Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Christine O’Donnell—Conservative Republican candidate for U.S. Senate from Delaware


The next Senate primaries are on September 14th. I have only received information on one of the primaries—the Republican primary in Delaware.

From www.teapartyexpress.org

“Let’s Win another U.S. Senate Race

We here at the Tea Party Express have enjoyed the opportunity to work with hundreds of thousands of supporters such as yourself to help take our country back. We’ve helped defeat sellout Democrats like Bart Stupak and Arlen Specter. And we’ve helped ensure victories for great candidates like Sharron Angle in Nevada, Mike Lee in Utah, Marco Rubio in Florida—and now, hopefully, Joe Miller in Alaska.

Today we are announcing another candidate that we are going to help propel to victory. Her name is Christine O’Donnell and she is running for U.S. Senate in Delaware. This is the seat previously held by none other than Vice President Joe Biden. You’ve probably seen Christine O’Donnell on TV where she’s been invited to appear as an analyst and commentator on Fox News Channel among other outlets.

And perhaps most importantly, she is running against Congressman Mike Castle who is one of the most vile RINO’s you will meet (Republican In Name Only). Congressman Castle has repeatedly attacked the tea party movement and conservatives, and he has proudly boasted about his liberal voting record while in Congress.

But wait, it gets better. This is a Special Election, meaning that the winner will be seated the day after the election—which means Christine O’Donnell could be the deciding vote in the U.S. Senate to block the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda during the ‘lame duck’ session after November’s elections, but before the new Congress is sworn in.

We’re looking for 500 patriots such as yourself to help us kick-start this campaign for Christine O'Donnell by making a contribution (https://secure.donationsafe.com/co) of $100 or more to support her campaign. And we need 75 people to make a contribution of $500, $1,000 or more. You can contribute as little as $5 up to the FEC-allowed donation of $5,000.

To contribute online - JUST CLICK HERE. (https://secure.donationsafe.com/co)

As always, if you prefer, you can mail in a contribution to our headquarters:

Tea Party Express
8795 Folsom Blvd. #103
Sacramento, CA 95826

*Note our new mailing address!”

From www.teapartyexpress.org

“We put out the word yesterday that we here at the Tea Party Express are working hard to help conservative Republican Christine O’Donnell defeat another liberal RINO, Congressman Mike Castle, in the race for U.S. Senate in Delaware.

In 24 hours we’ve raised just over $15,000. A good start but we have to do better.
You see liberal Mike Castle currently has $2.64 million cash-on-hand. It’s just like the Miller-Murkowski race all over again, with the liberal establishment candidate having his or her pockets lined with special interest and lobbyist money.

And Mike Castle has sold out principle for their big-contributions too.

Castle voted for the bailouts (the TARP bank bailouts, and the auto bailouts). He supported in-state tuition for illegal aliens. He supported the anti-business Cap & Trade. He supports taxpayer funding for abortions.

In fact it turns out Castle voted for Obama’s agenda nearly 60% of the time. He is one of the worst offenders in Congress among the GOP and its time to fire Mike Castle.

But wait, it gets better. This is a Special Election, meaning that the winner will be seated the day after the election—which means Christine O’Donnell could be the deciding vote in the U.S. Senate to block the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda during the ‘lame duck’ session after November’s elections, but before the new Congress is sworn in.

We’re looking for 469 more patriots such as yourself to help us kick-start this campaign for Christine O’Donnell by making a contribution (https://secure.donationsafe.com/co) of $100 or more to support her campaign. And we need 71 people to make a contribution of $500, $1,000 or more. You can contribute as little as $5 up to the FEC-allowed donation of $5,000.

To contribute online—JUST CLICK HERE. (https://secure.donationsafe.com/co)

As always, if you prefer, you can mail in a contribution to our headquarters:

Tea Party Express
8795 Folsom Blvd. #103
Sacramento, CA 95826

*Note our new mailing address!”

Monday, August 30, 2010

Alaskan Republican Senate primary—a petition for a fair & legal count of absentee ballots


I received the following as an e-mail over the weekend. I signed the petition, naturally.

From: http://www.teapartyexpress.org/

“We have learned that the NRSC (National Republican Senatorial Committee) has sent a team of lawyers and political hacks—including the NRSC’s top lawyer—to Alaska to potentially manipulate the vote-counting process in the Alaska GOP Senate race. Their apparent goal: to help Liberal Sen. Lisa Murkowski steal the election from Conservative Republican, Joe Miller, who currently leads in the vote count.

Joe Miller’s campaign has discovered that operatives are even calling absentee voters and asking them how they voted, purportedly so that they can figure out which absentee ballots to throw out (Joe Miller voters) and which ones to keep (Lisa Murkowski voters).

We need to fight back against this attempt to manipulate the election process. We went through this with Al Franken in Minnesota when the Democrat Party pulled this stunt—we can’t stand for it in Alaska with the Republican Party establishment.

Please sign the petition (http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/countthevotesfairly/) below and then share it with your friends. We’re going to make a big spectacle of this if the NRSC tries to steal this election for Lisa Murkowski. We WILL hold them accountable. Sign the petition - HERE. (http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/countthevotesfairly/)

Note: You may be asked to make a donation to iPetitions after you sign the petition. You need not do so. This petition is completely FREE and you can choose to ignore the donation request—it is NOT a request for donations by the Tea Party Express, and your signature will count without you making a donation to iPetitions.” (I was and did not donate without a problem; so expect it!—my addition)

From: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/countthevotesfairly/

“The Petition

We, the undersigned, are very concerned about news reports that the NRSC (National Republican Senatorial Committee) has sent a team of lawyers and political hacks to manipulate the vote count of absentee ballots, and skew the results to benefit liberal Sen. Lisa Murkowski against the current vote leader, Conservative Republican Joe Miller.

We demand the votes in the Alaska Senate race be counted fairly. If the NRSC engages in any inappropriate conduct in this vote count akin to Al Franken's manipulation of the Minnesota Senate race, then we will hold the NRSC accountable when the November elections come around and they come looking to us to vote for their establishment candidates.

Sign petition”

The following was sent on August 30th:

“We’ve told you about efforts by backers of Liberal Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski to dispatch teams of lawyers and political hacks to influence the counting of ballots in the extremely close Alaska Senate GOP Primary, where Conservative Republican Joe Miller holds on to a narrow lead of almost 2%.

Details are now emerging of repeated violations by Sen. Murkowski’s ballot observers, and are detailed in this letter from a prestigious Alaska law firm. Please read the letter—you might have to reload the page if the document does not appear the first time you try to access it: CLICK HERE to READ THE DETAILED LETTER. (I could not copy and paste the website address. I did download the letter and may post it at a later date—my addition.)

Friends, this is getting ridiculous. The NRSC, the Murkowski campaign and the Republican political establishment in Alaska are doing everything they can to steal Joe Miller’s apparent victory away from him. We must fight back.

We went through this with Al Franken in Minnesota when the Democrat Party pulled this stunt—we can’t stand for it in Alaska with the Republican Party establishment.

Please sign the petition (http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/countthevotesfairly/) below and then share it with your friends. Post the links on websites, blogs and group discussion boards. Send to your email lists. We’re going to make a big spectacle of this if the NRSC tries to steal this election for Lisa Murkowski. We WILL hold them accountable. Sign the petition - HERE. (http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/countthevotesfairly/)

Note: You may be asked to make a donation to iPetitions after you sign the petition. You need not do so. This petition is completely FREE and you can choose to ignore the donation request—it is NOT a request for donations by the Tea Party Express, and your signature will count without you making a donation to iPetitions.” (I was and did not donate without a problem; so expect it!—my addition)

Saturday, August 28, 2010

Senate Conservatives Fund update on supported candidates


I just received the following and wanted to post it today. I plan to give continued updates between now and the election. All of these candidates need your help and prayers if we are going to turn this country around through the ballot box. This election and the 2012 election may well be critical if we are to stop and reverse the immoral direction of this nation.

From: Senate Conservatives Fund http://www.senateconservatives.com/

Donation website: https://senateconservatives.com/takeamericaback?c=PP4C77C69F90FFA

“Dear Friends:

The November elections are quickly approaching and I wanted to take a few moments to give you a poll update on each of the races.

Thanks to your support, many of our SCF candidates have defied all odds to win their primary races against well-funded members of the Republican establishment. And with your help, they’ll be able to win their general elections against stimulus-voting, Obamacare-supporting, pro-bailout Democrats in November.

Below is a brief summary of the latest polls in all of the races SCF is working to help conservative candidates win.

Please consider supporting these candidates through our interactive Take America Back website. We have invested $75,000 in their campaigns this week but we need another $15,000 to meet our goal.

On this website, you can donate directly to a candidate of your choosing or select the ‘easy’ donation option that will allocate your financial gift among all of the candidates according to our strategic assessment for each candidate.

Thank you again for your time. None of these victories will be possible without your donations, volunteerism and prayers.

Respectfully,

Jim DeMint
United States Senator
Chairman, Senate Conservatives Fund

SCF Candidate Poll Update

01) Pennsylvania: SCF candidate Pat Toomey is nine points ahead of Democrat Joe Sestak, according to a Franklin & Marshall poll conducted August 16-23. Rasmussen Reports also showed that Toomey was good shape in their August 16 poll, where he came out eight points ahead of Sestak. When Toomey began his campaign against then-Republican Sen. Arlen Specter, no one thought Toomey had a chance. Many Republicans in Washington said the voters would not like his principled views, but now we know they were wrong. Electing Toomey to Specter’s Senate seat will let every liberal Republican know than their days are numbered.

02) Kentucky: Despite the liberal media’s ambitious campaign to convince voters that Rand Paul is too much of an outsider to serve in the Senate, his calls for smaller government and fiscal responsibility are being well-received in the Bluegrass State. An August 17 Rasmussen poll showed Paul 10 points ahead of Democrat Jack Conway. Similarly, a Reuters poll conducted August 13-15 gave Paul a five point advantage in the race. Rand Paul is one of the strongest fiscal conservatives running this year, and if he’s elected he will stand up to the big spenders in both political parties.

03) Utah: Mike Lee, who staged an insurgent campaign against incumbent Republican Senator Bob Bennett, is in a strong position to win the general election against Democrat Sam Granato. The last poll conducted on this race was in June by Rasmussen Reports. It showed Lee 30 points ahead of Granato. As an SCF member, you helped Lee face down the smear campaign that was waged against him by the Republican establishment in order to win the primary. Thanks to your generous support, Mike Lee is very likely to become Utah’s next senator.

04) Colorado: A Reuters poll conducted on August 20-22 gave conservative Ken Buck a nine-point advantage over Democrat Senator Michael Bennet. However, national Democrats have reserved over $3 million in television time to portray Ken Buck as an ‘extreme’ candidate. This will be one of the most competitive races in the country and conservatives must continue to provide Ken Buck with the resources he needs to win it.

05) Florida: The latest analysis from Public Policy Polling, a Democrat polling organization, shows Marco Rubio eight points ahead of Republican-turned Independent Charlie Crist. Even though Rubio is ahead in the polls, nothing should be assumed about this Florida race. Crist is a formidable campaigner and it is critical that conservatives maintain a high level of support for Rubio.

06) Nevada: A Rasmussen poll conducted on August 16 gives SCF candidate Sharron Angle a two-point lead over Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. A Mason-Dixon poll conducted earlier this month for the Las Vegas Sun Review Journal, however, showed Leader Reid one point ahead of Angle. Angle is in fine shape to win. Reid’s campaign, cheered on by the liberal media, is throwing the kitchen sink at Angle, an underdog candidate, and she’s maintaining a competitive edge through the onslaught of negative attacks. With your support, SCF will continue to boost Angle and give her all the support she needs to win in November.

07) Wisconsin: Democrat Sen. Russ Feingold’s seat is officially a ‘toss-up’ now because of the impressive showing SCF candidate Ron Johnson has made in the race so far. Feingold, once considered a shoo-in for re-election, is now one point behind Johnson in the latest Rasmussen poll on the race. Replacing a hard-line liberal with a principled conservative in Wisconsin will shake the liberal Washington establishment to its core.

08) Washington: SCF candidate Dino Rossi has Democrat Sen. Patty Murray running scared. Although Rossi is relatively new to the race, SurveyUSA already shows him seven points ahead of Senator Murray. This is in large part due to the rush of SCF support for Rossi. In the weeks before the primary election, SCF was able to invest over $50,000 into this race. Now that Rossi has secured the slot to run against Murray in the general election, SCF is working overtime to make sure Rossi has what he needs to defeat her.”

Donation website: https://senateconservatives.com/takeamericaback?c=PP4C77C69F90FFA

Friday, August 27, 2010

Defense of Marriage Law—Petition in support of


This petition deals with an inferior federal court judge’s illegal and unconstitutional decision dealing with a Congressional law to define marriage as between one man and one woman and allowing States to do the same. Note that the title for the court case is “Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.” Consequently, this court case is specifically a case in which a State shall be a Party!

According to the U.S. Constitution:

“Article III

Section. 2.

1) The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;”

“In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a STATE (my capitalization for emphasis—my addition) shall be a party, the supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”

Shouldn’t EVERY American citizen be concerned that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the Attorney General of the U.S. and his staff, and an inferior federal judge seem to either not know or not care what the U.S. Constitution requires for this case—that the case BEGINS in the U.S. Supreme Court! Not at an inferior federal court located within Massachusetts. This decision IS illegal and unconstitutional!

That being said, the court did make a ruling and therefore I am posting a petition to the U.S. Attorney General. Seemingly, the executive branch of the U.S. government has little desire to appeal and support a legal law passed by the U.S. Congress. This too should be a major concern for EVERY American citizen. IS OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CORRUPT OR JUST EXTREMELY INCOMPETENT?

From http://www.battleformarriage.net/petition

“Petition to the U.S. Department of Justice

Dear Attorney General Eric Holder,

As you are well aware, in the case of Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, a federal judge granted summary judgment to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in a decision that declares the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. Judge Joseph L. Tauro of the Massachusetts District Court issued a ruling proclaiming that the federal DOMA, which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman, violates the 5th and 10th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

Judge Tauro’s decision could have wide-ranging and significant effects on all states, especially those where marriage is protected by the Defense of Marriage Act. The weak case brought by your Justice Department ignored a number of factors typically used in legally defending marriage. Now, there are reports of hesitation as to whether the federal government will even appeal the decision despite the mandate to the Department of Justice to defend all statutes passed by Congress, even ones with which the current administration might disagree.

We ask that you file appeal before the September 7th deadline. If you do not plan to do your constitutional duty, we ask that you allow outside groups, including the Alliance Defense Fund, to fight on behalf of the large majority in Congress who voted for DOMA and the millions of Americans who voted within their own states to protect marriage.”

The following is a portion of the e-mail I received alerting me to the petition:

“President Obama has been getting much deserved pressure from his liberal allies regarding his stance on marriage, and for good reason. They know, as we do, that President Obama favors homosexual ‘marriage’ but tries to disguise his views. He knows the majority of Americans disagree with him and know that marriage is not, by nature, defined by gender.

While campaigning, President Obama spoke out against states that sought to protect marriage with constitutional amendments implying he would rather leave marriage decisions to an unelected judge. During the 2008 campaign, he spoke out against Proposition 8, the California constitutional amendment that defined marriage as between one man and one woman. This is the same victorious marriage protecting amendment that Judge Vaughn Walker, a federal district judge, struck down saying that support for such a definition is mere religious bigotry! Can you imagine? (As I’ve stated in a previous post, this also was an illegal and unconstitutional decision by an inferior court judge—my addition.)

Since taking office, the Obama Administration has done all they can to undermine marriage. Their latest assault concerns a federal challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Recently, a liberal court in Massachusetts, after a weak defense from the Obama Justice Department, ruled DOMA unconstitutional. President Obama’s Justice Department is dragging its feet as they contemplate whether they will EVEN APPEAL the decision! If the Department of Justice does not appeal, it is unlikely outside defenders of marriage will even be allowed to defend marriage in court.

The Department of Justice is supposed to vigorously defend statutes passed by Congress, not roll over to appease President Obama’s political base. Please sign our petition asking the Justice Department to either file an appeal, or get out of the way and allow others to take up the case! We will deliver these petitions to the Justice Department the week of September 13.”

Note: The material says the federal government has until September 7th to file and yet the Attorney General will not be given the petition until the week of September 13th. I’m not sure of the correctness of the dates but am posting it as I received it and it is posted on the website. I did “sign” the petition.

Again, the website is at http://www.battleformarriage.net/petition

Thursday, August 26, 2010



http://www.resistnet.com/video/latinos-given-6-votes-per

One person/six votes—courtesy of one federal judge!

The new post is the clip. I came across this clip while dealing with the clip posted yesterday. Note that a lower court federal judge once again rewrite the U.S. Constitution to suit his own sense of right and wrong. Many federal court judges are out of control and we the people are allowing it to continue. Why?

Wednesday, August 25, 2010



http://www.resistnet.com/video/wheres-my-congressman

Congress: Where's my Congressman?

This video clip was too good not to post!

Tuesday, August 24, 2010



Arizona’s Illegal Immigration Law—a comparison

I received the following video clip yesterday and had to post it. The date for this comment was stated as 12/14/2009 before Arizona passed the new law. The comparison, of course, is President Barack Hussein Obama’s position on this rather mundane issue and his position on allowing illegal immigrants to flood into the nation as is demonstrated by the administration’s attack on Arizona’s law.

The individual speaking in the clip is identified in my e-mail as Representative Ted Poe who is the House member from Texas District 2. He’s a Republican, of course, and is in his third term in the House having been elected by 89% of the vote in 2008. I don’t know if he is running this year but would think he probably is.
The new post is the clip.

Monday, August 23, 2010

J . D. Hayworth—issues and the primary election tomorrow


Saturday, I posted material that I had written in 2008 concerning John McCain. Today, some selected issues from J. D. Hayworth’s campaign website—www.jdforsenate.com.

“Defending Life and Marriage

J.D. Hayworth is unequivocally pro-life and pro-marriage. While John McCain supports embryonic stem-cell research, J.D. Hayworth knows that the destruction of human life, even in the name of some ‘greater good‘, is absolutely unacceptable. The unborn, as well as those in the later stages of life, will have an uncompromising champion in J.D. Hayworth. J.D. Hayworth champions the efforts of Representative Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) to concentrate on pluripotent stem cell research which utilizes embryonic-like adult stem cells.

J.D. is also pro-marriage and supports protecting marriage from those who seek to redefine it to suit a narrow political agenda. While John McCain opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment, J.D. Hayworth knows that defending marriage, and ensuring its survival as the fundamental building block of society, is a critical task.

Judges

One of the most critical votes a U.S. Senator gets to cast is to confirm the men and women who get to sit on the bench. Judges are our last line of defense against the tyranny of the government and it is critical that we appoint strict constitutionalists who defend the Constitution and the rights enshrined therein.

That’s why conservatives were so disappointed when John McCain led the so-called ‘Gang of 14’ that scuttled so many of President Bush’s conservative nominees. When liberal Democrats were sabotaging these qualified men and women, conservative Republicans banded together to defend them and attempt to confirm them. But they were betrayed by a handful of Republicans, led by John McCain, who ‘reached across the aisle’ to compromise away the conservative nominees.

As our U.S. Senator, J.D. Hayworth will never forget that his oath is to defend our Constitution, and there is no better way than to confirm strict constitutionalists to the bench at every level in the country.

Illegal Immigration

A national leader in the fight to secure our borders, J.D. Hayworth has actually ‘written the book’ on the subject, ‘Whatever It Takes’. When John McCain proposed his Amnesty Plan—the Heritage Foundation said it would cost taxpayers $2.6 Trillion—J.D. Hayworth stood up and fought against it. Taking on a U.S. Senator with nearly 30 years of seniority took courage, but J.D. understood that our economy could not survive the long-term effects of the McCain-Kennedy plan, and that encouraging millions of people to break our laws was a recipe for disaster.

J.D. has led the fight for real border security, interior enforcement, and requiring that law enforcement enforce our laws and protect our citizens. It is no surprise that he has been endorsed by great leaders like Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and State Senator Russell Pearce.

Comparing The Candidates

J.D. Hayworth helped write the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. John McCain voted against them and denounced them as ‘tax cuts for the wealthy.’

J.D. Hayworth opposed TARP. John McCain was a key vote for the measure. In fact, former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said that ‘We wouldn’t have gotten TARP done if John McCain hadn’t been supportive of it.’ McCain wanted to go even further, proposing an additional $300 Billion to buy up all of the bad debts, leaving the taxpayers to pay for the mistakes of others.

J.D. Hayworth opposed the auto bailouts. John McCain supported them.

J.D. Hayworth opposes Cap & Trade legislation and rejects phony climate change data. John McCain co-wrote the McCain-Lieberman Cap & Trade bill.

J.D Hayworth opposes amnesty for illegal aliens and has a long record of fighting to secure our borders and enforce our laws. John McCain co-wrote the McCain-Kennedy Amnesty bill that the Heritage Foundation estimated would cost the taxpayers $2.6 Trillion.

J.D. Hayworth believes that a vigorous political debate is vital to the long-term health of our nation, and that free speech is the cornerstone of our Constitutional Republic. John McCain co-wrote the McCain-Feingold legislation that placed a gag order on groups like the National Rifle Association and National Right to Life. This legislation was largely struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court because it constituted a direct assault on the first amendment rights of Americans. McCain was ‘disappointed’ by the outcome.

J.D. Hayworth supported the Federal Marriage Amendment and believes it is critical that marriage be protected from those who would redefine it. John McCain voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment.

J.D. Hayworth supports the appointment and confirmation of conservative, strict constitutionalists, as judges. John McCain led the Gang of 14 that blocked the confirmation of just these kinds of judges. Yet John McCain voted to confirm Eric Holder as Attorney General of the United States?

J.D. Hayworth is a proven, consistent conservative, with a lifetime rating of 98 from the American Conservative Union. John McCain’s lifetime rating is 81 and dropping. McCain’s score last year was an abysmal 63. And while John McCain falsely claims that J.D. Hayworth is a big spender, he ignores the fact that J.D. Hayworth has a better lifetime rating from Citizens Against Government Waste than does McCain.”

One of the problems a conservative Republican has running against a RINO—Republican In Name Only—Republican, who is already in office, is that the Republican Party leadership automatically, it seems, supports the RINO. That was true in the Arlen Specter race in 2004, it was true when RINO Congressman Mark Kirk ran for the Senate from Illinois earlier this year, and it is true for John McCain for the Arizona primary tomorrow.

The polls, from what I can tell, have John McCain with a large lead. However, as I’ve said many times, polls have never voted in an election. It is up to the voters to get to the voting booth and vote. Turnout is a very important part of any election and that is particularly true in primaries because of the historically low turnouts. Don’t let a small minority select the Republican Party’s candidate tomorrow. Vote!

Two RINO’s are running for Senate nominates tomorrow. Lisa Murkowski in Washington against Joe Miller and John McCain in Arizona against J. D. Hayworth. Both RINO’s are favored to win according to conventional wisdom. In all cases though, the voter will actually decide the candidate. Not polls. Not endorsements. Not incumbency. Not money spent. Not lies told. Vote tomorrow and vote tomorrow based upon the issues and the positions of the candidates.

T. A.: Thanks for calling! I hope you vote for J.D. Hayworth tomorrow.

Saturday, August 21, 2010

John McCain—Is he a conservative?


Tuesday, August 24th, primary elections are being held in Washington, Arizona, and Florida in which a senatorial candidate will be nominated by party vote to represent Republicans in the general election. All three Senate seats are presently held by Republicans. In my opinion, Washington Senator Lisa Murkowski and Arizona Senator John McCain are RINO’s—Republicans In Name Only. I have already stated my support for Joe Miller in the Washington primary. Today, I’m posting an earlier writing I did on John McCain in 2008. It is still relevant.

“Saturday, February 9, 2008—McCain: I really am a conservative.

The following article was in the Peoria Journal Star on February 9, 2008, page A5. I think the libertine mass media has now decided that John McCain will win the Republican Party Presidential nomination and it is now time to start the attack on him to prevent continued Republican control of the White House.

‘Top 10 reasons conservatives dislike McCain

Washington D.C. (AP)—While Republican John McCain is urging his conservative critics to rally around his presidential campaign, there is a lot of water under that bridge.

Here are the top 10 reasons some conservatives dislike the Arizona senator:

1. Campaign finance reform. McCain tried to limit the role of money in politics with measures that, critics say, stomp on the constitutional right to free speech. (It also probably makes it much more difficult for an incumbent to be defeated in an election be it the primary or the general election. Some might define such a law as the ‘Incumbent Protection Act’—my addition) [Major portions of the Act have now been ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court. But, during the 2008 election it was still the law and was used against McCain by Barack Hussein Obama. Some might call that poetic justice—my 2010 addition.]

2. Immigration. McCain has been a vocal supporter of a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, although he now says he understands the border between the U.S. and Mexico must be sealed first. (Why would any conservative Republican be concerned about Senator McCain joining forces with the libertine Senator Kennedy to give away our country to those people who deliberately violate our laws?—my addition) [Senator McCain is once again trying to tone down his support for amnesty for illegals! Happens every 6 years around election time. He was a co-sponsor of the attempt to grant amnesty to illegals. He should not be rewarded for his support for amnesty!—my 2010 addition]

3. Tax cuts. McCain twice voted against President Bush’s tax cuts, saying in 2001 they helped the wealthy at the expense of the middle class and in 2003 that there should be no tax relief until the cost of the Iraq war was known. But he now wants to extend the tax cuts. (McCain has said that economics is not his strong suit—my addition)

4. Gay Marriage. McCain refused to support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. (Enough said—my addition) [His argument, which was incorrect then and is more so now, was that it was a State issue not a federal issue. Today, we have one federal inferior court judge who has ruled that the California Constitutional Amendment to ban homosexual marriage is unconstitutional. That decision, wrong as it is, automatically makes it a fundamental federal issue. John McCain is politically astute enough to know that this would eventually happen since a Supreme Court Justice in a 1990’s case warned that it would indeed happen. If he is not politically astute enough to realize this, he should NOT be a U.S. Senator from Arizona!—my 2010 addition]

5. Stem cell research. McCain would relax restrictions on federal dollars for embryonic stem cell research, which critics consider tantamount to abortion. (Another of several examples of Senator McCain trying to straddle both sides of an issue—my addition.)

6. Global warming. Among the loudest voices in Congress for aggressive action against global warming and a frequent critic of the Bush administration on the issue. (Does he or does he not sound more like a libertine Democrat than a conservative Republican. He needs to read my posts on the ‘Al Gore gang’ and global warming—my addition.)

7. ‘Gang of 14’ member. One of seven Republicans and seven Democrats who averted a Senate showdown over whether filibusters could be used against Bush judicial nominees. (The Senate still is not dealing with and voting on conservative nominations to the federal courts—my addition.)

8. Kerry veep. McCain was approached by the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, about being his running mate. McCain talked with Kerry but rejected the offer. (Who are his friends?—my addition)

9. Works with Democrats. See all of the above. (More importantly, too often votes with the libertine Democrats—my addition.)

10. Belligerence. McCain can be acerbic toward his critics, such as when he labeled televangelists Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson ‘agents of intolerance.’ (Any Republican who uses libertine Democrats’ code words has a very serious problem!—my addition) He reconciled with Falwell in 2006. Conservative James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, said in a statement on the morning of super Tuesday primaries that he would not vote for McCain, citing among other things his ‘legendary temper’ and that he ‘often used foul and obscene language.’’ (Perfect characteristics for a President if the President’s name is Clinton! ‘‘But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.’’ Matthew 12: 36-37 (NIV)—my addition)

My additions to this list would include:

11. Friends with Rudy Giuliani and Ted Kennedy. Both supporters of the MURDER of UNBORN BABIES!!! What is that old saying? ‘Birds of a feather, flock together.’ Or as the WORD of GOD declares ‘Do not be misled; ‘Bad company corrupts good character.’’ I Corinthians 15: 33 (NIV)

12. Obsessed with power; disregards principles

13. A Democrat in action; Republican in name. Why else does he need to try to convince conservative Republicans that he is also a conservative?

14. The editorial staff of the Peoria Journal Star endorsed him in the Illinois Republican primary which occurred on February 5, 2008.

15. He is the ‘Republican’ darling of the libertine mass media. That is, until he actually runs against a libertine Democrat for the Presidency.”

“Here is a small portion of what I wrote about Senator John McCain when I DID NOT endorse him for President.”

“From what I have been told and what I have observed, John McCain is THE political chameleon of the Republican candidates. When I was in Arizona voting as a Democrat and running for political office as a Democrat, several Republicans told me the same thing. John McCain would be as comfortable politically running as a Democrat in Massachusetts as he is serving as a Republican in Arizona.

For President of the United States (and for a U.S. Senator—my 2010 addition), I want a candidate who believes and supports the policy and the principles he advocates. I do not want a President (or a Senator—my 2010 addition) who bases his latest decisions on the most current public opinion polls. That is not leadership!!!

John McCain has been quoted as declaring that both GOD CREATED the universe and Darwin’s evolution—slim to man—are true and compatible. Mr. McCain, it is not true. Get off the fence and state your belief. I don’t want a President (or a Senator—my 2010 addition) who tries to have it both ways—it is a recipe for disaster.”

Friday, August 20, 2010

Arizona’s Illegal Immigration law—an unscientific poll


I was sent a link to a video on illegal immigration. I found this poll will on the web dealing with the original link. The link for the poll is below:

From: http://www.personalliberty.com/poll/immigration-reform/index.php?SC=BEL2375

“Immigration Reform…
Should America Follow Arizona’s Lead?

PersonalLiberty.com, America’s #1 news site for independent-minded individuals, is conducting an urgent immigration poll. We want to know if you think America should follow Arizona’s lead when it comes to immigration reform.

The results of the poll will be available to you after you submit your vote and we’ll also share the poll results with major media outlets across the country. Thousands will vote, so take a moment right now to stand up and be counted… your opinion matters!

Vote today!

1) Should America follow Arizona’s lead when it comes to immigration reform?
Yes
No
Undecided

2) Do you believe illegal immigrants take jobs U.S. citizens want?
Yes
No
Undecided

3) Do you feel being asked for proof of citizenship is a violation of your civil rights?
Yes
No
Undecided

4) Would you like to see your state pass a similar immigration law?
Yes
No
Undecided
I live in Arizona

5) For whom did you vote in the 2008 presidential election?
Obama/Biden
McCain/Palin
Other

Please Enter Your First Name and Email Address Here: (Responses are confidential)

After submitting, please check your email for the results of the poll. You must provide a valid email to see the results of the poll.

I understand by participating in this poll I will also receive FREE Personal Liberty Alerts from www.PersonalLiberty.com. America’s #1 independent news source. I can unsubscribe at any time.”

“Here are the results!

The Total Number of people who voted in this poll: 393,198

1) Should America follow Arizona’s lead when it comes to immigration reform?

97% voted: Yes
3% voted: No
0% voted: Undecided

2) Do you believe illegal immigrants take jobs U.S. citizens want?

85% voted: Yes
9% voted: No
5% voted: Undecided

3) Do you feel being asked for proof of citizenship is a violation of your civil rights?

4% voted: Yes
94% voted: No
1% voted: Undecided

4) Would you like to see your state pass a similar immigration law?

93% voted: Yes
3% voted: No
0% voted: Undecided
3% voted: I live in Arizona

5) For whom did you vote in the 2008 presidential election?

8% voted: Obama/Biden
79% voted: McCain/Palin
12% voted: Other

Thank you for your participation.”

Thursday, August 19, 2010

Star-Spangled Banner—‘In God is our trust.’


I was sent an e-mail yesterday (Wednesday) which included a link to a new Joe Miller campaign advertisement. After watching the ad, I clicked onto another video which had been watched over 2.5 million times. It was a Tea Party rally where a man sang the fourth verse of the Star-Spangled Banner. I don’t recall every hearing the fourth verse before or every reading it. To watch the video copy and paste the link below:

From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9_bP219ehQ&feature=related

To watch the marine who sang the song being interviewed on Fox News copy and paste the link below. Did you see either an interview with this man or the video on any other news outlet?

From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WO40DMZWHQ&NR=1 (Fox News)

From http://www.usa-flag-site.org/song-lyrics/star-spangled-banner.shtml

“The Star Spangled Banner Lyrics
By Francis Scott Key 1814 (written September 14, 1814 and made the national anthem of the United State of America by an act of Congress on March 3, 1931—my addition)

Oh, say can you see by the dawn’s early light
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars thru the perilous fight,
O’er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?
And the rocket’s red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe’s haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o’er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning’s first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:
‘Tis the star-spangled banner! Oh long may it wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion,
A home and a country should leave us no more!
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps’ pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Be tween their loved home and the war’s desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heav’n rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: ‘In God is our trust.’
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!”

Notice that according to the song, America is rescued by Heaven, made by the Power, preserved as a nation by the Power, and has a motto of ‘In God is our Trust!’ This is our national anthem. Do we still believe it!

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Joe Miller—conservative Republican, supported by Tea Party Express


From http://www.teapartyexpress.org/

“During this year the Tea Party Express has helped boost a lot of conservative constitutionalists in key races across the country.

Thanks to your support that looks to be happening once again. One month ago polls showed Liberal RINO, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, with a lead of 32-points over her conservative challenger, tea party hero Joe Miller.

This past weekend we learned of a new poll of 1,223 Alaska voters that showed Joe Miller has now jumped 23-points, and now trails Sen. Murkowski by only 9%.

The election is just 15-days away (August 24th) and we have a chance to win this race and replace a Liberal U.S. Senator (Murkowski) with a conservative patriot (Joe Miller).
We need your help now more than ever as we’re going to give it everything we’ve got.

We’re going to launch a massive radio and TV advertising campaign but we’ve got to raise $150,000 more in the next 4 days to pay for it.

I know we can reach this goal with your support.

You can help us by making a contribution.

Some of you can afford a more generous contribution of $100, $500, $1,000 or even $5,000. And boy do we need your help to level the playing field and make sure that the conservative candidate—Joe Miller wins.

You can make a donation to our campaign for Joe Miller—HERE.

You can give as little as $5 and as much as $5,000 under FEC laws and regulations. How about we get 1,000 conservatives to give $100 or more in the next 24 hours to defeat RINO Lisa Murkowski.”

You can contribute to the Joe Miller campaign, if you so desire, at http://www.teapartyexpress.org/ or http://www.joemiller.us/

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Joe Miller—Conservative Republican candidate for Senator for Alaska


There are primary elections in Washington and Wyoming today. From what I can gather, there are no real contests that I am concerned about at this time. That is not the case for the primaries in Alaska, Arizona, and Florida on August 24th. Today and tomorrow, I plan to profile Joe Miller who is running for the Senate in Alaska. Today, Joe Miller’s position on the MURDER of unborn babies in relation to Lisa Murkowski’s voting record in the U.S. Senate. Lisa Murkowski is the present Republican Senator for Alaska. Note: This post has references to where anyone may go to find out how Lisa Murkowski voted on special issues dealing with the MURDER of unborn babies.

“June 23, 2010

Dear Pro-Life Supporter,

We are eight weeks away from the August 24th Alaska Primary Election. As you may know, Alaska is currently without a Pro-Life voice in the United States Senate. That is one of the reasons, after much deliberation, I have decided to enter the race.

Our current Senator, Lisa Murkowski, has begun a sustained media blitz to convince
Republican primary voters that she is a reliable Conservative voice in Washington. Unfortunately, her record is not consonant with the assertions being promulgated. From her earliest days in the Senate, she has been a willing accomplice of the Pro-Abortion lobby.

One of her first votes on their behalf was a Sense of the Senate Amendment Co-Sponsored by Senators Barbara Boxer and John Kerry. It read as follows:

“It is the sense of the Senate that the decision of the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade was appropriate and secures an important constitutional right; and such decision should not be overturned.”

It should be duly noted that the above language was attached to the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, ironically one of the votes that Senator Murkowski is pointing to in order to claim solidarity with Pro-Life voters. However, Alaska voters know better. Voting against Partial-Birth Abortion does not make you pro-life. Even some of the most hardened Pro-Abortion advocates in the United States Senate, including Obama Appointee Tom Daschle and current Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, recognize the barbarity of partial-birth abortion.

Sadly, Senator Murkowski’s Pro-Abortion record does not end there. In July of 2003, she
voted (Senate Amendment 1141) with Senator Barbara Boxer in a failed attempt to repeal the ‘Mexico City Policy‘, first established by President Ronald Reagan during his first term in office. The Mexico City Policy was aimed at one thing: protecting US Taxpayers from having to be responsible for the funding of unrestricted international abortions. The Policy permitted US taxpayer funding of some abortions and international abortion groups by including exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother. However, these exceptions were insufficient for Murkowski. She would not be satisfied until unrestricted US public funding was again going to abortions and abortion groups, as it had been before President Reagan took office.

In April 2005 Sen. Murkowski voted again with Senator Boxer (Senate Amendment 278) to repeal President Reagan’s policy. Senator Boxer’s speech on the floor of the Senate began as follows: ‘Mr. President, today I am offering an amendment to overturn the so-called Mexico City policy which undermines some of our country’s most important values and goals.’ Clearly and consistently Senator Murkowski has demonstrated her agreement with Senator Boxer’s sentiment on the issue of public funding of abortions oversees.

One of Obama’s first actions as President was to repeal the ‘Mexico City Policy.’ That same week, Republicans in the Senate called for a vote, and Senator Murkowski had the distinction of being one of only four Republicans to vote against reinstating the ban on exporting Federal dollars to foreign non-governmental organization that provide/promote unrestricted abortions (Senate Amendment 65). As of today, the limitations on US taxpayer financing of abortions oversees are no longer in force, thanks in part to the tireless efforts of Sen. Murkowski to repeal them.

In July 2006, Senator Murkowski voted in favor of the Stem Cell Research and Enhancement Act of 2005 (HR 810) which attempted to use Federal funds to support the destruction of living human embryos for medical research. In April 2007, she again confirmed her commitment to this act by also voting for passage of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 (S. 5).

Again in September 2007, Senator Murkowski voted (Senate Amendment 2708) to permit contributions to organizations that perform or promote abortion. In October of 2007, she further voted (Amendment 3330) against the prohibition of Federal funds to grantees that perform abortions. Her consistent voting record does earn her distinction. However, it is not the distinction of a conservative Senator.

As you are aware, just last week the Anchorage Daily News reported that the Denali KidCare Program funded 662 abortions last year. Senator Murkowski has been a champion of this program, voting against the majority of her Republican colleagues for CHIPRA (HR 2) in January of 2009.

On both of these occasions Senator Murkowski voted against provisions (Senate Amendment 4233 to SCR 70 and S. Amendment 80 to HR 2) that would have covered unborn children under the Act. Apparently, in her view, it is acceptable to use Federal dollars to terminate nascent human life, but not to save it.

Senator Murkowski is hoping to turn the US Senate Race into a ‘he said—she said’ moment, which she believes she can win with massive amounts of money from outside special interests. I ask you not to just take my word for it. For a listing of specific votes and further information please visit: WWW.JOEMILLER.US. Each vote is referenced by date on the United States Senate Website at (www.senate.gov), or by bill number at THOMAS.GOV (http://www.thomas.loc.gov/).

This is a unique primary election cycle. Americans are now engaged, and across the country long-standing incumbents are falling in primary elections, such as Sen. Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania and Sen. Bob Bennett in Utah. Let’s do our part to bring change to Washington, and ensure that Alaska has a Pro-Life voice in the United States Senate. I cannot do this alone, but together, we can. I need your help!

In the next few days, we will be filing our FEC report for the second quarter of 2010. We’re within striking distance of a powerful incumbent, but we cannot compete without the financial assistance over everyday Alaskan voters. And we need to send a message to those who are still on the sidelines. This is the race to watch! And not just watch—this is the race to join!

Please invest in this campaign. The choice today is between one candidate whose Pro-
Abortion record is without question, and my candidacy as a consistent and outspoken defender of life. With a contribution of $2400, $1000, $500, $100, or $50 you can let your voice be heard. This is your opportunity to speak up for Life.

I pledge to you that if you send me to Washington DC, there will be no greater advocate for Life in the United States Senate. I am committed to advocating for innocent life and vigorously opposing the culture of death.

There is very little time to redeem this unique epoch in our history. Please make this race a priority and make a significant investment in this campaign before the June 30 reporting deadline.

‘Do not be weary in doing well, for in due time we will succeed if we persevere.’ This year could bring about the sea change we’ve been working towards for a generation. Let’s make history together!

Standing up for those unable to stand on their own,

Joe Miller
Candidate, United States Senate
401 E. Northern Lights Blvd.
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
907 929-9563

http://www.joemiller.us/
facebook.com/JoeWMiller
Twitter: JoeWMiller

P.S.—Please respond today with a generous donation of $2400, $1000, $500, $100, or $50. Your contribution will make a difference in this important race!

‘It is so encouraging to have a solid pro-life candidate running for office. We are
saddened and disappointed with Senator Murkowski’s anti-life voting record. We call
on all pro-life Alaskans to support Joe Miller.’

—Dr. Christie Eberhardt, President of Alaska Right to Life

PAID FOR BY JOE MILLER FOR US SENATE

How many abortions are performed in Alaska each year at Taxpayer Expense?

According to an article published in the Anchorage Daily News last week (June 18th), at least 664 Alaska abortions—costing $384,000—were paid for through Denali KidCare, the State of Alaska Program designed to ensure that Alaska’s children and teens “have the health insurance they need.” In the article, the Alaska Dept. of Health & Human Services confirmed that 664 (a little over 35%) of abortions in Alaska last year were funded through this one government program alone. [Note: This does not include other sources of government funding that result in abortions, such as the $350 million that Planned Parenthood reported receiving from various government sources in their most recent annual report]

How is it that public funds initially set aside to help children, are instead being used to abort them? While it is true that KidCare is only legally required to fund abortions that are ‘medically Necessary‘, a term that has likely been abused to include everything from interference with a woman’s work and school, to an unborn child whose presence is ‘harmful to a woman’s psychological health,’ the responsibility for the public funding of these abortions can be laid at the feet of one Alaska politician. Lisa Murkowski.

Alaska media rarely highlights Senator Murkowski’s Pro-Choice record, and with good reason. In an election year when Sen. Murkowski is attempting to appear conservative, she wants her pro-choice record to disappear. Let us examine that record.

Where does Denali KidCare get its funding? A large part of its funding comes from up to 70% matching federal dollars through the Federal ‘State Children’s Health Insurance Program,’ known as SCHIP. On March 14th 2008, the United States Senate voted on whether unborn children would be eligible for child health assistance under SCHIP. It was a narrow vote. In the end, some Democrat senators, and nearly every Republican senator, including Sen. Ted Stevens, voted that unborn children were entitled to health assistance.

Sen. Murkowski abandoned Sen. Stevens and her Republican colleagues, and voted with
Sen. Obama and three other Republicans (one of whom has since become a Democrat) to deny protection to unborn children, pushing the Democrat vote to 52, against protecting the unborn.

‘It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish.’
—Mother Teresa

On January 29th, 2009, the matter again came up for a vote in the Senate. Again, Sen. Murkowski abandoned her Republican colleagues and joined Sen. Begich and Sen. Boxer in voting to deny health assistance to unborn children. Yet you won’t hear about such things. After all, this is an election year—and she has decided to be conservative…at least until the election. However, the next six years will reflect the last six. In case after case, on issue after issue, and vote after vote, Murkowski has voted against Alaskan families. It is time the record was set straight!

FOR A LISTING OF VOTES AND FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE VISIT: http://www.joemiller.us/.”

Monday, August 16, 2010

Ground Zero Mosque Petition


I was listening to Sean Hannity today as I was working on my post for today. Mr. Hannity had a debate between a supporter of and an opponent of building a mosque near Ground Zero in New York City. After hearing the debate, I decided to post a petition in opposition to building the mosque. This petition was mentioned by the debater in opposition. Tomorrow I plan to return to my originally planned post.

From http://www.actforamerica.org/

“We Oppose the Mosque at ‘Ground Zero’

Add your name to the group of 95,653 people who have already signed using the Internet!

Please read our petition below and fill in the form to add your signature. Then, forward this petition to your friends and family.

(ACT! For America Privacy Policy: We value your privacy and we will not give, rent or sell your contact information to any other organization. By providing us this information you help us ensure that everyone who signs the petition participates only once.)

We Stand With the Victims of 9/11, We Oppose the Mosque at ‘Ground Zero,’ and
We Urge You to Join Us in Opposition

To Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the Elected Officials of New York:

We the undersigned join with millions of Americans who are opposed to the founding of a mosque at the very site where Islamist jihadists destroyed the World Trade Center and took the lives of nearly 3,000 people.

We are opposed to the grotesque symbolism represented by the building of this mosque at ‘ground zero.’ We are especially appalled that those pushing for this mosque have designated its grand opening date for September 11, 2011—the ten year anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history.

We are deeply disturbed by the insensitivity to the families of the victims of the 9/11 jihadist attack exhibited by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and his supporters. We find it grossly hypocritical that Islamists and their allies repeatedly lecture Americans about the need to be ‘sensitive’ to Muslims while Imam Rauf and his allies practice the height of intolerance and insensitivity through the blatant act of building a mosque at ‘ground zero.’

We are offended by the views Imam Rauf has expressed about 9/11, such as his conspiratorial theory that Muslims did not perpetrate the 9/11 attack and that America’s policies were partly to blame for the attack. Such views are a slap in the face of the victims and families of 9/11.

We find it repulsive that Imam Rauf and his followers and supporters would seek to build a mosque near ground zero promoting the same Sharia ideology that the 9/11 hijackers used as the justification for their act of unconscionable murder.

Therefore, in deference to the families of the 9/11 victims and their memory, we call upon the elected officials of New York to oppose the building of this mosque near ground zero and for them to urge Feisal Abdul Rauf and his followers to find another location for it.

Because of the importance of providing a highly credible petition, this petition form asks for certain contact information to help ensure that no one signs the petition twice. Please note that only name, state, country, and email address is required; the remaining is optional. We do not rent or sell your contact information, and only your name and state will be included on the petition we deliver. Thank you for taking a few moments to complete this information.

Sign in here!”

“Please fill out the entire form below and click the continue button. All fields marked with an ‘ * ’ are required to continue.

By responding to this offer or program, you agree to receive periodic updates and opportunities to get involved with our organization and the American Congress for Truth, ACT for America’s sister organization. The American Congress for Truth is a 501C3 dedicated to providing research and educational resources. You will have the opportunity to opt-out in the footer of all email communication.

ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization. Because we engage in activities such as lobbying and legislative advocacy, contributions to ACT for America are not tax deductible.”

Saturday, August 14, 2010

Primary elections remaining in 2010


Primary elections remaining in 2010

01) August 17

Washington—Senate election, seat held by a Democrat
Wyoming

02) August 24

Alaska—Senate election, Republican Lisa Murkowski is being challenged
Arizona—Senate election, Republican John McCain is being challenged
Florida—Senate election; Republican incumbent is retiring

03) August 28

Louisiana—Senate election, seat held by a Republican
(1st Party Congressional) [Note: if a candidates wins this 1st primary with over 50% of the vote there is no 2nd primary. If not, the second primary (runoff) is October 2nd with the State primary—my addition]

04) September 14

Delaware—Senate election, special election held by a Democrat
Maryland—Senate election, seat held by a Democrat
Massachusetts—Republican Scott Brown won a Senate seat in a special election in January at the death of Senator Kennedy
Minnesota
New Hampshire—Senate election, Republican incumbent is retiring
New York—both Senate seats, both Democrats, one is a special election
Rhode Island
Vermont—Senate election, seat held by a Democrat
Wisconsin—Senate election, seat held by a Democrat

05) September 18

Hawaii—Senate election, seat held by a Democrat

06) October 2

Louisiana
(State Primary, & 2nd Party Congressional Runoff if necessary)

Friday, August 13, 2010

DON’T TREAD ON ME! The letter to the IRS


“Early flags designed for use in the American colonies reflected the Old World origin of the colonists. In the British colonies many flags were adaptations of the British Union Jack (see Flags, National). The colors red, white, and blue, which symbolized colonial unity, were first used in a flag in New England in 1737. The flag was blue with a white canton quartered by a red cross. In one upper quarter of the canton was a globe symbolizing the New World.

As relations with Great Britain became more strained, the colonists designed a large number of flags expressive of their political sentiments and ideals. A favorite emblematic device in the flags of the southern colonies was a rattlesnake, usually depicted as coiled and ready to strike and having 13 rattles. In South Carolina it was emblazoned on a yellow flag and was accompanied by the inscription ‘DONT TREAD ON ME.’” Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007 [DVD]. Redmond, Washington: Microsoft, Corporation, 2006.

I don’t know about others, but I have issues where I have figuratively “drawn a line in the sand.” I will not obey laws that are in direct violation with GOD’S will. One of those lines is being required to support the MURDER of American citizens by law—in this case, the MURDER of unborn babies financed by the federal government. This is an instance of “DON’T TREAD ON ME.” GOD’S law supersedes any man-made law!

I have, for a long time, taken the position that I don’t give my money to governments any sooner than required. Consequently, I owe taxes to the federal government every year when I file my income tax. Also, because I prepare taxes for others, I usually don’t file until the August 15th extension deadline.

This year, as normal, I owe taxes to the federal government. This year, I WILL NOT FILE! AND I WILL TELL THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT JUST THAT!

The question is when. If you’ve read my book, you know that 13 is the prime number for The Black Sword. It is also mine. As it happens, August 13th is on a Friday—Friday the 13th. Would there be any better day to say to the federal government—DON’T TREAD ON ME; DON’T TREAD ON GOD’S LAW!

Consequently, that’s the day I will notify the federal government that I refuse to help finance the MURDER of unborn babies.

I WILL NOT SUPPORT A GOVERNMENT THAT REQUIRES ME TO HELP FINANCE THE MURDER OF UNBORN BABIES!

DON’T TREAD ON ME!

DON’T TREAD ON GOD’S LAW!

The letter to the IRS attached to a 1040 form with just my name, address, social security number, and signature included on the form:

Donald L. Vance
XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Morton, Illinois 61550
August 13, 2010


Be it known that:

MURDERING unborn babies is obscenely immoral and illegal.

Requiring citizens to finance the MURDER of unborn babies is obscenely immoral and illegal making every citizen an accessory to the crime of MURDER.

Therefore:

In all good conscience, as a Christian who must answer to a higher authority—GOD—WHO is both just and moral, I will neither file nor pay income tax to an immoral, illegal manmade institution which condones and finances the MURDER of unborn babies.

GOD bless the United States if it is obedient to the WILL of GOD.

GOD condemn the United States if it is immoral, rebellious, and unrepentant as it disobeys the WILL of GOD.

Donald L. Vance

Copy sent to Barack Hussein Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid.

Naturally, I will update this situation on this blog as appropriate.

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Black conservatives respond to the NAACP


As I was searching for the petition posted yesterday in support of Arizona and its new illegal immigration law, I came across a video that I had seen previously. Some conservative, Black, Tea Party Express supporters were involved in a news conference in relation to the NAACP comment that some members of the Tea Party are racists. I am posting today the links to two videos from that news conference. Watch both. They are informative. The links:

“Tea Party Express Black Conservatives Press meeting at the National Press Club in DC (refuting NAACP contention that the Tea Party is racist or has racist elements within it—my addition.)

http://www.resistnet.com/video/tea-party-express-black

Tea Party Express press conference........ 8/4/2010”

And another ten minutes with additional coverage:

http://wootv.us/play.php?vid=731

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Arizona’s illegal immigration—a petition in favor of Arizona


From: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/supportarizonaimmigrationlaw/

“The Simple truth is that we’ve
lost control of our own borders,
and no nation can do that and survive.”
- Ronald Reagan

“ALERT: A federal judge has blocked key parts of Arizona’s immigration law.

In addition, several boycott efforts have been launched against the state of Arizona in the wake of the state’s new law combating illegal immigration.

We here at the Tea Party Express stand with the state of Arizona and reject the boycott efforts that have been launched against the state.

It is the duty of our federal government to secure our borders and defend this nation—one of the few actual responsibilities our federal government is supposed to be involved in.

But the federal government has failed in their duties. And so we at the Tea Party Express stand with those great patriots in Arizona who have stepped forward to take action and do the job the federal government has failed to do itself.

The state of Arizona should not be subject to Boycotts—they should be applauded for having the courage and convictions to take on this problem and address it, when others have failed to do so previously—and thus the massive problem with illegal immigration that we have today.

Please show your support for the state of Arizona and the effort to secure America’s borders—by SIGNING YOUR NAME BELOW!”

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Arizona’s illegal immigration law and more impacts of illegals


In previous posts, I have provided information in relation to illegal immigration and diseases, education, and jobs. There are additional impacts that I’m not going to specifically post, at least, at this time. The different topics are listed in this post and may be accessed at http://www.usillegalaliens.com/.

01) Introduction
02) Forward
03) The Dark Side Of Illegal Immigration
04) Impacts Of Illegal Immigration: Terrorism
05) Impacts Of Illegal Immigration: Crime
06) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Sex Crimes
07) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Property Crimes And Operation Predator
08) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Gangs
09) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Crime Summary
10) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Traffic Accidents
11) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Cultural Difference
12) The Balkanization Of America
13) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Education
14) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Diseases
15) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Jobs
16) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Abuse Of The Guest Worker Program
17) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: American Infrastructure
18) Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Economic Costs
19) The Costs of Illegal Immigration
20) Should We Grant An Amnesty?
21) The North American Union And The Security And Prosperity Partnership
22) Recipe For Disaster: How To Destroy America
23) Border Security And The Border Fence
24) Solutions To The Illegal Immigration Problem
25) More Realistic Solutions To The Illegal Immigration Problem
26) How You Can Take Action
27) More Information
28) Immigration Facts, Figures And Addendum

Monday, August 09, 2010

Monday, August 9, 2010 Arizona’s illegal immigration law and illegals impact on jobs


From http://www.usillegalaliens.com/

“Impacts of Illegal Immigration: Jobs

The MSM (Main Stream Media—my addition.) report ad nauseam that illegal aliens are only ‘doing work that Americans won’t.’ This mantra is mercilessly bandied about by illegal immigration supporters and echoes throughout the halls of Congress and the White House whenever the topic comes up. What is never mentioned, however, is that the illegal aliens are artificially depressing compensation and that illegal aliens are the only ones who will do the work at such low wages. In actual fact, illegal immigration distorts the law of supply and demand in a capitalistic society. Additionally it is grossly hypocritical to want to raise the minimum wage on one hand while the other hand winks at illegal aliens working at far below prevailing wages. (Which is exactly what the Democrats did!—my addition)

In any case, illegal aliens are not just picking lettuce and digging ditches any more. It wasn’t that long ago that being a dry-waller, brick-layer, house framer, painter, roofer, carpet layer, plumber, or electrician was a decently compensated, middle class trade. Now it is increasingly becoming the work for illegal aliens at far less than the free market rate. While illegal alien workers are only a small portion of many of those job categories their willingness to work at dramatically lower rates artificially drags down the compensation for all workers.

When the resident poor and uneducated Americans can subsist on welfare they are not going to pick lettuce, dig ditches, clean toilets or wash dishes at minimum wage.
However, if there are massive shortages of workers for such jobs, the forces of supply and demand will come in to play and the compensation for those jobs will rise to attract more workers. At some point, it will pay more than being on welfare and be attractive enough to turn off Oprah and the labor shortage will be alleviated.

There are also side affects of ‘only doing the jobs that Americans won’t do,’ at artificially depressed wages anyway. One is that it increases the load on the welfare systems as there are fewer working poor and more welfare recipients. Another is that many unscrupulous employers pay illegal aliens in cash, off-the-books, avoiding all taxes which also makes the illegal alien worker have little or no income ‘qualifying’ them for welfare benefits as well. (Surely, illegal immigrants wouldn’t do both—work off-the-books and also collect welfare payments—would they?—my addition)

One of the problems with the MSM, the President, and Congress believing that only illegal aliens will do the work that Americans won’t is that they must have never done any of that kind of work. It must be so beneath them that they just can’t believe ‘Americans’ will actually do it.

When I was seventeen I was 6’2” and weighed 155 pounds. That summer I took a job in a Dole Pineapple plant where for 12 hours a day, six days a week for three months I had to lift, carry, throw, and stack 100 pound sacks of cattle feed. Working on the loading dock one day where the sacks were filled, it was my job to pick up a bag from two automatic filling machines and carry them eight feet or so to the edge of the dock and throw them into a truck. The two filling machines produced four bags a minute. That is 240 an hour and 2,880 a shift. At 100 pounds each that was 144 tons.

It was hot, humid, dusty, stunk and I was paid minimum wage—with an agricultural exemption from any overtime. While Tennessee Ernie Ford wrote a song entitled ‘Sixteen Tons’ about mining coal, we didn’t get any songs written about us doing 144 tons—you just did the job.

When I started that job I could barely pick up a 100 pound bag with two hands. At the end of the summer I still weighed 155 pounds but could pick up a bag with each hand and fling it ten feet. I also learned that it wasn’t the kind of work I wanted to be doing for the rest of my life. (No kidding!—my addition)

Many of the people reading this report have similar stories and work experiences. These are the jobs that legal immigrants, students, and the working poor have been doing for the last 100 years. The jobs were not done by illegal aliens. Do we need a bona fide guest worker program to allow seasonal migrant workers from Mexico to come in and earn money picking lettuce? Probably, but I am tired of hearing that illegal aliens are only doing the work that Americans won’t do because that is BS—I’ve done that work. I even did it in December 2006 when I spent five and a half hours snow shoveling 36 inches of snow from my, around my, and one of my neighbor’s Colorado homes. I didn’t want to do that work either but I did it because it had to be done. Where were all the illegal aliens when you really needed them?

A March 2006 article in The Christian Science Monitor by Ron Scherer, Immigration debate crux: jobs impact - Experts weigh how illegal workers affect US employment, reports:

‘Do undocumented workers take away jobs from Americans?’ asks Anthony Chan, chief economist at JP Morgan Private Client Services in Columbus, Ohio. ‘My best guess is that they take some jobs away. Some Americans are willing to work at those jobs at low salaries, but not all [Americans are].’

Analysts are quick to point out that the economics of undocumented immigration are complex. Few models have been crafted that try to look at how the US economy would perform without tapping into inexpensive labor for some jobs.

‘We can’t run econometric models. The numbers aren’t good enough,’ says David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor’s in New York.

One challenge in performing any calculations is agreeing on the number of undocumented workers. Only estimates exist, and they range from 9 million to 20 million. The conventional estimate is 11 million. But no one really knows for sure.

By way of contrast, the Bureau of Labor Statistics calculates how many people out of a workforce of 143 million are unemployed. Last month, 7,193,000, or 4.8 percent, were out pounding the pavement. (Today, off course, it is 9.6% officially and must higher unofficially—my addition.)

The Center for Immigration Studies, which is in favor of some restrictions on immigration, recently issued a report looking at jobs and undocumented workers. One of its conclusions was that between March 2000 and March 2005, only 9 percent of the net increase in jobs for adults went to people born in the US.

‘This is striking because natives accounted for 61 percent of the net increase in the overall size of the 18- to 64-year-old population,’ writes Steve Camarota, director of research.

Howard Hayghe, an economist at the Department of Labor, confirms that this number is correct. But he also points out that by 2005, the economy was doing a better job of producing jobs—and the percentage of native-born residents finding jobs rose to 41 percent. In other words, the stronger economy absorbed more workers of all educational levels. ‘The more office buildings you build, the more people you need to clean them. The more roads you build, the more workers you need,’ says Mr. Hayghe.

In addition to the 7 million Americans looking for jobs, another 1.5 million are considered to be ‘marginally attached’—that is, not actively looking for work. Moreover, some 386,000 are counted as ‘discouraged’ workers. And there are about 19 million, including students and senior citizens, who are not in the workforce.

‘If we close the borders and have less undocumented workers, it would put some upward pressure on overall wages,’ says Mr. Chan. ‘It’s no secret business will have to pay workers more money.’

The National Academy of Science reported in Dropping Out - Immigrant Entry and Native Exit from the Labor Market, 2000-2005 that from 1980 to 1995 there was a 44% of the decline in the real wages of high school dropouts as a result of immigration. Since Black and Hispanics Americans lead the statistics in dropping out of high school this means that illegal aliens affect these two groups the greatest and is a great contributor to the high unemployment rate in this segment of the population.

A commentary by Dan Stein, Executive Director, Federation for American Immigration Reform in Mass Immigration Takes Greatest Toll on African-Americans notes that:

‘In some cases the influx of immigrants has allowed native-born workers to move up the ladder. But in all too many other instances, mass immigration has moved American workers off the ladder entirely, particularly Black Americans. According to a report by the National Academy of Sciences done during the economic boom of the late-1990s, the dramatic rise in immigration was a direct cause of dramatic declines in jobs and income for Americans with a high school education or less.

If one tracks the economic progress of African-Americans, or the lack of it, over the past century there is an unmistakable correlation with patterns of immigration. Blacks have made the greatest economic advances during periods of low immigration, while economic conditions have stagnated or regressed during period of high immigration.’

The prestigious Wall Street investment firm Bear Stearns recently published a report, The Underground Labor Force is Rising to the Surface, which claims that the illegal alien population is double the official government estimates and that the Government vastly underestimates the cost of illegal immigration. According to Bear Stearns:

The illegal alien population of the U.S. is about 20 million—roughly the population of New York State.

1) Between 4 and 6 million jobs have shifted to the underground economy since 1990. These are not ‘jobs Americans won’t do,’ but rather jobs Americans used to do.

2) On the revenue side, the United States may be foregoing $35 billion a year in income tax collections because of the number of jobs that are now off the books.

3) There are approximately 5 million illegal workers who are collecting wages on a cash basis and are avoiding both income and FICA taxes.

4) The United States is hooked on cheap, illegal workers and is deferring the costs of providing public services to these quasi-Americans.

Long before the nation was flooded with illegal aliens somebody picked the lettuce, mowed the grass, flipped burgers, dug the ditches, and cleaned hotel rooms. These entry level jobs were done by guest agricultural workers, the working poor, legal immigrants and, in the summer, by students. Given supply and demand in a capitalistic society and there still are plenty of legal immigrants and resident Americans who would do these jobs at a fair and free market wage. (Exactly! Let supply and demand determine the price of labor instead of allowing illegal labor to artificially lower the price of labor by artificially increasing the supply of labor. This is nothing more than basic supply and demand economics altered by illegal immigrants who become a cheap labor force whether on-the books or off-the-books—my addition.)

As Victor Davis Hanson recently noted in Rethinking illegal immigration:

‘Areas in the United States that have experienced far less illegal immigration seem to have no insurmountable problems manning restaurants, cutting lawns or serving the needs of hotel guests. Travel to the Midwest, for example, and you’ll see students are employed as cooks and maids. Construction relies on legal laborers. The evidence suggests massive illegal immigration causes as much upheaval inside Mexico as it supposedly prevents—while aggravating, not solving, problems in the United States.’

When illegal aliens take these jobs they not only take jobs from American teens and drive the wages down but also deny entry level work and the ladder of opportunity from the working poor and legal immigrants thus making the American Dream harder to obtain. Additionally, even Wal-Mart can’t hire all the retirees who want to work part time. Have you ever gone to Las Vegas? Next time note all the retirees working in the restaurants. As noted by Frosty Wooldridge in Our Country Coming Undone:

‘Illegal immigration hurts America’s poor. In a recent account in the New York Times, Black children suffered 50% greater poverty in the past 10 years due to immigration. Illegal immigrants compete for jobs normally done by America’s poor. A study by the Center For Immigration Studies wrote that ‘Mexican immigration is overwhelmingly unskilled and it’s hard to find an economic argument for unskilled immigration because it tends to reduce wages for U.S. workers.

... Cheap labor from illegal immigration is not ‘cheap.’ It’s subsidized by all of us in the form of our tax dollars paying for their services. It makes a few employers wealthy at the expense of all of us.’

Steven Malanga notes in How Unskilled Immigrants Hurt Our Economy, ‘A handful of industries get low-cost labor, and the taxpayers foot the bill.’ Sounds like a great deal for some employers but, as usual, the taxpayers are the ones getting ripped off.

An October 16, 2006 article in the Boston Globe, by Andrew M. Sum and Paul E. Harrington, Two kinds of immigration, notes:

‘The overall effects of new immigrant inflows from 2000 to 2005 on American labor markets are unprecedented ... new immigrants accounted for 86 percent of the total gain in employment that the nation experienced over the past five years. Our analysis suggests that close to two-thirds of these new immigrant arrivals were unauthorized. (ILLEGAL—my addition.) Among males, all of the net growth in employment between 2000 and 2005 was attributable to new immigrants. This extraordinary finding casts serious doubt on the common contention that new immigrants simply take jobs that Americans do not want.

Worse still, the impact of this displacement of native-born workers and established immigrants was concentrated among young people ... Available evidence shows that there has been a high rate of displacement of younger, native-born male workers and younger women without four-year college degrees by newer immigrants, especially undocumented immigrants. Our own statistical analysis of native-born adults under 25 revealed that higher inflows of new immigrant workers in their state of residence hurt their ability to find jobs. The negative effects were larger for young men than for women, for young adults with no postsecondary schooling, and for native-born Black and Hispanic males.

The notion that there is a shortage of unskilled, low-educated workers in the United States and in Massachusetts is a canard. The evidence—ranging from employment rates to measures of changes in annual earnings, weekly wages, and employee benefits—reveals a surplus of less-educated workers in both national and state labor markets. The lifetime earnings of adults without high school diplomas over the past 25 years have declined catastrophically, and these declines have imposed increasing fiscal burdens on the rest of the taxpaying public.’

A May 8, 2006 article in the Washington Times, Immigrants and wages, reports:

‘Examining more closely the pattern within the 2000-2005 period provides compelling evidence illegal immigrants have been used deliberately to force down wages. In most industries that use illegal immigrants heavily, inflation-adjusted wages rose modestly during the first years of the current decade. Yet soon after, they dropped significantly. Obviously, the nation’s restaurateurs, hoteliers, contractors and cleaners decided paying workers $12 per hour and often less, with few or no benefits, was outrageous. In response, they stepped up efforts to bring Mexican and Central American labor markets and standards into the United States.

The wage trends in illegal immigrant-heavy industries make it clear these sectors are not facing shortages of native-born workers. They’re facing shortages of native-born workers who will accept poverty-level pay. If the president and Congress have any interest in ensuring American immigration policy helps raise and not depress living standards, they’ll tell these employers to stop the special-interest pleading and do what their predecessors throughout U.S. history have done: Raise pay high enough to attract the U.S. workers you need, and if your business models aren’t good enough to accommodate living wages, invest in developing new labor-saving technologies.

Denying pauper-wage industries the crutch of a wage-depressing flood of illegal immigrants is essential for keeping the United States a high-wage, First World economy. It is also essential for offering real economic opportunity to legal immigrants and native-born low-income Americans. The wage trends in illegal immigrant-heavy industries make it clear these sectors are not facing shortages of native-born workers. They’re facing shortages of native-born workers who will accept poverty-level pay.’

Steven Malanga also stated in How Unskilled Immigrants Hurt Our Economy:

‘Consequently, as the waves of immigration continue, the sheer number of those competing for low-skilled service jobs makes economic progress difficult. A study of the impact of immigration on New York City’s restaurant business, for instance, found that 60 percent of immigrant workers do not receive regular raises, while 70 percent had never been promoted. One Mexican dishwasher aptly captured the downward pressure that all these arriving workers put on wages by telling the study’s authors about his frustrating search for a 50-cent raise after working for $6.50 an hour: ‘I visited a few restaurants asking for $7 an hour, but they only offered me $5.50 or $6,’ he said. ‘I had to beg [for a job].’

Similarly, immigration is also pushing some native-born workers out of jobs, as Kenyon College economists showed in the California nail-salon workforce. Over a 16-year period starting in the late 1980s, some 35,600 mostly Vietnamese immigrant women flooded into the industry, a mass migration that equaled the total number of jobs in the industry before the immigrants arrived. Though the new workers created a labor surplus that led to lower prices, new services, and somewhat more demand, the economists estimate that as a result, 10,000 native-born workers either left the industry or never bothered entering it.

With all the MSM hand wringing over the plight of the illegal alien workers recently rounded up at the Swift meat processing plants across the US in December of 2006, few reported that it was knowingly going on for years, as noted by Joel Dyer in an article in the Greeley Tribune, Meatpacking industry has a long history of reliance on immigrant laborer, and that management used illegal labor and the high turn over to artificially keep wages down.

You probably also missed the AP article in the Greeley Tribune, Former Dallas employees sue Swift alleging wage manipulation, where some former employees aren’t too happy about the way Swift kept the wages down.

As for doing the dirty work that Americans just won’t do, even at those artificially depressed wages, did you happen to see another report in the Greeley Tribune by Bill Jackson, More applicants applying for Swift & Co., on your local news where it was reported that 800 citizens and legal immigrants applied for the few dozen vacant positions in the Greeley meat packing plant?

That little fact, which goes counter the MSM’s constant blather, was also reported by Fernando Quintero in the Rocky Mountain News in Loss for one is another's gain - Applicants line up to fill jobs left empty by Swift plant raid but it didn’t make the national news cycle either.

So even with the depressed wages, caused by illegal aliens, it would appear that there are still a lot of legal immigrants and Americans willing to do the jobs the MSM say only illegal immigrants will do.

All of these dynamics were actually illustrated in another raid as noted in a January 17, 2007 article in the Wall Street Journal, An immigration raid aids Blacks for a time, where it was reported:

‘STILLMORE, Ga.—After a wave of raids by federal immigration agents on Labor Day weekend, a local chicken-processing company called Crider Inc. lost 75 percent of its mostly Hispanic 900-member work force. The crackdown threatened to cripple the economic anchor of this fading rural town.

But for local African-Americans, the dramatic appearance of federal agents presented an unexpected opportunity. Crider suddenly raised pay at the plant. An advertisement in the weekly Forest-Blade newspaper blared ‘Increased Wages’ at Crider, starting at $7 to $9 an hour—more than a dollar above what the company had paid many immigrant workers. The company began offering free transportation from nearby towns and free rooms in a company-owned dormitory near to the plant. For the first time in years, local officials say, Crider aggressively sought workers from the area’s state-funded employment office—a key avenue for low-skilled workers to find jobs. Of 400 candidates sent to Crider—most of them Black—the plant hired about 200.

... For the first time since significant numbers of Latinos began arriving in Stillmore in the late 1990s, the plant’s processing lines were made up predominantly of African-Americans.’

The sudden reversal of economic fortunes in Stillmore underscores some of the most complex aspects of the pitched debate over immigration: Do illegal immigrants take jobs from low-skilled American workers? The answer in Stillmore initially appeared to be yes.

Note that the plant once had predominantly Black workers but then replaced most of them with illegal alien Hispanic workers at lower wages. When the illegal aliens were removed, the Black workers got their jobs back and the wages went up. The article continues to go on talking about the problems of the plant keeping its new workers at such low wages. However, this is not an argument for needing workers that will ‘do the work Americans won’t do’ but illustrates that the free market equilibrium of supply and demand is still not functioning in the plant. Rather than pay a decent wage to get good workers, the mindset is still to pay the lowest wage possible for a dirty job so consumers can pay ten cents less for a pound for chicken. The use of cheap labor also inhibits modernization, automation, and mechanization where productivity would go up resulting in even more skilled and higher priced employees producing more packaged chicken than lower priced employees for the same total labor costs. Unfortunately, until all the illegal aliens working in all the other chicken processing plants have been removed the free market will still be distorted.

Given the current excitement amongst the Democrats by the potential Presidential candidacy of Barack Obama, it is worth remembering an article by Robert Engler from 2004, A goblin is haunting Barack Obama’s election campaign to become the Democratic senator from Illinois. That goblin is in the shape ... where it was noted:

‘The fact of the matter is, illegal immigration, especially illegal immigration from Mexico, is hurting Black Americans. If Democratic candidates ever getting around to speaking the truth, they will have to tell Black voters that illegal immigration is taking jobs away from Black Americans, cutting into resources available for welfare, and restructuring public schools and many urban areas. In short, the votes of Latinos are bought by the Democrats at the expense of Black America.’ (True, and Black voters were not told and are not being told this truth because it flies in the face of Democrats hoping to increase the party’s voting base by granting citizenship to all these illegal immigrants—my addition.)

Tony Brown, author of What Mama Taught Me, knows all too well how Black Americans are injured by illegal immigration. He writes, ‘The U. S. Census Bureau reported in the New York Times... the poor Black and Latino communities lose the most income of any group of Americans, including all Americans who did not finish high school and all Americans who are paying higher taxes to subsidize welfare benefits for illegal immigrants and businesses that hire them. Illegal immigrants overuse welfare benefits and services and underpay income taxes for a net loss to local, state and federal taxpayers.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) http://www.fairus.org, has also documented the detrimental impact of illegal immigration on Black Americans. In California, Blacks are being forced out from communities like South Central, Los Angeles, where they have long lived. ‘This once predominantly Black neighborhood is becoming largely Hispanic. South Central is being transformed. Here we talk about ‘Black flight.’ People are leaving neighborhoods where they have lived for years because they don’t feel like they belong any more reports Terry Anderson in the San Francisco Examiner, (Feb. 3, 1999.)’

The Federation for American Immigration Reform continues in its report that, ‘Other statistics are also sobering: a GAO study found that a decade of heavy immigration to Los Angeles had changed the janitorial industry from a mostly native Black, unionized workforce to one of non-unionized Latinos, many of whom were illegal aliens. According to the Census, the employment of Black Americans as hotel workers in California dropped 30 percent in the 1980s, while the number of immigrants with such jobs rose 166 percent. A similar story can be told of the garment industry, the restaurant business, hospital work, and public service jobs.’ One can expect Blacks in Illinois to suffer the same declines as illegal immigration from Mexico continues.’

Immigration researcher and commentator Roy Beck noted in his 1996 book, The Case Against Immigration that: ‘To review the Black side of our nation’s immigration tradition is to observe African Americans periodically trying to climb the mainstream economic ladder, only to be shoved aside each time. It is to see one immigrant wave after another climb onto and up that ladder while planting their feet on the backs of Black Americans ... The most racist policy in this country for the past 25 years has been our immigration policy, because it has been the worst thing that has happened to Blacks from the federal government since slavery.’

The Harvest Institute also documents the impact of illegal immigration on Black Americans. ‘Dr. Claud Anderson, president of The Harvest Institute, a Black research and education organization, announced that The Harvest Institute does not support President Bush’s recently proposed amnesty for illegal immigrant aliens and has released an Information Alert (available at www.harvestinstitute.org). Dr. Anderson said, ‘Despite the stance of many civil rights groups, immigration’s impact on native Blacks and their communities is disproportionate, direct and devastating. Blacks are losing faith because the government continues a pattern of bestowing the rights that should first go to native Blacks to immigrants from foreign countries. Native Blacks are ignored and patronized with symbolic and ceremonial actions by both political parties. The issue of immigration is roiling within Black communities and has become ... Divisive.’

As the Democrat’s ‘multicultural’ candidate, Barack Obama has little to say about this multicultural issue. You can read his position papers and look at his website and find no recognition that illegal immigration from Mexico is hurting Black Americans. One has to wonder what kind of immigration policy Obama will vote for if he ever becomes a U. S. Senator. One has to wonder even more why Black Americans continue to vote Democratic, when the Democrats are not looking out for their interests.’ (We now know. President Barack Hussein Obama is a staunch supporter of illegal immigration and hopes to grant amnesty—citizenship—to all illegal immigrants—my addition.)

This article is referenced not to slam Obama or the Democrats, because the collateral damage from illegal aliens is affecting all Americans of all political parties, but to illustrate that the Democrats know it disproportionately impacts their primary voting block the greatest but still are doing nothing about it illustrating it doesn’t make any difference what political party the inept politicians belong to.

As noted in Debating the effect of undocumented workers.

‘Workers who have been most affected by the massive influx of illegal immigrants into the United States over the past five years are low-skilled, young native-born workers, according to a recent study by the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University.’

‘It appears that employers are substituting new immigrant workers for young native-born workers,’ economists Andrew Sum, Paul Harrington and Ishwar Khatiwada wrote. ‘The negative impacts tended to be larger for in-school youth compared to out-of-school youth, and for native-born Black and Hispanic males compared to their white counterparts.’

The study concluded that the rise in immigrant employment, especially among illegal workers over the past decade, has contributed to a breakdown in the nation’s labor laws and labor standards, undermining the unemployment insurance and Social Security systems and basic worker protections that have evolved over the last century.’

It is not just a Black or Hispanic thing. Illegal immigration hurts all Americans. As noted by T.J. Bonner in Judicial Watch’s Special Report, New Fronts In The Immigration Battle:

‘You cannot convince me that if you paid a decent wage to American workers, that they would not take many of these jobs. Drywall hangers, for example, used to make $18, $20 an hour; now the going rate [is] $8 to $10 an hour. These are jobs that Americans cannot afford to work in because they cannot afford to live in sub-standard living conditions. On the other hand, people who have no interest in this country, [who] live [with] 15 adult males, unrelated, in a one-bedroom apartment ...[and] send most of their money back home—they are more than willing to take those jobs.’ (Exactly!—my addition)

Harvard Professor George Borjas has reported that illegal aliens displaced American workers at a cost in excess of $133 billion dollars in 2005. Does that sound like a ‘victimless crime?’ By any conceivable measure the answer has to be ‘NO!’ especially if you are one of the displaced workers.

Review the links at the end of this section for more detailed information on the impacts of illegal immigration on jobs.

So we now conclusively know that illegal aliens are taking jobs that Americans used to do and still would do if greedy businessmen and big business weren’t trying to take advantage of illegal aliens and hire the cheapest labor so that they could put the ill-gotten savings to the bottom line.

What are some of the results? In a recent Associated Press report, Hispanics' immigration to South raises tensions with Blacks - Groups have same goals, could be allies, some say, it was noted:

‘We’ve just never been friends and buddies,’ said Isabella Brooks, the president of the NAACP in Colquitt County, near Tifton. She said she has no white neighbors and doesn’t socialize with the Hispanics up the street because of the ‘language barrier.’ And ‘In places such as Houston and Los Angeles, where Blacks and Hispanics have long lived side by side, the two groups most often fight for jobs, notably low-income jobs that were often held by unskilled Black workers.’

Note that the language barrier creates greater balkanization and the job displacement fuels resentment. More collateral damage.

Another issue related to the impact of illegal aliens on jobs is covered in the section on the abuse of the guest worker program.

Additionally it is worth noting that all those higher priced H1B workers do not contribute to the Social Security System, as noted by Edwin Rubenstein in Can Immigrants Save Social Security? who noted:

‘An estimated 500,000 foreigners are in the U.S. on temporary H-1B visas under the 50-year-old program designed to fill employer needs unmet by U.S. residents for professionals and specialists with a bachelor’s or higher degree, including architects, engineers, accountants, doctors, college professors and even fashion models. Nearly 54% are involved in computer-related fields, according to a recent federal study. Their median income is about $50,000, and half are expected to earn between $40,000 and $60,000.

Admittedly, H-1B’s represent a narrow slice of the immigrant workforce. (Technically they are ‘guest workers’ rather than immigrants.) But their high earnings makes them valuable potential contributors to Social Security. With median income of $50,000, the half million H-1Bs could potentially contribute $1.9 billion to the pension system, or enough to fund benefits for more than 95,000 retirees.

Foregone payroll taxes are just the tip of the iceberg. H-1b’s are entitled to every social service funded by U.S. taxpayers. They use our city parks, roads, and other infrastructure. And after working six years without paying Social Security taxes many H-1bs get Green Cards, qualifying them for Social Security benefits when they retire. No effort is made to collect back payroll taxes. And what about those American workers who lose their jobs, their health insurance, and Social Security points because companies prefer the cheaper H-1bs?

Recent immigration laws have raised the H-1B quota and made it easier for displaced H-1Bs to stay in the country. That’s good for companies that employ guest workers, but ordinary Americans and their Social Security System are worse off because of it.’

Come to think of it, aren’t these the kind of legal immigrants we want rather than unskilled and uneducated immigrants who are a drain on society?

In any case, when you hear the Government wanting to increase the amount of ‘guest workers’ in the country to solve the illegal immigration problem, remember that what they are not saying is that they are also allowing YOUR company to bring in guest workers for YOUR job, whatever it may be. The devil is in the details.

Only when H1-Bs are given to foreign correspondents and media people will the MSM start reporting on this disgraceful program.

Finally, while counter intuitive, it is worth noting that increased immigration is actually bad for union participation as illustrated by

Go to Numbers USA – Unions for more information on the relationship between immigration and unions.

Given the difference in wages between union workers and illegal alien workers, I suspect that illegal immigration is even worse for unions.

Reduction in wages, job displacement, and billions of dollars out of the pockets of American workers from a ‘victimless crime’ to save ten cents on a head of lettuce.”