Tag Archives: Immigration

I wonder…

Hmmm, I wonder what will happen when a culture that has been made afraid of its traditions, guns, speaking up, standing up, and making a stand because anyone who does will be attacked and jailed. A society that has been made afraid of its government and what has become a ruling class. A society that has been torn apart and put at each others throats for trivial slights and offenses against each other. A society that from cradle-to-grave is being taught to only trust in government to make all their decisions in life and defense. Even while the same government opens the country’s borders to all comers from the 3rd World and refuses to name the marching toward conquest Enemy as an enemy. A society that is disarmed and unable to defend themselves from petty thieves or grand politicians schemes of self-serving grandeur—

Comes into direct contact with…

—Another society where the people have been taught from cradle-to-grave to hate all Outsiders. To demand that all other people and religions are to bow down and obey- to submit. A society where death is the way to paradise and that killing non-believers is justified. Anyone who speaks out is to die. Anyone else who stands in their way is to be massacred. There is to be no quarter until all are conquered. A society that worships guns, death, killing, murder in the name of their cause for World Domination.

What would happen if such a thing were to ever happen?

Hmmm…

What Washington doesn’t want people to think about on Immigration

While the debate rages in Washington about immigration, one thing that should be on the top of the list of considerations is being largely overlooked. In spite of the fact that the following report was aired on ABC, it’s unlikely that anyone is going to be hearing too many politicians grabbing the spotlight to talk about it. They will prefer to keep people focused on images of immigrants that want legal status, children that were dragged across the border illegally through no fault of their own, and the various low wage workers that certain portions of our economy theoretically must have in order to survive. There will be talk about STEM, and how much we need highly skilled immigrants, in spite of the fact that the better solution lies in better education opportunities for legal citizens. But, there won’t be very much talk about unfinished fence lines, small towns on the border within ear shot of the drug wars being waged just south of the theoretical border, or the fact that civilians have become the front line of our border defense through the use of personal security cameras. Politicians will not talk about the fact that there are citizens of this nation that have taken to bearing arms not out of choice because of their rights under the Second Amendment, but out of necessity, for their own safety. They are essentially a citizen militia, defending our border.

Grit and Grace on CDN – July 11th

gritandgraceCDN2
When: Thursday, July 11th, 9pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Grit and Grace on CDN on Blog Talk Radio

What: What does a Jewish Conservative originally from New Jersey and a former liberal turned Conservative Southern Baptist from Mississippi have in common? A whole lot of Grit and Grace! Please Join Jennifer Meadows and Josh Bernstein for one of the most content rich Conservative talk shows that takes an honest and raw look at the issues affecting or nation. The Grit and Grace show is one of a kind and we promise our listeners no talking points, just real solutions.

Tonight: Immigration – the most important issue we face in America. Will House Republicans commit suicide and pass this bill??

The White House is urging Federal employees and contractors to spy on one another in an “Insider Threat” program. In particular, they were to pay close attention to the “lifestyles, attitudes and behaviors – like financial troubles, odd working hours or unexplained travel”…
This initiative covers all Federal workers including the Dept. of Education and the Peace Corps. Paranoid anyone???

At 9:30 Eastern, Nick Dranias will be with us from the Goldwater Institute to discuss the implementation nightmare that is Obamacare, and the biggest threats we face in America today to our Constitution.

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on BlogTalkRadio

Norquist and Kudlow have finally proven they are strident liberals

Donkey Hotey (CC)

Donkey Hotey (CC)

While Washington has in recent weeks been pondering what to do about illegal aliens, a number of pseudoconservatives have recently(and finally) outed themselves as strident liberals after decades of pretending to be conservatives.

They are: ATR President Grover Norquist, CNBC host Larry Kudlow, and NH Senator Kelly Ayotte.

There was plenty of evidence even before their jump on the amnesty bandwagon that they are not conservatives. This was especially true of Norquist, who has advocated (and continues to advocate) appeasing Islamists, implementing Sharia in the US, deep defense cuts, isolationism, and protecting tax loopholes for Washington lobbyists that contribute significantly to the deficit problem and allow rich liberals like Warren Buffett to pay little to nothing in taxes.

Ayotte, for her part, has advocated killing the crucial MEADS missile defense system and succeeded in cutting the Air Force’s airlifter fleet.

And now, we have both of them advocate for amnesty for 12-20 million illegal immigrants.

They falsely claim that immigration, per se, is good for America, and that illegal aliens should be legalized because, well, everyone in America except the Indians is an immigration or descendant of immigrants. In other words, Republicans should reward lawlessness.

Not only will this reward lawbreaking and make legal immigrants – and those currently waiting for an immigration visa to the US – look like fools, it will also alienate the vast majority of Republican voters, sending the GOP to the dustbin of history.

And worst of all, amnesty will create 12-20 mn new Democratic voters, by putting illegal aliens on a pathway to citizenship within no less than 5 years. If that happens, there will never again be a Republican President or Congressional majority. And you can take that to the bank and cash a check on it.

Don’t believe me? Let’s do simple math.

Let’s assume, conservatively, that there are 12 mn illegal aliens in the US, and that if legalized, they’ll be voting Republican in George W. Bush numbers (44%).

OK, now the math:

44% * 12 mn = 5.28 mn new GOP voters

56% *  12 mn =  6.72 mn new Dem voters:

Net gain: 1.44 mn new voters for the Democrats.

So even under the most optimistic assumptions, if amnesty is passed, the Democrats will gain, on net, 1.44 mn more voters than Republicans – strengthening the Dem majority even further and forever making the GOP a minority party. The two major parties will be the Nancy Pelosi Democratic Party and the Ed Markey Democratic Party.

Rand Paul – another pseudoconservative who has jumped on the amnesty bandwagon – falsely claims that Republicans must win California back and that supporting amnesty will help the GOP do so. He falsely claims California is winnable and its citizens want the same thing as other Americans – lower taxes, lower government spending, balanced budgets, etc.

Actually, California is permanently, irrevocably lost to the GOP, and it’s precisely because of uncontrolled immigration – legal and illegal. California is actually a textbook reason why amnesty MUST be defeated at all costs.

Massive immigration, both legal and illegal, but mostly legal, has transformed California from a Republican bastion into such a liberal state that no Republican, moderate or conservative, can get elected statewide in California anymore. Not so long ago, this state gave America such great Republican Senators and Governors as Richard Nixon, S. I. Hayakawa, Ronald Reagan, and Pete Wilson.

Between 1952 and 1988, California voted Republican in every presidential election except in 1964.

But since 1988, it has become a stridently liberal state where fewer than 30% of voters are Republicans.

What’s worse, the vast majority of Californians WANT Big Government, high taxes, and high government spending. They’ve passed  an anti-business cap-and-tax system and stringest “fuel efficiency” standards. Their state is highly unionized. In 2010, they rejected proposals to suspend cap-and-tax until the unemployment rate drops, and last year, they elected a State Senate Democratic SUPERMAJORITY, allowing the Democrats – who already control the State Assembly and the Governorship – to raise taxes without limits.

As a result, productive citizens and businesses are fleeing the state en masse. The few who remain yet are being taxed to death. Those who remain in California are predominantly welfare moochers, government employees, union thugs, gangsters, and members of extremely leftist organizations.

This is what the ENTIRE country will look like if amnesty becomes law. If it does, the entire country will have the electorate of California. AND THERE WILL BE NO TURNING BACK.

It will actually be worse, because millions of voters will desert the GOP for supporting amnesty and thus rewarding lawbreaking.

The GOP will then be unable to even maintain 41 seats in the US Senate.

Thanks to Republicans’ repeated betrayals of American workers and selling out to K-Street bundlers, the GOP already has enough problems cobbling together an electoral majority.

California and New Mexico are lost forever to the GOP. Colorado, Virginia, and Florida haven’t voted Republican since 2004. Republicans can barely defend Arizona these days. Only Texas remains secure – for now.

If Texas goes, America goes.

Capitulate on illegal immigration, and there goes Texas, the entire Southwest, Florida, Virginia, and there goes the presidency, forever.

And what policies will these illegal aliens – whom the Rubio-McCain-Rand amnesty will turn into 12 mn new Democrat voters – support?

A Big Government and an even bigger welfare state with higher taxes and higher government spending.

Successive polling by the Pew Research Center and other polling organizations shows that Hispanics, by overwhelimng majorities, suport such policies, including a “bigger government with more” over a “smaller government with fewer services”; and that the vast majority of Hispanics trusts the federal gov to “do the right thing” “always” or “almost always”.

No amount of “voter education” will conver these voters to conservatism, because people are unwilling to give up their political beliefs. You can’t convert a Latino-American socialist from Mexico or Argentina to conservatism any more than you can convince an Islamist to give up on jihad or North Korea to give up on Kimilsungism (juche).

Have you ever wondered why most Latin American countries have socialist governments? Because the vast majority of their citizens are socialists. And by importing them to the US, you’re only going to make the US another socialist country. People’s political beliefs don’t change simply because they step onto American soil.

(Similarly, French socialists have, for decades, been importing millions of poorly educated, unskilled, socialist-minded Arab immigrants into France, knowing full well that this will eventually create an unbeatable socialist majority in France. But unlike the US, French rightwingers actually fight fiercely against this scheme; rightwing President Nicolas Sarkozy was particularly tough on immigration, deporting illegals and cutting even legal immigration levels by half.

Who are the real surrender monkeys here: the French or the citizens and politicians of this country?)

For those who still believe socialist Hispanic voters are winnable, I say: Look at the majoritzy of Hispanic families.

They’re headed by single mothers, without a father in the home. Their children are educated at taxpayers’ expense K-12 and receive Pell Grants and student aid.

For food, there are foodstamps.

If mom works, she gets the Earned Income Tax Credit which keeps her below the income tax treshold. If she doesn’t work, she receives 99 weeks of unemployment benefits and other welfare checks.

For healthcare, there’s Medicaid and Obamacare.

In other words, the majority of Hispanic (and black) families are totally dependent on the federal government – from birth to adult life to the grave.

Yes, we all know a few Hispanic families who aren’t dependent on the federal government and who are hard-working, productive, God-fearing, and perhaps even conservative. But they are very few in number. The vast majority of Hispanic families fit the description above.

A typical Hispanic woman far more likely than white women to become pregnant out of wedlock and be a single mother. Her children are far more likely than white children to be fatherless, do poorly in school, drop out of high school, be unemployed, commit crime, and end up in prison.

Why should these people – who depend on the federal government for their livelihoods – vote for a party that pledges to cut taxes they don’t pay and to reduce the government programs they depend on and live off, instead of the party that pledges to let them keep what they already get and to give them more?

Especially in today’s world, where the vast majority of voters in all countries are interested only in getting more from others – preferrably for “free” – and forcing others to pay the bill?

“But we must pass amnesty to appeal to Hispanics, or we will never win another election!”, you will say.

That’s nonsense. Republicans don’t need to. Republicans instead need to appeal better to white voters – especially women and Hispanics. And passing amnesty will only infuriate these voters. Especially traditional Republican voters.

As Byron York has shown, using Nate Silver’s highly accurate election result forecasting model, even if Romney were to win 70% of the Hispanic vote last year, he would STILL have lost the presidential election. Even with 70% of the Hispanic vote.

Romney lost because too few white voters supported him – and because blacks, eager to defend Obama turned out in even greater numbers than in 2008, and in even greater numbers than whites did.

Obama’s incumbency and Hurricane Sandy also certainly played a role. Before Sandy, Gallup had Romney ahead of Obama by 5 points; after Sandy hit the East Coast, Romney’s margin dwindled to just 1 point, and eventually, Romney lost the popular vote in addition to the EC vote.

Nate Silver’s model shows that Romney would’ve needed to win 73% of the Hispanic vote – a share that NO ONE in US history has won, not even Barack Obama – to win the 2012 election.

Even Barack Obama has never won 73% of the Hispanic vote: in 2008, he won 67%, and last year, he won 71%. But never 73%. And the notion that any Republican, even an amnesty supporter or a Hispanic like Rubio, can ever win 73% of the Hispanic vote, is ridiculous. Nobody in US history, not even Barack Obama, has achieved this.

But, as Nate Silver’s model shows, had only 4% more of white voters backed Romney, he would’ve won the election.

Last but not least, as one Latina has recently pointed out in the Mediaite, amnesty will utterly fail to win Republicans new Hispanic votes, because Hispanics don’t care about immigration. Their top issues are jobs, the economy, education, and the budget deficit – NOT immigration. And many of them probably don’t want a new influx of cheap illegal alien workers competing with legal Hispanic immigrants for jobs.

A legal Hispanic kitchen maid earning 10 dollars/hour will probably not appreciate new illegal alien workers competing with her for a 5 dollar/hour salary.

Because that is why Republicans are really pushing for amnesty: their K-Street bundlers want to bring in even more, even cheaper, foreign workers to displace American and legal immigrant workers.

Employers love to hire illegal immigrants, as they can pay these people less and also evade all federal and state employment laws.

It’s the business lobby and the two major parties against the American people. Like Timothy Carney points out, it’s K Street against Main Street.

To sum up, Republicans lost last year due to a number of factors, but Hispanic voters were not one of them. They were still only 8% of the electorate. Trying to please Hispanic voters with amnesty will utterly fail; on the contrary, it will create, on net, millions of new Democratic voters who will send the GOP to the graveyard.

If amnesty becomes law, these illegal immigrants will become US citizens and will give the Dems a permanent, unbeatable majority. The entire country will have the electorate of California – and there will be no turning back. And to see how well that works out, just look at California.

The Failure of Mass Immigration

Mexican flag displayed at immigration protest

Mexican flag displayed at immigration protest

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Among the many divisive issues consuming policymakers this summer, immigration is now center stage. This past week the Senate passed a bill proposing a “pathway to citizenship” for some 11 to 15 million illegal immigrants living in the US. Arguments for and against legalization are mainly centered on economics. Is legalization a net gain or a net drain on the US economy? Will legalization bring in more tax revenue or further strain welfare benefits? Will bringing people “out of the shadows” help or hurt America’s jobs crisis?

Unfortunately, there are other and perhaps more important issues to consider. Chief among them is the notion of culture. While the multiculturalists pretend that culture is either irrelevant—a fictitious social construct—or the legacy of nativist racism, the reality is that culture matters.

Europe provides an excellent example. Over the last few decades Europe has embraced America’s immigration model. European nations opened their borders to millions of immigrants from all over the world, especially the Middle East. The results are consistent across the European continent: sharp social and cultural division between indigenous and immigrant populations.

These divisions are becoming increasingly ferocious and hard to conceal, even by the main stream media that dominates Europe. This summer alone Sweden, Great Britain, and France have experienced potentially explosive social situations. In May, Muslim immigrants ransacked cars, office buildings, and community centers for almost a week, transforming the normally majestic city of Stockholm into an urban inferno.

Different story lines played out in London and Paris but with similar results. In England two Muslim youths attacked and murdered a British soldier in broad day light, violently mauling him to death on video. Within hours, members of the anti-immigrant group the English Defense League (EDL) stormed the streets of London in angry protest. A week later a French soldier was attacked and severely wounded in Paris. In both situations, the respective governments quickly distanced the attackers from their broader immigrant communities and media outlets carefully filtered the storylines to calm public emotions.

Of course these problems are not new. Major riots in immigrant areas erupted in London in 2011 and Paris back in 2005. Tension exists wherever mass immigration has occurred in Europe: Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, even in Greece. Unfortunately, the same tired arguments and familiar culprits such as economic disenfranchisement, Islamophobia or nativist racism are blamed for the melee. However, the obfuscation is gradually giving way to the underlying cultural divisions responsible for what is taking place.

It is not just about Islam versus secularism. It is about differences of language, values, and even legal regimes (Sharia versus sovereign law). In short, integration or assimilation is virtually non-existent in Europe. On the contrary, mass immigration has brought balkanization, segregation, and social disharmony.

How do these issues relate to the United States, the supposed paragon of assimilation where, historically, mass immigration has been a boon to prosperity? The truth is the European experience tracks very closely with America’s worsening immigration problem. Here too, large immigrant communities separate from main stream America have taken root.

These are primarily though not exclusively Hispanic. In these communities, crime is more frequent, illegitimate birth-rates are higher, poverty is more wide-spread, and the spoken language is Spanish rather than English. These should be troubling signs for Washington policymakers. But they are seldom mentioned as serious concerns.

The lesson of mass immigration in Europe, and indeed, throughout the world, is that it erodes national cohesion and inevitably produces conflict. Another lesson is that numbers matter. Immigration on a small scale can be beneficial, especially when immigrants speak the national language, possess marketable skills and education. However, immigration en masse from peoples of foreign cultures bereft of useful skills or even a basic education is simply a failed policy.

That’s right, culture is inescapably important. If huge numbers of a distinct group migrate into another country, they tend to insulate themselves from the broader national culture. In Europe’s case, millions of Muslims retain and reject Western culture (secularism and liberalism) because they can; their large numbers enable and encourage them to establish their own communities. In America’s case, millions—over 40 million since the 1970s—mostly from Latin America have done the same.

In sum, the sure fire way to destroy America’s already wavering social cohesion would be to grant amnesty to 15 million illegal immigrants. Legalization would undoubtedly flood our borders with millions more immigrants, as the 1986 amnesty certainly did. It would also further inflame racial-cultural tensions in the United States, eventually pushing America’s disunion to the breaking point.

Cameron Macgregor is a former naval officer. He is currently a graduate student at George Mason University.

S. 744: Here Comes Trouble



immigration
The immigration “Gang of Eight” has been instrumental in bringing Comprehensive Immigration Reform (S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act) to Congress in 2013.

Congress asked the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to examine S. 744. The CBO did, looking only at the effects of the first ten years of the bill. Knowing that, the “Gang of Eight” wrote the bill so that long-term effects don’t kick in until after the tenth year. What does all of this mean? TROUBLE!

One of the major provisions of S. 744 is the “path to citizenship.” A new “registered provisional immigrant” (RPI) status for eligible undocumented immigrants (illegal aliens) would be created. Those in RPI status also qualify for a Social Security number and state driver’s license. All registered immigrants (and spouses and children) could, after 10 years, seek to become lawful permanent residents (LPRs). Three years later, they would be eligible to apply to become US citizens. The only requirement is that aliens be in the US as of December 31, 2011.

The Heritage Foundation also examined S. 744, and their conclusions are, at best, disturbing. They examined the bill from three perspectives: reducing flow, effects on workers, and cost.

  • Reducing flow (of illegal aliens): S. 744 would, according to the CBO, reduce the future inflow of illegal immigrants into the US over the next two decades by only 25 percent, despite promises of a secure border. CBO estimates that by 2033, 7.5 million new illegal immigrants will have entered the US and taken up residence. Gosh, I may be naïve, but I’ll bet that they ALL will say they were here before December 31, 2011.
  • Effects on Workers: The CBO estimates that per capita Gross National Product (GNP) would lower by .7 percent by 2023, and per capita GNP will be lower until 2031. Further, the CBO estimates the bill would drive down their average wages for legal American workers. Wages will be depressed until 2024. It is important to measure post-tax wages as well as per capita GNP.
  • Cost: Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation estimates that the new 7.5 million illegal immigrants could cost the taxpayers (federal, state, and local) an additional $400 billion over 20 years. Rector comments:

    “S.744 provides only a temporary delay in eligibility to welfare and entitlements. Over time, S.744 makes all 18.5 million [11 million here now plus 7.5 million new ones] eligible for nearly every government program, including: Obamacare, 80 different welfare programs, Social Security and Medicare. When this occurs, spending will explode, but nearly all the real costs do not appear in the CBO score.”

    “… the most significant costs during the lifetime of would-be legalized immigrants are during their retirement years after they qualify for Medicare and Social Security. For the vast majority of unlawful immigrants, that is well past the 10-year budget window.”

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, said:

“The bill’s drafters relied on the same scoring gimmicks used by the Obamacare drafters to conceal its true cost from taxpayers and to manipulate the CBO score. There is a reason why eligibility for the most expensive federal benefits was largely delayed outside the 10-year scoring window: to mislead the public.”  [emphasis mine]

And, the “11 million” illegal aliens already here have established a track record. For example:

  • Fifty percent of all immigrant households with children used at least one welfare program, compared to 32 percent for non-immigrants.
  • Fifty seven percent of households headed by an immigrant with children used at least one welfare program, compared to 39 percent for non-immigrant households with children.
  • Immigrant households’ use of welfare tends to be much higher than non-immigrants for food assistance programs and Medicaid. A large share of the welfare used by immigrant households with children is received on behalf of their US-born children.
  • Welfare use tends to be high for both new and established immigrants. Sixty percent of immigrant headed households with children who arrived since 200 used at least one welfare program.

Does anyone believe that the new illegal immigrants will be any different? If so, I own a bridge in which you may be interested.

BTW, the term “Gang of Eight” is applied to any bi-partisan group of eight Senators. There is presently a “Gang of Eight” for intelligence. Don’t be confused by that term.

But that’s just my opinion
Please visit RWNO, my personal, very conservative web site!

NBA Finals Brings Out The Racists!

Last night was Game 3 of the NBA Finals- the San Antonio Spurs took on the Miami Heat in the Alamo City! In San Antonio, basketball is almost a religion! We bleed black and silver! Our home was no different than probably 98% of the San Antonio population last night. We were in front of the TV, getting ready to cheer on the Spurs!

I was finishing up in the kitchen, preparing snacks for the kids, when everyone started yelling for me to come in the living room. To my great surprise, I saw Sebastien De La Cruz, who is a personal friend of our family, standing in the middle of the court, belting out The National Anthem! We were so proud of him! I sent a text to his Mom to tell her what a great job he did, and settled in to enjoy the butt-whoopin’ that our boys gave to Miami!

spurs_stomp_the_heat

If you missed Sebastien’s performance, watch this! He is a very talented young man!

Sebastien was, in fact, my oldest daughter’s “first boyfriend” when they were in the 3rd grade. Over the last few years we have become friends with their family, and last year, when Sebastien made it to the Finals on American’s Got Talent 2012, we cheered him on every step of the way!

So it was with great sadness that I woke up this morning to find out that while we were so proud of Sebastien and his performance last night, he had unwittingly become the target of racism.

Here is a sampling of Twitter comments during last night’s performance. Warning! Foul language, and pure hate follows:

sebastien_de_la_cruz_racism

Now, this may seem like a simple case of racism to you, but I have a very different theory. Nevermind the fact that Sebastien is a LEGAL, AMERICAN CITIZEN, BORN AND RAISED in America! Nevermind that his PARENTS were born and raised here, and quite possibly, his grandparents as well! The real issue here is immigration, and how the politicians see it as nothing but a political game!

I believe that our country is reaching the boiling point on many issues, and immigration is one of the hotbed issues that is part of the boiling cauldron. Sadly, the president is doing nothing but adding fuel to the already blazing hot fire! People are fed up with the politicians going around the law to serve their own “needs”, and in the process, a child is paying the price for the dissension they have caused!

Barack Obama had the potential to be one of the greatest presidents in American History. He could have been the person to unite this nation like never before. He is a black man, with a white mother.

Step outside of the white and black issue, and you have the Hispanic issue. Barack Obama and the Democrat party’s grandstanding on immigration reform has done nothing but further divide this great nation. Rather than obeying the law, the Democrat Party, along with some from the Republican side of the aisle, are doing everything they can to go around the law of the land. Rather than addressing the issue in a legal manner, they are

A “long-time Democratic Party political operative with direct experience at the highest levels of government” says that the harsh reality is that the “Democrats could give a sh*t about Mexicans. This whole thing, this whole issue has always been about votes first. Period. Always. And this time around it’s all about 2014.”

Just yesterday, Democrat Senator Tim Kaine argued for illegal immigration on the Senate Floor- IN SPANISH! To top that off, Chuck Schumer said, ‘illegal immigration will be a thing of the past‘! So what they are telling every citizen in America is that they- the politicians, and those who come here illegally, do not have to obey they law! Forget the fact that millions of people every year come here legally!

The more these politicians push to go around the law, the more anger they stir up among the American public! Yes, you will always have racists! My husband and I are both very white people with five very dark “Mexican” children! We have been the brunt of racist comments before- including from my own extended family!

So here we are- the land of opportunity, land of the free, home of the brave, yet we are a nation very much divided against herself! On one side we have a nation full of politicians (on BOTH sides of the aisle!) using an entire race for their own political gain, and many of the pawns in their sick, political game go right along with it, being played for a fool! On the other side we have people who are tired of the political games at the expense of our nation and those who want to play by the rules. In the middle, you have the racist idiots that can’t see how truly disgusting they really are!

We truly have reached a sad place in America!

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.” Abraham Lincoln

__________

Source: Hispanic News Network

God Help Me; I Agree With Bob Beckel

Varin Tsai (CC)

Varin Tsai (CC)


Something happened that made me stop and question myself as a Republican, am I one, or have I drifted over to the dreaded Liberal side of the aisle? After all, I have considered myself a Republican since I was sixteen years old.  That question rang in my head and I could not get it out, after all, me becoming a Liberal is like Bill Ayers joining the NRA, or Sandra Fluke buying her own birth control pills, it just would not happen. So the only conclusion that I can come to, is that Mr. Beckel is finally coming to his senses and he is starting to lean right on his thinking.

The two things that started me thinking, were when Mr. Beckel said that we should stop letting Muslims into this country with student visas and also admitted that Muslims are indeed the enemy, something that Obama still refuses to admit, I agree with him on both counts. Our enemy are Muslims, so why wouldn’t we scrutinize them more than anyone else? Now if anyone else on Fox had said the same things that Mr. Beckel said, they would have been branded a racist on every Liberal outlet, but because he belongs to their club, he gets a pass, funny how that works.

“I think we really have to consider, that given the fact so many people hate us, we’re going to have to cut off Muslim students from coming to this country for some period of time, so that we can at least absorb what we got, look at what we’ve got and decide whether some of the people here should be sent back home or sent to prison,” As Mr. Beckel spoke those words while I was watching one of my favorite shows The Five, I immediately got up and grabbed a Q-Tip to clean out my ears, because I thought there might be something wrong with my hearing.

Mr. Beckel also said, “If the FBI could not deal with this fellow in Boston with all they had on him, it seems to me that we ought to give time for them to clear up their problems with the current Muslim population here and then let students come back in.”

Mr. Beckel is correct. There are now 75,000 foreign students from Muslim countries attending college in the U.S. and 20,000 more on the way in the fall. According to unofficial inquiries made to the Department of Homeland Security, agencies involved in screening students after they receive visas are said to be backlogged on making contact with the new U.S. arrivals. The big problem here is that some of these foreign students never enroll in a U.S. college once they get here. When their visa runs out, they stay here illegally without identification or residence notification.

There was also another time I found myself agreeing with Mr. Beckel, it was during the Amazing Race controversy. On the show, the twisted metal of the downed plane is treated as any other prop, with a bright “Amazing Race” “Double-U-Turn” signed planted in front of it, signifying to contestants the next phase of their scavenger hunt.
“There are 850,00 American Vietnam veterans alive today, and you owe them an amazing, big apology,” Beckel said, noting he once worked for CBS, and had even been against the war for “policy” reasons.

That’s three times I found myself agreeing with a Liberal, that’s more than I agreed with a Liberal in my sixty years on this earth, so I naturally had to question my Republican thinking. Then it dawned on me, I wasn’t the one who was changing, it was Mr. Beckel who was coming over to my side. I guess after all those years working on Fox, his head is finally getting out of the clouds and he is finally coming down to reality. Good for you Mr. Beckel, every Liberal has to wake up and smell the coffee and realize that Liberal policies just don’t work. Keep up the good work Mr. Gutfeld, Mr. Bolling, Miss Perino, Miss Tantaros, Miss GuilFoyle, you will have him voting Republican in 2016.

My latest book “What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids.”    Available Here.

Beckel

This is one man’s opinion.

Billion Dollar Babies and American Jihad – Intellectual Froglegs

And here is the latest installment of Intellectual Froglegs:

Joe Dan Gorman nails it yet again, with his in-depth analysis of leftist propaganda on Jihadists, phobias, abortion, Planned Parenthood, and Janet Napolitano. In case you’re wondering, Napolitano has no clue how to do her job, except the part where she spews disjointed jargon in Congressional hearings. And the new inconvenient truth – successful terrorist attacks in four years under Obama is FIVE, and in seven years after 9/11 under Bush is ZERO.

Here We Go Again: A Discussion with Numbers USA’s Rosemary Jenks

Screen Shot 2013-01-30 at 10.12.17 AMWith the “Gang of Eight” announcing their immigration reform package yesterday, I’m sure many American found the deal sensible, rational, and fair.  It’s a bipartisan deal, which pleases the independent segments of the electorate, and has Sen. Marco Rubio endorsing it wholeheartedly.  Immigration keeps the United States economically vibrant, unlike Europe, which has become older, grayer, and more Islamized.  We should welcome immigrants, but not at the cost of undermining our economic interests – which is what NumbersUSA, an organization dedicated to common sense immigration reform, is trying to tell members of Congress.  I was able to speak with Rosemary Jenks, NumbersUSA’s Director of Government Relations, about the new proposal last night.

On NumbersUSA’s website, they lay out the details of the package:

 1. Create a tough but fair path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States that is contingent upon securing our borders and tracking whether legal immigrants have left the country when required;

2. Reform our legal immigration system to better recognize the importance of characteristics that will help build the American economy and strengthen American families;

3. Create an effective employment verification system that will prevent identity theft and end the hiring of future unauthorized workers; and,

4. Establish an improved process for admitting future workers to serve our nation’s workforce needs, while simultaneously protecting all workers.

It doesn’t sound like snake oil, but anything from government that sounds too good to be true – tends to be that way.  Case in point, the passing of Obamacare.  However, to low-information voters, or those who aren’t privy to immigration data, it represents, as Jenks said:

…part of the problem with the immigration debate because when you see an outline of a proposal, and you don’t know a whole lot about the issue, it tends to look pretty reasonable.  It’s only when you get into the details that things start to fall apart. So, you know for example – the bottom line is that this proposal is virtually identical to the proposal from the Gang of Eight in 2007. And I actually like Sen. Sessions’s title for them better, which is “masters of the universe.”  They basically have been meeting behind closed doors.  They don’t allow anyone else into the meetings – anyone who might disagree with them – and then they come out with this grand announcement, and assume that everyone will fall in line and vote for it. But the problem is that this proposal is not well thought out in terms of what’s best for America. And part of the reason for that is that involved in their little secret meetings, and closed-door negotiations, are groups like the AFL-CIO, the Chamber of Commerce, and organized religion, the ethnic advocacy groups – special interest groups have all had their say, but the one group that’s always left out of these negotiations is the America people. So, here we go again – starting this whole process, and we’re looking at essentially the same proposals with the same meaningless so-called triggers that aren’t actually triggers – and massive amnesty.

Closed-door negotiations? It’s a bit ironic that comprehensive immigration reform that intends to keep us an open, immigrant friendly nation needs to be fleshed out in secret meetings.  However, what shocked me was the involvement of the AFL-CIO.  The Democratic wing that’s beholden to union interests have usually opposed illegal immigration since they allow, for example, contractors to underbid union contracts.  Why are they for amnesty? Jenks explains that:

basically, the unions have an interest in amnesty because immigrants, legal or illegal, is the only growing population of union-dues paying members. If they want to continue their dues, the need to legalize the illegal population to keep them here, keep them unionized, and keep them paying dues.  So in exchange for that amnesty, they’ve made a deal with the Chamber of Commerce, in which the unions give up on guest workers – to get amnesty – and the Chamber gives them amnesty to get guest workers.  So, everybody wins, except the American worker.

However, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) did say, at the close of the press conference yesterday, that the proposal will tie  immigration the influx of legal immigration to the nation’s unemployment rate.  However, Jenks wasn’t convinced that this item in the package will be taken seriously.

 Well, the fact that they’re talking about giving expedited amnesty to AG workers [agricultural workers] and to dreamers – and then some kind of extended amnesty to all of the rest of the eleven million illegal aliens in the country, despite the fact that we have 7.9% unemployment tells me whatever they have in mind for the future is certainly not going to happen because they’ve already vastly exceeded the ability of our economy to employ these people. We’ve already got twenty million Americans who can’t find full-time jobs.  So, we’re going to add eleven million more?

The growth industries in the U.S. economy are mostly highly skilled, high-tech occupations.  So, why would we then be giving a massive amnesty –expedited amnesty – to AG workers, and creating a new guest worker program for low-skilled labor?  It doesn’t make sense.  We should be reforming our legal immigration system to meet the needs of the 21st century. Instead of doing that, they’re basically just packing on a whole bunch of new programs that will continue to flood the labor market, primarily the low-skill labor market, and increase the competition for our own most vulnerable workers. And who’s going to pay for it?  The taxpayers.

Yet, Brad Plumer posted on The Washington Post’s WonkBlog yesterday – and said that illegal immigration has “slowed since 2007.”  So, what’s the big deal?  Isn’t that a positive indicator?

there has been – it appears – through some Census data – that the number of new illegal aliens coming into the United States slowed somewhat during the recession, but there’s also evidence that the number has started to pick up again.  It’s entirely possible that’s because of all this talk of amnesty – but the bottom line is illegal immigration is going to be affected by some small degree by economic changes in the United States.  But the fact is that the illegal population has stayed at about an estimated eleven million. It hasn’t actually dropped.  We still have a huge problem, and you can’t stop illegal immigration by redefining it as legal.   That’s not a long-term solution.

What alternative policy does NumbersUSA endorse to solve this crisis?  Jenks said that since its inception, NumbersUSA has supported the proposals laid out from the 1995 U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, which was chaired by former Texas Congresswoman Barbara Jordan.  Jordan, a Democrat, and her commission had these key points in their report.

  • a scale back of family chain-migration by implementing a prioritization of family relationships to determine who will be admitted through family-based immigration. Spouses and minor children of US citizens would continue to be admitted as first priority;
  • elimination of other family-based admission categories, including:
    • Adult, unmarried sons and daughters of U.S. citizens;
    • Adult, married sons and daughters of U.S. citizens;
    • Adult, unmarried sons and daughters of legal permanent residents; and
    • Siblings of U.S. citizens.
  • a focus on the admission of highly-skilled individuals to support the national interest by bringing to the U.S. individuals whose skills would benefit our society. Recommended the elimination of the admission of unskilled workers and elimination of the diversity visa lottery;
  • immigration admissions level of 550,000 per year, to be divided as follows:
    • Nuclear family immigration 400,000;
    • Skill-based immigration 100,000;
    • Refugee resettlement 50,000.
  • Stressed deportation is crucial. Credibility in immigration policy can be summed up in one sentence: those who should get in; those who should be kept out, are kept out; and those who should not be here will be required to leave.

Without a doubt, amnesty will be unpalatable to Republicans in the House.  As a naturalized citizen, who immigrated via adoption from South Korea, I want America to remain an open nation.  However, there are rules.  It’s unfair to the legal immigrants to be cast aside because millions of illegals broke the law.  They’ve waited patiently, and now they’re about to be cut in line.  There’s something unethical about it, but we shall see how conservatives react to this new amnesty push – even with the stringent standards attached to the pathway to citizenship.

Originally Posted on PJ Tatler.

Managing Illegal Immigration: One Option

Everyone agrees there is a need for the United States government to manage immigration. Our southern border is nearly 2,000 miles long; its sheer length invites many to cross looking for a better life. Those who make it illegally are often willing to work for lower wages than residents.

There are many in the US who would like us to simply adopt those here illegally offering them citizenship. Others say offer a migrant worker program for those who wish to remain residents of their homeland and find a way to put the others in the country onto a citizenship track. Still others want to send those here illegally back. After all, just by skipping the immigration lines that others are in they are cheating the system.

The United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia have a problem with illegal immigrant workers and they have high unemployment, especially with young, unskilled men. Like the United States companies have hired undocumented workers at low wages with hope that they can avoid a government inspection. Unlike the United States, the governments of the UAE and Saudis have a plan and they’re not messing around.

This week the UAE issued a two-month amnesty to illegal residents who leave the country voluntarily. Those without passports can obtain out-passes and leave the country without penalties and those with passports and an airline ticket with a scheduled departure will have fines dismissed.

The UAE is increasingly tackling the issue of undocumented immigrants in the country and launched a ‘No to Violators’ campaign to educate UAE residents about illegal immigration. Anyone who hires or houses an illegal immigrant could face two months in prison or a $27,777 fine, and employing a foreigner who is not in their sponsorship part-time carries a $13,888 penalty.

The UAE’s Ministry of Interior spokesman warned that if a person is arrested after the expiration of the amnesty deadline, he will face tough legal action.

In a similar effort Saudi Arabia is stepping up efforts to lower unemployment among its citizens by fining private sector firms that employ more foreigners than Saudis.

The policy, which will be implemented at the start of the new Islamic year on Nov. 15, will require private companies with majorities of foreign workers to pay a fee for each excess foreigner. “The aim of this decision is to increase the competitive advantage of local workers by reducing the gap between the cost of expatriate labor and local labor,” it said.

Roughly nine in ten employees of private companies in Saudi Arabia are from other countries; firms prefer to hire foreigners, many from South or Southeast Asia, because they will work for lower wages than locals.

There is no doubt that these countries are smaller than the United States. They also may be more able or willing to enforce these laws than we would. Still, would these plans work in the United States? Which one would be most effective? Our current administration has no willingness to jail or deport those here illegally so would fining the companies, the employers, be an option to which they might be open?

How Immigration Ruined The Californian Republican Party

As we on the Right continue to ponder how we got handily beaten by a president with a dismal record, one of the areas that are salient in our rebuilding efforts rests with Hispanic voters.  About fifty thousand latinos turn eighteen every month, making this a key demographic Republicans must become competitive if we to survive as a political force.  Losing Latinos to Democratic candidates 73%-24% spells certain doom for the party.  This doesn’t mean we sell out on our principles.  Supporting full amnesty is a fool’s errand.  However, we may have to accept certain provisions on future immigration proposals. Provisions that create pathways to citizenship by creating benchmarks for immigrants who have served in the military, achieved a certain level of education, and don’t have criminal records seems like a good starting point concerning our outreach with Latinos.

Sen. Marco Rubio’s alternative Dream Act is another area where Republicans can debate whether it is sufficiently conservative, or in dire need of revision.  Regardless, if we continue with our perceived anti-immigrant ways, we are destined to become a nationalized version of the Republican Party of California, which was destroyed when Prop. 187 was passed in 1994.

The bill, detailed by Nancy H. Martis of the California Journal back in 1994, goes as follows:

Proposition 187 bans illegal immigrants from public social
services, non emergency health care and public education. Various state and
local agencies would be required to report anyone suspected of being an
illegal immigrant to the state attorney general and U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS). The attorney general would be required to
maintain records and transmit reports to INS. Manufacturing, distributing or
selling false citizenship or residence documents illegal under existing
state law would become a felony. The proposal’s fiscal impact would be
felt three ways, the legislative analyst estimates. State and local
governments would realize savings from denying certain benefits and services
to persons who cannot document their citizenship or legal immigration status,
and this could amount to $200 million annually, based on INS estimates.
However, the state, local governments and schools would incur significant
costs to verify citizenship or immigration status of students, parents,
persons seeking health care services or social services, and persons who are
arrested. This could total tens of millions of dollars annually, with
first year costs considerably higher, potentially in excess of $100 million.
Finally, there would be a potential loss of federal funds up to $15
billion annually in federal money for education health and welfare programs
due to conflicts with federal requirements.

It was introduced by Republican assemblyman Dick Mountjoy and endorsed by Republican Governor Pete Wilson – which made it a key issue during his ’94 re-election bid.  While the bill passed, it had an overwhelming negative effect on the electorate.  First, it was the death knell for Republicans concerning statewide elections.  We never became competitive again, until Governor Schwarzenegger won his gubernatorial/recall bid in 2003.  The bill was declared unconstitutional, and killed with legal action.  The election of 1988 is still the last contest where California went Republican.  An ignominious footnote since the GOP was able to carry the state in 1960, ’68, ’72, ’76, ’80, and ’84.

The effects of Prop. 187 are still felt today – with the complete collapse of the two-party system in the state.

As Michael R. Blood of AP reported on Nov. 10:

Democrats hold the governorship and every other statewide office. They gained even more ground in Tuesday’s elections, picking up at least three congressional seats while votes continue to be counted in two other tight races — in one upset, Democrat Raul Ruiz, a Harvard-educated physician who mobilized a district’s growing swath of Hispanic voters, pushed out longtime Republican Rep. Mary Bono Mack.

The party also secured a supermajority in one, and possibly both, chambers in the Legislature.

 […]
Republican voter registration has dipped so low — less than 30 percent — that the party’s future state candidates will be hobbled from the start.

Republicans searching for a new direction after Mitt Romney’s defeat will inevitably examine whyPresident Barack Obama rolled up more than 70 percent of the Hispanic and Asian vote, and 9 of 10 votes among blacks, essential ingredients in his victory. Women also supported Obama over Romney nationally and in California, where they broke for the president by 27 percentage points.

There is no better place to witness how demographic shifts have shaped elections than in California, the home turf of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan that just a generation ago was a reliably Republican state in presidential contests.

A surge in immigrants transformed the state, and its voting patterns. The number of Hispanics, blacks and Asians combined has outnumbered whites since 1998 in California, and by 2020 the Hispanic population alone is expected to top that of whites. With Latinos, for example, voter surveys show they’ve overwhelmingly favored Democratic presidential candidates for decades. Similar shifts are taking place across the nation.

Another sign of the times:

 Today, whites make up a little more than 40 percent of the population, while 2 in 10 residents are Asian and about 1 in 3 is Hispanic, according to the census.

[…]

Romney “implemented a winning election strategy for 1980,” University of Southern California professor Patrick James said in a statement issued by the school. “If you look at the demographics and voting proportions, the Reagan coalition would not win a majority today.”

Independents now outnumber Republicans in 13 congressional districts in California, a trend analysts predict will continue.

California counted more registered Republicans in 1988 than it does today, although the population has grown by about 10 million over that time. You’d have to go back to that year to find a Republican presidential candidate who carried the state, George H.W. Bush.

Surprisingly, Democrats continued to make gains in the state even at a time of double-digit unemployment, with polls showing that voters are unhappy with Sacramento and Washington. And it could get worse for the GOP. Republicans are trailing in two other House races in which the vote counting continues.

[…]

Still, Democrats believe they have the state’s demographics on their side with a message that appeals to a younger, more diverse population.

More than half the young voters in the state, ages 18 to 39, are Hispanic, according to the independent Field Poll. Thirty-five percent are Asian. If you look into a classroom in the Los Angeles area — tomorrow’s voters — 3 of 4 kids are Hispanic.

We shall see how California Democrats exert their new power.  If you’re a mentally competent person, I wouldn’t suggest taking a bet that the economic situation will improve.

While Heather MacDonald wrote in National Review that  while “a March 2011 poll by Moore Information found that Republican economic policies were a stronger turn-off for Hispanic voters in California than Republican positions on illegal immigration,” Califronia proves that such perceived anti-immingrant measures can lead to disastrous results.

Then again, she did touch upon our image problem with Latinos:

Twenty-nine percent of Hispanic voters were suspicious of the Republican party on class-warfare grounds — “it favors only the rich”; “Republicans are selfish and out for themselves”; “Republicans don’t represent the average person”– compared with 7 percent who objected to Republican immigration stances.

spoke last year with John Echeveste, founder of the oldest Latino marketing firm in southern California, about Hispanic politics. “What Republicans mean by ‘family values’ and what Hispanics mean are two completely different things,” he said. “We are a very compassionate people, we care about other people and understand that government has a role to play in helping people.”

And a strong reason for that support for big government is that so many Hispanics use government programs. U.S.-born Hispanic households in California use welfare programs at twice the rate of native-born non-Hispanic households. And that is because nearly one-quarter of all Hispanics are poor in California, compared to a little over one-tenth of non-Hispanics. Nearly seven in ten poor children in the state are Hispanic, and one in three Hispanic children is poor, compared to less than one in six non-Hispanic children. One can see that disparity in classrooms across the state, which are chock full of social workers and teachers’ aides trying to boost Hispanic educational performance.

Yes, we have work to do.  The fact that entitlement reform will be part of our outreach strategy makes me more optimistic we can win them over, or at least enough to win an election.  Republican immigration policy needs to be smart and comprehensive.  We can start by not passing anymore legislation that takes states off the table in national elections.

Originally posted on The Young Cons.

Boehner Caving?

Since the results of the 2012 election came in, Speaker of the House John Boehner has shown signs of abdicating his role as a Conservative American leader.

On taxes he has said “For purposes of forging a bipartisan agreement that begins to solve the problem, we’re willing to accept new revenue, under the right conditions.”

Where repealing Obamacare is concerned: “Well, I think the election changes that. It’s pretty clear that the president was reelected, Obamacare is the law of the land.”

What were Boehner’s remarks regarding amnesty for illegal aliens? “A comprehensive approach is long overdue, and I’m confident that the president, myself, others can find the common ground to take care of this issue once and for all.”

This is not the kind of leadership Conservative Americans deserve.

Boehner appears to be falling into the same trap Republicans have repeatedly fallen in to when dealing with “progressive” Democrats.  Time after time, Republicans have agreed to “compromise”; essentially capitulating to “progressive” Democratic demands in exchange for meaningless, empty promises.

Abandoning American principles by caving in to “progressive” demands has never led to success for Republicans. Republicans have tried the surrender approach before and it has never worked.  The only way Republicans ever make gains is by standing by the principles of liberty and freedom that made America great.

Passage of amnesty legislation will not help the GOP win Hispanic voters. Passing amnesty in 1986 did nothing to help Ronald Reagan and his fellow Republicans in the 1988 midterm elections. The Republicans still lost. Hispanic voters kept voting for Democrats, as they continue to do to this day.

The facts show, Republicans like Boehner who support amnesty are helping “progressive” Democrats import more Democrats.

Since becoming Speaker, Boehner has blocked voting on immigration enforcement in Congress.  This includes a bill that would have freed up seven million jobs currently held by illegal aliens.  Not only is Boehner apparently willing to help “progressives” import more Democrats he also holds the morally reprehensible position of allowing unemployed American workers to suffer.

Less than a week after losing a fairly close election it is understandable that the losing side feels under siege.  Nevertheless, feeling under siege does not justify surrender.

The only real solution for Republicans is to employ the considerable talents of young Hispanic leaders within the Republican Party to reach out to Americans of Hispanic descent and explain to them why America’s founding principles are more in line with their values and beliefs than are “progressive” ideas.

If Republicans wish to remain a vibrant Party that seriously contends in future elections, this is the path.  The sooner Republicans begin the process the better.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/boehner-caving/

Immigrants, Then And Now, What A Difference

I think many immigrants come here for a better life; many come just to freeload off the American taxpayer. However, I think even the ones that come for a better life expect something free, because let’s face it, the word is out, go to America and you will be given what you need to live, not go to America and you will be given the opportunity to live. A big difference from the time my grandfather came to this country in the 1900’s, those immigrants just came for freedom and a better life, not a handout.

Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out to people why today’s American is not willing to accept this new kind of immigrant any longer. Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to the United States , people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in New York and be documented.

Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country in good and bad times. They made learning English a primary rule in their new American households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home.

They had waved goodbye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children assimilate into
one culture. Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare, no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the skills and craftsmanship they had brought with them to trade for a future of prosperity.

 

Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out. My father fought along side men whose parents had come straight over from Germany , Italy , France and Japan … None of these 1st generation Americans ever gave any thought about what country their parents had come from. They were Americans fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan. They were defending the United States of America as one people.

When we liberated France, no one in those villages were looking for the French American, the German American or the Irish American. The people of France saw only AMERICANS. And we carried one flag that represented one country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up another country’s flag and waving it to represent who they were.
It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be an American. They stirred the melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl.

And here we are with a new kind of immigrant who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they want to achieve it by playing with a different set of rules, one that includes the entitlement card and a guarantee of being faithful to their mother country. I’M SORRY! That’s not what being an American is all about. I believe that the immigrants who landed on Ellis Island in the early 1900’s deserve better than that for all the toil, hard work and sacrifice
in raising future generations to create a land that has become a beacon for those legally searching for a better life. I think they would be appalled that they are being used as an example by those waving foreign country flags.

 I wouldn’t start talking about dismantling the United States just yet.

GOD BLESS AMERICA !!

 This is one man’s opinion.

« Older Entries