Obama Administration Cooks the Books on Unemployment

• West: Jobs numbers were cooked

  By SEUNG MIN KIM |

  10/5/12 10:51 AM EDT

  Count Rep. Allen West among those who think Friday’s jobs numbers were cooked.
  
  The controversial Florida Republican called the latest jobs report “confusing to say the least” and said he agreed with accusations by former GE CEO Jack Welch that President Barack Obama’s administration may have engineered the numbers to aid his reelection bid.
  (Also on POLITICO: Unemployment back to Inauguration Day level)
  
  “I agree with former GE CEO Jack Welch, Chicago style politics is at work here,” West wrote on his Facebook page Friday. “Somehow by manipulation of data we are all of a sudden below 8 percent unemployment, a month from the Presidential election. This is Orwellian to say the least and representative of Saul Alinsky tactics from the book ‘Rules for Radicals’ - a must read for all who want to know how the left strategize.”
  
  Welch wrote on Twitter earlier Friday morning that the jobs figures were “unbelievable” and that “these Chicago guys will do anything” – a reference to Obama’s reelection campaign.
  (Also on POLITICO: Jack Welch: The unemployment numbers are cooked)
  Friday’s jobs report showed an unemployment rate of 7.8 percent and 114,000 jobs added in September, marking the lowest employment rate since Obama was sworn into office in January 2009.
  Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, whose agency releases the jobs figures every month, responded that charges of a conspiracy theory are “ludicrous.”
  
  "I'm insulted when I hear that, because we have a very professional civil service," she said on CNBC. "I have the highest regard for our professionals that do the calculations at the [Bureau of Labor Statistics]. They are trained economists."

Dee Perez-Scott: More Democrat corruption

Crony Capitalism: $737 Million Green Jobs Loan Given to Nancy Pelosi's Brother-In-Law
You read that right. According to The Weekly Standard, in spite of the growing Solyndra scandal, on Wednesday, Barack Obama's Department of Energy just gave another 1 Billion in taxpayer dollars to so-called "green energy companies" and 737 million went to Nancy Pelosi's Brother-In-Law.

"Despite the growing Solyndra scandal, yesterday the Department of Energy approved $1 billion in new loans to green energy companies - including a $737 million loan guarantee to a company known as SolarReserve: On SolarReserve's website is a list of 'investment partners," including the "PCG Clean Energy & Technology Fund (East) LLC." As blogger American Glob quickly discovered, PCG's number two is none other than 'Ronald Pelosi, a San Francisco political insider and financial industry polymath who happens to be the brother-in-law of Nancy Pelosi, the Minority Leader of the United States House of Representatives.'"

It's clear. The Obama Regime is out of control because... quite frankly... no one is standing up to Barack Obama... and that must change, right here and right now.

Statistics for Dee Perez-Scott

--- There are actually two messages here. The 1st is very interesting, but the 2nd is absolutely astounding - and explains a lot.

A recent "Investor's Business Daily" article provided very interesting statistics from a survey by the United Nations International Health Organization.

Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis:
U.S. 65%
England 46%
Canada 42%

Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:
U.S. 93%
England 15%
Canada 43%

Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:
U.S. 90%
England 15%
Canada 43%

Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:
U.S. 77%
England 40%
Canada 43%

Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
U.S. 71
England 14
Canada 18

Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in "excellent health":
U..S. 12%
England 2%
Canada 6%

heck this last set of statistics!!

The percentage of each past president's cabinet who had worked in the private business sector prior to their appointment to the cabinet. You know what the private business sector is…a real-life business, not a government job. Here are the percentages.

T. Roosevelt..........38%
Taft.........................40%
Wilson .................52%
Harding..................49%
Coolidge.............. 48%
Hoover .................42%
F. Roosevelt.........50%
Truman..................50%
Eisenhower..........57%
Kennedy..............30%
Johnson................47%
Nixon...................53%
Ford.......................42%
Carter...................32%
Reagan.................56%
GH Bush............. 51%
Clinton ...............39%
GW Bush.............55%

And the winner is:

Obama............... 8%


This helps to explain the incompetence of this administration: only 8% of them have ever worked in private business!

That's right! Only eight percent---the least, by far, of the last 19 presidents! And these people are trying to tell our big corporations how to run their business? They know what's best for GM, Chrysler, Wall Street, and you and me?

How can the president of a major nation and society, the one with the most successful economic system in world history, stand and talk about business when he's never worked for one? Or about jobs when he has never really had one? And when it's the same for 92% of his senior staff and closest advisers? They've spent most of their time in academia, government and/or non-profit jobs or as "community organizers." They should have been in an employment line.

Pass this on… we'll NEVER see these facts in the main stream media.

One of the penalties of not participating in politics is that you will be governed by your inferiors." Plato

Dee Perez-Scott: AZ Legislature to intervene in federal law suit

Hooray! On Friday,February 11, 2011 a motion was filed on behalf of the Arizona State Legislature to intervene in the Obama Justice Department lawsuit against the State of Arizona. Governor Jan Brewer paved the way for this intervention when she signed emergency legislation on February 7, 2011 authorizing the Arizona Legislature to retain counsel to help defend S.B. 1070 and the interests of the people of the state of Arizona.

Obama Should Re-think his Policy on Fossil Fuels

Will the lights go out in America in 2028 if Obama doesn't encourage the development of the fossil fuels we will need if Saudi Arabia stops exporting?

Financial Times: Saudi to develop solar and nuclear power
Saudi Arabia will be burning most of its oil production domestically in less than 20 years, if current consumption patterns persist, a senior official has warned. In response, the authorities plan to cut reliance on fossil fuel and develop an alternative energy mix, including atomic and solar sources, as rising local demand could dramatically curtail the kingdom's ability to export oil. The world's largest oil exporter will need 8m barrels a day by 2028, roughly equivalent to its current production, merely to meet domestic energy needs, Hashim Yamani, president of the King Abdullah Atomic and Renewable Energy City, said on the sidelines of a conference on Sunday. The kingdom currently burns a total of 3.2m/b a day, he said.

39th Reason Why Obama should be Impeached or NOT Re-elected

Next to the economy, it's one of the most divisive topics, particularly among Latino voters. Immigration has also generated a lot of debate on Ask America, our informal polling platform where readers can vote and comment on hot political issues this election season.

The most popular question posed to users about immigration was on Arizona's controversial new law. We asked, "Would you like to see your state adopt an immigration law similar to Arizona's?" Out of the more than 50,000 responses, 74 percent were in the "Yes" column, with 26 percent saying "No."

If this is a true measure of the popularity of Arizona's law, why did the president sue that State to invalidate SB1070? Who does he serve Hispanics, illegal aliens, or other citizens that think SB 1070 is a good idea?

33rd Reason Why Obama Should be Impeached or NOT re-elected

The cash-strapped Obama Administration's unofficial 401(k) nationalization czar is utopian New School for Social Research academic Teresa Ghilarducci -- who was dubbed by U.S. News and World Report as "the most dangerous woman in America" after she appeared before Congress to testify in favor of government seizing 401(k)s and other retirement assets.
The "Most Dangerous Woman in America" Who Helped Obama Rip Off GM Bond Holders Now Wants YOUR Retirement Money! Following her Congressional testimony at a 2008 hearing to begin ending 401(k) and IRA tax advantages, Ghilarducci admitted on conservative talk show host Wilbur Kirby's KVI 570 show in Seattle the truth about the left's scheme for gaining control of private retirement accounts:
"I'm just rearranging the tax breaks that are available now for the 401(k)s and spreading [here she paused briefly to consider her words] spreading the wealth..."

32nd Reason to Impeach or NOT Re-elect Obama

January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009 it was actually January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, the start of the 110th Congress. The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:

January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress:

At the time:

1. The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77

2. The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%

3. The Unemployment rate was 4.6%

4. George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB CREATION!

Remember the day...

1. January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.

2. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!

3. Thank Congress for taking us from a 13,000 DOW, 3.5 GDP and 4.6% Unemployment to this CRISIS by dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from the Democrat Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fiasco's!
(BTW: Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001, because it was financially risky for the U.S. economy, but no one was listening).

And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac?

OBAMA.

And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie???

OBAMA and the Democratic Congress.

So when someone tries to blame Bush...

REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!" Bush may have been in the car, but the Democrats were in charge of the gas pedal and steering wheel they were driving. Set the record straight on Bush!

31st Reason Why Obama Should be Impeached or NOT Re-elected

Government transportation spending is full of costly boondoggles.  After a long delay, President Obama is proposing what he hopes will be a way out of that. As part of a wider spending program he detailed Wednesday that includes tax breaks for businesses and $50 billion in infrastructure spending, the president is floating the idea of an "infrastructure bank."

An infrastructure bank is designed to leverage public money with private funds, creating much more bang for the taxpayer buck. It's also designed to take politics out of infrastructure spending by moving the decision making away from Congress to an independent panel. Think of it as a way to avoid more bridges to nowhere.

The idea garners support from transportation experts of all ideological stripes.  "For every dollar you spend, you get substantially more investment," said Bracken Hendricks, a senior fellow at the left-leaning Center for American Progress who specializes in energy and infrastructure. "It's really a smart way to do it."  What else would you expect a neo-prog to say?

While the bank faces strong opposition on Capitol Hill, here's how it might work:  Obama offered little in the way of details on how the bank would be funded or structured. But Emil Frankel, a former transportation expert in the administration of George W. Bush and now director of transportation policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, said it could be started with an initial investment of maybe $2 to $4 billion.

That money would be used to guarantee loans for private capital on projects the private sector is interested in funding. That would include any infrastructure with a revenue stream like toll bridges and highways, Internet cables, or high speed rail.

Frankel said loan guarantees allow private firms to access capital at low interest rates. They generally result in garnering about 10 times the investment for each dollar of government money - so $4 billion in guarantees would generate $40 billion in spending.

The money is certainly needed.

Engineering groups have long criticized the country for neglecting its infrastructure. The nation now has a backlog of some $2.2 trillion in projects that need funding, according to the latest report from the American Society of Civil Engineers.

Okay, Smiling Barack, one has to wonder why you haven't applied the idea of an independent panel to Social Security and Medicare to take politics out of the mix.  It's time to let the Trustees of these funds to decide what needs to be done restore their solvency in terms of changes to the ceiling on taxable income, the tax rate, and the retirement age using the best information demographers, actuaries, and statisticians can provide.  A 60% super majority in both Houses of Congress should be required to overturn the Trustees' decisions.  Congress hasn't wanted to touch these problems with a ten foot pole.  The independent panel or board of trustees is the answer.

Reason #29 Why Obama Should be Impeached or NOT Re-elected

All of this did not happen on Obama's watch but he has done little enough about it.

When WW III Started - 1979


This is not very long, but very informative You have to read the catalog of events in this brief piece. Then, ask yourself how anyone can take the position that all we have to do is bring our troops home from Iraq, reset the snooze alarm, go back to sleep, and no one will ever bother us again. In case you missed it, World War III began in November 1979... US Navy Captain Ouimette is the Executive Officer at Naval Air Station, Pensacola , Florida . Here is a copy of the speech he gave last month. It is an accurate account of why we are in so much trouble today and why this action is so necessary.

AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP!

That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September 2001 (When more than 3,000 Americans were killed) and maybe it was, but I think it should have been 'Get Out of Bed!' In fact, the alarm clock has been buzzing since 1979 and we have continued to hit the snooze button and roll over for a few more minutes of peaceful sleep since then. It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran . This seizure was an outright attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the world's most powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency.  [Where was the ultimatum that if those occupying our embassy and sovereign territory were not immediately removed, Teheran would be subjected to round the clock bombing until they were and if one person among the embassy staff was harmed, the attacks would continue until those responsible were brought to justice by extradition to the U.S.] This  attack on the U. S. Embassy set the stage for events to follow for the next 25 years.

America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Vietnam experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then, President Carter, had to do something. He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin, but stood as a symbol of America 's inability to deal with terrorism.

America 's military had been decimated and down sized since the end of the Vietnam War. A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly organized military was called on to execute a complex mission that was doomed from the start.

Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped and killed throughout the Middle East . America could do little to protect her citizens living and working abroad. The attacks against US soil continued.

In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was driven into the US Embassy compound in Beirut . When it explodes, it kills 63 people. The alarm went off again and America hit the Snooze Button once more.

Then just six short months later in 1983 a large truck heavily laden down with over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut and 241 US servicemen are killed. America mourns her dead and hit the Snooze Button once more. Two months later in December 1983, another truck loaded with explosives is driven into the US Embassy in Kuwait , and America continues her slumber. The following year, in September 1984, another van was driven into the gate of the US Embassy in Beirut and America slept. Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe . In April 1985 a bomb explodes in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid. Then in August 1985 a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the main gate of the US Air Force Base at Rheine-Main, 22 are killed and the snooze alarm is buzzing louder and louder as US interests are continually attacked. Fifty-nine days later in 1985 a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro is hijacked and we watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled out of the passenger list and executed. The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners when they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4. And the most tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie , Scotland in 1988, killing 259.

The wake up alarm is getting louder and louder. The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America . In January 1993, two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. The following month, February 1993 , a group of terrorists are arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City . Six people are killed and over 1000 are injured. Still this is a crime and not an act of war? The Snooze alarm is depressed again. Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in Riyadh Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women. A few months later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from the US military compound in Dhahran , Saudi Arabia . It destroys the Khobar Towers , a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500. The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as they see that America does not respond decisively. They move to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania . These attacks were planned with precision. They kill 224. America responds with cruise missile attacks and goes back to sleep.

The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on 12 October 2000 , when a small craft pulled along side the ship and exploded killing 17 US Navy Sailors. Attacking a US War Ship is an act of war, but we sent the FBI to investigate the crime and went back to sleep.

And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. Most Americans think this was the first attack against US soil or in America . How wrong they are. America has been under a constant attack since 1979 and we chose to hit the snooze alarm and roll over and go back to sleep. In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from every high official in government over what they knew and what they didn't know. But if you've read the papers and paid a little attention I think you can see exactly what they knew. You don't have to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National Security Council to see the pattern that has been developing since 1979.

I think we have been in a war for the past 25 years and it will continue until we as a people decide enough is enough. America needs to 'Get out of Bed' and act decisively now. America has been changed forever. We have to be ready to pay the price and make the sacrifice to ensure our way of life continues. We cannot afford to keep hitting the snooze button again and again and roll over and go back to sleep.

After the attack on Pearl Harbor , Admiral Yamamoto said '... it seems all we have done is awakened a sleeping giant.'

This is the message we need to disseminate to terrorists around the world.

This is not a political thing to be hashed over in an election year, this is an AMERICAN thing. This is about our Freedom and the Freedom of our children in years to come.

President Obama, young people, and all those others who dozed off in history class and who seem so quick to protest such a necessary military action need to leave the alarm on when it rings.

Reason #28 Why Obama Should be Impeached or NOT re-elected.

The United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al-Qaida has of non-Muslims, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the leader of the effort to build a mosque near the site of the 9/11 terror attacks in New York, told an Australian audience in July 2005.


In a taped speech, Rauf made a number of comments that would make anyone who is not concerned about the mosque at the Ground Zero site rethink their support for the man tasked with heading the "bridge-building" center.
"We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al Qaida has on its hands of innocent non Muslims. You may remember that the US-led sanctions against Iraq led to the death of over half a million Iraqi children. This has been documented by the United Nations. And when Madeleine Albright, who has become a friend of mine over the last couple of years, when she was Secretary of State and was asked whether this was worth it, said it was worth it."

(Fact check: A report by the British government said at most only 50,000 deaths could be attributed to the sanctions, which were brought on by the actions by former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.)

The United States has supported authoritarian regimes, Rauf said, and it's understandable that people in those nations would take action into their own hands. "Collateral damage is a nice thing to put on a paper but when the collateral damage is your own uncle or cousin, what passions do these arouse? How do you negotiate? How do you tell people whose homes have been destroyed, whose lives have been destroyed, that this does not justify your actions of terrorism. It's hard. Yes, it is true that it does not justify the acts of bombing innocent civilians, that does not solve the problem, but after 50 years of, in many cases, oppression, of US support of authoritarian regimes that have violated human rights in the most heinous of ways, how else do people get attention?"(Fact check: This is justifying acts of terrorism by blaming the United States for the oppression of Islamic regimes of their own citizens. This also ignores U.S. aid of Muslim citizens in nations such as Kosovo and Kuwait).

Asked why Muslims commit suicide bombings, Rauf belittled the fanatical religious motivation of such attacks and said: "But what makes people, in my opinion, commit suicide for political reasons have their origins in politics and political objectives and worldly objectives rather than other worldly objectives. But the psychology of human beings and the brittleness of the human condition and how many of us have thought about taking our own lives, we may be jilted, had a bad relationship, you know, didn't get tenure at the university, failed an important course, there's a host of reason why people feel so depressed with themselves that they are willing to contemplate ending their own lives. And if you can access those individuals and deploy them for your own worldly objectives, this is exactly what has happened in much of the Muslim world. "

(Fact check: Here Rauf tries to negate that suicide bombings are driven by Islamic religious beliefs and trying to equate terrorist activity to someone who doesn't get tenure.)

On Israel, Rauf said he does not favor the plan to establish a Palestinian state along with Israel. Instead, "The differences, perhaps, may lie on whether the solution lies in the two-state solution or in a one-state solution. I believe that you had someone here recently who spoke about having a one land and two people's solution to Israel. And I personally - my own personal analysis tells me that a one-state solution is a more coherent one than a two-state solution. So if we address the underlying issue, if we figure out a way to create condominiums, to condominiamise Israel and Palestine so you have two peoples co-existing on one state, then we have a different paradigm which will allow us to move forward."

(Fact check: A one-state solution is a euphemism for the destruction of Israel, because Palestinian Muslims will quickly outnumber the Jewish resident of Israel. Such a position is advocated by radical groups, such as the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.)

"And when we observe terrorism," he said, "whether it was done by the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka or by al Qaida or whoever is behind the bombings in London or those in Madrid, we can see that they were target political objectives.

(Fact check: Rauf again seems to justify terrorist acts by equating hitting civilians with political objectives.)

Rauf, who was recently on a trip to the Middle East sponsored by Obama's State Department, gave the speech on July 12, 2005, at the University of South Australia.

Reason #27 Why Obama Should be Impeached or NOT re-elected

    Il Duce

THIS MOST UNBELIEVABLE PRESIDENT?HERE IS HIS RESPONSE WHEN HE BACKED OFF FROM HIS DECISION TO REQUIRE THE MILITARY PAY FOR THEIR WAR INJURIES. Bad press, including major mockery of the plan by comedian Jon Stewart, led to President Obama abandoning his proposal to require veterans carry private health insurance to cover the estimated $540 million annual cost to the federal government of treatment for injuries to military personnel received during their tours on active duty. The President admitted that he was puzzled by the magnitude of the opposition to his proposal. "Look, it's an all volunteer force," Obama complained. "Nobody made these guys go to war. They had to have known and accepted the risks. Now they whine about bearing the costs of their choice? It doesn't compute.." "I thought these were people who were proud to sacrifice for their country, "Obama continued "I wasn't asking for blood, just money. With the country facing the worst financial crisis in its history, I'd have thought that the patriotic thing to do would be to try to help reduce the nation's deficit.. I guess I underestimated the selfishness of some of my fellow Americans." Please pass this on to everyone including every vet and their families whom you know. How in the world did a person with this mindset become our leader? REMEMBER THIS STATEMENT.... "Nobody made these guys go to war. They had to have known and accepted the risks. Now they whine about bearing the costs of their choice?" If he thinks he will ever get another vote from an Active Duty, Reserve, National Guard service member or veteran of a military service he ought to think it over.. If you or a family member is or has served their country please pass this to them. Please pass this to everyone. I'm guessing that other than the 20-25 percent hardcore liberals in the US will agree that this is just another example why this is the worst president in American history. Remind everyone over and over how this man thinks, while he bows to the Saudi Arabian king.

Reason #16 Why Obama Should be Impeached or NOT Re-elected

Reason #15 Why Obama Should be Impeached or NOT Re-elected

Jan Brewer v. Eric Holder:

The Justice Department filed suit Tuesday against Arizona, charging that the state’s new immigration law is unconstitutional and requesting a preliminary injunction to stop the legislation from taking effect.

The lawsuit says the law illegally intrudes on federal prerogatives, invoking as its main argument the legal doctrine of “preemption,” which is based on the Constitution’s supremacy clause and says that federal law trumps state statutes. The Justice Department argues that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility.

But the filing also asserts that the Arizona law would harm people’s civil rights, leading to police harassment of U.S. citizens and foreigners.

At 25 pages, it is two and a half times the length of the bill itself. One wonders if anyone in the Obama administration actually read this document given their infamous unwillingness to read the Arizona law.

Legal Times:

“In our constitutional system, the federal government has preeminent authority to regulate immigration matters. This authority derives from the United States Constitution and numerous acts of Congress,” reads the introduction

With the State Department joining as a plaintiff, the lawsuit also cites the president’s authority over foreign affairs. “Immigration law, policy, and enforcement priorities are affected by and have impacts on U.S. foreign policy, and are themselves the subject of diplomatic arrangements,” it says.

In a news release, Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. focused on two additional areas: the impact the law could have on immigrants’ willingness to cooperate with local police in criminal investigations, and the police resources that could be diverted from other investigations.

Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, Calif.:

“For the better part of two decades, citizens in border states like Arizona, Texas and California have been told that illegal immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the federal government while their concerns about the safety of their families and communities have been largely brushed aside or met with inconsistent, under-resourced and ineffective responses from the federal government. They now find themselves over-run by drug cartels, gangs and human trafficking. The people who live under the constant threat of border violence have every right to be protected and have every right to defend themselves, their families and their communities.

“For President Obama to stand in the way of a state which has taken action to stand-up for its citizens against this daily threat of violence and fear is disgraceful and a betrayal of his Constitutional obligation to protect our citizens. Rather than spend time, energy, resources and money stopping a state from enforcing existing immigration laws, the Obama Administration should instead mobilize every resource available to stand with these states and families who live daily with the reality of violent crime along an unsecure border and suffer the consequences of the federal government’s failure.”

Perhaps it’s a better legal argument than a political one, but the federal government does seem to be opening quite the can of worms to argue that a state-level attempt to do what the federal government claims is its sole responsibility is uncalled for while that same government is spending time and energy suing Arizona while it continues to not live up to its responsibility.

Katherine Hamm

Reason #9 Why We Should Impeach or Not Re-elect Obama

Sheriff Paul Babeu of Pinal County, Ariz., says it is“an outrage” the Obama administration has stopped building thedouble-fencing needed to assist the Border Patrol in securing theU.S.-Mexico border. He says it is time for the United States to begin fighting illegal immigration and drug smuggling directly at the border instead of within the country where it harms American citizens and communities.

Reason #7 Why Obama Should be Impeached or Not Re-elected

Concerned about the Obama administration’s plan to grant amnesty to illegal aliens?

Guess what. It’s already happening.
According to The Houston Chronicle:

The Department of Homeland Security is systematically reviewingthousands of pending immigration cases and moving to dismiss those filed against suspected illegal immigrants who have no serious criminal records, according to several sources familiar with the efforts. Culling the immigration court system dockets of noncriminals started in earnest in Houston about a month ago and has stunned local immigration attorneys, who have reported coming to court anticipating clients' deportations only to learn that the governmentwas dismissing their cases. In some instances, the article notes, illegal aliens who have been convicted of crimes will be allowed to stay in the country as long asthese crimes do not involve a DWI, family violence or sexual assault.But other than those specific circumstances, right now it appears the other deportation candidates are in the clear. (Most of these folks are in the system because they were arrested for committing crimes, so to release those who have only been “convicted” means that illegal alien violent criminals are being set free.) The court "was terminating all of the cases that came up," said one immigration attorney who was notified that the government requested dismissals in three of his deportation cases. "It was absolutely fantastic." According to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) memo, this new policy could impact up to 17,000 cases. --- CORRUPTION CHRONICLES

Dhimmitude and Sharia Diktat

Muslims get a pass on the First Amendment to the US Constitution - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" -

Dhimmitude is the Muslim system of controlling non-Muslim populations conquered through jihad. Specifically, it is the TAXING of non-Muslims in exchange for tolerating their presence AND as a coercive means of converting conquered remnants to Islam.

The ObamaCare bill is the establishment of Dhimmitude and Sharia Muslim diktat in the United States. Muslims are specifically exempted from the government mandate to purchase insurance, and also from the penalty tax for being uninsured. Islam considers insurance to be "gambling", "risk-taking" and "usury" and is thus banned.

Muslims are specifically granted exemption based on this. How convenient. So I, Ann Barnhardt, a Christian, will have crippling IRS liens placed against all of my assets, including real estate, cattle, and even accounts receivables, and will face hard prison time because I refuse to buy insurance or pay the penalty tax.

Meanwhile, Louis Farrakhan will have no such penalty and will have 100% of his health needs paid for by the de-facto government insurance. Non-Muslims will be paying a tax to subsidize Muslims. Period. This is Dhimmitude.

Is this your president?

A Commentary on President Obama’s Recent Immigration Speech

A recent report on CNN stated “President Barack Obama renewed his push for comprehensive immigration reform Thursday[7/1/2010], calling for bipartisan cooperation on an issue that has repeatedly proven to be a major cause of deep social and political division.

The president tried to find what has often proven to be an elusive middle ground on the subject, highlighting the importance of immigrants to American history and progress.”

If he was trying to find an elusive middle ground, he didn’t look very hard or very far. There is no denying America’s “immigrant past” but the operative word in that phrase is the word “past.” Our country is now fully settled and developed and has a limited need for more immigrants. More in this case means less for everyone – a lower standard of living, a lower quality of life, more pollution, more demand for energy and the use of fossil fuels, and the depletion of finite natural resources already spread too thin.

The middle ground is not so elusive; it is right there staring us in the face. The goal post on one end of the playing field is mass deportation; on the other it is amnesty and mass legalization. In search of the middle ground both of those extremes need to be abandoned or rejected and neither the President nor the Congress has shown any inclination to do so. The way to heal the deep social and political division in this country regarding immigration is to stay a little closer to the fifty yard line. There is plenty of room there for a statesman but the charlatans, demagogues, and partisans will have to sit closer to the goal posts in the cheap seats.

What could be more reasonable than to tie the immigration rate in each sector of our economy to the unemployment rate in that sector? That is the middle ground on the numbers of immigrants we should admit.

Must we sacrifice the employment rights and opportunities of American labor to satisfy applicants for immigration and the special interest groups that support them? I say no, that is not the middle ground.

What could be more reasonable than to require employers to present irrefutable proof that they have been unable to fill their jobs with citizen labor by offering a living wage and a hiring preference before they can even consider retaining or hiring foreign labor? That is the middle ground.

Obama acknowledges “the fear and frustration many people now feel with a system that seems ‘fundamentally broken’ ” but provided no details.

There is no evidence to support the unfounded allegation that our immigration system is “fundamentally broken.” That term is just a cliché. It is one of the many used by the politicians in Washington when the facts say otherwise. This is just a ploy of those who want a looser and more expeditious immigration process even though the one we currently have has already permitted Russian sleeper agents and terrorists to enter our country easily without challenge.

The fear and frustration arises from the people’s distrust of an Administration that refuses to enforce the immigration laws already on the books and secure the borders.

“According to CNN, Obama asserted that the majority of Americans are ready to embrace reform legislation that would help resolve the status of an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.”

Indeed they are but, considering what happened after the last amnesty, they are not ready to embrace another one. Even Obama admits that another amnesty could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. The best way to resolve the status of an estimated 12-20 million illegal aliens is to make E-verify mandatory across the board for all employers, public and private, and all employees, current and prospective. Vigorous internal enforcement is the only thing that will stem the tide of illegal aliens streaming across the border on a daily basis, taking jobs, and swelling the ranks of unemployed Americans. If we grant another amnesty that allows all of the illegal aliens to stay and work, that will create a huge incentive for millions more to violate our borders.

The East Germans found to their dismay that people would brave machine gun towers, mine fields, and multi-layered fences and walls to escape to the West. The reason they were willing to take these incredible risks is because if they were successful, they knew they would never be repatriated.

Similarly, illegal aliens are willing to cross the hot and forbidding deserts of Arizona and other border states because they know that if they can escape the immediate environs of the border, they will be home free. Under the current Administration’s non-enforcement policies, the probability of being apprehended internally and repatriated is extremely low. What President Obama and Secretary Napolitano refuse to admit is that to secure the borders requires more than just improvements in staffing, infrastructure, and rules of engagement improvements; it requires vigorous and continuous internal enforcement with expeditious repatriation of all of those who are apprehended. That is the missing ingredient of border security in depth. The borders can never be secure without the sure threat and actuality of repatriation of the large numbers of the illegals who are surplus to our economy. Obama and Napo seemed to have missed the lesson learned by the East Germans or are simply ignoring it to pander to the Hispanics who seem to have a greater loyalty to their ethnic brethren than they do to America and, for that matter, even to their own enlightened self-interests.

"I believe we can put politics aside and finally have an immigration system that's accountable," Obama told an audience at Washington's American University. "I believe we can appeal not to people's fears, but to their hopes, to their highest ideals. Because that's who we are as Americans."

Yes, but he has not put politics aside as he continues to pander to the immigration special interests and ethnic communities that apparently believe American has an unlimited capacity to absorb more people without any adverse effects. They think our finite natural resources can somehow be stretched ever farther without impacting the quality of life and standard of living for all of us, including those misguided and shortsighted immigration advocates.

An immigration system that is accountable should take cognizance of the rate of unemployment by sector in our economy. It should be accountable to U.S. citizens not to foreign interests or special interest groups who give precedence to foreigners over the wishes of the American people.

By making our immigration system accountable, the hopes and aspirations of Americans can still be realized, despite the current prolonged recession. It is not contrary to American ideals to focus on the needs of our economy and our people rather than the desires of all those who may wish to come here. We have no need for or obligation to accept more immigrants than we can reasonably assimilate and accommodate without economic dislocations. That number is no greater than 250,000 annually in all categories including chain immigrations or so-called family reunifications and including the estimated number of illegal aliens who slip through our borders undetected. This overall limit, however, should be exclusive of foreign students, tourists, and temporary migrant farm workers.

“The president targeted Arizona's controversial new immigration law, which requires immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times and requires police to question people if there's reason to suspect they're in the United States illegally. It also targets businesses that hire illegal immigrant laborers or knowingly transport them.”

He is dead wrong to criticize the Arizona law. In fact, the Arizona law should be the centerpiece of any immigration reform. Anything less would constitute mere lip service to border security, something we may soon regret when the next terrorist incident occurs. Border states have a special problem that Obama has yet to recognize.

“The Arizona measure -- currently under review by the Justice Department -- has ‘fanned the flames of an already contentious debate,’ Obama said. It puts pressure on police officers to enforce rules that are ‘unenforceable’ while making communities less safe -- in part, by making people more reluctant to report crimes. It also has ‘the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound.’"

Those flames should be fanned. That seems like the only way to get the attention of the Administration. This is too important an issue to be left solely to politicians interested only in their own re-election. Obama might be surprised how many law enforcement officers welcome the new rules as a tool they have long needed to do their jobs effectively. There are ways to minimize the imposition on loyal American citizens and legal residents but there should be little sympathy for those who aid and abet the illegal aliens physically or by supporting their cause.

“Arizona's Republican governor, Jan Brewer, responded Thursday that Obama’s failure to secure the border with Mexico is what forced her state to act on its own.

‘Do your job. Secure the border,’ Brewer said of the president in a speech to a Republican group. She pledged to ‘defend this law against every assault, including attacks by the Obama administration.’"

In his speech, Obama warned that rounding up everyone in the country who has entered illegally would be both "logistically impossible" and "tear at the fabric of the nation." At the same time, the president indicated it would be wrong to offer blanket amnesty for people who came into the United States unlawfully. He got that second part right!

He said to do so "would suggest to those thinking about coming here illegally that there will be no repercussions for such a decision. And this could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. ... It would also ignore the millions of people around the world who are waiting in line to come here legally." The problem with this statement is that the repercussions he proposes would have no deterrent effect whatsoever on any foreigners bent on violating our borders.

Ultimately, he was right when he said, "our nation, like all nations, has the right and obligation to control its borders and set laws for residency and citizenship. And no matter how decent they are, no matter their reasons, the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable."

However, he was wrong about the logistic feasibility of rounding up and repatriating a substantial number of the illegal aliens . The logistic feasibility of such an effort was amply demonstrated by the repatriation of eight million ethnic Germans back to the German heartland from the Eastern Territories in less than a year following the close of World War II in 1945-6. And this was done using a war-ravaged transportation system. However, we don’t need to round up and repatriate every one of the 12-20 million illegals to make a point. Most will get the message if we begin a systematic and effective program of apprehension and repatriation without delay.

“Obama said those who entered the country illegally must admit they broke the law, register with the appropriate authorities, pay taxes, pay a fine, and learn English. They must ‘get right with the law before they can get in line and earn their citizenship.’"

Surely you jest, Mr. President! Admitting they broke the law is meaningless and laughable. We don’t let other law breakers off the hook just because they plead guilty!They can only get right with the law if they come into compliance with the law as it existed at the time they violated the border. They need to return home and apply for legal immigration under whatever quotas might be available to them.

What is Obama thinking of? Is he thinking at all? In any event, he did not propose any mechanism or funding to enforce the registration, payment of back taxes and a fine, and provide testing to assure that they are learning English. Those provisions are either unenforceable or will simply be unenforced just like the current immigration laws.

“The president urged Congress to tackle immigration reform legislation, but stressed that it would require support from both Democrats and Republicans.

‘That is the political and mathematical reality,’ he said.

“Despite Obama's call for bipartisan immigration reform, several senior Democratic sources said Thursday that they see virtually no chance of Congress taking up such a measure before November's midterm elections.

Though some hold out hope for potential movement during a lame-duck session of Congress after the election, most sources say the more realistic earliest target is next year. But even that, according to one source, may be ‘happy talk.’”

At the same time as the President is calling for bipartisan immigration reform, he continues to support what is known euphemistically as “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” (CIR). Most understand CIR to be a code term for the granting of amnesty to or the mass legalization of millions of illegal aliens. That term also encompasses a major increase in legal immigration quotas which are already way too large. If the President wants bipartisan support for immigration reform, he needs to narrow his focus to border security as the first step. The number of illegals transiting the border must be reduced to no more than 10,000 per year. The actual achievement of this goal must be attested to by border patrol and ICE agents in a privately administered confidential survey before any other reforms should be considered. That level cannot be achieved without intense internal enforcement and the repatriation of relatively large numbers of the illegals. That is the only way to create the necessary disincentive.

We can do this humanely at little cost to the government. If the illegals paid their way here, they can certainly pay they way back. If not, their employers should pick up the difference. The most important thing is to expedite their removal rather than keeping them in detention facilities for long periods of time. To accomplish that goal, we should pay the detention facility operators on the basis of throughput rather than detainee-days.

In the meantime, a study should be done to determine how best to determine the real needs of our economy for immigrants and to propose a way of adjusting our immigration quotas so that they are more precisely metered to those needs. Our objective should be to stabilize our population before it is too late.

Obama's Two-Faced Stance on Healthcare for Illegals

During Barack Obama's address to Congress on September 9, 2009, South Carolina Republican Congressman Joe Wilson made news after shouting "You lie!" when the President said the Administration's healthcare plan would not cover illegal aliens.

Wilson's outburst drew heavy and sustained criticism from the liberal press and their hypocritical allies in Congress. (No one in the media bothered to mention the fact that Obama had just moments before Wilson's comment accused his opponent of lying about the Obamacare plan.) But the fundamental question remains. Did Obama seek to cover illegal aliens with his healthcare reform proposals? Actually he later said that illegal aliens will not only be ineligible to receive taxpayer funded subsidies for healthcare, they will not even be able purchase health insurance with their own funds in the government-created marketplace.

Congressman Wilson may have been ill-mannered but I have no doubt that he is correct.
First, there is no mechanism in the health reform bill to check the bona fides of every applicant for taxpayer funded subsidies for healthcare so any illegal who wishes can simply apply. Second, if Obama succeeds in granting amnesty to the 12-20 million illegal aliens despite overwhelming public opposition, he will have converted them all to legal immigrants. Then in the next step all he needs to do is throw out the long standing federal policy and give taxpayer subsidies to legal immigrants who are not citizens.

This Obama two-step deceit on healthcare for illegals is a prime example of his perfidy and his presidential policy deception. It's deja vu all over again as Chicago-style, Alinskyite politics again raises its ugly head. So Obama really is a liar and there is nothing he says or does that we should put any trust in.