Illegal immigration, the shutdown, and the wall

So we now have a government shutdown over funding for repairs and construction of new physical barriers along our southern border.  As full disclosure, my wife is a currently furloughed employee and she is anxious to return to work.  But she is 100% behind the shutdown!  And so am I.  

There are estimates that 5-6% of the population of the US workforce is made up of illegal aliens.  Could be more than 10 million overall.  They work for lower wages and benefits in jobs that, some say, Americans won't do.  That may or may not be true.  I propose a "light" green card program that is funded by those who benefit from it.  Let's call it "DACIE".  Deferred Action for Illegal Entry.

"DACIE" should have a grace period, where if you are in the US illegally, you must come forward, submit a biometric sample including DNA (this is already a requirement for naturalization), and prove that you are gainfully employed or have means to support yourself and your family without public assistance. Anyone that is in this program will not be eligible for ANY taxpayer supported public assistance, state OR federal and agrees to this as a condition. If you apply for any public assistance, you are automatically ineligible for this program.  If you have overstayed your visa, that shows you have financial ability to pay and will be required to pay a fine for that before you are allowed into the program. If you fail to do this within the grace period, lets say 18 months, there is NO wiggle room. If you do NOT comply with the requirements, you are subject to deportation at any time. If you are arrested, you WILL be deported IMMEDIATELY. Members of the US military, or students making progress to a college degree will be exempt from the financial guidelines, but still must submit biometric and DNA samples.  Any past felony convictions are AUTOMATICALLY disqualified, and future felony convictions will immediately disqualify the applicant and agree to the condition that they be subject to immediate deportation as soon as their jail term is completed. 

 All employers are also required to comply with e-verify and ANY employer who has employees that are currently in this group MUST provide proof that payroll taxes and SS/Medicare taxes are being withheld and certifies that they will be withheld in the future. For social security purposes, their employment starts when they have their first withholding and they will then be subject to the same rules as EVERYBODY else. In addition, a new withholding, FOR THIS GROUP ONLY equal to the current Medicare tax will be created to finance the cost of this program. When they are granted citizenship, the new withholding in the paragraph above is ended!  If they choose to not become an American citizen, they will continue paying this tax. Any employer who doesn’t comply will be subject to large fines and/or jail. 

All members of this group will be submitted to USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) and there will be NO FEE WAIVERS for this group or exceptions from taking the civics or English language tests.  

The MOST important part of this program is the addition of a poison pill. If any court finds any part of this program to be illegal or unconstitutional, ALL parts of the program are defunct and all participants are subject to existing immigration laws and may be subject to immediate deportation.

So California Wants To Be A Sanctuary State...

California doesn't think they should have to comply with federal laws that they don't agree with.  They call themselves a "Sanctuary State".  Fine.  If they don't want to comply, then there is no reason to compel them to.  They should have to WANT to do it.  I have a solution to that! 


Mr. President, sign an executive order immediately removing all ICE enforcement and personnel from the state of California and moving all operations such as border inspections and all immigration related activities to new quarters along the California/Arizona border.  Within 30 days, you will have a lawsuit from the state claiming the federal government has failed in its duty to enforce immigration laws within the state!  But how can this be.....a sanctuary state.....you can't be enforcing a racist law like this.......can you?  The state will have to claim that it is the federal governments responsibility to enforce the law IN THEIR STATE.  Game, set, match!

A few missives and quotes from our founding fathers on gun control

George Washington
“A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined..."

Samuel Adams
“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”

Thomas Jefferson
“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

“The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”

Patrick Henry
“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.”

George Mason
“To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them.”

James Madison
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.”

“The ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone.”

**Madison was vehemently against a standing army because history shows that standing armies can be used as tools of tyranny as well as tools of defense.

Noah Webster
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.”

Convention of States Project and Publius Huldah

If you are relying on Publius Huldah as an honest broker on questions about the Convention of States movement, let me tell  you about her.  First place, she is a divorce lawyer, not a constitutional scholar.  She even calls her self a strict constitutionalist yet opposes an article V convention even though it is one of the 2 ways the constitution can be amended.  She is married to an ex-client, Frank Scutari, who has been convicted of aiding and abetting his brother, Richard Scutari with crimes relating to armed robbery, the Alan Berg murder, the Aryan Nations and other anti-government groups. Frank Scutari was accused of helping fugitive members of The Order, a white nationalist revolutionary organization, by helping fugitives keep in touch with one another by setting up a network of rented offices.  Frank has also pled guilty to being an accessory to a 1984 armed robbery in which $3.6 million was taken from an armored truck in California.  This is the kind of person you think you should be forming YOUR opinions on?

DACA--Don't Americans Count Anymore

I see a story about a UC Berkley student who was arrested because he is in the country illegally. You can read the story here. This is another sob story about a person who thinks HE is special because he wants to be a lawyer and help others to get around our laws. The story refers to him as a "Dreamer" He is NOT a "Dreamer". If he was, he would NOT have been arrested. The clue is that his DACA status was NOT mentioned in this story. He is no different that the other 5 million people in this country illegally because they overstayed their visas. If he wants to be a citizen, then go back to Ecuador and do it the right way. The people who have complied with DACA parameters, even though it is fiat and NOT a constitutional edict, I have no problem with. They are complying with our "laws". However, they are STILL, legally, illegal aliens. I know there is no way to get rid of all 11 million plus but we also can't allow them to become citizens unless they do it the right way. 

I believe a new program should be created and funded by those who benefit from it.  This program should have a grace period, where if you are in the US illegally, you must come forward, submit a DNA sample, and prove that you are gainfully employed or have means to support yourself and your family without public assistance. Anyone that is in this program will not be eligible for ANY taxpayer supported public assistance, state OR federal and agrees to this as a condition. If you apply for any public assistance, you are automatically ineligible for this program.  If you have overstayed your visa, that shows you have financial ability to pay and will be required to pay a fine for that before you are allowed into the program. We create a NEW type of green card for this group. If you fail to do this within the grace period, lets say 18 months, there is NO wiggle room. If you do NOT comply with the requirements, you are subject to deportation at any time. If you are arrested, you WILL be deported IMMEDIATELY. Members of the US military, or students making progress to a college degree will be exempt from the financial guidelines, but still must submit DNA samples.  Any past felony convictions are AUTOMATICALLY disqualified, and future felony convictions will immediately disqualify the applicant and agree to the condition that they be subject to immediate deportation as soon as their jail term is completed. 

 All employers are also required to comply with e-verify and ANY employer who has employees that are currently in this group MUST provide proof that payroll taxes and SS/Medicare taxes are being withheld and certifies that they will be withheld in the future. For social security purposes, their employment starts when they have their first withholding and they will then be subject to the same rules as EVERYBODY else. In addition, a new withholding for this group equal to the current Medicare tax will be created to finance the cost of this program. Any employer who doesn’t comply will be subject to large fines and/or jail. 

The last part is that, in return for allowing them to stay in this country, they MUST start AND finish the process to become US citizens. They will NOT have a different path to citizenship. They will NOT be allowed to “cut the line” in front of those who are complying with our immigration laws currently. 

The MOST important part of this program is the addition of a poison pill. If any court finds any part of this program to be illegal or unconstitutional, ALL parts of the program are defunct and all participants are subject to immediate deportation.  DACA stood for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. This type of program will allow DACA to no longer stand for Don’t Americans Count Anymore.

If you are a US Senator, be a Senator for ALL AMERICANS!

I know this is a tilting at windmills kinda thing, but the titles for our federal representatives in Congress is "United States Senator from " fill in the state name here. In other words, they should be representing what is in the best interests of the country AS A WHOLE! Why should I have to pay higher FEDERAL income taxes in Texas because California or New Jersey has decided to have high STATE income taxes. Why should the people of high state tax states have input in my FEDERAL taxes when I don't have any input in their STATE taxes. If your state has a problem because you won't be able to deduct state taxes, FIX IT THERE FIRST!

Ben Franklin's Final Speech at the Constitutional Convention

For full disclosure, Ben Franklin is my great-great-great-great-great-great-great Grand Father.  It was the side of  William Franklin, the Tory governor of New Jersey...but we can't pick our ancestors, now can we!

Mr. President:

I confess that I do not entirely approve of this Constitution at present, but Sir, I am not sure I shall never approve it: For having lived long, I have experienced many Instances of being oblig'd, by better Information or fuller Consideration, to change Opinions even on important Subjects, which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow the more apt I am to doubt my own Judgment, and to pay more Respect to the Judgment of others. Most Men indeed as well as most Sects in Religion, think themselves in Possession of all Truth, and that wherever others differ from them it is so far Error. Steele, a Protestant in a Dedication tells the Pope, that the only Difference between our two Churches in their Opinions of the Certainty of their Doctrine, is, the Romish Church is infallible, and the Church of England is never in the Wrong. But tho' many private Persons think almost as highly of their own Infallibility, as of that of their Sect, few express it so naturally as a certain French Lady, who in a little Dispute with her Sister, said, I don't know how it happens, Sister, but I meet with no body but myself that's always in the right. Il n'y a que moi qui a toujours raison. 

In these Sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its Faults, if they are such; because I think a General Government necessary for us, and there is no Form of Government but what may be a Blessing to the People if well administered; and I believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a Course of Years, and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other. 

I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution: For when you assemble a Number of Men to have the Advantage of their joint Wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those Men all their Prejudices, their Passions, their Errors of Opinion, their local Interests, and their selfish Views. From such an Assembly can a perfect Production be expected? It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this System approaching so near to Perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our Enemies, who are waiting with Confidence to hear that our Councils are confounded, like those of the Builders of Babel, and that our States are on the Point of Separation, only to meet hereafter for the Purpose of cutting one another's throats. Thus I consent, Sir, to this Constitution because I expect no better, and because I am not sure that it is not the best. 

The Opinions I have had of its Errors, I sacrifice to the Public Good. I have never whispered a Syllable of them abroad. Within these Walls they were born, and here they shall die. If every one of us in returning to our Constituents were to report the Objections he has had to it, and use his Influence to gain Partisan in support of them, we might prevent its being generally received, and thereby lose all the salutary Effects and great Advantages resulting naturally in our favour among foreign Nations, as well as among ourselves, from our real or apparent Unanimity. Much of the Strength and Efficiency of any Government, in procuring and securing Happiness to the People depends on Opinion, on the general Opinion of the Goodness of that Government as well as of the Wisdom and Integrity of its Governors. I hope therefore that for our own Sakes, as a Part of the People, and for the sake of our Posterity, we shall act heartily and unanimously in recommending this Constitution, wherever our Influence may extend, and turn our future Thoughts and Endeavours to the Means of having it well administered. 

On the whole, Sir, I cannot help expressing a Wish, that every Member of the Convention, who may still have Objections to it, would with me on this Occasion doubt a little of his own Infallibility, and to make manifest our Unanimity, put his Name to this instrument.

Someone please explain....

Why is it that the left is so concerned about foreign interference and influence in our elections? I would think, based on their OWN actions, they would welcome that. Reason you say? Because they obviously welcome interference and influence in our law making! Otherwise, they would NOT have their panties in a wad over DACA!!!!!

Affiliate Links

Wal-Mart

GolfEtail

So you think Obamacare kept health insurance premiums down? Think again!

According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, the average exchange premiums were 105% higher in the 39 states using Healthcare.gov in 2017 than average individual market premiums in 2013. Average monthly premiums increased from $232 in 2013 to $476 in 2017, and 62% of those states had 2017 exchange premiums at least double the 2013 average.  This is NOT from a right wing think tank or Fox News.  It is not from Rush Limbaugh.  This is from the people who actually are responsible for this.  Read for yourself here.

Repeal THEN adjust by market forces, NOT REPLACE~!

ACA, aka ObamaCare is one of the worst pieces of legislation EVER passed into law.  It shouldn't be replaced.....it SHOULD be repealed in its entirety and allow the free markets, now that the publicity provided to the insurance industry has been digested, to provide the products and services that the market asks for at a price they are willing to pay.  It is bad legislation!

It is a bad legislation because it does MULTIPLE bad things:

1. It has mandates that require policies to include things that some people will NEVER NEED. A single man does NOT need birth control pills or mammograms….EVER! And NO women need prostate exams….EVER!
2. It allows people to pay a small penalty to the government (regardless of whether you say it is a tax or not) UNTIL they need insurance, THEN buy it. This becomes an actuarial nightmare. I would like to be able to buy car insurance or home owners insurance AFTER I need them!
3. It did NOT strengthen MediCare. In fact, the additional “free” items that the law mandates, like an annual wellness visit and elimination of the drug “donut hole” in Part D have actually weakened Medicare financially. The latest projections are that Medicare Part D spending will more than double between 2016 and 2025. When Medicare's trustees reported on the status of the federal healthcare program in 2015, they projected that the Medicare Part A hospital insurance trust fund would run out of money in 2030. Now the trustees estimate that the trust fund will be depleted in 2028 -- two years earlier than previously expected.
4. Most importantly is the slight of hand that the left has used to sell this canard! They have tried to make healthcare a RIGHT! IT IS NOT!! This is only about an attempt to create a single payer system in the US so the government controls a LARGE part (as much as 1/6th) of then economy. It started with a law they KNEW would eventually implode because it is financially unsustainable. It is obvious because they actually made plans to pay insurance companies for their losses in the first years. They KNEW that premiums HAD to go up and would go up substantially, regardless of their statements (remember save $2500/year?) and that choices would go down (remember keep your plan and keep your doctor?). They KNEW that the next step, after the “evil” insurance companies became the target, would be to say “OK, this has become too expensive! We need to take control!” They put the health insurance companies OUT OF BUSINESS and EVERYONE goes on Medicare, essentially.

Of course, they didn’t plan on Republicans taking control of the White House, Senate, and House. So unless we can repeal it and return to free market competition, the left will do what they always do….wait until they can pick it back up. Make no mistake, that is the price of NOT repealing the entire legislation.

Illegal Aliens and their children. Are "anchor" babies citizens?

Why do you suggest we treat parents who are illegal aliens and their children who are, also, illegals differently?  The liberal position seems to say if you have children, you don't have to follow our laws.  Now, what OTHER laws do they NOT have to follow?  I know we have somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 million illegals and it isn't practical to deport them all, but we have to start looking out for the best interests of Americans first.  We need to be very aggressively deporting ALL criminal aliens AND their families, regardless of where the children are born.  The parents go back and take their children with them.  Pretty simple.

Now libs will be screaming at the top of their lungs "if you are born here, you are a citizen!!!!"  and will cite SCOTUS precedent (which is rooted in completely inane footnote in a case by William Brennan, an extremely liberal "activist" judge who refused to hire women and probably the most inexplicable appointment EVER made by a Republican president) and the 14th Amendment, conveniently ignoring the fact that the 14th Amendment was intended to ensure that freed slaves were citizens.  It had NOTHING to do with immigrants.  In fact, in 1884, in Elk v. Wilkins (112 U.S. 94), the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not grant Indians citizenship.  The first sentence of the 14th Amendment "was to settle the question, upon which there had been a difference of opinion throughout the country and in this court, as to the citizenship of free negroes and to put it beyond doubt that all persons, white or black … should be citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside.”  It says NOTHING about immigrants.

Regardless of what MANY people think, SCOTUS is not infallible.  Remember, Dred Scott was the law of the land for 50+ years.  They DO make mistakes when they allow politics to enter into their decisions.  

Wealth, power, and open borders.

You ever wonder why so many billionaires, like George Soros and Mark Zuckerberg, are such ardent supporters of liberal policies and goals? It sure seems like they ALL think alike, doesn’t it? But that can’t be the case, because one of the traits of these types of people is the willingness to take a risk, to do something nobody else has, or can, do. I have a theory and it revolves around open borders, their place in the economic pyramid and their unwillingness to let others have the same opportunity to join them there. 

Imagine for a moment that you are one of the chosen….you’ve acquired wealth that can’t even be imagined by most people. You have more money that you and your family could ever spend for generations. There literally is nothing in the world that you can’t afford. Your wealth affords you something that is not easily attained….power and influence!

Power is a fickle thing. Political power, even more so. Political power is based on nationalistic structures. Constitutions can be very annoying when you are trying to make sure that the power that your wealth now gives you isn’t chipped away by others attaining the same, or even more, wealth than you have. And God forbid if it is eroded by someone elected by the dirty masses! Ergo, we see the influence of open borders in economically advanced societies like the US and Europe. 

As more and more immigrants with no concept of the “nation” that they now occupy, there is less and less “nation”…and less and less economic success due to the fact that the VAST majority of immigrants don’t possess the education or skills that will allow them to succeed in a capitalist system and the welfare state that was a shining beacon to them now becomes their means of support. Remember, even if you are entirely dependent upon the welfare state for your subsistence, that subsistence level in the US is orders of magnitude greater than the life BEFORE immigration. They become reliant upon the welfare state, sometimes for generations. As they attain citizenship, their allegiance stays with those who feed them without considering the notion that they are “kept” for a purpose. With fewer and fewer people likely to attain the wealth they have, it becomes less likely that the subsequent generations of the mega-wealthy will have to compete for the power and influence attained by their scions. And the band plays on!

Islam: A Political Ideology Masquerading as a Religion

When will someone have the guts to talk about Islam realistically?  Islam is a theo-political construct. It is just another branch of the totalitarian branch, very much like Marxism. Look at the similarities....a single, all powerful leader...not elected. A "puppet" legislative branch with elected "representatives" who are required to rubber stamp the will of the supreme leader....a judiciary that does the same. Economic stratification that is not reflected by a statistical bell curve where the "middle class" has a large population but instead has a statistically insignificant size of upper class and a MASSIVE percentage of economically disadvantaged who either have no allegiance to the political system (see Kurds, Bedouins,etc) or total reliance upon government for subsistence. It simply wraps itself in the guise of religion as a way of control. 

Think about it....Marx said "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs)". In other words, it is required of the individual to produce as much as he can and it is then given to the "distribution" mechanism (government) to redistribute as it sees fit. It actually DECIDES who needs what and how much and if an individual decides that he needs more than is given by the government, that individual becomes an enemy of the state subject to punishment by the state.

Then along comes Mohammed, who doesn’t have a “state” for redistribution of production but he needs to figure out a way to punish those who don't follow his commands. Now remember, you have to make sure that your subjects don't do too much thinking for themselves.  So you start by saying women can't go to school.  That's a good start.  Need them breeding and making more subjects...don't need them wasting time with things like reading...and writing...and being exposed to other cultures.  That takes care of half the population right there!!!! 

As for the other half, he comes up with a pretty good idea….get the people who he controls to believe it is not the state that will punish them for going against his will…..but GOD! Do what you are told and you will be rewarded in the afterlife! Don’t worry about now….this life…it’s not really important. In fact, if you are particularly submissive, you may be rewarded with 72 virgins in Heaven. Not really sure how that is a reward but….. Oh, and, just for the record, if you do commit transgressions against God’s will (actually the state’s will) it would not be a simple flogging or life in prison….no….it will be an eternity in HELL!!!!!  So if you are a goat herder that can’t read or write and probably the only people he knows that CAN are the very people I’m talking about above, you aren’t going to be in any position to dispute what they say…..unless you are willing to spend eternity in Hell.

  
So now, because it is God making the rules and doling out the punishment, that makes it a religion.  Huh.....pretty good scam, if you ask me!  

Income Inequality in America

Today I read an article about the statistics of the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and how unfair it is. 

I am constantly amazed by the “conspiracy” pundits surrounding the “wealth” inequality in the US. The social engineering aristocracy that invented this “issue”(just like global cooling (1970's), global warming (1990's) and climate change (21 century)) and their socialist followers never consider that when one spends less than they earn, their wealth INCREASES! That is the bottom line. Literally!

The wealthy, even though they spend what may appear to the less wealthy as an exorbitant amount of money to live, are, as a group, spending less than they earn.  And this is NOT an illusion.  I know that the income my wife (MBA with a bunch of computer certifications) and I (less academically achieved with just a BS and a few certs) allows us to live comfortably in a large metropolitan suburb in Texas.  However, we also know that it won't go quite as far as it would in other suburban locales here.  That same income would not go NEARLY as far in Manhattan...or San Francisco.  So, besides some of the obvious reasons why we don't live in those places, too cold, taxes are ridiculous, way too politically correct for my tastes, etc, we choose NOT to live there. 

If you want to live in those places, that is your choice, but all things income wise being the same, you either have a lower standard of living or you make more money to maintain that standard.  If you spend more than you make, you get..... poorer! Spending less requires choices that may not be fun, and making more means, usually, new skills that may be difficult to master or simply working harder. However, since both choices are not, by definition, easy or fun, it is just written off as inequality and the pitchforks and torches come out.