The amnesty by executive fiat is a fait accompli – five million law breakers are now going to become American citizens with all the benefits American taxpayers are forced to provide, including ObamaCare.
The “fiscal cost of immigration” will include: Medicaid, unemployment insurance, Social Security, workmen compensation, TANF, earned income credit, WIC, SNAP, free phones, SSI, free education, free lunch programs, kindergarten programs, day care, and other services such as police protection, fire protection, military protection, libraries, parks, highways, and over 80 different welfare programs that already provide cash, food, utilities, education, and housing to 100 million low-income Americans.
Young Americans and their families will pay hefty health insurance premiums for Obamacare, with high deductibles and diminished benefits on the bronze, silver, and gold levels, while illegal aliens will pay nothing or $2.71 per month.
After all, we are such a rich nation; why not spread the wealth around the globe to millions of illegals and to the chain migration that will soon follow. The veterans can wait months to get a doctor’s appointment and American children can be denied entry to colleges or federal grants because minorities and their quotas must be protected and served first. They are the “Dreamers” of tomorrow’s America, the chosen citizens of the new America.
Can we financially afford 5 million amnestied illegal aliens and the remainder 29 million that will follow?
Thumbing their noses at the 4 million foreigners awaiting proper documentation to immigrate legally to the U.S., large groups of illegals bussed into D. C. by Casa de Virginia, a subsidiary of Casa de Maryland, celebrated this week the reward to their lawlessness, waving small American flags handed out to them on the prior-organized buses and at the rally.
Dr. Savage explained on his show that, “while some immigrants work hard, they have large families at home who do not work at all,” subsidized by the American taxpayers. To make matters worse, 30 percent of the prison population in our country is comprised of recidivist illegal aliens, some of whom have committed horrendous crimes.
We are a nation of immigrants but the fundamental difference between the last century’s immigrants and today’s immigrants is that the 20th century immigrants assimilated, came here to take advantage of the opportunity to make a better life for themselves, learned English the best they could, did not accept welfare, and worked very hard to make this country a better place.
The current immigrants come here for the economic opportunity of government welfare, are not interested in assimilating or learning English, and generally do not like America, they want to transform it into the dictatorships they came from, where the corrupt culture is a culture of government dependency, survival through dishonesty, and breaking the law is a way of life. They are interested in a better life provided to them by our taxpayers with no allegiance to our nation, or respect for our country, borders, culture, language, and the rule of law.
Can we financially afford 5 million amnestied illegal aliens and the remainder 29 million that will follow? No, but the administration will continue to print more worthless money to add to our already unmanageable and exploding national debt, cut more benefits to seniors, cut the military even more, and cut education to fund Medicaid for the new arrivals.
Once illegal immigrants overwhelm the social safety net and bankrupt various programs, there will be chaos. The people most affected by this flood of illegal aliens are not going to be the middle class or the upper middle class, those affected will be the lower middle class and the people at the bottom, who will be competing with illegals for unskilled employment and other government benefits.
This amnesty will benefit the greed of employers seeking employees who will be paid lower wages. Obamacare made sure there was a provision within that protected from penalty employers who hire illegal workers. Amnestied illegals will depress wages for existing legal immigrants and for American citizens and the unemployment numbers and the welfare rolls will swell to unmanageable levels.
There was a pride and joy in waiting patiently for four years to get a green card legally, then another four years to become a naturalized American citizen. There was an honor to be sworn in as an American citizen.
There is no honor in crossing the border in the dead of night, sneaking into our country illegally like bandits, bringing in untreatable diseases, accepting undeserved amnesty and eventual citizenship from a President who single-handedly decided to alter the meaning of citizenship with the stroke of a pen, break the laws of the United States in the process, and forever “fundamentally transform” America into a banana republic mocked by the world.
Breaking into America’s house in the middle of the night, demanding ownership of the deed of trust is dishonorable. If the Congressional Republicans are serious about representing the interests of the American people who rejected amnesty vociferously in the November election, they should veto the discretionary amnesty and refuse to fund it.
Found at Canada Free Press.
Deep-sea anglerfish are strange and elusive creatures that are very rarely observed in their natural habitat. Fewer than half a dozen have ever been captured on film or video by deep diving research vehicles. This little angler, about 9 cm long, is named Melanocetus. It is also known as the Black Seadevil and it lives in the deep dark waters of the Monterey Canyon. MBARI’s ROV Doc Ricketts observed this anglerfish for the first time at 600 m on a midwater research expedition in November 2014. We believe that this is the first video footage ever made of this species alive and at depth.
Check out this huge list of US Government Agency Rules. Will amaze you at the crap we all have to deal with!
Saudi Arabia points the finger at ISIL.
The killing of seven Shia Muslims on Nov. 3 may be the first time the Islamic State has been involved in an attack in the country. The interior ministry said the attackers—of whom it arrested four suspects—got their orders from abroad.
Chuck Hagel’s resignation is the end of Obama’s fantasy foreign policy
It’s hard to remember, but up until the final months of his first campaign for president, Barack Obama, his staff, and bien pensantopinion expected him to focus on foreign policy: Extricating the US from unpopular Middle Eastern wars and pivoting to the Pacific.
He hoped to do so, as he hoped to do most things, in bipartisan fashion. Obama didn’t have the Democratic foreign-policy establishment behind him when he ran, but he did earn endorsements from many Republican realists: Brent Scowcroft, George H. W. Bush’s foreign-policy advisor; former secretary of State Colin Powell and then-senator Chuck Hagel among them. Obama’s first secretary of Defense was also a Republican, Robert Gates.
So last year, when Obama needed a new secretary of Defense, Hagel, a Vietnam combat veteran turned skeptic of US interventions, seemed the ideal candidate—someone who could work with Republicans in Congress to quietly wind down the war in Afghanistan.
But the bipartisan bona fides didn’t matter. At Hagel’s confirmation hearing before his erstwhile colleagues, he was lambasted from the left and right, and confirmed 58-41, compared to the unanimous endorsement received by his Democratic predecessor, Leon Panetta.
The wake-up call—that politics have long ignored that old politesse about the water’s edge—didn’t end then. While Hagel proved up to managing his department, he was not ready for the shifting challenges of global security: the rapid rise of ISIL in the security vacuum created by the Syrian civil war and sectarian tensions in Iraq following the US withdrawal, or Russia’s land-grab in Ukraine.
Hagel’s great failing as secretary of Defense wasn’t merely that he couldn’t articulate a response to these threats (or Congressional criticism) to reporters—it’s that the US doesn’t seem to have a strategy at all for dealing with failed states, extremist groups, or Vladimir Putin.
Indeed, more important than Hagel’s ousting was the news—leaked late on a Friday, natch—that US combat troops will be fighting in Afghanistan for an additional, unexpected year.
Putting flesh on the bones of that strategy will be hard for Hagel’s successor. Even with US troops deployed, the Taliban has exerted political control over much of the country. But the administration can’t afford to have another state marked by US military intervention descend into a messy conflict.
Hagel’s departure should mark the end of pretending troop withdrawals will be painless—or that the president’s diplomatic efforts will be backed by lawmakers of either party.
Let’s hope Obama’s next pick for Defense secretary has some better ideas.
Iran’s no China
The Obama administration will never abandon its courtship of Iran.
On the eve of the extended deadline in the US-led six-party talks with Iran regarding Teheran’s illicit nuclear weapons program, the one thing that is absolutely clear is that courting Iran is the centerpiece of US President Barack Obama’s Middle East policy. Come what may in Geneva, this will not change.
To be clear, Obama does not seek to check Iran’s rise to regional hegemony by appeasing it. None of the actions he has taken to date with regard to Iran can be construed as efforts to check or contain Iran.
Their goal is to cultivate a US alliance with Iran. As Obama sees things, Iran for him is what China was for then US president Richard Nixon. Nixon didn’t normalize US relations with the People’s Republic of China in order to harm the Chinese Communists. And Obama isn’t wooing Iran’s Islamic revolutionaries in order to harm them.
Unfortunately for the world, China is not a relevant analogy for Iran. Nixon sought to develop ties with Beijing because he wanted to pry the Chinese out of the Soviet orbit. Courting China meant harming Moscow, and Moscow was the US’s greatest foe.
There is no Moscow that will be weakened by the US’s empowerment of Tehran. The only parties directly and immediately harmed by Obama’s policy of courting Iran are America’s allies in the Middle East.
Obama’s policy of courting Iran also has three victims: Israel, the Sunni Arab states, and the rest of the world
The Allies’ appeasement deal with the Nazis in 1938 had three victims: Czechoslovakia, the rest of Europe, and the rest of the world.
Obama’s policy of courting Iran also has three victims: Israel, the Sunni Arab states, and the rest of the world.
Obama’s initiation of the six-power nuclear talks with Iran harms Israel because the talks facilitate Iran’s nuclear program. That is, Obama is enabling Iran to develop the means to attack Israel with nuclear weapons.
According to press reports of the content of the negotiations, the US has already abandoned its major red lines. It has abandoned its demand that Iran dismantle its centrifuges. Late last week the US was reportedly about to abandon its demand for Iranian transparency to the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding its past work on atomic bomb development.
In other words, the deal the US was hoping to conclude this week with Iran, and will now continue negotiating next month, involves taking no serious action to curtail Iran’s progress in developing nuclear weapons.
And in exchange for taking no action to curtail its nuclear progress, Iran demands and will likely receive a complete abrogation of binding UN Security Council economic sanctions against it. Those sanctions were passed in response to Iran’s illicit nuclear progress. The deal the US is now willing to sign renders Iran’s nuclear program legitimate.
Then there are the rest of the states in the region. The Saudis and their Sunni brethren are not the Czechs. They are Poland, Belgium, France and Holland. Like the Nazis and the European states in late 1938, Iran threatens all Sunni states in the region.
As the Americans have engaged in obsessive-compulsive nuclear negotiations with Iran, the Iranians have divided their attention between nuclear development and regional expansion. In September they took over Yemen.
Houthi militia from northern Yemen took over Yemen’s capital city Sana’a that month. The Houthi are Shi’ite, and are to Yemen what Iran’s Lebanese Shi’ite proxy Hezbollah is to Lebanon. The Houthis, who are already a major force in the US-trained Yemeni armed forces, are demanding control over them.
In addition to its proxy’s takeover of Yemen, as Middle East analyst Tony Badran reported earlier this month, the Iranian leadership is orchestrating a major information campaign to present itself as the regional hegemon to regional actors.
Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps Commander Qassem Soleimani has had his picture taken with Kurdish peshmerga in Iraq as well as with Iraqi regular military forces. Iranian security chief Ali Shamkhani went to Lebanon in late September and offered to arm the Lebanese Armed Forces.
Iran, these photo-ops and visits signal, is the new boss of the region.
Yemen shares a 1,700 km border with Saudi Arabia.
The Houthis already fought a border war with Saudi Arabia in 2009. The Iranian proxy’s control over much of the border today is a clear threat to Saudi sovereignty. In light of the close ties the Houthis have spent the past decade cultivating with Saudi Arabia’s Shi’ite minority, it is also a threat to the internal political stability of the kingdom.
As the Obama administration has erased red line after red line in the nuclear talks, and sided with Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood and other Iranian Sunni allies against US allies, Iran’s leaders have gloated that their hegemony over Yemen raises to four the number of Arab states under their dominion, that list including Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.
Iran’s control over Yemen is a direct threat to the world economy
Iran’s control over Yemen is a direct threat to the world economy. Before the Houthis marched on Sana’a, Iran was able to threaten global oil markets with its sovereignty over the Straits of Hormuz that controls naval traffic between the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. With the Port of Aden, Iran will also control maritime traffic between the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean.
It is true that massive increases in US oil sales due to its shale oil development will reduce some of the Middle East’s power to dictate oil prices. But Middle Eastern oil sales still constitute 40 percent of the world market and will continue to be a massive force in the global economy in the coming years. As the force controlling the flow of that oil, Iran will exert massive influence over the global economy.
Add to that the fact that Iran’s Hezbollah has sleeper cells in every major city in Europe and in several hubs in North America, and that Iran has strategic alliances with Venezuela and Nicaragua, a nuclear- armed Iran exerting hegemonic control over the Middle East and its oil exports will become a strategic danger to the global economy and global security.
One of the many eyebrow raising aspects of Obama’s courtship of Iran is that it isn’t tied to a US retreat from the region. The US isn’t retreating.
Obama has ordered hundreds of air strikes on Islamic State targets to date, and more will undoubtedly follow. The US participated in the NATO overthrow of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. US power remains a major factor in regional affairs, and Obama has not shied away from using it during his tenure in office.
The problem is that in all cases, his use of US power has helped Iran more than it has helped US allies. And in the case of Libya, US power has directly threatened US allies and empowered al-Qaida and it associates.
With the rise of China today, some US analysts question the wisdom of Nixon’s opening to Beijing. But there is little argument that his China gambit caused strategic damage to the Soviet Union and contributed to the US victory in the Cold War.
Not only will Obama’s Iran opening not redound to the US’s benefit in the short term. Its inevitable result will be a decade or more of major and minor regional wars and chronic instability, with the nuclear-armed Iran threatening the survival of all of America’s regional allies. It will also lead to shocks in the global economy and massively expand Iran’s direct coercive power over the word as a whole.
Not only is Obama no Nixon, compared to him, Neville Chamberlain looks like a minor, almost insignificant failure.
Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.