he told her so in their face to face meet last year in February. The Pope’s comments came last year as he was addressing the problem of politicians who claimed they are Catholic but support legislation that is immoral and anti-religious.
This conflict between the Church and American politicians became noteworthy after the election year of 2008 as many American politicians who claimed that they were Catholic openly challenged the Church’s teachings on abortion. Nancy Pelosi is one such American politician.
The Pope meant to break the Church’s years of silent regarding Catholic’s in politics who openly defy the Church’s moral imperatives. Recently Catholic politicians who would run for political office made it a practice to simply ignore or misrepresent Church’s teachings which they disagreed with in order to justify supporting immoral political positions related to the social issues of the day. (see article)
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has to be aware that she is not in good standing with the Church made even clearer after her meeting with the Holy Father last February 2009. Yet she disregarded the Papal rebuke and published her own rebellious version of what happened between her and Pope Benedict XVI.
"It is with great joy that my husband, Paul, and I met with his Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI today. In our conversation, I had the opportunity to praise the Church's leadership in fighting poverty, hunger and global warming, as well as the Holy Father's dedication to religious freedom and his upcoming trip and message to Israel. I was proud to show his Holiness a photograph of my family's papal visit in the 1950s, as well as a recent picture of our children and grandchildren."—Nancy Pelosi
It is against that background that Nancy Pelosi spoke at the Catholic Community Conference on Capitol Hill on May 6, Pelosi specifically referenced illegal immigrants in America , saying as a practical matter, “we can’t say to people, 12 million of you, ‘go back to wherever you came from or go to jail.’” Pelosi further instructed the conference saying she wants them to speak from the pulpit for immigration reform and tell Catholics who oppose it that reform “is a manifestation of our living the gospels.” (see story)
The cardinals, the archbishops and the bishops come to me and say we want you to pass immigration reform. And I say but I want you to speak about it from the pulpit. I want you to instruct your… whatever the communication is …the people who oppose immigration reform are sitting in those pews and you have to tell them that this is a manifestation of our living the Gospels.
Our patron saint of San Francisco Saint Francis of Assisi he said preach the Gospel, sometimes use words. We need the words to be said because it isn’t being picked up automatically—Nancy Pelosi
(see 2:22min video)
This is even a new low for Pelosi. Pelosi is a Liberal Progressive. Liberal Progressives usually champion so-called, “separation of church and state.” Yet Pelosi is so desperate she is attempting to gain a political advantage using religion.
Think about it, she is willing and has the impertinence to first show her face at a Catholic conference knowing full well she is not in good standing with the leader of the Catholic Church.
Then in spite of her open defiance against the church’s teachings Pelosi lends rebellious council to the Church’s holy men as if she is an authority of what the manifestation of the gospels is. Who does Nancy Pelosi think she is “Our Holy Lady of Congress”?
This is blasphemy. It is an outrage. To think that Nancy Pelosi would stoop to using the gospels of Jesus Christ which have been officially rejected by the American political class, especially by Liberal Progressives who support homosexuality and abortion in open defiance of the gospels, and then to attempt to employ the same gospels that Progressives abhor in a scheme to manipulate believers to vote against voter’s own interest is simply blasphemous!
Nancy Pelosi is not in good standing with her church and neither is she or Democrats in good standing with the American people.
Therefore Nancy Pelosi should be defrocked by the American people of her self-appointed position as “Our Holy Lady of Congress” as soon as the American people can cast our ballots before these Liberal Progressive Democrat swine in November.
I find it hard to believe that President Calderon of Mexico has the giant cojones to criticize the immigration laws of the United States.
He has found sympathy from the morons that are governing our contry, from the Department of Homeland Security, right up to the "Chief Moron".
When you actually take the time to think about it, nobody in the Obama White House has one ounce of experience at ever running any kind of a business. So it is no surprise that they can't understand the very simple terminology in the Arizona Illegal Immigrant Law. Remember........... these are the people who questioned Sarah Palin's qualifications of leadership. The voters fell for the "teleprompter king's" rhetoric, and look what we got stuck with.
My whole point about Calderon's "complaint" is that Mexico's illegal immigrant policy is severe.......... in terms of the type of punishment and it's degree. If you are an unfortunate immigrant, coming up from Central America, and enter Mexico illegally, you will have all the time in the world to regret it. So in light of Mexico's policy,does Calderon have any right in the world to criticize us???
I am supplying a link here, which everyone should click on and read in it's entirety. Then you will understand part of the frustration of Arizona, and the rest of the border state, with the Federal Government's lack of compassion and overall intelligence.
Osama bin Laden and AG Eric Holder: Perhaps a name Holder can’t say
I mean the thing is that- and I get frustrated and there was part of me that was hoping this was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country because there are a lot of people who want to use this terrorist intent to justify writing off people who believe in a certain way or come from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way. I mean they use it as justification for really outdated bigotry. –Contessa Brewer, MSNBC comments on her disappointment when the terrorist Faisal Shahzad was captured
Say Radical Islam Eric come on you can do it.
I mean, like I think Attorney General Eric Holder gets frustrated and stuff and there is a part of him that is hoping that he will never have to say the phrase Radical Islam. You know something like MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer’s problem with like everyone thinking that Middle Easterners are bad and stuff.
Like everybody is just going to blame them for terrorism and things. Because there are a lot of people who want to use that guy Faisal, I think that’s his name, because he was born in the Middle East and has ties there. And like he even did some terrorist training there.
People will automatically use the fact that he allegedly attempted to bomb Time Square with hundreds of people around as a reason to justify writing off people who believe a certain way or come from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way.
Like I mean they use those things as justification for really outdated bigotry. Just because some people with ties to any kind of Islamic country are trying to kill us. (hear 43sec. audio)
I’m thinking that’s why AG Eric Holder had such a hard time testifying before the House Judiciary Committee on last Thursday. Apparently he gets frustrated when the term “radical Islam is used. (see 2:06min video)
In testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on 5/13/2010, US Attorney General refuses to use the term "radical Islam."
Interestingly Contessa Brewer and Eric Holder sound strikingly similar. Almost like the two were infected by the same diseased ideology… Progressivism.
That is certainly one of the concern that I have that you will end up in a situation where people are racially profiled. And that could lead to a wedge drawn between certain communities and law enforcement.
Which leads to the problem of people in those communities not willing to interact with people in law enforcement, not will to share information, not willing to be witnesses when law enforcement needs them. I think you need to think of the collateral consequences of such a law.—Attorney General Eric Holder, ThisWeek
Question, did Attorney General Eric Holder Read the Arizona Immigration Law before he attacked it? Here’s AG Holder on ABC’s ThisWeek Sunday News raising concerns about Arizona’s law. (see 1:06min video)
After hearing the Attorney General’s concerns about the Arizona Immigration law some in the media began to get suspicious and began to ask questions. Had the President or his Attorney General even read the law that they were attacking?
It certainly didn’t seem like it to those of us who read the law because what the president and his AG were saying didn’t even come close to what the law actually is. What they were saying was “Weapons of Mass Destruction” wrong!
Brit Hume of Fox News asks the question how could the president and his Attorney General get it so wrong? I don’t know Brit they seem like a couple of bright guys maybe they’re getting their News from the cable’s CNN or MSNBC or maybe they’re being informed by broadcast News of ABC, CBS, NBC or 60 minutes. (see 2:48min video)
I know what to do, let’s call the AG before a congressional hearing and ask him if he’s read the Arizona law. Or if he didn’t read it where did he get his information from. He’ll tell us.
Congressman Ted Poe will you asked the AG if he’s read the Arizona law before he went on ABC’s ThisWeek to raise concerns about it, or if he’s read it any time since?
We would like to know since Mr. Holder probably made the over 40 million illegal aliens in this country fearful about Arizona and we wouldn’t want illegals to think that entering the United States illegally is a violation of law subject to being arrested and deported back to the country that they are a citizen of, now would we. (see 3:44min video)
Congressman Ted Poe (R-TX) questioning Attorney General Eric Holder about his knowledge of Arizona Senate Bill 1070 (commonly known as the Arizona Immigration Law).
Pitiful just pitiful, oh I see Mr. Holder you haven’t read the law. And the reason that you didn’t is because it’s your staff’s fault for not briefing you and putting the law before you before you went on national television and made wild accusations and categorically false statements about Arizona and Arizona Senate Bill 1070.
In addition to that I’ve also heard the wild accusations and categorically false statements that your boss, the president is making about Arizona and its Immigration law. I’m betting he hasn’t read the law either.
Below is linked copy of the law for all of you other Liberal misinformed haters who quote chapter and verse of what your ill-informed president says about everything. Obviously you don’t know to check things out for yourselves. (Arizona Senate Bill 1070)
Now the next time someone jumps up and shouts, “You Lie!” When Soetoro is speaking you ‘all will know that someone has probably read something that Barry Hussein Soetoro just didn’t have time to read before Soetoro popped off about it before the nation! Or the alternative may well be that neither little Barry nor little Eric can read!
"I have to say, though, I did not appreciate what I considered to be a ridiculous spectacle during the congressional hearings into this matter.
You had executives of BP and Transocean and Halliburton falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else.
The American people could not have been impressed with that display, and I certainly wasn't." —president Barry Hussein Soetoro
I call it the paradox of finger pointing at the finger pointers. In a holier-than-thou sermon last Friday which was meant to be an update to the American people regarding the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico president Barry Hussein Soetoro pontificated on the evils of companies finger pointing at one another and not owning up to their corporate responsibilities.
However in the midst of the president’s homily if one listened closely one could hear the faintest mea culpa also in a speech which resonated largely in, “do as I say, but don’t finger point as I do” tones.
Yet unbelievably, president Barry Hussein Soetoro admitted that he is responsible for the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. That’s right he did. Did he say I’m responsible for the oil spill in the Gulf? No he didn’t. But would you expect a man who has spent his entire presidency up until now finger pointing at “the previous administration” to willingly and openly except responsibility for anything?
So why do I say he admitted guilt? Because he did in the only way he knows how to, hidden in plain sight in language said and unsaid. Once you understand the double speak which he and his fellow Democrats employ and once you know the facts, it’s quite easy to decipher what he meant from what he said. What he said was the following:
"For too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore. To borrow an old phrase, we will trust but we will verify."—president Barry Hussein Soetoro
(see 2:16min video)
Now when we decipher the president’s statement we first find a Barry Hussein Soetoro finger point at both the previous administration and the Clinton administration. And maybe even beyond that. He chooses to do that with a carefully laid beginning premise. He says, “For too long, for a decade or more…”
So when we do the math the administrations that the federal agency was under which permitted drilling in the time frame of a decade or more included at least two administrations before his administration. This is a finger point!
Secondly this is a man that receives daily briefings regarding global situations by the best intelligence on the planet. He has the whole of government agencies as well as the intelligence agencies; the NSA, the HLS, the CIA, and the FBI at his disposal yet instead of making a detailed factual time and date statement regarding the “cozy relationship” between oil companies and the federal agency which allowed them to drill with no or easily obtained permits, the president chooses to say the words, “It seems…”
It seems? It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies? Why wouldn’t president Soetoro know definitively whether or not permits were issued based on his allegations? Hum?
It is my contention that the president does know exact dates and times yet he chose to use wording that would distance him from any blame in this matter on the one hand, while on the other hand only accepting Executive responsibility. Executive responsibility is taking responsibility for the actions of one’s subordinates while absolving oneself from any personal responsibility.
It would be like a Captain of a ship handing over the bridge to his first officer and in the Captain’s absence the ship is ran aground. The Captain would be held responsible even though technically he didn’t cause the ship to go aground.
Third the president said, “That cannot and will not happen anymore. To borrow an old phrase, we will trust but we will verify."
This statement is dripping with ambiguity referring to the issuing of permits without proper scrutiny based on the cozy relationships between the oil companies and the federal agency’s, in charge of oversight, actions--actions done under previous administrations. Furthermore because all of this happened, for too long, or for a decade or more I (Barry) was not here. All of this is meant to convey the unspoken message that, “these deals for drilling didn’t happen on my watch.”
But also if one looks closely we see president Soetoro assuming some responsibility for the future when he says, “That cannot and will not happen anymore…we will trust but we will verify.”
So from all of this the impression that we are supposed to come away with is under the Soetoro administration things will change from the way the oil companies and the government previously did business before the Soetoro administration.
But not so fast Mr. president. Let’s take a look at the facts. Let’s do a little trust but verify!
It is reported that oil companies received permission to drill oil starting in January 2009 and continued to receive permission to drill for offshore oil as late as May 2010 by the New York Times. Uh Mr. president were you not inaugurated in January of 2009?
The [MMS] agency since January 2009 has approved at least three huge lease sales, 103 seismic blasting projects and 346 drilling plans. Agency records also show that permission for those projects and plans was granted without getting the permits required under federal law.-- IAN URBINA, The New York Times (see article)
Five request for drilling from oil companies dates ranging from 5/4/10 to 5/12/10 and five approvals for drilling in the Gulf of Mexico dates ranging as late as 5/10/10 to 5/12/10 (see source)
And let’s not forget in March of 2010 the Barry Hussein Soetoro administration announced that it was going to open offshore areas that had never been opened for drilling before. (see article)
And Mr. president you did this knowing or you should have known that there were problems with the government agency in charge of oversight of the oil companies because a May 27, 2009 letter from Ken Abbott a scientist of BP outlined his concerns if drilling for oil were permitted in the Gulf of Mexico. (see letter)
This is a responsibility that all of us share. The oil companies share it, the manufacturers of this equipment share it, the agencies in the federal government in charge of oversight share that responsibility. I will not tolerate more finger pointing or irresponsibility.—president Barry Hussein Soetoro
And it is well that you shouldn’t tolerate any more finger pointing Mr. Soetoro because even the hard core progressives know that no matter how you attempt to parse words and craftily blame others with your high and condescending paternal lashing out we all know that you’re the blame for this crisis.
He [President Soetoro] owns this now [Gulf Oil catastrophe]. It was only a few weeks ago he came out for offshore drilling.—Bill Maher (source)
So go ahead and preach at us like old crazy drunk Uncle Joe who thought he was fooling everybody but wasn’t fooling anyone. This Catastrophe is your Katrina. It happened on your watch. It was warned about under your administration and it was you sir who called for drilling offshore for oil.
If there was an Oil man in the Whitehouse and this same disaster happened on his watch he would be catching holy hell right about now for the greatest oil spill and ecological disaster in U.S. history.
Funny thing about pointing fingers Mr. president you point one and there’s three pointing back at you. But in this case I’m willing to bet there’s about 308 million fingers or more pointing at you Mr. president.
It didn't take long for the threatened Arizona boycott to backfire on the few states that have espoused it. Already, with almost 70% of the nation solidly behind Arizona, more and more states are promising to support the state with conferences and vacation trips. In addition, those states are contemplating similar legislation, and a majority of their residents, are planning on voting with their pocket-books to give California and the rest of the whiners a taste of their own boycott medicine.
I knew that this would happen!!! You would have had to be a complete idiot to think that the "silent majority" was going to let this pass by unchallenged.
Can't wait to see how this plays out....... in the "lame-stream media", and in the States. I have a feeling that the whole thing is going to quietly die down, when the bleeding hearts come to grips with the reality of life and forget about all this political correctness, and the politicians realize that it will hurt them far more than the few hispanic votes that they will gain.
They forget that in that 70% in favor of the Arizona law, there are most of the hispanic-American citizens and legal residents. They too want the protection from the illegals and dope smugglers.
This ain’t your Mother’s or Father’s college education! No what you’ll find on University of California college campuses these days is the Muslim Student Association, the Hezbollah Student Association and “Hitler Youth” week celebrations all in the name of diversity and inclusion no doubt.
David Horowitz a guest speaker of the Young Americans for Freedom on the campus of the University of California San Diego on May 10, 2010 was challenged by a young female Muslim Jew-hater and supporter of the eradication of all Jews, regarding what the student attempted to characterize as misrepresentation about who is actually funding the Muslim Student Associations (MSA) on University of California Campuses.
It has became the anti-Conservative,the anti-America radical's (in this case Muslims) strategy to show up at Conservative meetings or guest appearances and attempt to either interrupt the meeting or shout down the guest speaker or attempt to make politically correct but bogus points during the question and answer period after the speech. (So much for freedom of speech, the freedom to associate and live and let live!)
Jumanah Imad Albahri is just such an anti-Conservative, anti-America radical. She attempted to make hay with what she thought was a false claim she found it in literature of Mr. Horowitz. It was literature that by her own admission was not a part of the discussion.
I was reading your literature, I found that much more interesting than your talk, and I found some interesting things about the MSA which is an organization that is very active on campus and it is hosting our annual “Hitler Youth” week (you should come out to those events).
If you could clarify the connection between the MSA and Jihad terrorist networks because last I checked we had to do our own fundraising and we never get help from anyone.
So if you can clarify the connection between UCSD’s MSA or if don’t have such information if you could connect other MSA‘s on UC’s because the connection wasn’t too clear in the pamphlet, so if you could just clarify. --Jumanah Imad Albahri, Student at University of California San Diego
But instead of showing up Mr. Horowitz as Ms. Albahri intended to do Mr. Horowitz was able to expose the Muslim Student Association, which is an approved organization of the University of California, as an anti-Jewish hatred organization that advocates the malicious genocide of Jews. See Ms. Albahri’s startling confession of that fact. (see 3:29min video)
Remember when college was about pledging the right Sorority or Fraternity? Or maybe you remember when college was about preparing yourself for a career that would earn you prestige and a better life. Today’s college it seems especially in the University of California system is about educating tomorrow’s Hezbollah and tomorrow’s Muslim Jew killers. It is an outrage that the University of California would condone Jihadist groups and hate groups on it's campuses.
Thus far UC's have allowed this appalling bigotry on it's campuses under the pretense of diversity and then the UC turns a blind eye to the haters and potential murderers that it is educating. UC students who will one day no doubt use the UC's education which they've received to kill Jews.
No this ain’t your mother’s and father’s college education you can tell by the lack of America flags on the Campuses of the University of California System.
I can't believe the outright stupidity of some of the people of California!!! Whoever the "brain" of the planned boycott of Arizona is, he or she is not the brightest bulb in the box.
If this illegal immigration problem were strictly local, I could understand what they are trying to do. However, the entire country is riled up over a situation that the Obama administration has no intention of addressing......at least not until after the mid-term elections....... and for obvious reasons.
With more than 70% of the country squarely behind Arizona and it's hard-working and dedicated legal residents, California is risking the ire of the entire country. Obviously the "open border" advocates of the "Sunshine State" did not do their homework, or for that matter, didn't even attend class.
Don't be so hasty my left-wing friends. Oh ye that wields the "sword of revenge", may cut off thine own testicles! What you are proposing to use against the people of Arizona is dangerous. The vast majority of this country, who support Arizona, it's Governor, and it citizens, might not just stand by while you attempt to blackmail that state into "submission".
It will be from people like myself and the average working person in the rest of the country, that will come a boycott of California.....starting with the Pelosi Vineyards and your wine business in general. From there, it will be an easy step to boycott the entertainment business based in California, and on and on and on.
If I were a California politician or even a resident, I would give very careful consideration before participating in such folly. We are, after all............one nation under God......and it is OUR NATION, not Mexico's!!!!
If you choose to divide it with vote-pandering to the Hispanic community by coming to the "aid of the illegals"... and making false claims of "racism"....DO SO AT YOUR PERIL. You are already drowning in red ink, you may also drown in your wine.
We see ourselves, all of us here, as the Northern Front of a Latin America revolutionary movement. There are more than 40 million of our people north of the Rio Grande. That means to them (U.S. citizens)that’s 40 million potential revolutionaries north of the border inside of the belly of the beast.—Ron Gochez, History teacher Sanchee High School in California
AND YOU SO NAÏVELY THOUGHT THIS WAS ABOUT MISGUIDED U.S. LAWS
We are no longer speaking about Comprehensive Immigration Reform what we are really speaking about according to California High School History teacher Ron Gochez is Revolution!
According to Gochez White people are frail and racist and deserve to have their country overrun by what Gochez considers that rightful owners of this country, Mexicans. That is not surprising considering the source but what is surprising is that there are people in our government that share Gochez’s beliefs. People in our White house and Congress share Mr. Gochez’s beliefs.
According to Gochez there are 40 million Mexicans in the United States not just the official 12 million that the Barry Hussein Soetoro will admit to. And these 40 million invaders are posed to make vast improvements to the United States. And when these revolutionaries are done with the United States the United States will be just as well governed as Mexico or Columbia, or Venezuela. (see 4:55min video)
We see ourselves, all of us here, as the Northern Front of a Latin America revolutionary movement. There are more than 40 million of our people north of the Rio Grande. That means to them (U.S. citizens)that’s 40 million potential revolutionaries north of the border inside of the belly of the beast.
So when you think about why they (U.S. citizens) want to keep us out, of all people, that’s why. Because they know that we now know the truth, they know that we, “La Raza” we’re professionals, we’re educators, we are revolutionary students, what does that mean?
We are not just a regular culture anymore we are a culture of revolutionary spirit and that’s the fear!
So that being said I want to leave you with this, as a revolutionary and with revolutionary concepts let’s be clear about one thing our enemy is not the minutemen, our enemy is not the minutemen because the minutemen are not the ones who have killed over 4,600 people at this border.
But our enemy is the same enemy as Hugo Chavez, as Hugo Chavez has, our enemy is the same enemy that has kept Africa poor, our enemy is the same enemy that has kept Asia poor, our enemy is Capitalism and Imperialism.-- Sanchee H.S. history teacher Ron Gochez, La Raza Rally at UCLA
Ron Gochez’s sentiments are not new. These intentions have been underlining the illegal Mexican invasion of the United States for over the last 20 years no matter what official or unofficial U.S. government positions have been.
"We're going to take over all the political institutions of California. California is going to be a Hispanic state and anyone who doesn't like it should leave. If they [Anglos] don't like Mexicans, they ought to go back to Europe." -- Mario Obledo, former California secretary of health and welfare and co-founder of Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF)
Recently Liberals in the Democrat Party have planned to use the 40 million revolutionaries that are inside the belly of the beast to advance their political agenda of Liberalism. Like mutual parasites the Mexican revolutionaries and the Liberal Democrats feed off of one another.
Democrats’ plans are to use illegal Mexican invaders in this country to swell Democrat ranks thereby corrupting the election process of this country while taking and maintaining power. All the while the illegal Mexican invaders use the Liberal Democrat non-enforcement of borders in their quest of “Reconquista”, or taking back land which they claim that was stolen from them.
But let’s not forget the actual history between the two countries:
1821: Spain accepts Mexican independence.
1836: Texas breaks free of Mexican rule.
1846-48: Mexico loses much of its territory in the Mexican-American War. Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo signed.
1867: American Union Army assists Mexico’s Benito Juarez, a democratic reformer, removes France from Mexico.
1910: Mexican Revolution.
1914: U.S. Marines enter Veracruz.
1916: U.S. chases Pancho Villa out of New Mexico.
1938: Mexico nationalizes PEMEX. Cardenas and Roosevelt sign Good Neighbor Policy.
1942: Mexico supports U.S. in WWII. Relations generally stable during postwar years.
1960s: Tourism industry thrives, Mexican nationalism rises.
1971: U.S. imposes 10 percent tariff on all imports, hurting Mexico, which sends almost 70 percent of its exports to the U.S.
1980s: Mexico supports nationalist movements in Nicaragua and El Salvador. U.S. drug war creates mutual tensions.
1992: North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) signed. U.S. moves plants to Mexico to exploit cheap labor.
1995: Devastating Mexican peso devaluation.
2003: Mexican population in U.S. reported to have increased 10 percent in just three years, mostly as a result of illegal immigration. (source)
Even so Mexican agents have infiltrated the government of our country and are speaking seditiously against the United States and on behalf of Mexico to the detriment of U.S. interests. Take note of what’s happening in California as Mexican descendants in publicly held offices speak similar to Ron Gochez:
Art Torres, California Democratic Party chairman, at the Latino Summit Response to Prop 187 at U.C. Riverside (Jan. 14, 1995):
"Power is not given to you, you have to take it! People say to me when I was on the Senate floor, when I was in the Senate, why do you fight so hard for affirmative action programs. And I tell my white colleagues: because you're gonna need them. Remember, 187 is the last gasp of white America."
Antonio Villaraigosa, former speaker of the California State Assembly and present Los Angeles City Council member-elect, discussing Prop 187 with a KABC-TV, Los Angeles reporter (July 29, 1999):
Reporter: "What happens to the will of the people?"
Villaraigosa: "Well, the will of the people is something all of us have to respect, but when the will of the people is unconstitutional, the will of the people is null and void."
Mario Obledo, former California secretary of health and welfare and co-founder of Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), interviewed on radio station KIEV, Los Angeles (June 17, 1998):
"We're going to take over all the political institutions of California. California is going to be a Hispanic state and anyone who doesn't like it should leave. If they [Anglos] don't like Mexicans, they ought to go back to Europe."
Gloria Molina, Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, speaking at the 1997 Southwest Voter Registration Education Project:
"We demand to be counted. And what we know as well is that the big giant that they keep talking about is awakening. And he's pretty angry about what's going on. Ya basta! [Enough!] This community is no longer going to stand for it. … And our vote is going to be important. But I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, 'I'm going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back.'"
Pay who back?
Fabian Nunez, California assemblyman, at the Latino Summit Response to Prop 187 at U.C. Riverside (Jan. 14, 1995):
"Each of you, get ten people to go with us on that march in Washington, D.C., and I guarantee you just as we mobilized 150,000 to the streets of Los Angeles on October 16, we will mobilize 1 million people and bring Washington to a standstill, and those rednecks that are out there making decisions for the betterment of their communities will think twice before they push forward anti- immigrant legislation against our community."
State Sen. Nell Soto, D-Ontario, June 25, 2003, San Bernardino Town Hall meeting to discuss SB60, the bill that would grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, responding to critics who say the legislation promotes illegal immigration:
"Guess what?" Soto said. "The immigrants are already here. I welcome them. I hope they keep coming."
Do any of these quotes strike anyone as marginally racist or irresponsible?
'Since We Stole It, Let Them Steal It Back'
On June 17, I watched an incredible exchange during the legislative hearing over the Matricula Consular card (SB522) introduced by Manny Diaz, D-San Jose. The bill would require every state public officer or employee to accept, for identification purposes, the card as equivalent to a California driver’s license or ID card issued by the DMV.
Statements in favor included MALDEF, La Raza, the League of California Cities, the City of Los Angeles, and The Friends Committee on Legislation.
When the speaker stated "Opposition to the Bill?" a clearly audible "Oh God, same jerks" could be heard by all.
Statements opposed included several law enforcement and police organizations and the Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform (FAIR). Yeh Ling-Ling, the executive director of the Diversity Alliance for a Sustainable America (DASA), stated:
"It frightens me to see that our government is accepting ID cards issued by foreign governments. For example, in the land of my ancestry, China, the level of fraudulent documents is very high. Let’s say from the Philippines, Vietnam, Cambodia, where I lived, with money you can buy basically anything. Including documents.
"After the bombings [Sept. 11], I urged Congress to protect our borders. Very few congressional members listened. After the bombings, where thousands of people died, people were saying, it was unthinkable. Please, think of the list of what Mexico has been trying to do. What Mexican-American leaders, what many of them, have said. Mario Obledo said in 1998, quote, ‘eventually we are going to take over all the political institutions of California.’
"They said publicly that they are going to use immigration to control the Southwest, retake the Southwest, and eventually, take over the entire U.S. So please listen to those statements carefully."
Interruption by State Sen. John Vasconcellos, D-San Jose: "Since we stole it from them, why do you say it’s unfair to steal it back from us?"
Yeh Ling-Ling: "I’m sorry?"
Vasconcellos: "We stole it from them in the first place."
Yeh Ling-Ling: "Exactly what do you want to have happen?"
Vasconcellos: "I found your testimony (shaking his head, putting his glasses down) … I don’t want to debate you."
Yeh Ling-Ling: (with a questioning look) "Exactly?"
Vasconcellos: "I don’t want to debate you. I’ve listened to what you’ve had to say, period."
Since nobody in the chamber voiced any objection to Vasconcellos’ remarks, the reasonable inference is, yes, the Left is moving even further left, and American legislators like Vasconcellos believe that since Mexico was stolen by the U.S., there really isn’t anything to debate.
It should be noted as well that Ling-Ling has been confronted by other California Democrats while delivering similar testimony. Recently, during a hearing on SB60 (driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants), Sen. Nell Soto castigated Ling-Ling in a manner similar to Vasconcellos’, stating that her remarks were "blatantly racist," had no place at a legislative hearing and "really insulted the intelligence of some of us here."
Ling-Ling, whose group is based in Oakland, responded from the audience: "They were quotes, OK, from Mexican-American leaders."
What could Soto say? It was an embarrassing moment for SB60 backers.-- Patrick Mallon
40 Million plus illegal Mexican revolutionaries are in the United States (the belly of the beast) according to High School teacher Ron Gochez positioning themselves for “Reconquista” the taking back of U.S. land for Mexico and they have agents within the U.S. government aiding and betting them in this act of sedition against the United States of America. What Liberal Democrats call this very serious problem, this anti-America act, they call it Comprehensive Immigration Reform.
President Obama and Vice President Biden present Elena Kagan for nomination to the Supreme Court
Kagan's supposed academic achievements are being touted as the primary justification for putting someone who has never been a judge on the nation's highest court.
Now the fact that Kagan is more or less an academic nonentity would be of merely academic interest if she possessed unrelated but compelling qualifications for ascending to the nation's highest court. But what else, exactly, has she done?—Paul Campos
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado at Boulder. In his article The Next Harriet Miers? He absolutely slays the phony Liberal narrative that Elena Kagan is a brilliant legal scholar who makes up for a lack of jurist experience with unsurpassed legal scholarship.
Therefore according to linear Liberal logic Kagan is worthy of being nominated and confirmed for the Supreme Court only because president Soetoro says so. Not because of any deserving scholarly works or experience. This is starting to sound strangely familiar to the president’s own eligibility problems.
According to Professor Campos there is no there there in Kagan’s legal academic scholarship. Campos recounts a career of nearly 20 years since Kagan became a law professor in which Kagan’s academic writings are so scant he was able to read everything that Kagan had ever published in one day. (see article)
Yesterday, I read everything Elena Kagan has ever published. It didn't take long: in the nearly 20 years since Kagan became a law professor, she's published very little academic scholarship—three law review articles, along with a couple of shorter essays and two brief book reviews. Somehow, Kagan got tenure at Chicago in 1995 on the basis of a single article in The Supreme Court Review—a scholarly journal edited by Chicago's own faculty—and a short essay in the school's law review.—Paul Campos
I’m beginning to think that we are approaching that mysterious mystical Barry Hussein Soetoro birth certificate argument where we argue about the long vaulted copy of Soetoro’s birth certificate which no one has seen yet Obama sycophants argue to the death that based on a document that they have not seen Soetoro was born in Hawaii.
In like fashion Campos reveals that the narrative that Liberals are building about Kagan’s legal academic prowess is based on an academic record which isn’t there to support the claim that Kagan is brilliant.
At best we can only say that Elena Kagan is an Obama crony who is less deserving of a Supreme Court nomination than Harriet Miers was. And we all have accepted that Miers though educated was not qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice. But neither is Elena Kagan.
Attorney General Eric Holder said Sunday that the Justice Department was considering a federal lawsuit against Arizona's new immigration law.
"We are considering all of our options. One possibility is filing a lawsuit," Holder told NBC's "Meet the Press." Possible grounds for the lawsuit would be whether the Arizona law could lead to civil rights violations, he said.—CNN
Say the word Arizona when you speak to a Liberal or Progressive, the latest name which they answer to these days, and immediately their eyes roll back into their heads and they beginning to regurgitate the whole 1960’s civil rights “we shall overcome” mantra like that has anything to do with the illegal alien invasion that is transpiring in this country.
Our country is being overrun by illegal invaders also known as the aforementioned illegal aliens.
Illegal Invaders or Mexican Nationals or Citizens of the Sovereign country of Mexico have and are illegally crossing America’s border which is a federal violation of American law.
Yet these lawbreakers in a topsy-turvy logic and truth defying attempt are calling this gross violation of American sovereignty their constitutional civil right. They are also calling their illegal presence in the United States their constitutional guaranteed civil right. Both are outrageous and outlandish lies.
Oh I understand why Mexicans would leave the hell hole called Mexico, nothing to be proud of there. But what I can’t understand is why Americans would accept all of the lame claims on American rights from citizens from another country who are obviously here to exploit the sickly U.S. economy.
Oh yeah I understand all of that immigrant baloney that illegal invader anarchists shovel at us but actual immigrants come via U.S. immigration law not via Arizona/Mexico, Texas/Mexico or California/Mexico borders over and through fences.
Now Liberals that occupy the highest echelons of American government are hell bent on defying all reality. The Barry Hussein Soetoro administration’s Justice Department under AG Eric Holder has announced that it is considering suing Arizona on behalf of Mexico, Mexican Illegal invaders and Mexican Illegal invader anarchists who wish to violate the U.S. Constitution. (see article)
So let’s get this clear. The American federal government is considering suing Arizona a state of the United States of America because Arizona has decided to uphold the constitution of the United States of America, something that the president of the United States has sworn to do but has chosen not to do. The president has ignored his responsibility to uphold the constitution since his inauguration. (see 1: 31 min video)
We are no longer a nation of laws since the inauguration of 2009 we have officially become a nation of liars. Every word that the government speaks through Barry Hussein Soetoro is meant to obfuscate reality. There is nothing but deceit in what Soetoro and his chosen henchmen say.
[T]hose living illegally in the United States would have to pay a penalty and any taxes they owe, learn English and "make themselves right with the law" before starting the process of gaining U.S. citizenship.—CNN
When Soetoro speaks about Comprehensive Immigration Reform he is really speaking about amnesty for 20 million illegal Mexican invaders who have broken U.S. law primarily because their own country Mexico no longer functions as a legitimate Nation. So instead of Mexicans fixing their own country they come here thereby bringing the same dysfunction to the United States that they have in Mexico.
Oh it will not happen overnight, but it has already begun. The president of the United States has called for amnesty for illegal invaders of a foreign nation. He is presenting Mexico’s multiple problems as if they are the problems if the United States of America. Mexico’s problems are the United States’ because Mexico, Liberals and unnamed powers have made Mexico’s problems which are our secondarily seem to be our primary problems.
So instead of looking to fix why it is that Mexicans are fleeing Mexico we call each other names pejoratives like racists and bigots because those of us who see what is actually going on will not simply accept the popular narrative that what is wrong is our immigration laws.
We understand that changing our laws and thereby making illegality legal by the waving of the Congressional magic wand the problem of illegal invasion into this country will not be solved. What is faulty with that line of non-reasoning is that Mexico is still the problem and no matter how much or how many laws we change here until the economy and the government in Mexico are fixed they will continue to illegally invade the United States.
Unless of course the people of the United States foolishly allow their government to change the law thus legalizing the illegal invasion of the United States by Mexican Nationals.
I don’t believe that the American people are that stupid. Just because the Barry Hussein Soetoro government does doesn’t mean that we are all that stupid.
If Democrats and Liberals are allowed to continue to misinform about this great Mexican illegal invasion they will bring irreparable harm to the country that was once the greatest example of freedom that the world has ever seen.
Democrats and Liberals can only do this if you and I are as stupid as they think we are.
Elena Kagan Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court?
Kagan's views continue to bump up against each other in media coverage of her pending nomination because we lack definitive evidence of what she really believes. Perhaps her views will become clearer during her confirmation process in the Senate, and perhaps, if confirmed, she will make an excellent justice.
But, for a president to appoint someone to a lifetime position, wouldn’t it be preferable to know what she believes on the biggest issues of the day—and how she arrived at those conclusions? If Obama does nominate Kagan, as he likely will, he will be taking a very big risk.—Paul Campos
According to sources Elena Kagan will be president Barry Hussein Soetoro nomination to the Supreme Court today. She is an ideal nominee for president Soetoro because she is somewhat of a stealth nominee. (see article)
Kagan like Soetoro, before he was elected president, is not well known outside of the circles in which she orbits. However there are some things known about her. She has just not had a great many published works which she has expressed a political philosophy. (president-elect nobody knows.)
Kagan fought to have the ROTC removed from the campus of Harvard when she was Dean of Harvard Law school. She fought it all the way to the Supreme court citing, in her opinion that the military discriminated against homosexuals with “Don’t ask Do tell” military policy. A policy mind you that president William Jefferson Clinton endorsed by signing into law.
Kagan fought all the way to the United States Supreme Court to deny students their Constitutional rights. In the litigation of Rumsfeld v. FAIR, Elena Kagan filed amicus briefs with the Third Circuit Court and the United States Supreme Court to institutionalize discrimination against the military and students who wish to serve which, as mentioned above, the Supreme Court struck-down.
Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan, believes the military should be banned from campus. In a 2005 letter about military recruiting, Kagan arrogantly called the military's recruiting policy "discriminatory," "deeply wrong," "unwise," and "unjust.".-- Patrick X. Coyle (source)
And then there is that speculation that Kagan’s nomination by president Soetoro is a bone thrown to the gays and lesbians to beat back their concern that Soetoro has not moved quickly enough to infuse the culture with homosexuality. (Kagan first homosexual supreme?)
An issue that is causing consternation among gays because either the White house or Kagan are treating Kagan's alleged homosexuality as something to be proud of. That issue is being quashed by the White house until they get their nominate seated on the Court.
In fact the general public knows very little about Kagan’s views and that will make it very difficult for those in the Senate who oppose the political philosophy behind the nominating of Kagan.
What is known about Kagan is the most leftist president in the history of the United States of America wants her on the Supreme Court to represent his political philosophy. That prospect alone should give Conservatives the will to fight for a more acceptable nominee.
However it is my contention that we need diversity of a different sort on the Court. A diversity that has nothing to do with who you sleep with or what color your skin is or who your ancestors were.
We need regional diversity on the Supreme Court. We need a Justice that can relate to everyday people not just the elitists on the East coast. Didn’t president Soetoro say that he would nominate such a person? Someone who could relate to everyday people? He did. He did say that, and if he meant it Elena Kagan is not that person. Therefore she should not be his nominee.
Forget liberal vs. conservative justices. The Supreme Court is way out of regional alignment: It's heavily tilted toward the Northeast corridor and could become even more so as President Barack Obama prepares to fill an upcoming vacancy.
Five of the nine justices have strong ties to Boston, New York and central New Jersey. Chief Justice John Roberts is a Midwesterner raised in Indiana, but he went to college and law school at Harvard and has spent his entire professional life in Washington.-- Mark Sherman (source)
Kagan hails from that cookie cutter academia elitist circle of privilege that very few attain to. Her judgments would come from a life experience that has no real connection with common people.
Diversity on the court often is measured by gender, ethnicity, religion and race, and the current candidates are being assessed by those measures. But there could be some value, both in the politics of the nomination and a familiarity with issues a new justice might bring, in choosing someone who lives far from Interstate 95, the principal north-south route along the Eastern Seaboard.
"The impetus to appoint someone from the West is a really good one. –Mark Sherman
If the president was serious about his own criteria for selecting a Justice for the Supreme Court then he couldn’t possibly nominate Kagan. The president said he wanted a nominee who understood the "practical day-to-day" implications of rulings, someone who had judicial "empathy."
Kagan is a Manhattan-born Eastern who was educated, works and travels in political elitists circles.
Today once again we’ll see if the president’s words mean anything. And if Kagan is nominated against the president’s own criteria she should be opposed on the very grounds that the president established. She was not and will not be in touch with everyday American people. Those are the very principles that this president laid out for his criteria in selecting a nominee.
Bombing suspect and alleged terrorist Faisal Shahzad
I mean the thing is that- and I get frustrated and there was part of me that was hoping this was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country because there are a lot of people who want to use this terrorist intent to justify writing off people who believe in a certain way or come from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way. I mean they use it as justification for really outdated bigotry. –Contessa Brewer, MSNBC
Why did Faisal Shahzad, the failed New York City Car Bomber, almost fly out of the United States on board a jetliner headed for the United Arab Emirates? I’ll tell you why—it’s because of people who think like Contessa Brewer, News anchor for MSNBC, that’s why.
Brewer, like most Liberals, want their fake scenarios about life to be true and validated rather than accept evidence that they just might be wrong about their beliefs and their view of the world.
So Ms. Brewer was “so hoping” that a White Christian Militiaman Bible believing anti-President Soetoro Timothy McVey type would have been apprehended for this attempted terror attack on New York City. But instead Ms. Brewer’s worst fears were confirmed.
For months on end the President, his administration and his Party have been attempting to create this narrative that it is American Conservatives who are a threat to America and not Muslims. So naturally Ms. Brewer being loyal to that narrative the president created would hope that the suspect, when caught, wouldn’t be anyone with ties to any kind of Islamic country because her fear, like the president’s fear, was that people would then blame terrorism on Islamists and or Muslims and in Ms. Brewer’s mind that would be unfair.
To Liberals like Ms. Brewer to blame Islamists and Middle Easterners for terrorism is out dated bigotry. Granted to blame every Middle Easterner for terrorism would be extreme but no more extreme than for someone to hope that a car bomb in the middle of New York City was not an act of terrorism and then for that person to hope that the terrorist that commit such a vile act of terrorism would be an American instead of someone who had connections with terrorist in the middle east or someone who (using Ms. Brewers’ words) came from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way.
Check out how the Liberal Elite Media and others hyped up the possibility that this failed act of terrorism could be some “mad” tea party fanatic who dislikes president Soetoro’s health care law. Also hear Ms. Brewer own words as she hopes for a different reality.(see 2:35mins video)
Because the President has himself encouraged this type of thinking Faisal Shahzad could repeated go back and forth to Pakistan and receive terrorist and bomb making training while Americans pull of their shoes, open their laptops, and place them on conveyor belt x-ray devices before they themselves receive full body scans before each flight to Mayberry USA.
So now that Attorney General Eric Holder and Soetoro administration doesn’t want to appear completely inept they want to pretend that they had the guy in their sights all along (see 1:12min video)
The Pakistani-American who has confessed to trying to blow up a car bomb in New York’s Times Square was only caught ‘at the last second’, authorities have admitted.
In scenes that could have come straight from a Hollywood film, Faisal Shahzad managed to give authorities the slip and board a flight out of the U.S.—UK Daily Mail
Huh? That’s not even what the Liberal Elite Media is reporting Eric they are even saying that Faisal Shahzad almost got away (see 1:37mins video)
It’s not at all farfetched to surmise that political correctness and message manipulation conditioned the airline employees so that they didn’t what to seem like they were racial profiling or discriminating so they allowed Faisal Shahzad on the plane just like they thought president Soetoro and people like Ms. Brewer would have wanted. He probably didn’t even have to take off his shoes.
So he almost got away. Thanks president Soetoro, thanks Contessa Brewer, thanks Janet Napolitano, thanks Eric Holder, thanks Mayor Bloomberg and thanks Liberal Elite Media for the job of convincing Americans that terrorists are just like us.
Just how close was he from getting away? They had to call the airplane off from the runway back to the gate (see 1:27min video)
Emirates 202 carrying Times Square Bomb Suspect is recalled to gate at JFK moments before takeoff. Audio from liveatc.net.
Another near miss for this administration, they just missed disaster from the underwear bomber, now averting near tragedy with the car bomber and he almost got away. It makes one wonder. Where’s all of that smart government that Liberal are so fond of talking about?
Felipe Calderon President of Mexico and illegal alien entry anarchist for the U.S. but not for Mexico
Mexican President Felipe Calderon denounced as "racial discrimination" an Arizona law giving state and local police the authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants and vowed to use all means at his disposal to defend Mexican nationals against a law he called a "violation of human rights."-- Jerry Seper
Mexico’s illegal alien law is much more draconian than anything in the United States of America. Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. And get this Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals. (see article)
The Mexican law mandates that federal, local and municipal police cooperate with federal immigration authorities in order to arrest illegal aliens exactly if not more than what the Arizona law requires.
But the legislation, signed April 23 by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, is similar to Reglamento de la Ley General de Poblacion — the General Law on Population enacted in Mexico in April 2000, which mandates that federal, local and municipal police cooperate with federal immigration authorities in that country in the arrests of illegal immigrants.
Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals.
Under Mexican law illegal aliens in their country are considered criminals and Mexico enforces this law. So tell me how is anyone from Mexico going to call an American bigoted or racist when Mexico racial profiles for illegal aliens and treats illegal aliens far worse than anything than Americans would.
The law also says Mexico can deport foreigners who are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," violate Mexican law, are not "physically or mentally healthy" or lack the "necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents.
Every country in the world protects its citizens and its borders even Mexico does. So why would American illegal alien entry anarchist want to keep America’s borders porous and why would these anarchist attempt to change American law to accommodate 20 million criminals who have broken American immigration law?
"Mexico wants people to come to the United States and to send their money home," he said. "They want to make their problems our problems — that's their foreign policy. President Calderon should spend more time focusing on problems in his own country instead of criticizing Arizona for doing what Mexican law requires its own to do."
Mexico is a broken country politically and economically that is why Mexico is attempting to use America to solve its economic and social problems. Arizona is the only state that so far is willing to attempt to protect itself and the United States from the Mexican illegal alien invasion.
Mexico would not tolerate such an illegal alien invasion and neither should the United States.
"I could certainly criticize oil companies and I could criticize America in general for not attacking this problem in the '70s. Brazil got off oil in the last 30 years; we certainly could have."—Bill Maher
Bill Maher has made a career of saying things that sound good to those who believe in political correctness. But good doesn’t necessarily translate into true. Maher knows the pattern well, just say something snippy and anti-Bush, there will be very little fact checking on what you’ve said.
So imagine the sheer irony when Maher goes on his usual Liberal holier-than-thou rant (this time directed at president Soetoro) and then Maher makes a statement to punctuate his disdain for Soetoro’s apparent betrayal of Liberal ideology regarding drilling oil. He claims that Brazil has been oil independent for nearly 30 years.
I believe they did. I believe they in the ’’, they had a program to use sugar cane ethanol. And I believe that is what fuels their country. –Bill Maher
Only this time Maher was called on his statement about Brazil being oil independent by George Will. (see 8:23min video)
Apparently shaken by the fact that his veracity was questioned Maher asked for a judge to fact check his assertion. Politifact.com obliged Mr. Maher and found his statement about Brazil’s oil situation wasFALSE.
Yes, I think he should. You know, he, he owns this issue now, because it was only a few weeks ago that he came out for offshore drilling. And, I would say philosophically this is, you know, the problem I think a lot of people on the Left have with the country and have for many years is that there’s no one that really represents our point of view. There’s two parties who want to fight the war on terror with an army in Afghanistan. There’s two parties who want to drill offshore. Where is the other side on this?
So, you know, I could certainly criticize oil companies, and I could criticize America in general for not attacking this problem in the ’’. I mean, Brazil got off oil in the last 30 years, we certainly could have. But it is very disappointing, I think, for this President to be taking a position, as he has, and I guess he’s backpedalling now on it, I hope. I mean, I hope there’s a flip-flop I can believe in there.—Bill Maher
Funny thing about comedians who attempt to venture into politics, in comedy the truth and lies are virtually interchangeable. However too often when a comedian attempts to became political he or she tends to rely on comedic wit. Unfortunately he or she falls back into the practice of interchanging truth and lies as they would normally do in their act.
I’m guessing that Maher’s confusion was due to the fact that he was out of place.
Maher is more at home on HBO interchanging the truth with lies. There he doesn’t have to worry about anyone questioning the facts in his monologue. There the only judge that he faces are the ones who don’t check facts they only laugh at how wittily Maher interchanges the truth with lies.
Angered by Arizona's crackdown on illegal immigrants, protesters took to the streets on Saturday to denounce the new law and call on President Barack Obama to act urgently on immigration reform at May Day rallies across the United States.-- Jill Serjeant
Mexico needs Comprehensive Immigration reform not the United States. We need only to enforce the existing laws that the government under president Barry Hussein Soetoro has refused to enforce.
On a weekend that was supposed to see American Streets spillover with anti-American and anti-Arizona protests that was not the case. Instead it has been a brutal disappointment for anti-Americanist who attempted take advantage of Arizona’s illegal alien law (which protects Arizona from an illegal alien invasion) by attempting to get millions of people into the streets. What illegal alien anarchists intended was to use Saturday May 1, 2010 to rally illegal aliens and illegal entry anarchists all across the United States against the laws and constitution of this country.(see article)
But instead of the hoped for images of massive millions of illegal alien-entry anarchists marching through the streets of American what actually happened was very low turnouts across the nation and a News cycle which focused on a real new terrorist threat, a bombing attempt in New York City and the now catastrophic foreign British Petroleum oil spill in the gulf of Mexico. (see articles here and here)
Arizona law attempts to wean Mexicans and the country of Mexico off of the full supple America tit. And as one might expect Mexicans are throwing a hurricane Katrina size tantrum because the Diary Cow which they stole has warned them that it will not forever give free U.S. government milk to foreign goats that should be grazing on their own Mexican grass.
Angered by a controversial Arizona immigration law, tens of thousands of protesters - including 50,000 alone in Los Angeles - rallied in cities nationwide demanding President Barack Obama tackle immigration reform immediately.-- SOPHIA TAREEN
There is nothing broken about American immigration law. Let me repeat, there is nothing broken about American immigration law. What is broken is the entire country of Mexico!
Mexico is not providing for its people, the Mexican government is not protecting its people from out of control lawless drug cartels and Mexico’s economy is so non-existent that it has resorted to stealing from the United States’ economy. Mexico is broken not American’s immigration law.
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer gives the reasons why this law is constitutional and necessary for the safety of Arizona while she beats back the lies that illegal entry anarchists have told about this bill. (see 5:16min video)
But blame not only rest with Mexico. In America we have a broken federal government which consists of a broken presidency, a broken Congress and a broken Judiciary. America’s federal government is also corrupt. America’s federal government is broken and corrupted by liberalism. If liberalism is not halted dead in its destructive tracks Liberalism will be the ruination of America.
Any time the American president, American politicians and any American citizen can openly advocate for breaking American law as illegal alien entry anarchists have done then it is true something is broken. Two things are broken Mexico and the U.S. Federal Government.
The reason that immigration is the problem that it is—is because the president, congress and the judiciary are not doing their jobs. The federal government which Barry Hussein Soetoro presides over is broken not immigration laws and not the immigration system. The federal government has willfully violated its own law by neglecting the law’s enforcement and then by calling their own neglect to enforce “broken immigration law” or a “broken immigration system.”
It is not either of the two. What it is, is a failure of U.S. federal government and as a result of that failure the federal government is broken and can only be fixed by replacing the entire federal government complex starting by removing every Liberal Democrat and every Liberal Conservative first.
Arizona has given America the key to its salvation. According to sources Mexicans are the fastest growing minority in the United States. That statistic is based purely on illegality and illegal entry into this country.
Any comprehensive reform is only a cover for the broken Mexican government and the broken U.S. federal government. First fix Mexico and then fix the U.S. federal Government which refuses to enforce its own immigration laws. That is the reform that we need.
Arizona is doing that, they are doing what is right. Arizona has done nothing wrong. Illegal alien entry anarchists are wrong.
Whether that includes the president of the United States of America (and it does) the Congress both Democrats and Republicans who support illegal alien entry into the United States, they are all illegal alien entry anarchists and they are enemies of the constitution when they support comprehensive immigration reform, or in plain language, amnesty for over 20 million illegal aliens.
And the chain reaction that will ensue when 20 million illegals are eligible to vote and invite 20 million more of their family and friends into the United States based on laws that would allow them to under the comprehensive plan.
Right now only the state of Arizona has chosen to do what’s right and stand against misguided popular opinion. Only the state of Arizona is fighting for America. Arizona is right no matter what the president or what the media says, Arizona is right.
If we can no longer determine between right and wrong as a nation then we are truly a nation that is lost.
