As we have seen, some states, like Arizona and Alabama, are willing to do the work the feds just won’t do, that of policing the borders and workplaces. Under President Obama, immigration enforcement exists only in terms of appearance. Millions of jobs are still occupied by unlawful foreigners, despite years of terrible joblessness among citizens of this country, when workplace enforcement could liberate those positions for Americans who need them. Plus, Obama’s administrative amnesty ensures that Washington deports only the very worst criminals.
It is highly unlikely that even a well crafted national e-verify would be actively enforced by this pro-amnesty administration, so why cripple the states when they are working to protect American citizens from criminals and job thieves?
One of the most tired clichés of the immigration debate is that “immigrants do the jobs Americans won’t do.” With 16 million Americans out of work, this justification for not enforcing our immigration laws rings hollower than ever.
There are an estimated 7-8 million illegal aliens in the workforce. Virtually all of them are in unskilled sectors such as agriculture, food service and preparation, and construction; which also have extremely high levels of native born unemployment.
Freeing up those jobs for Americans should be common sense during a recession.
Hiring illegal aliens is already a crime under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, but neither George W. Bush nor Barack Obama enforced this law. Part of the problem is that it is easy for “undocumented” immigrants to get fake documents. Under the current system, an honest employer may be duped into hiring or an illegal, while unscrupulous businesses can intentionally look the other way and plead ignorance if they get caught.
In 1996, Congress created the E-Verify program to help close this loophole. E-Verify is an electronic system that allows an employer to enter the social security or alien registration number of a potential employee. This gets checked against a government database to confirm whether an employee is here legally within minutes. When I served in Congress I cosponsored a number of pieces of legislation to mandate E-Verify nationwide.
These bills never made it through Congress, so states and localities began to do the job the federal government wouldn’t do. In 2006, Hazleton, PA, under the leadership of their mayor Lou Barletta, passed the Illegal Immigration Relief Act. The next year, Arizona passed the Legal Arizona Worker Act (LAWA.) Following Arizona’s lead, Georgia, Alabama, Oklahoma, Indiana, North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, and many other states passed their own E-Verify laws.
Predictably, the ACLU sued Hazleton and the Chamber of Commerce sued Arizona on the grounds that states were preempted from enforcing immigration law.
In May, the Supreme Court ruled that LAWA was constitutional in Chamber of Commerce vs. Whiting. The next week, they upheld the Hazleton law. This opens the door for even more states to pass E-Verify laws when they go back in session.
In the wake of all this momentum in favor of state laws and E-Verify, the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Lamar Smith (R-TX) introduced the H.R. 2164, The Legal Workforce Act in June. On the surface, the Legal Workforce Act is a great bill. It requires E-Verify for all new hires and improves the system to prevent identity theft. Unfortunately, the bill includes a preemption provision that will prevent States and localities from enforcing employer sanctions on illegal immigration unless the federal government acts first. This, in effect, will completely wipe out our victory in the Supreme Court.
By including the preemption section, Rep. Smith has won the support of the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups who lobbied against every previous piece of immigration control legislation because it restricts their supply of cheap labor.
However, he has lost the support of some conservatives. Lou Barletta, who is now a freshman Congressman (R-PA), opposes the bill. He claims, “If this bill becomes law, states and municipalities will be powerless without the federal government acting first. Waiting for the federal government to enforce its own immigration laws is how we got into this mess in the first place.” Continue reading this article
According to the elite liberal media, if everyone would just stop saying critical things about Islam, then hostile Muslims would chill and worldwide kumbaya would prevail. But if 1400 years of war, invasion and (now) immigration by Islam against the West is any indication, a pacifist response to historic Islamic bellicosity is not recommended.
The shooter, Anders Breivik, listed all kinds of influences in his 1500-page manifesto, from Adam Smith and Shakespeare to Homer and John Stuart Mill. But the New York Times, as the influential top dog of the media mob, decided to call out non-liberal bloggers as blame objects.
One of the major targets, Robert Spencer of JihadWatch.org, appeared on CBN recently to answer his critics:
VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. — Not long after the terrible massacre in Norway, the media started searching for scapegoats, and they began to pin the blame on an influential American blogger.
Some news articles about the killings have suggested that accused mass murderer Anders Breivik was inspired by a handful of bloggers who write about the dangers of Islam on the Internet.
Breivik sought to kill members and supporters of Norway’s ruling Labor Party, which he believes has allowed Norway to be Islamisized.
The press zeroed in on one respected Islamic expert in particular, Robert Spencer, who blogs on the website, Jihadwatch.org.
“Tonight, officials are pouring over this 1,500-page manifesto that Breivik wrote, he quoted heavily, not only from the Unabomber, but from American blogger Robert Spencer, who shares his suspicion of Islam,” ABC’s World News Tonight reported in the days that followed the massacre.
But Spencer has never called for violence against Muslims. He is the author of 10 books, including the New York Times bestsellers, “The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion” and “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam.” He also leads seminars on Islam and jihad for the U.S. military, the FBI, and the intelligence community.
Critics of Islam have long been accused of hate speech, and some believe the Norway massacre is now being used as an excuse to further stifle criticism of Islam.
When a big-time polling company (Gallup) partners up with an Islamic nation (Dubai) to show Muslim success in the United States, the investigation may not be very challenging.
The just-released 132-page report (half in Arabic) is titled “MUSLIM AMERICANS: Faith, Freedom, and the Future; Examining U.S. Muslims’ Political, Social, and Spiritual Engagement 10 Years After September 11.” (Download here.) The presentation is cheerful and seems preoccupied with whether Muslims residing in this country are “thriving” and how much discrimination they have suffered at the hands of cruel Islamophobe Americans.
Gallup apparently did not ask whether those surveyed approved of the more than 17,500 jihadist attacks since 9/11, as tracked by the “Religion of Peace” website, which is currently scoring Ramadan 2011.
If I were designing a poll, there would be more probing questions for Muslim residers in the United States, such as the following:
● Is sharia law superior to the Constitution?
● Would America be a better place if ruled by sharia?
● Does your local mosque preach the eventuality of a worldwide caliphate?
● Were Jews behind the attacks on the World Trade Center?
Despite Gallup’s lack of curiosity, the company did turn up at least one noteworthy statistic, one that indicated how little Muslims are integrated in this country, as measured by their lack of identification with America compared to all other religious groups.
The overwhelming majority of American Muslims say they are not sympathetic with terror groups like al Qaeda, but they identify less strongly with the United States than other religious groups in the country, according to a new poll on Tuesday.
While 69 percent of American Muslims identify either very strongly or extremely strongly with the U.S., that compares with about 90 percent of Christians and Jews in the U.S. who hold those views, the Gallup survey found.
A full 91 percent of Protestants, 89 percent of Catholics, 86 percent of Jews and 92 percent of Mormons say that they identify either very strongly or extremely strongly with the U.S.
American Muslims and Mormons tend to identify with their faith and the U.S. equally, but Catholics, Protestants and Jews all said that they identified more with their country than with their religion, Gallup said. Continue reading this article
In the latest example of the cruelty of demographic change, Marvel Comics has killed off its Spiderman-Peter Parker character and replaced him with a diverse persona who is half black, half hispanic and maybe even gay in a three-fer opportunity for comic sales.
Can readers also hope to see a left-handed superhero to portray the struggles of southpaws for respect in a ruthlessly right-handed world?
As a mere civilian in the comix universe (whose favorite was always the mysterious Dr. Strange), I find it odd to axe one character to be replaced by a more demographically advantageous one, when the captains of publishing could just create a new book. Marvel might cobble together a Divers-o-man concoction to promote the flawed ideology that diversity is the highest good.
Comics are increasingly used to bend kids’ minds with propaganda of various agendas. Consider “The 99,” a copious gaggle of Muslim superheroes to instill Islamic values.
Since comics are fantastic fiction, however, reality has a level of squish built in, where normal rules don’t apply. Miles Morales, the new diverse Spiderman, exists in the Ultimate imprint of the Marvel company, while the Peter Parker superhero is alive and well in the regular universe. If only real life were so flexible.
We have an African-American president, so why not an African-American Spider-Man, too?
Revealed in Marvel Comics’ Ultimate Fallout Issue 4, out Wednesday, the new Spider-Man in the Ultimate universe is a half-black, half-Hispanic teen named Miles Morales. He takes over the gig held by Peter Parker, who was killed in Ultimate Spider-Man Issue 160 in June.
In his first appearance, he simply breaks up a fight. But readers will learn the true origin of Morales and how he became the new Spider-Man when Ultimate Spider-Man relaunches in September with a new No. 1 issue.
“The theme is the same: With great power comes great responsibility,” says writer Brian Michael Bendis. “He’s going to learn that. Then he has to figure out what that means.”
The new Ultimate Spider-Man series, as well as Wednesday’s Ultimate Fallout issue, will be available digitally the same day as in stores.
In the regular Marvel Universe, Peter Parker will still be the same web-swinging Spidey as he has been since his first appearance in 1962. But in the Ultimate line, launched in 2000 to tell contemporary stories, he received a new origin and a reimagined supporting cast that paralleled the Spidey in regular Marvel continuity.
Morales’ journey will be a similar vehicle for today’s fans, says Marvel’s editor in chief, Axel Alonso.
“What you have is a Spider-Man for the 21st century who’s reflective of our culture and diversity. We think that readers will fall in love with Miles Morales the same way they fell in love with Peter Parker.” Continue reading this article
German elites slammed Sarrazin for his 2010 book Deutschland schafft sich ab (Germany does away with itself) which analyzed the negative effects of Muslim immigration, but the book became a best seller for discussing what many Germans were already thinking.
Well known Aussie pundit Andrew Bolt interviewed Sarrazin last week.
Economist Oliver Marc Hartwich reflected on the reason for Sarrazin’s success — honesty in a politically correct society — but that has resulted in resistance from entrenched interests against criticism of the ruling order.
FORMER career civil servants and central bankers seldom have star potential. Their work rarely excites the public and their pictures do not usually appear on front pages. This would have been Thilo Sarrazin’s fate as well. A former state treasurer in the city of Berlin and director of the German Bundesbank, Sarrazin was mainly known to political insiders.
All of this changed last August when he published the book Germany abolishes itself (Deutschland schafft sich ab). Within months the provocatively titled tome of 464 pages, laden with statistics and footnotes, became the best selling non-fiction book in German post-war history. More than 1.5 million copies have been printed to date. Its author developed into an unlikely media star whose name recognition in Germany now surpasses the Pope and the chancellor.
Sarrazin’s media success may be unlikely but it can be explained. In a media society governed by political correctness, he did not play by the rules. Perhaps because Sarrazin was used to speaking his mind behind closed doors he believed he could also get away with it in public. As it turned out, that was too optimistic an assumption.
The main points Sarrazin made in his book were neither particularly new nor were they factually incorrect. Like many authors before him, he pointed out that German society is ageing and shrinking because of low birthrates. He also offered a blistering critique of the welfare state, which he claimed had created a persistent, uneducated underclass.
Sarrazin then dared to suggest that due to the availability of welfare entitlements for the poor and career incentives for the rich the great majority of children are now born to parents from lower socio-economic backgrounds.
Finally, he explained how Germany’s haphazard immigration system had failed to attract high potentials and instead became exploited by poorly educated migrants. The additional point that Muslim migrants are segregating from mainstream society, again backed up by unambiguous statistical data, was the icing on the cake of Sarrazin’s assault on everything that the guardians of political correctness regard as sacred. Continue reading this article
Here’s an update on the Middle East’s “Arab Spring” which was much celebrated in the liberal press as an example of the improvability of human societies, even the backward ones. Peaceful protest could lead to positive political change. Plus, if real democracy were offered in Egypt and beyond, then the great majority would embrace it and forget about Islamic extremism. Kumbaya in a turban.
Recent events in Cairo are unhopeful in that regard, however. The photo below is from another rally but the sentiments are the same ones expressed in Tahrir Square on Friday, where at least one Islamist declared, “We are all Osama bin Laden” (viewable in the video below).
Reporting from Cairo— A huge rally Friday meant to symbolize Egyptian unity highlighted instead the deepening splits between secularist and Islamist parties over the direction of a nation convulsed in recent weeks by protests and fears that the revolution for democracy has sputtered.
The demonstration in Cairo’s Tahrir Square reaffirmed the power of the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist organizations that amassed tens of thousands of supporters. It was a stark display that signaled battles certain to unfold in coming months over the influence of Islamic law on Egypt’s new constitution.
Secularist parties have pressured the ruling military council to draft guidelines to govern the writing of a constitution. The Brotherhood has criticized the move as an attempt to circumvent the new Parliament, which Islamists are expected to control, giving them power to pass a constitution weighted in Sharia law.
“The people want an Islamic state,” Islamists chanted while outnumbered secular demonstrators watched from the sidelines in a square streaked with religious banners and echoing with sound of voices from loudspeakers.
“I’m really scared of the potential of an Islamic state in Egypt. Islamists like the Muslim Brotherhood don’t allow any democracy within their movement,” said Amira Badr, a 27-year-old administrator. “What will they do to a whole nation in the name of religion? I’m a devout Muslim, but I separate religion from politics.” Continue reading this article
It’s marijuana time in California, and every season seems to bring bigger, more destructive grows in our protected public lands. Mexican organized crime has moved in with a vengeance, with little pushback from authorities until late in the season.
It sounds like the criminals are winning. More pot is being grown and there is lots more violence. Local hunters and hikers are afraid to go into the Mendocino National Forest because of the threat. The worsening violence is driving even Mexicans out of the business. Sheriff Tom Allman said if public lands are not taken back from the criminals soon, “then we may get to the point of no return.”
One Mexican former grower mused that California might “end up like Mexico.”
Unfortunately, the increased incursion of Mexican thugs coincides with a state budget stretched to the maximum and little interest in Sacramento of protecting parks and forests. The New York Times reported on July 29, “Budget Cuts Endanger State’s Marijuana Eradication Program” which could mean the surrender of part or all of California’s treasured public land to criminal invaders.
Now underway in Northern California is one of the largest marijuana eradication efforts in state history. “Operation Full Court Press” is taking place in the Mendocino National Forest, which reaches into six counties. More than 100 people have been arrested so far, but who’s behind these illegal operations? Our media partner California Watch, a project of the non-profit Center For Investigative Reporting has just completed a major project looking inside the marijuana trade.
For years, local and federal authorities have been trying to put a stop to illegal marijuana coming out of California. Last year they seized some 7 million plants, much of it is grown on public lands. It’s even been found in national parks, including Yosemite.
In Mendocino County, officers have been training for a joint local, state and federal eradication operation. It is the largest series of raids ever conducted in this part of Northern California. Last week, the raids started and it was spearheaded by Sheriff Tom Allman.
“We’re at a fork in the road and if we don’t make an aggressive push right now to take back some of our public lands, then we may get to the point of no return,” Allman said.
That battle to take back the land is increasingly turning violent. Last year drug agents killed two armed Mexican men at remote pot farms in Mendocino County.
“I’ve had people come to me and say, ‘My family has hunted in the Mendocino National Forest for five generations and we don’t go there anymore because every time we go there, we hear shots being fired around or people have literally walked into our hunting camp and said get out of here,’” said Allman. Continue reading this article
Today’s example of Islamic malevolence is the wanna-be Fort Hood murderer #2, Pfc. Naser Abdo, who was arrested Wednesday in Killeen, Texas, for plotting a deadly attack with explosives and firearms.
In 2009, Major Nidal Hasan murdered 13 and wounded 32 on the Fort Hood base. Perhaps he was an inspiration to Mr. Abdo.
Interestingly, Abdo’s pursuit of conscientious objector status made him a darling of the anti-war left, like the Courage to Resist website which celebrated his actions, as “The missing story of Muslim peacemaking” and was quickly scrubbed from view after the arrest.
“Muslim peacemaking” — now there’s a phrase!
Al Jazeera swooned similarly in its portrayal of the courageous Muslim lad trying to keep his faith among the bellicose infidels, as reported by MEMRI last year:
Reporter: “The Muslim U.S. soldier Nasser Abdo prays five times a day where he lives near the Fort Campbell base in Kentucky, from where some 5,000 soldiers are to be sent to Afghanistan as part of President Obama’s plan, which strives to eliminate the Taliban. Abdo’s fellow soldiers are preparing for deployment to Afghanistan soon, according to their orders. But this Muslim soldier is refusing to be sent with his unit, because, he exclaims, as a Muslim he is forbidden to kill Muslims.”
Nasser Abdo: “I don’t believe I can involve myself in an army that wages war against Muslims. I don’t believe I could sleep at night if I take part, in any way, in the killing of a Muslim.”
Clearly, recent events show he had no problem with killing fellow soldiers or innocent civilians.
The Fox report below has a few seconds showing Abdo praying toward Mecca taken from the Jazeera story.
Now the gentle conscientious objector has shown a less kindly side, behaving in a “defiant” way in court and yelling out the name of the Islamic mass murderer Nidal Hasan, who has apparently become a hero to America-hating jihadists.
Chalk up another poster boy for hostile Islam in America.
An AWOL soldier accused of plotting to launch an attack on Fort Hood was defiant during his first court appearance on Friday, yelling out the name of the Army psychiatrist blamed in the 2009 deadly shooting rampage at the same Texas base.
Federal prosecutors charged 21-year-old Pfc. Naser Abdo with possessing an illegal firearm, two days after he was arrested at a motel about 3 miles from the front gate of Fort Hood. He told authorities he planned to construct two bombs in the motel room using gunpowder and shrapnel packed into pressure cookers and then detonate the explosives at a restaurant frequented by soldiers, court documents released Friday said.
Abdo, who had requested conscientious objector status because his Muslim beliefs prevented him from fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. refused to stand up during Friday’s court hearing when asked. As he left the room, he shouted: “Nidal Hasan Fort Hood 2009.”
Hasan, an Army major and psychiatrist, is charged in the 2009 deaths of 13 people at Fort Hood in the worst mass shooting ever on a U.S. military installation.
Abdo’s words in court were a sharp contrast to an essay he wrote last year as the first anniversary of the Fort Hood shootings approached and as he petitioned for conscientious objector status. In the essay, obtained by The Associated Press, Abdo said the attacks ran against his beliefs as a Muslim and were “an act of aggression by a man and not by Islam.”
Abdo was approved as a conscientious objector this year, but that status was put on hold after he was charged with possessing child pornography. He went absent without leave from Fort Campbell, Ky., during the July 4 weekend.
On July 3, Abdo tried to buy a gun at a store near the Kentucky post, according to the company that owns the store. Police in Killeen, where Fort Hood is located, said their break in the case came Tuesday from Guns Galore LLC — the same gun store where Hasan bought a pistol used in the 2009 attack. Store clerk Greg Ebert said Abdo arrived by taxi and bought 6 pounds of smokeless gunpowder, three boxes of shotgun ammunition and a magazine for a semi-automatic pistol. Continue reading this article
If there is anything dumber than Muslim immigration generally, it is admitting members of the hostile Islamic tribe into the US military. Training potential fifth columnists in the use of weapons is unwise for national security and public safety.
Today’s reminder of the wisdom of prudent crime prevention is the AWOL Muslim soldier arrested in Killeen, Texas, for plotting an attack on Fort Hood. That was the place where in 2009 Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan murdered 13. Perhaps Fort Hood is considered to be the site of an Islamic victory and therefore worth a revisit by a dedicated Soldier of Allah.
The character in question, Pfc. Nasser Abdo, had sought and recently received conscientious objector status, because he learned that being deployed would necessitate him to take up arms against fellow Muslims. The Army occasionally requires shooting people — who knew??
An Army private has been arrested in connection with an alleged plot to attack Fort Hood that authorities suggest was close to being carried out. The arrest, first reported by Fox News, comes nearly two years after a deadly shooting rampage at the base.
Pvt. Naser Jason Abdo, an AWOL soldier from Fort Campbell in Kentucky, was arrested by the Killeen Police Department near Fort Hood and remains in custody at the Killeen jail.
Abdo, 21, was found with weapons, explosives and jihadist materials at the time of his arrest, a senior Army source confirms to Fox News. He was arrested at around 2 p.m. Wednesday after someone called authorities to report a suspicious individual.
Eric Vasys, a spokesman with the FBI’s San Antonio Office, said authorities found firearms and bomb making components inside Abdo’s motel room. Sources also say Abdo was attempting to make a purchase at Guns Galore in Killeen, the same ammunition store where Maj. Nidal Hasan purchased weapons that were allegedly used to gun down 13 people and wound 30 others at the base on Nov. 5, 2009.
Sources said Abdo had enough materials to make two bombs, including 18 pounds of sugar and six pounds of smokeless gunpowder — a possible trigger for an explosive. A pressure cooker was also found. Another counterterrorism source said the bomb making materials and methodology came “straight out of Inspire (a terrorist magazine) and an Al Qaeda explosives course manual.” Continue reading this article
King’s opening remarks (Watch) noted that the hearing was part of an ongoing investigation.
At this hearing, the third in a series, we will examine Somalia-based terrorist organization al Shabaab’s ongoing recruitment, radicalization, and training of young Muslim-Americans and al Shabaab’s linking up with al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).
A new fact from the hearing was that 40 Somalis residing in America have returned to their beloved homeland to fight for jihad with al-Shebaab (pictured), not the 20+ number that has been the usual figure for several years.
One interesting witness was the St. Paul Chief of Police, Thomas Smith. His testimony was enthusiastic about the wonders of police “outreach” to Somali youth. (Read it here.) He made the St. Paul police sound more like social workers than crime-fighting cops. Smith described an array of fun athletic programs: “Our Police Athletic League has over 300 Somali American youth participants who compete in soccer, flag football, softball and volleyball games that are organized, coached and refereed by Saint Paul Police Officers.” Kumbaya is alive and well in Minnesota!
Of course, top quality outreach like St. Paul’s does not come cheap. Chief Smith praised the success of AIMCOP (African Immigrant Muslim Community Outreach Program). AIMCOP is a two-year program funded by a Bureau of Justice Assistance grant at a cost of $670,679 to the taxpayers.
The point is that hostile, culturally inappropriate groups like Somali Muslims are a really bad choice for immigrants and cost the taxpayer a pile of money as a result. They arrive with a dislike of our values, and the young men act out via crime, gangs and Islamic violence. Extreme diversity in immigration is favored by liberals as a way to demonstrate their flawed belief that all cultures are morally equal, which they most certainly are not.
Agencies like the police, schools and social services are faced with the task of socializing hostile tribes that do not want to assimilate. Taxpayers are then forced to spend a lot of money to run expensive programs to keep Somali boys out of trouble.
It would be cheaper and safer to end the failed social experiment of diverse immigration, particularly Muslims.
One soccer game and camping trip at a time, St. Paul police officers are spending time with Somali-American youth to help counter the threat of Islamic radicalization, the city’s police chief testified Wednesday in Washington.
Police “began to engage in serious outreach work with our Somali-American residents” in 2004, said Chief Thomas Smith. That became the foundation for the African Immigrant Muslim Community Outreach Program (AIMCOP), funded largely through a federal grant.
In addition to youth work, police hold community education meetings targeted at Somali adults, and regular meetings between Smith and elders.
“We strongly believe that by creating these safe, diverse and ongoing opportunities for Somali-American youth and the police to interact, that trust, cooperation, friendship and mentorship will increase, and opportunities for al-Shabaab to recruit and radicalize our youth will decrease,” Smith said in remarks prepared for a U.S. House Homeland Security Committee hearing in Washington. Continue reading this article
In Washington, it’s business as usual in some precincts, where many of the top Democrats haven’t heard (or don’t care) that the country is broke.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton objects to reductions in her cushy budget that allows her to be Ms. Generous around the world on the nation’s depleted credit card. In fact, the State Department has been shoveling money at corrupt countries where much of the aid has been stolen or wasted on ridiculous projects.
Too much of foreign policy consists of thinly disguised bribery to shape behavior overseas. Maybe it works to a degree, but the country can no longer afford it.
How wasteful and objectionable are State Department programs? Very. One example that got a lot of attention last year was the use of tax money to build mosques overseas, as part of a cultural preservation program, or something. According to FactCheck.org, “The State Department says that, in total, the fund has contributed nearly $26 million to approximately 640 cultural heritage sites in more than 100 countries, and more than half was given before Obama took office.”
Another example of crazy diverse waste is Clinton’s scheme to empower Afghan women by giving them cell phones:
[. . .] The connection Maryam sees between women and wireless is apparent to the world’s biggest telecommunications companies, which have begun a push to bring female customers in the developing world to the same level as men. The U.S. and Australian agencies for international development are backing the effort by Vodafone Group Plc, France Telecom SA and others with $1 million to fund research into how to find and keep women like Maryam, and to persuade men that handsets aren’t a threat. [. . .]
The U.S. is helping fund MWomen to bring women’s handset use on par with men’s and change “the all-too-common belief that cell phones afford more freedom to women than they deserve,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said at an Oct. 7 press conference.
Sen Tom Coburn didn’t get much press coverage for his own detailed analysis of wasteful spending (and how to save $7 trillion), which was regrettable. But it is all online for inquiring minds to see: Back in Black: A Deficit Reduction Plan. Following is Coburn’s July 18 press conference about the analysis on C-SPAN:
The State Department section of Coburn’s report is linked here.
When the American people are asked what government spending should be cut in order to balance the federal budget, foreign aid programs generally top the list. In fact, the annual State and Foreign Operations appropriations have increased over 80 percent from 2002 to 2010, adjusting for inflation. President Obama‟s budget request for Fiscal Year 2012 is a record-high $59 billion for State and Foreign Operations appropriations.
Back to the Secretary of State’s complaints about her budget being trimmed a little:
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is urging a group of House Republicans to give up their push for a bill that would slash payments to the United Nations and limit aid to Egypt, Pakistan and the Palestinian Authority, among other groups.
Clinton said in a letter Tuesday that she would urge President Barack Obama to veto the bill if it passes in both houses of Congress because the measure “would be debilitating to my efforts to carry out a considered foreign policy and diplomacy, and to use foreign assistance strategically to that end,” The Washington Post reported.
The bill cleared the House Foreign Affairs Committee last week in an effort to cut $6.4 billion from the president’s request for $51 billion in foreign aid for 2012. While it has the potential to pass the GOP-controlled House, it’s seen as unable to get through the Democrat-led Senate.
The bill would impose “onerous restrictions” on State Department operations and foreign aid, Clinton wrote, and the “severe curtailing” of dues payments to international groups including the UN and the Organization of American States would be damaging.
The legislation’s proposal to block funding to countries that don’t meet corruption standards “has the potential to affect a staggering number of needy aid recipients,” as do proposals to restrict aid to Egypt, Lebanon, Yemen and the Palestinian Authority. The bill would only allow the flow of money to those countries if the Obama administration was able to certify that no members of terror groups or their sympathizers were serving in their governments.
Brad Goehner, a spokesman for Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), the chairwoman of the House committee, told the Post that the letter was “disappointing, particularly given the current debt crisis, that the Obama administration is fighting to keep sending taxpayer money to foreign organizations and governments that undermine U.S. interests.”
The mainstream press from the Los Angeles Times to the commie People’s World agree that California’s new partial DREAM Act is a great thing. The whole Mexifornia DREAM Act couldn’t be pushed through even the totally Democrat government, so its evil author, Sen Gil Cedillo, chopped it into two parts.
The less objectionable section was just signed into law, wherein illegal aliens can mooch financial aid from private sources. The next piece of legislation AB131 is still in the state Senate and would permit illegal aliens access to public funds like Cal Grants. Illegals already get taxpayer-subsidized in-state tuition, which adds to their huge sense of entitlement.
Of course, it is crazy public policy to allot scarce funds and college slots to educating illegal aliens who cannot work legally even after graduation. What about citizen students whose parents have paid into to system for decades? As Assemblyman Tim Donnelly observed, “Bottom line is California doesn’t have enough money to take care of its obligations to its citizens right now.”
But Governor Jerry Brown called opponents “wrong morally and humanly.” Brilliant. Liberals believe they are morally superior when they spend other people’s money to uplift adored victim groups, such as illegal alien kiddies.
New law covers private funding; governor signals he may also favor expanding public Cal Grants eligibility.
Following through on a campaign promise, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law Monday easing access to privately funded financial aid for undocumented college students. He also signaled that he was likely to back a more controversial measure allowing those students to seek state-funded tuition aid in the future.
Assemblyman Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles), author of the private financial aid measure, described it as an important but incremental step toward expanding opportunities for deserving students who were brought to the U.S. illegally through no choice of their own. Cedillo is pressing ahead with a more expansive measure that would make certain undocumented students eligible for the state’s Cal Grants and other forms of state tuition aid.
Brown said he was “positively inclined” to back that bill but would not make a decision until it crosses his desk.
“I’m committed to expanding opportunity wherever I can find it, and certainly these kinds of bills promote a goal of a more inclusive California and a more educated California,” Brown told reporters after the bill-signing ceremony Monday.
For Brown, signing Cedillo’s bill was a gesture of goodwill toward Latino voters, who helped elect him in large numbers last fall. Legislation providing education funding to undocumented students has been a top priority for many Latino groups, which have found many of their efforts thwarted so far at the federal level. Last year proponents failed to marshal enough votes in the U.S. Senate to ensure passage of the federal DREAM Act, which would have created a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. before age 16 if they attended a college or served in the military.
Brown’s position on the California Dream Act was being closely monitored after he angered some prominent Latino leaders by vetoing a bill last month that would have made it easier for farmworkers to organize. Though Brown noted in his veto message that he signed legislation helping farm workers unionize during his first stint as governor in the mid-1970s, his veto was sharply criticized by the United Farm Workers, which counted the bill among their top priorities.
But several analysts who study Latino politics said the California Dream Act was far more important symbolically to many in the Latino community. Fernando Guerra, director of the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University, said the bill was viewed by many as a measure of social acceptance of Latinos because it would increase opportunity for the best and brightest among the undocumented. Continue reading this article
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.