The President likes to talk up the American middle class and how he is working to protect it. Meanwhile in the real world, the middle class is shrinking because of Washington policies like mass immigration, outsourcing and excess regulation.
Obama has courted the billionaires of Silicon Valley to be supporters, and the tech bosses like open borders for IT workers so they can make even more money. A major tool is the H-1b visa for foreign tech employees who are supposed to be used only when a citizen cannot be found to do the job.
On Friday, Fox News journalist William La Jeunesse reported on the current state of H-1b visas with a timely example: Southern California Edison has brought in hundreds of Indians to replace citizen employees.
LA JEUNESSE: The president talks a lot about protecting the middle class yet 400 American workers here in Los Angeles are losing good middle class jobs to foreign workers on visas approved by the administration. Laid off workers at SCE, Southern California’s largest utility are furious because they must also train replacements from India. [. . .]
The Immigration and Nationality Act requires the hiring of a foreign worker not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of US workers comparably employed, but experts say the law is routinely ignored. [. . .]
SCE will save about $40,000 per worker, about $16 million a year by replacing American workers with foreigners on an H-1b visa.
Professor Norm Matloff’s newish blog, Norm Says No, has a lot of information about the wrong idea that the US needs to import millions of tech workers because Americans aren’t interested in the occupation. Not so: the wealthy companies just want to save some money.
America’s Senator, Jeff Sessions, read from the Computerworld article below, concerning SCE’s use of H-1bs, starting at around 2:35, on the Senate floor on Thursday as part of a talk about Washington’s attack on the American worker.
About 500 IT jobs are cut at utility through layoffs and voluntary departures
Information technology workers at Southern California Edison (SCE) are being laid off and replaced by workers from India. Some employees are training their H-1B visa holding replacements, and many have already lost their jobs.
The employees are upset and say they can’t understand how H-1B guest workers can be used to replace them.
The IT organization’s “transition effort” is expected to result in about 400 layoffs, with “another 100 or so employees leaving voluntarily,” SCE said in a statement. The “transition,” which began in August, will be completed by the end of March, the company said.
“They are bringing in people with a couple of years’ experience to replace us and then we have to train them,” said one longtime IT worker. “It’s demoralizing and in a way I kind of felt betrayed by the company.”
SCE, Southern California’s largest utility, has confirmed the layoffs and the hiring of Infosys, based in Bangalore, and Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) in Mumbai. They are two of the largest users of H-1B visas.
The utility has a large IT department. In 2012, before any layoffs, it had about 1,800 employees, plus an additional 1,500 contract workers.
Computerworld interviewed, separately, four affected SCE IT employees. They agreed to talk on the condition that their names not be used.
The IT employees at SCE are “beyond furious,” said a second IT worker.
The H-1B program “was supposed to be for projects and jobs that American workers could not fill,” this worker said. “But we’re doing our job. It’s not like they are bringing in these guys for new positions that nobody can fill.
The President really should avoid the National Prayer Breakfast because it is not a good venue for his unique skill set. Rather than adopting an attitude of humble spirituality, his inner lecturer tends to take over, and expresses itself in tiresome tropes of moral equivalency like comparing medieval Christianity with today’s headchoppy arsonist Islam.
His strongest religious belief is apparently that Americans are sinners, both historically and currently, who need to be scolded and punished, as well as replaced by illegal aliens.
Yes, Professor, the Inquisition was evil, and bad things happened during the Crusades, though the goal of defending Christianity’s home from hostile Muslims was quite noble. But appalling atrocities occur today and the President routinely excuses them because of the religion of the killers.
The mention of the Crusades is another bow to jihadists, who commonly refer to Christians as Crusaders, and not in a friendly way. In 1998, Osama bin Laden urged fellow Muslims to join him in jihad against “Jews and Crusaders.”
President Obama, at the National Prayer Breakfast this morning, said:
Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.
This is banal.
The problem with all such high-horse declarations by Obama is his continual omission of historical context and, in this case, his conflation of the frequent with the rare. The Crusades began in 1095, almost a millennium ago; the Inquisition in 1478, now over 500 years past. When the president says “people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” he should remember that all religions at the time committed terrible deeds that shock the modern sense of morality — given the savage wars between Christendom and Islam, and the religious purifications and civil discord common to all the religious factional strife that played out, violently, in accord with the ethos of the times.
Slavery was outlawed in the U.S. in 1865. Jim Crow ended officially a half-century ago. Indentured servitude, however, continues, almost exclusively among some Islamic groups in the Middle East and Africa. The caste system and ethnic and religious tribalism that institutionalized discrimination and second-class status, quite akin to Jim Crow, persist in places in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. I doubt today whether a Jew of any nationality would be allowed to immigrate and buy real estate in too many corners of the Islamic Middle East. Outside of the West, women and homosexuals are often treated no differently than in the Seventh Century. Continue reading this article
Interestingly, Clifton noted, “At the recession, we lost 13 million jobs, only three million have come back.” He said that in the context of explaining misleading numbers, not the cause of the economy’s failure to create jobs. Certainly business people generally say that they survived the recession by implementing more efficiency, which is shorthand for computers, automation and robots.
One example: When was the last time you phoned an office and got a human receptionist?
Here’s something that many Americans — including some of the smartest and most educated among us — don’t know: The official unemployment rate, as reported by the U.S. Department of Labor, is extremely misleading.
Right now, we’re hearing much celebrating from the media, the White House and Wall Street about how unemployment is “down” to 5.6%. The cheerleading for this number is deafening. The media loves a comeback story, the White House wants to score political points and Wall Street would like you to stay in the market.
None of them will tell you this: If you, a family member or anyone is unemployed and has subsequently given up on finding a job — if you are so hopelessly out of work that you’ve stopped looking over the past four weeks — the Department of Labor doesn’t count you as unemployed. That’s right. While you are as unemployed as one can possibly be, and tragically may never find work again, you are not counted in the figure we see relentlessly in the news — currently 5.6%. Right now, as many as 30 million Americans are either out of work or severely underemployed. Trust me, the vast majority of them aren’t throwing parties to toast “falling” unemployment.
There’s another reason why the official rate is misleading. Say you’re an out-of-work engineer or healthcare worker or construction worker or retail manager: If you perform a minimum of one hour of work in a week and are paid at least $20 — maybe someone pays you to mow their lawn — you’re not officially counted as unemployed in the much-reported 5.6%. Few Americans know this. Continue reading this article
France is in a terrible state, where hostile Muslim attacks are ratcheting up, particularly in the mass murders at the Charlie Hebdo office, but the old habit of political correctness remains in place. The Hebdo slaughter was a major shock to the French psyche, yet the willingness to deal with the cancer of Muslim immigration is missing, according to a report from CBN’s Dale Hurd. In fact, his report asks, “Does France face civil war?”
PARIS – French Holocaust survivors gathered last month on the 70th anniversary of the liberation the Auschwitz.
They are men and women who saw terrible anti-Semitism as children and who must again live in a time when some in France and in Europe want to kill Jews.
France’s Jews have felt like a target for a long time. And the killings by Muslim terrorists at the Charlie Hebdo newspaper and kosher supermarket have only confirmed their worst fears, and it will cause more of them to leave France for Israel and the United States.
Post-Charlie: Same Old, Same Old
Some have called the massacre France’s 9/11. But America clearly changed after 9/11. It’s not at all clear if France has changed enough.
Yes, there have been arrests and more police and soldiers have been deployed. But political correctness is still so deeply rooted in France that speaking out too strongly against Muslim immigration and being labelled a racist can still end a career.
French TV commentator Eric Zemmour was fired in December for saying that Muslims should be deported to avoid “chaos and civil war.”
Zemmour has written the bestseller, The French Suicide, about how France is being destroyed. CBN News had hoped to interview Zemmour, but his publicist told us he was in hiding because of death threats.
One week after the killings, Paris police banned an anti-Islamization march.
Even popular far-right leader Marine Le Pen has been tiptoeing around the subject. She’s reportedly feuding with her foreign policy adviser, Aymeric Chauprade, who gave an exclusive interview to CBN News.
Chauprade angered Le Pen by saying that France is at war with some Muslims and in danger from what he called a fifth column of 1 million radical Muslims in France.
“The problem, which is maybe worse, is the sympathy from a large part of the Muslim population in France toward jihad and towards the radical idea,” he told CBN News.
“(French leaders) refuse to accept the idea that violence is rooted in Islam. I do not say all Muslims are violent but that violence is rooted in Islam’s holy texts,” he said.
An Outpouring of Hypocrisy
The world saw millions of Frenchmen flood into the streets to say “I am Charlie.” It was a touching outpouring of support for free speech in the face of Muslim terror.
But conservatives in France saw something else: hypocrisy.
The same French leaders marching for free speech have not allowed free speech critical of Islam, except for few Charlie Hebdo cartoons, and have crafted policies that have allowed Muslim extremism to flourish in France.
French author, journalist and publisher Jean Robin says the government brought on the attacks, by being harder on critics of Islam than on Muslims. Continue reading this article
There are pieces of the hearing available through Congressmen’s website, but the whole thing is not, at least yet. Sometimes whole hearings show up on C-SPAN days later.
So here are a few hearing clips, starting with the opening statement of Judiciary Chair Bob Goodlatte. He posted a text version of his opening statement, which was a preview of the dreary facts to come. The President has used his imperial pen and phone very effectively to destroy immigration enforcement in this country, endangering both the citizens’ jobs and safety.
Chairman Goodlatte: When President Obama announced unilateral changes to our immigration laws with a wave of his “pen and cell phone” on November 20, 2014, he indicated that he would allow millions of unlawful and criminal aliens to evade immigration enforcement. He did this with the issuance of new so-called “priorities” for the apprehension, detention, and removal of aliens. Under the Obama Administration’s new enforcement priorities, broad categories of unlawful and criminal aliens will be immune from the law. This means that these removable aliens will be able to remain in the U.S. without the consequence of deportation. To make matters worse, even the most dangerous criminals and national security threats can cease being a “priority” for removal if there are undefined “compelling and exceptional factors.”
On the same date, President Obama effectively announced the end of Secure Communities. Despite the fact that the President claims he took action to prioritize immigration enforcement against criminal aliens, he is scrapping a tool that identifies criminal aliens booked in jails across the United States so that federal law enforcement officials can prioritize their removal. Secure Communities, created in 2008, is a simple and highly successful program to identify criminal aliens once arrested and jailed. It protects Americans from those who are a danger to their communities. (Continues)
I was pleased to hear a strong opening statement from Trey Gowdy, who at times has been rather squishy about illegal immigration. “A sovereign country should never apologize for having a secure border any more than this Congress or this capitol apologizes for having metal detectors at every single entrance,” he remarked — that’s what we want to hear from our elected representatives.
Congressman Lamar Smith was formerly the Judiciary Chair and knows the issue very well. A Jan. 30 press release emphasized protections for American workers.
Smith first questioned Sheriff Babeu and focused on the danger of releasing thousands of violent criminal aliens. The Sheriff specifically mentioned the Apolinar Altamirano case, where a previously arrested alien murdered a 21-year-old convenience store clerk, Grant Ronnebeck, in Mesa Arizona. The killer had kidnapped a woman and held her for a week, but the authorities allowed bond for a clearly dangerous foreigner and the result was a preventable death.
When Smith turned to Jessica Vaughan about the criminal recidivism, she responded, “What I’m told by ICE officials — and I’ve been told on a number of occasions — is that they believe, from their internal data, is there is a recidivism rate of about 50 percent of criminal aliens who are released by ICE.”
This is how much the administration cares about the safety of the American people.
Former Texas judge Louis Gohmert was particularly outraged about the idea of releasing criminals, 50 percent of whom will offend again, remarking, “As a judge when I was considering bail or bond that was a primary consideration, the likelihood of them returning and the public safety. I can’t imagine releasing somebody on a makeable bond if both sides agreed the defendant had a 50% chance of reoffending.”
The Center for Immigration Studies used a FOIA request to find out how many extra-legal work permits the administration has doled out to non-Americans since 2009 and the result was a stunning 5.5 million. No wonder the net job growth has gone to immigrants and aliens.
The study’s author, Jessica Vaughan, appeared with Lou Dobbs to discuss the report:
“This Freedom of Information Act request has unearthed the operation of a shadow immigration system previously unknown to the American public. A full investigation is warranted. In addition to the widespread non-enforcement of existing immigration law—such as the public charge rule—we know now the Administration has been issuing millions of additional work permits beyond what Congress has authorized. Since 2009, the Administration has issued 5.5 million new work permits in excess of the regular immigration flow. This massive increase in the labor supply has occurred simultaneously with a steep drop in family incomes and a sharp rise in the number of Americans pushed out of the workforce. All jobs gains since the recession have gone to foreign workers, while the slack labor market has depressed median family incomes almost $5,000 in that time.”
It’s understandable politics for Obama to make a show of bestowing amnesty on millions of foreign job thieves, many of whom are culturally inclined to big government anyway, and a big freebie seals the deal that the great majority will be loyal lifelong Democrats. So the amnesty gambit benefits the Democrat Party enormously.
But the administration’s generous dispensing of work permits, and therefore scarce jobs, to foreigners in secret during the Great Recession must be seen as purposely causing extra pain for citizens. Obama must dislike Americans even more than many assume.
And remember: to the intrusive foreigners, the work permits are the real amnesty because they came for the Yankee dollars only, not to become American citizens. But the administration will naturalize them soon enough so that they can vote for still bigger-spending government.
President Barack Obama has quietly handed out an extra 5.46 million work permits for non-immigrant foreigners who arrived as tourists, students, illegal immigrants or other types of migrants since 2009, according to federal documents released by a Freedom of Information Act request.
“The executive branch is operating a huge parallel work-authorization system outside the bounds of the [immigration] laws and limits written by Congress [and which] inevitably reduces job opportunities for Americans,” said Jessica Vaughan, the policy director at the Center for Immigration Studies, while filed the FOIA request.
“The true magnitude of how often he has evaded the limits set by Congress on foreign workers has never been known until now,” she told The Daily Caller.
“If Congress wants to take back control of our immigration system, it needs to control the issuance of work permits, which have been the vehicle for Obama to get around the [legal] limits on immigration and work visas imposed by Congress,” she said.
On Tuesday, senators will vote for or against a budget measure that would sharply limit Obama’s ability to award another five million work permits to illegals via the Department of Homeland Security. Obama promised to hand out the next five million work permits as part of his unpopular November 2014 executive amnesty, which also largely ends efforts to repatriate the 12 million illegals living in the United States. Continue reading this article
Amazon has moved in a big way toward automating its “fulfillment centers” where customer orders are processed. It uses the Kiva warehouse system shown in a local TV report (below), in which management is just a bit too cheerful about humans working happily alongside the zippy little machines which bring items to be packed into boxes and shipped. (See my earlier blog about the innovative Kiva, Amazon.com Robots Are in Place to Process Christmas Orders.)
Two Amazon processing centers are located near Dallas and now employ 1500 Texans, but you have to wonder for how long. Amazon wants to process and deliver orders ever more rapidly, and automating its operation to the maximum extent possible is a big part of that business plan. CEO Jeff Bezos got a lot of attention a couple years backs when he announced on Sixty Minutes that he hoped to use drones to deliver Amazon merchandise. Last May, he told investors at the annual meeting that he planned to increase Kiva robots from 1400 to 10,000 by year’s end.
Below, Kiva robots operate from a computer system that tracks and moves everything in the warehouse. They scoot under mobile racks of merchandise and move needed items to packing stations run by humans.
On Friday, Jeff Sessions exhorted his colleagues in the Senate to use the Constitutional powers of Congress, even urging them to stop hiding under their desks.
Senator Sessions held the Immigration and Nationality Act while he spoke on the floor.
The GOP members apparently need a reminder that they can and must stand up against the dictatorial president. You get the feeling Sessions is frustrated with the lack of resolve in an institution that has a lot more power available to it for use, but the new ruling party, which was elected to oppose Obama, remains somnolent.
Republican Senators, the hour is late. Listen to the best man among you.
SESSIONS: Is there any country in the world that says it’s appropriate for a business to hire somebody who entered their country unlawfully? What kind of logic can support such a reasoning? For the President is not an imperial master. The Congress of the United States is not helpless when it confronts the President.
Colleagues, we’ve got to get out from under our desk here! Are you afraid to say to the President of the United States we don’t agree with this and we’re not going to fund this? Is that the world we’re in? Are we hiding under our desks, that the President may go on television and attack us? Because we won’t agree with his ideas? Surely not. Surely not.
So the Congress has the power to appropriate money. It goes back to the historic development before America became a nation, that the parliament took over the power of money from the king. Parliament passed the laws not the king. And we adopted that and we created a constitutional order instead of a king to decide how we operate and the parliament, the congress of the United States was empowered to handle the money. And what obligation, colleagues, does this Congress of the United States have to give the President of the United States money to undermine the laws of the United States. What power does he have to compel us to do so? Zero.
We’re going to continue to work to improve immigration law and make it better and serve the national interest of the United States, not special interests, not activist groups and not big businesses, but the average working American’s interest.
The topic of attacks against free speech was a theme in a recent SunTV segment of JihadWatch between Michael Coren and Robert Spencer. Jihadists are determined to end Western criticism of Islam, aka blasphemy which can be punished by death according to Muslim scriptures.
COREN: These issues don’t direct involve terrorism, it’s not always the issue of terrorism, it’s our freedom of speech being eroded and decayed. Artwork violating Islamic blasphemy law removed from a Paris exhibition — this is not Egypt or Syria or Iraq or Saudi Arabia; this is France, the home of art, avant garde, expressionism, breaking artistic barriers. They’ve changed their policy because they’re frightened of what some Muslims might say?
SPENCER: Well, they’re afraid of what some Muslims might do, Michael, what they’re afraid of is that Islamic jihadis might strike them the way they struck at Charlie Hebdo. So what you have here is a victory of terrorism. The terrorists wanted France and the rest of the free world to conform to Islamic blasphemy law, and they showed that they are willing to kill to make that happen, and in response all too many Western institutions and activities like this one are curtailing their acts and conforming to Islamic blasphemy laws to avoid suffering the same fate. It is a collapse of courage on a massive scale.
COREN: What sort of artworks were so offensive?
SPENCER: There was an artwork of a woman who was stepping on a prayer mat with shoes and this is not allowed, shoes when you go into a mosque, and so this is considered to be so possibly disrespectful and inflammatory to Muslims that it was voluntarily removed by the people running the exhibit.
Winning through intimidation — that’s the Islam strategy. And it works because people know violence will follow if intimidation alone doesn’t do the trick.
Sheriff Clarke has become a popular guest on Fox News recently, presumably because of his plain-spoken voice for police issues and a ground-level view of law enforcement. At the hearing he critiqued the Holder Justice Department for its “almost hostility toward local law enforcement” both in “public statements made about the profession and policy decisions that treat police officers as adversaries instead of allies in the pursuit of justice.”
Senator Ted Cruz discussed prosecutorial discretion (Obama’s excuse for amnesties for five million) with legal scholar Turley, who thought any law could be shut down entirely under such a principle.
Senator Jeff Sessions spoke up for the separation of powers which means Congress must grow a spine and defend its rights from the President who would be King.
SESSIONS: I believe Congress has a duty to defend its legitimate constitutional power. It has several powers of its own. One of them is the power of the purse. One of them is the power of confirmations. I don’t see any need for this Congress to confirm somebody, be it the chief law enforcement officer of this nation who is at that table insisting that she intends to execute a policy that’s contrary to law and to what Congress desires and to what the American people desire, and says that someone here unlawfully is as much entitled to a job in this country as somebody who’s here lawfully is just beyond my comprehension. Are we through the looking glass? …
The real question is fundamental: What are we going to do to defend our Constitutional heritage? What will this Congress be able to say to subsequent Congresses if we acquiesce to these kind of activities? I think it has permanent ramifications for the relationship of the branches of government.
Regarding the confirmation of Loretta Lynch — who thinks “everyone in this country” has the right ro work “regardless of how they came here” — that process will take a little time. Judiciary Chair Charles Grassley appeared on C-SPAN this morning and said she would have to answer written questions over the next week or thereabouts, meaning there is no hurry to vote on her immediately.
So there is time to phone your Senators and mention that you think immigration should be legal, controlled and reduced.
Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) is a cultural and Islamic practice that is performed commonly on young girls with the hope that it will make them uninterested in sex when they get older. It is sometimes fatal because of unsanitary conditions, and may cause lifetime pain in victims.
Doctors at one English hospital have dealt with 1,500 cases of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) in just five years, it emerged today.
Figures from Birmingham’s Heartlands Hospital reveal that staff see six patients who have been subjected to the barbaric procedure every week.
Nationwide, 15 new cases of FGM are reported to hospital around the country every day. But the victims of the shocking practice are clustered in certain areas, which explains the high rate in Birmingham. Heartlands saw 349 cases in 2013, following 288 cases in 2012, 316 in 2011 and 317 in 2010. It is thought to be one of the centres which has seen a large number of the 463 cases now being identified in England every month.
NSPCC Head of Child Protection Operations John Cameron said: ‘These figures show the NHS is consistently seeing a high number of FGM cases every month. FGM is a live public health issue and it is vital all health professionals are trained to spot the signs of FGM and that girls who are subjected to this brutal practice get the post-traumatic support they deserve.
‘We need to ensure doctors, midwives and other healthcare professionals are working effectively together with children’s services to support and protect FGM victims and their family members.’
The records show the number of women recorded as having been subjected to the practice, even if they were in hospital for another reason. Campaigners have pointed out that the numbers may be just the tip of the iceberg, as only those women who have sought specific medical treatment are included in the data. Continue reading this article
Sessions’ office posted a one-minute clip of his longer cross-examination in committee of Loretta Lynch, the President’s choice to be Attorney General. He interrogated her about illegal aliens’ non-existent right to take American jobs.
SENATOR SESSIONS: Let me ask you this: In the workplace America today, when we have a high number of unemployed, we’ve had declining wages for many years, we have the lowest percentage of Americans working. Who has more right to a job in this country? A lawful immigrant who is here, a green card holder, a citizen, or a person who has entered the country unlawfully?
NOMINEE LYNCH: Senator, I believe the right and the obligation to work is one that is shared by everyone in this country, regardless of how they came here, and certainly if someone is here regardless of status I would prefer that they be participating in the workplace than not be participating in the workplace.
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Chairman of the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, issued the following statement after the conclusion of today’s Judiciary hearing to announce that he would vote against the nomination of Loretta Lynch to be the next Attorney General:
“President Obama’s executive amnesty represents one of the most breathtaking exertions of executive power in the history of this country. After Congress rejected the President’s favored immigration legislation, the White House met with the interest groups who had crafted that bill and implemented the major provisions of the legislation that Congress had rejected through executive fiat.
The legal opinion attempting to justify this circumvention of Congress was issued by the Attorney General’s Office of Legal Counsel. At the outset of this nomination process, I said that no Senator should vote to confirm anyone for this position—the top law enforcement job in America—who supported the President’s unlawful actions. Congress must defend its constitutional role, which is clearly threatened.
Unfortunately, when asked today whether she found the President’s actions to be ‘legal and constitutional,’ Ms. Lynch said that she did. I therefore am unable to support her nomination.
My concerns are furthered by Ms. Lynch’s unambiguous declaration that ‘the right and the obligation to work is one that’s shared by everyone in this country regardless of how they came here. And certainly, if someone is here, regardless of status, I would prefer that they would be participating in the workplace than not participating in the workplace.’ 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.