<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; Immigration</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/immigration/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 06:51:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Steve Moore &amp; Michael Barone at Restoration Weekend</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/steve-moore-michael-barone-at-restoration-weekend/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=steve-moore-michael-barone-at-restoration-weekend</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/steve-moore-michael-barone-at-restoration-weekend/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2014 05:50:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electorate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Barone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Midterm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poll]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stephen Moore]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=248293</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two top conservative minds give their take on America's political and economic landscapes. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong style="color: #232323;">Below are the video and transcript to the panel discussion “Politics and the Economy,” which took place at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 20th Anniversary Restoration Weekend. The event was held Nov. 13th-16th at the Breakers Resort in Palm Beach, Florida. </strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/115323365" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>When I was coming into this weekend I wasn&#8217;t even fully ready because I was like, wow, what an election we just had. Wow.  Then day three of Restoration Weekend and I&#8217;m like, wow, there is so much more to be done, and it&#8217;s so funny, this is the third year that I&#8217;ve been part of Restoration Weekend thanks to David and Michael Finch, and for years and years many of my friends who are here from Orange County, Marilyn, Cathy Grimmer, Paul and Sally Bender had said, &#8220;You&#8217;ve got to go to Restoration Weekend, no matter what the outcome of the election.  We go there and we leave feeling revived and ready to fight more.&#8221;  After this particular weekend I was thinking to myself, a weekend might not be long enough.  We should maybe start, David, Restoration Week. I don&#8217;t know.  Michael&#8217;s going to kill me for saying that.</p>
<p>We have a really great panel today.  We have two of the foremost minds of the conservative movement.  Their brains are so big that I&#8217;m intimidated to be on stage with them.  I&#8217;m going to introduce them both from left to right and they don&#8217;t need introductions, you all know them so I&#8217;ll make this quick.  Michael Barone, obviously a senior political analyst for the <i>Examiner</i>, Fox News contributor and the author of the <i>Almanac of American Politics</i>.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>Co-author.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>Co-author, foremost author, right?  Then second, Stephen Moore, long-time writer and editorial writer and columnist with <i>The Wall Street Journal</i>.  Now he&#8217;s the Chief Economist of the Heritage Foundation and I think his most impressive credential, because I&#8217;m biased, is that he&#8217;s also a columnist for the <i>Orange County Register</i> so, just saying.  We&#8217;re going to start our panel off with opening remarks.  We&#8217;ll start with Steve and then we&#8217;ll move to Michael with kind of their thoughts on what&#8217;s next on politics and the economy.  Then we&#8217;ll ask a couple of questions and then open it up for you all to get your questions answered as well.  Steven, let&#8217;s start with you.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Okay, so let me give you my quick &#8212; Michael is obviously the Dean of Politics.  I&#8217;m going to give you just a quick seven or eight minute kind of sketch on what&#8217;s going on with the economy.  Some of you have seen these slides before, and I&#8217;m sorry if I&#8217;m a little bit repetitive of what I said last year, but I think this is such an important message.  Let me just start by saying this, I&#8217;m incredibly bullish on the U.S. economy.  I think we&#8217;re going to see an incredible, especially after this election, I think we&#8217;re going to see a big burst out of growth.  We&#8217;ve been stuck in this 2 percent rut on growth now for six years.  This has been an incredibly weak recovery but because of a lot of factors I talk about, I just think we&#8217;re really prepped for a big recovery.  As I said last year, but I&#8217;ll repeat this, the one industry that has really almost carried the rest of the economy on its back for the last six years has been this oil and gas boom.  It&#8217;s not a surprise to anybody in this room by now.  This is an incredible expansion we are living through.  Politics is so rich with irony.  The irony of Barack Obama&#8217;s Presidency is that he will have presided over the biggest oil and gas boom in American history and this is a president who hates the oil and gas industry.  If you look at this chart you can see what&#8217;s going on here.  The red line is all employment in every industry outside of oil and gas over the last six years, and you can see the big decline obviously in employment that happened during the great recession of 2008 and 2009 and you can see what a really flimsy recovery this has been, and it has taken us so long to get back to zero.  By the way, this goes through the end of 2013.  If it went through today, we&#8217;re right back about zero; so that is to say it took us six years but we finally recovery of every job that was lost during the recession.  That&#8217;s a pretty, pretty long and slow recovery process.</p>
<p>Now look at the blue line. That&#8217;s the oil and gas industry, and it&#8217;s interesting, I was giving a talk this summer to the Oklahoma and Texas Oil and Gas Drillers Association.  By the way, I think that may even be more conservative than this group here and so I started off my speech by saying, &#8220;Congratulations, you&#8217;re the people who reelected Barack Obama.&#8221;  They weren&#8217;t real happy but without this boom, there is no way that Barack Obama would have ever been reelected because the economy would have still been in a recession in 2012.  Now what&#8217;s interesting about this boom are a couple of things.  It is not &#8212; as you know, Michael, my mentor was the Great Julian Simon and Julian Simon taught us that natural resources don&#8217;t come from the ground or from the earth. they come from the human mind.  This boom in oil and gas is such a perfect example of what Julian talked about; that the ultimate resource is the human mind because this massive amount of energy we have in this country.  It&#8217;s not as if all of a sudden overnight God endowed America with all this oil and gas. It has been there for hundreds of thousands of years.  This is a testament.  This breakthrough is a testament to incredible technological prowess.  Wild cat or entrepreneurs, most of this energy was not found by Chevron and Exxon and so on, but smaller oil drillers just went out there and found this stuff, and it&#8217;s also a result of incredible technology.  We&#8217;re just seeing technologies that have changed this industry in such a massive, massive way.</p>
<p>Now what&#8217;s interesting about this story are a couple of things.  One is that if we get this right, and I said this last year &#8212; actually I misspoke last year.  Last year I said if we get this right within five years, the United States of America is going to be energy independent.  That is to say we are going to be selling more of this stuff than we buy and that&#8217;s true, I&#8217;m going to stick with that.  It&#8217;s quite plausible that by the Year 2020 if not before, the United States will be a net exporter of oil and gas, and as you know, that is a complete game changer with respect to our economy, and it&#8217;s a game changer, by the way, with respect to our National Security.  If we can actually sell this stuff rather than buy it; you know that you&#8217;ve been reading about this, ISIS gets about $5 million a day, $5 million a day from petro dollars.  We are funding the people that are trying to kill us so if we don&#8217;t have to buy this stuff, it changes the whole geopolitical situation, but I&#8217;ve changed my tune on this.  I would simply say this.  I kind of underestimated how big this is.  Before I said five years from now we&#8217;re going to be energy independent.  Five years from now we&#8217;re going to be energy independent.</p>
<p>My new line on this is five years from now the United States of America; this great, great, great country of ours is going to be the energy dominant country in the world, the energy dominant country in the world.  The thing that&#8217;s amazing about this, if you look at that incredible boom &#8212; just think about this ladies and gentlemen, think about how big this would be and could be if you actually had a president who liked this industry.  This has happened at a time when Barack Obama is doing everything possible behind the scenes to completely decapitate this industry.  For example, the pipeline issue is a big one and, by the  way, we don&#8217;t just need the Keystone Pipeline, obviously we do; we need pipelines all over this country to get the oil and gas that we have to every area of the country and around the world where we need it.  So that&#8217;s number one, Obama is not allowing virtually any new pipelines to be built.</p>
<p>Second of all as you know, if you look at this oil and gas boom on that chart, almost all of that, 98 percent of that boom is happening on private land.  Almost none of it is happening on federal.  In fact, I saw a statistic the other day that we&#8217;re actually drilling less today on public land than we were six or seven years ago.  If we were to open up federal lands &#8212; and I&#8217;m not talking about drilling on Yosemite or Yellowstone or the precious national parks that are environmentally sensitive; I&#8217;m just talking about drilling on forest land and so on that&#8217;s basically vacant.  If we were able to do that we could literally raise trillions of dollars of revenue of the next ten years to repay our national debt or to do other things to raise revenues.  We could practically eliminate the corporate income tax and replace that with money that we could get from drilling on federal land.</p>
<p>So that&#8217;s the second one, and the third one that&#8217;s so important and that we should all be paying attention to is these new EPA Regulations that President Obama is talking about, and this insane deal that President Obama supposedly signed with the Chinese.  Did you all follow this that the Chinese are now going to agree to reduce their carbon emissions by 25 percent by the year 2030?  That is the biggest bald-faced lie I have ever heard.  The Chinese are not going to reduce their carbon emissions.  They are laughing at us today in Beijing.  The Chinese are building a new coal burning fire plant every month in China so they are using fossil fuels. They&#8217;re going to burn this and they said to Obama, &#8220;Yeah, you go back to the United States and you cut your carbon emissions by 25 percent and we&#8217;ll do the same,&#8221; wink, wink, wink.  That isn&#8217;t going to happen.  This is just unilateral economic disarmament by the United States, and let me make another point about this because I think it is such an important issue.  I think a lot of you probably know this but can anybody in this room tell me what country of all the industrialized nations in the world, which country has reduced its carbon emissions the most over the last six years.  We have.  How many of you know that?  The United States. If you read the school books or read the newspapers you would know that.  We have reduced our carbon emissions more than any other country.  Wait a minute, how could that possibly have happened?  How could that possibly be true?  We didn&#8217;t do cap and trade.  We didn&#8217;t do, I don&#8217;t think we ever signed the Kyoto Treaty.  I don&#8217;t think we ratified it.  We didn&#8217;t have a carbon tax, all these things that all these sanctimonious Europeans said that they did.  We&#8217;ve cut our carbon emissions more than they have and I think you all know the reason why &#8212; because we&#8217;re converting electricity to natural gas.  Natural gas has become the number one source of electricity in the United States; it just surpassed coal.  Natural gas is a wonder fuel.  It is like this amazing wonder fuel.  Think about this; 1) It is abundant, we have hundreds of years&#8217; worth of natural gas in this country; 2) It is made in the USA; 3) It&#8217;s incredibly cheap; and 4) It&#8217;s a clean burning fuel.  Now why in the world would anybody be against natural gas?</p>
<p>But you know what&#8217;s amazing, the environmentalists have turned against natural gas; they&#8217;re against it even though it reduces greenhouse gasses.  Stunning, isn&#8217;t it?  I&#8217;ll make one last point about this.  If you look at electricity production today in America, because you all know this – the master resource is energy.  You can&#8217;t produce anything without energy and everything that we have, a major component of that is cheap and affordable energy.  Well if you look at our electricity today, where do we get our electricity today?  I just told you the number one source of electricity today is natural gas.  The number two source of electricity is coal.  So they don&#8217;t want natural gas, right, because they don&#8217;t want fracking.  The second source of electricity in the United States is coal.  They don&#8217;t want coal; they&#8217;re shutting down coal mines all over the country.  The third source is nuclear power.  They hate nuclear power.  The fourth source is an incredibly good, very affordable source of renewable energy, which is what?  What&#8217;s the number one source of renewable energy in American today?  I heard somebody say it. Hydropower.  Actually hydropower is a very good source of energy.  They hate hydropower too.  Why do they hate hydropower?  Because then don&#8217;t want dams, it&#8217;s going to kill the fish.  So any form of electricity production that actually works they&#8217;re against.  This leads me to an important point that I want to make.</p>
<p>You know, David, at this conference we&#8217;ve been talking a lot about the sinister elements in America today, the communists and the Jihadist and the &#8220;so-called progressives.&#8221;  I want to make a point to you that I think is really important.  I would make the argument to you that the most dangerous movement in the world today is not all of these other groups, and I&#8217;m not saying they&#8217;re not dangerous.  The most dangerous movement in the world today is the Radical Green Movement.  These people are absolutely crazy.</p>
<p>So I&#8217;m going to just kind of move on and make a couple of other quick points.  This is the crux of my argument about the economy, and this drives liberals crazy, so I want just two or three minutes to walk you through this.  If you look at this chart, the way I put it is the last 50 years there have been two great economic crises in America.  The first of course was the late-1970s and early-1980s when the United States went through what I call a mini depression.  We all remember that period.  You all remember 20 percent mortgage interest rates and 14 percent inflation and the fact that in the late-70s and early-80s America was truly deindustrializing, and if actually you read about what liberals and even a lot of conservatives were saying at that time, you remember this, Michael: America is an empire in decline, the Japanese are going to take over and actually the Soviet Model works better than ours does and so on.  That was the kind of environment that Ronald Reagan took over in and of course, in 2008 Barack Obama took office during an incredible economic crisis.  There&#8217;s no question about it.  We had lost six million jobs, the real estate bubble had burst, and half of the banks in America had collapsed.  So when Barack Obama walked into the White House, he walked into office in an incredible crisis, as he says ever speech that he gives.</p>
<p>Now here is what makes this experiment so interesting.  These two presidents used diametrically opposite approaches to dealing with the crisis, right?  So you all know the Reagan formula. It was to cut tax rates; it was to get government spending under control.  He worked with Paul Volker to slay inflation by cutting the money supply, and in a sense what Ronald Reagan did was he empowered workers and entrepreneurs and businesses to rebuild the American economy, the supply side recovery.  Barack Obama came in and did exactly the opposite, right?  Barack Obama used every single page out of the Keynesian playbook and, by the way, I&#8217;m not going to blame this just on Obama.  I would say the last year and a half or two years of the Bush Administration were a disaster too. So what did we do in response to the 2008 crisis?  Well, we bailed out big banks, insurance companies and auto companies.  We passed an $850 billion dollar so-called spending stimulus bill.  We had ObamaCare.  We had tax increases on the rich.  We borrowed $7 trillion, in six years we have borrowed $7 trillion.  This is a Keynesian&#8217;s dream, right?  We threw everything in the Keynesian playbook at that recession.  If you look at this chart, what I think is really interesting and I don&#8217;t think liberals have a good response to this.  What this chart is showing you is that the U.S. economy has grown by 2 percent under Barack Obama under his Keynesian formulation.  In fact, I think I wrote a piece on this for you guys are OCR.  You can see, so the economy has grown by 11½ percent over that period.</p>
<p>Now that&#8217;s decent but then you look at what happened under President Reagan.  Under Ronald Reagan the economy didn&#8217;t grow at 11½ percent over the recovery period; it grew at nearly 25 percent.  Now that&#8217;s a big, big difference ladies and gentlemen, that&#8217;s a huge difference.  That means, and what the number there you&#8217;re looking at, what that means, and if I updated that to today &#8212; because I don&#8217;t have the last two quarters on here. The underlying point of this chart is if the U.S. economy had grown as rapidly under Barack Obama&#8217;s recovery as it did under Ronald Reagan&#8217;s, the GDP national output and national income of this country would be $2 trillion larger today, $2 trillion.  That&#8217;s a massive number. If we were to give that $2 trillion to every single family &#8212; by the way, that&#8217;s year after year after year we&#8217;d be $2 trillion larger.  If we didn&#8217;t have that growth gap and we prorated that money to every family in America, the average family in America today would have $15,000.00 more income. $15,000.00 more income.  Now here is the amazing part about this.  The average family in America doesn&#8217;t have $15,000.00 more income in this recovery.  I think most of you know this.  The average median income family in the United States has $1,500.00 less income than when this recovery, so-called recovery, began.</p>
<p>Now why is that so important?  I think that single statistic may more than anything else explain why the Democrats had their heads handed to them a week and a half ago. Barack Obama was saying just ten days before the election, &#8220;Every single statistic shows improvement while I&#8217;ve been President.&#8221;  Well he left out the one that Americans care the most about.  What Ronald Reagan used to call &#8220;real take home pay&#8221; and &#8220;real take home pay&#8221; has been reduced and not increased over Barack Obama&#8217;s presidency, and that explains in my opinion, Michael, why 51 percent of Americans today say that the United States of America is still in a recession – because for half of the Americans it still is a recession.  When you&#8217;re losing income relative to inflation, you&#8217;re not feeling better about things; you&#8217;re feeling worse and that&#8217;s a point we have to hammer home over and over again.  One quick final point.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>Okay, real quick though.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Okay, just the states.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>Michael wants to talk about something.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>No, I know. I agreed not to be too long, but this is so important.  No, I just got to do the Texas thing.  So this is just the last point.  If you really want to understand the superiority of our ideas versus their ideas, we&#8217;ve got such a great, great experiment here in the United States, and it turns out the four largest states in America, two red states, Texas and Florida are obviously red states.  The two biggest blue states are California and New York.  Correct me if I&#8217;m wrong about this Michael but I believe one out of three Americans lives in those four states.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>That&#8217;s right.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>So those are the states that really matter and the basic bottom line here is that these red states, and this is what my book is about, the red states are incredibly outperforming the blue states.  You know this, migration pattern – there is a huge migration out of the Midwest and out of the Northeast into the South and to states like Phoenix and Utah and so on, and this is what liberals cannot, they cannot explain this because they kept saying, &#8220;Look, they want higher minimum wages, higher tax rates on the rich, don&#8217;t allow drilling, more regulation&#8221; and so on.  All of these things were supposed to create a worker&#8217;s paradise for the workers.  What they can&#8217;t explain is if that&#8217;s the case why are people leaving those states and what this chart is showing you is that over the last 15 years, for every job that was created in California and New York, three to four jobs were created in Texas and Florida.  Look, what&#8217;s the income tax rate today in Texas and Florida?  Zero.  How many in this room are Californians or New Yorkers?  Do you know what your highest income tax rate in California and New York is today?</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>Don&#8217;t remind us.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>13.5%.  This stuff matters.  I debated Paul Krugman on this about a month ago, about the economy.  I showed him this chart and I said Paul, you&#8217;ve got the Nobel Prize in economics.  Please explain to me if your ideas are so much superior to ours, what explains this, and you&#8217;ll love this, Michael. He said, &#8220;Well there&#8217;s a very simple explanation.&#8221;  He said people are leaving because of the weather, because of the weather.  Now, actually, as with everything &#8211;</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>The last year that Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex had something like 90 consecutive days of triple digit weather.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Exactly, you took my &#8211;</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>I&#8217;d like to have Paul Krugman mow some lawns in that weather.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>I said to Krugman, well, Paul, that&#8217;s an interesting theory, that you say you know people, and by the way, there is some truth to that. People want to live in warmer places, and I said if that&#8217;s the thing, if this is all driven by weather, Paul, you&#8217;ve got the Nobel Prize, please explain this to me, why are people leaving San Diego and going to Houston?  He had no answer.  I&#8217;m going to stop there.  Thank you very much.  It&#8217;s been a pleasure.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>Thank you Steve, and all right, Michael, ready to give us the political scoop?</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>Well I&#8217;ll try to give you my view of a couple of important things, including some reflections on the dialogues that have been going on here at the Restoration Weekend.  I can&#8217;t resist beginning with some census data because I can&#8217;t think of anything more interesting to do than to plow through historical census data, make tables and things like that.  Steve&#8217;s economic tables are no match for this and the match is my home State of Michigan versus the State of Texas.  When I was growing up in Michigan everybody said well Texas is going to progress, inevitably. They will get big labor unions and so forth.  They&#8217;ll have business corporations that will cooperate with the unions.  They&#8217;ll get big government.  They&#8217;ll have an income tax, they&#8217;ll be like us in Michigan and so forth – census date.  In 1970, Michigan had nine million people.  In 2010, 40 years later, Michigan had ten million people.  A little bit of growth over 40 years, not spectacular.  In 1970 Texas had 11 million people.  Just a little bit bigger than Michigan.  In 2010 Texas had 25 million people.  Explain that Professor Krugman.  You got cold winters in Michigan, but you sure got hot summers in Texas and you actually have some cold winters there too.  Anybody that&#8217;s moving to Texas for the weather is deluded.  So let me just make three major points here that have been to some extent inspired or amplified by what I&#8217;ve been hearing, listening and talking to people with about at the Restoration Weekend.</p>
<p>The first is about the macro economy in which I do not consider myself to be an expert by any means.  I do know that there was a congressman from New York that said if you tax something you get less of it; if you subsidize something you get more of it.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Would that be Jack Kemp?</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>Yeah and Jack had the right idea.  Obviously we want to get the macro economy growing again.  Some conservatives are saying okay we&#8217;ll just reduce rates on the high end like Reagan did and that will be fine.  I think we need something more than that.  For one thing, tax rates are not as high as when Reagan entered office.  There&#8217;s less to be cut, but I think we&#8217;ve got to do something else.  We&#8217;ve got to lower some tax rates.  We&#8217;ve got to get rid of some of the really hostile and anti-growth regulatory things and the crazed religion of the Radical Greens.  I think we also have to try to do something about family formation.  If we want to unleash human capital &#8212; and Steve has written about this recently.  I don&#8217;t know if his former colleagues at the <i>Wall Street Journal</i> editorial board are a little miffed at you, but one of the things that I think is holding us back to some extent, although it&#8217;s difficult to quantify, is family formation or the lack thereof.  All the sociological studies show that children raised in two-parent families do better by all sorts of metrics from crime to economic growth and productivity.  No, I don&#8217;t want to say anything negative about single parents and so forth.  But almost 50 years ago Pat Moynihan wrote his family report and he said that we&#8217;ve got a real crisis because 25 percent of black children are born out of wedlock.  The figure today is 70 percent.  The figure for all children is 40.  That is higher form of magnitude than what Moynihan was looking at justifiably, presciently, with alarm back in 1965, so what can we do.  The Tax Code doesn&#8217;t automatically shape behavior.  I think there are ways society can send signals.  When you look back in history people like us like to talk about declines of morals.  There are also increases in moral behavior that occur in various ways.  The United States in 1820 was a nation of drunks.  Basically alcohol consumption was cut by about two-thirds over the next 40 or 50 years.  That was an advance in human capital among other things.</p>
<p>We had senators like Mike Lee, Marco Rubio, others talking about child tax credit increase, other things to send money and signals to people to try to encourage family formation, to encourage two-parent families to give kids the advantage.  I think that there are a lot of other ways that we can think about this in terms of economics; but that&#8217;s one way to send a signal, that&#8217;s one way to give what Cass Sunstein calls a &#8220;nudge,&#8221; which in this case I think is useful.  So I think that we ought to be thinking about that and those of you who are active, and many of you are, in the voluntary sector, those of you who create organizations who work and organizations to try to foster better behavior, I think this is something many of you probably already are thinking about: how do we strengthen that kind of behavior because there&#8217;s a lot of human capital over the last generation that could have been created and wasn&#8217;t created.  That&#8217;s a problem.  We&#8217;d like to do better in the next generation, and how are we going to do this?</p>
<p>The second point I want to make is in another sense about the new generation and that&#8217;s taking a look at the election data, and this one was kind of fun to take a look at.  I was always a little dismayed at reading the number on President Romney, is to take a lot at two groups that we&#8217;ve been told are going to be a larger part of the electorate in years hence, and they are, and that we were told were going to be part of an inevitable during natural and permanent Democratic Party majority in America – the Hispanics and the Millennials.  If you made straight line extrapolations from the 2008 exit pole you might very well have thought that.  Both those groups, Hispanics, a term invented by a census bureaucrat circa 1970; Millennials, people born after 1980 or the 18 to 29 year-old-age group among voters, voted approximately two to one for Barack Obama in 2008.  They will be a larger part of the electorate.  My move to amend the Constitution to raise the voting age to 35 is barred &#8212; and permanently barring from the vote anyone born after 1980, our chances for that solution has been missed.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>I wouldn&#8217;t be able to vote.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>There you go, okay, sorry about that.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>No it&#8217;s all right, it&#8217;s all right.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>I&#8217;ll listen to your recommendation and start voting.  Those things having failed, those groups were going to go by, and you have writers like <i>National Journal&#8217;s </i>Ron Brownstein, who is a very talented guy, talking in addition about the non-white majority – divides electorate into whites and non-whites and says there will be a non-white majority.  Well let&#8217;s see how that&#8217;s working out.  Let&#8217;s start off with the Millennials.  In 2008 they voted 66/32 to Barack Obama.  Expressing that vote as a democratic margin as percentage of the total electorate.  Take the democratic popular vote margin among Millennials as a percentage of the total electorate. It&#8217;s 7 percent of the total electorate.  Barack Obama&#8217;s margin among the total electorate that year, 7 percent.  Essentially all of this popular vote margin came from them.  What has happened in years since.  Well the Millennials down there in their parents&#8217; basements have not been doing so well.  They were told that there was hope and change – that Obama was a with-it sort of person and he was cool and the other people weren&#8217;t and so forth.  In 2012 the Obama margin among Millennials goes down to 60 to 38.  That&#8217;s actually the biggest decline arithmetically among any age group so there is some decline.</p>
<p>It brings to mind the fact of the baby boomer, the fate of the baby boom generation politically, which I guess I&#8217;m part.  I&#8217;d like to say that the good news is that the baby boom generation is going to die out.  The bad news is I&#8217;m going to die about the same time.  The baby boom generation was 50/50 in the Nixon/McGovern race when the rest of the country was 63/36 for Nixon.  In 2012, 40 years later the baby boom generation voted for Mitt Romney, so people are affected by the changes and the things they see in their life as well as by some of the conservatizing forces perhaps of growing older, perhaps wiser, but in any case, the initial vote is not destiny.  Where were the Millennials in this election?  Take a look at the Exit Poll, the national vote for House of Representatives, it was 54/43 Democratic.  Express that as a percentage of the total electorate, Democratic margin as a percentage of the total electorate is 1.5 percent, 7 percent in 2008, 1.5 percent.  Millennial turnout will be higher in the general election than it was in the off-year election, so 1.5 percent translates to about 2 percent general election terms.  That&#8217;s a handicap for republicans.  They&#8217;ve got to carry their age groups by a larger margin in order to win, they did so, winning 52/45 House popular vote overall in this year in 2014 as well as 2010.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s happened to the Millennials in large part it&#8217;s a lot of human capital that&#8217;s not being achieved, that&#8217;s not finding an outlet.  I think one of the things I have felt is that there is a misfit between the Millennial generation and the way that they want to customize their own world.  Set up their own Facebook page and all this stuff, iPod list, that&#8217;s pretty antique now.  The tension between that and the centralized command and control policies of the Obama Administration. Those are policies that were initially crafted by people in an industrial age – 40,000 people worked at the Ford Rouge Plant.  You had a huge union local, it had 60,000 members.  You had a corporation that was one of the largest in the world.  The building was built in 1916 to 1918 at a cost of $1 billion which was actually a lot of money then.  I went around the Ford Rouge Plant in a car this summer – it&#8217;s 5.0 miles to drive around the perimeter of that place.  That is an artifact of the Industrial Age.  So individuals are small cogs in large machines, that&#8217;s what you do, big government, the centralized experts Jonathan Gruber will take care of you, you&#8217;re too stupid to take care of yourself, that&#8217;s the Industrial Age policies.  That&#8217;s a bad fit with this generation.  We&#8217;re not in an industrial age, we are in an information age.  The Ford Rouge Plant is a symbol of the Industrial Era, this is a symbol of the Information age.  It&#8217;s got more data in here than the Ford Rouge Plant ever processed and these policies aren&#8217;t working for them.  I think they&#8217;re waking up to that.  White Millennials are a significant Republican margin of this election.  The black under 30 voters.  Actually male blacks under 30 actually are moving towards Republicans more than their elders.  So I think that there&#8217;s some hope there. They are looking for something.</p>
<p>The Republicans have an opportunity, they sure don&#8217;t have a mandate. But they&#8217;ve got an opportunity for getting in touch with these people for policies that will enable them to find work, to earn success in ways that maximize their own special talents – their own individual interests.  The contribution that that individual uniquely can make to society.  The other side&#8217;s programs don&#8217;t give you any access to society.  The other side&#8217;s program don&#8217;t give you any access to that – you&#8217;re just a cog in a large machine.  These programs &#8212; I think conservatives can come up with a couple of programs that allow human capital to flourish in ways that are particular to the individual.  I think there&#8217;s an opportunity there.</p>
<p>Hispanics – Brownstein likes to lump together all &#8220;non-whites.&#8221;  I think this is misleading.  Hispanics and Asians, the people that fall into these categories, do not share the history experiences and heritages of Black Americans, which are, as many Black Americans will tell you, they are unique and they are absolutely correct in saying that.  They&#8217;re not behaving that way.  When Asians come to this country these days they don&#8217;t see separate drinking fountains marked off for them and they aren&#8217;t prevented from voting and in fact, what we&#8217;ve got is very different numbers.  If you look at the Hispanics, they go 67/31 Obama, 2008, 71/27 Obama, 2012.  They don&#8217;t like the self-deportation comment of Mitt Romney and so forth.  This election they&#8217;re moving in the other direction.  You look at the Exit Poll. It&#8217;s 62/36 for Democratic candidates for the House nationally.  But this aggregated by state.  One of the things you see, about 40 percent of Hispanics live in California, New York and New Jersey.  They were voting over 70 percent on average for the Democratic Party.  They are increasing Democratic margins that would exist if there were not a single Hispanic in any of those states.  If you are looking at the rest of the country, you&#8217;re seeing a different pattern.  In Rick Perry&#8217;s Texas, John Cornyn carried Hispanics 49/48, Greg Abbott got 44 percent here in Florida, Rick Scott got 38.  In Kansas and in Georgia, states with growing Hispanic percentages that some Democrats think are going to carry those states for them, Hispanics voted for the Republican, Nathan Deal, David Purdue, Pat Roberts.</p>
<p>My observation is that Hispanics are voting more like their white neighbors than their black neighbors and depending on the state they&#8217;re in.  I think that once again here are people that are looking for opportunity.  Here are people that are disproportionately in their younger years.  Here is human capital; potential human capital that is being under-utilized in this economy and these individuals are not being given an opening under this Administration&#8217;s policies so I think that once again there is significant opportunities and the idea that this is a totally non-white 90/10 democratic majority is simply factually wrong.  I could add that the Asian numbers show a flip from 73/26 Obama 2012 to 50/49 Republican.  I&#8217;m not sure that&#8217;s good data.  Sorry folks we&#8217;d love to believe it but I think that you&#8217;ve got small and potentially unrepresentative samples, but I think it&#8217;s an interesting mix and some of you are in situations like that.</p>
<p>Let me move on to my third topic that I want to talk about and that is one that I know evokes controversy or strong feelings in this room and that is immigration.  I think again there is a potential to unleash and enhance human capital in the United States, which we are in danger of missing, which people on the other side of the political fence are in danger of missing, and I think we have a set of immigration laws that have built on a system, that is built on a series of laws, 1924, passed 90 years ago, 1965, passed 49 years ago.  We inadvertently got a system that prefers extended family reunification of mostly low-skill people to admission of high skill people.  We&#8217;ve got a system now which we&#8217;ve got to lobby for declaring legalization of illegals, primarily low-skilled, and there&#8217;s an effective lobby for that.  There&#8217;s an effective lobby for increasing the number of H1BVs, as they tend to tie high-skilled people to a particular firm.  Microsoft wants you to work.  Apple wants you to work.</p>
<p>I think we should take this opportunity, the fact that it&#8217;s obvious that we need to change our immigration laws, to take a new approach and not just do patch work.  I&#8217;m not going to get into arguments here about what we do about seasonal farm workers, that&#8217;s a collateral issue.  I think that one of the things we&#8217;ve seen now, unlike 2006 and 2007, which is when the sort of design of the bill that passed the Senate in 2013 was formulated.  That&#8217;s a period when most of us thought we were going to have an unending surge of migration, especially low-skill migration from Latin America and some of us thought the best thing we can do is regularize it through some legalization.  We thought also that our high tech system was going on fine, we didn&#8217;t have any problems there and we thought that we had plenty of demand for low skill workers because the economy was growing.  Well, the surge in that migration from Mexico to the United States from 2007 to 2012 was zero, we don&#8217;t have that problem, and I think the argument is stronger today in my opinion than it was then, that says that legalization measures incentivize illegal immigration, which wouldn&#8217;t otherwise occur.  I think prior to 2007 it was going to occur anyway.  I think now we saw with the influx of Central Americans in the Rio Grande that there is an argument that undercuts the argument for legalization or at least suggests caution.</p>
<p>What I think is most important is to encourage high-skill immigration.  Steve and I disagree, I don&#8217;t think we need a lot of low-skill people right now, new people.  He thinks we always do.  I think we always need high skilled people in this country and I think if you want to maximize human capital in the United States or in the world, we want high-skilled people in this country, as many as we can get.  We&#8217;ve got a system where we admit a grudging amount of them, tied to particular firms.  I think we might do better if we let in high-skilled people, people who can demonstrate that they have high skills and abilities and let them see what they can do in something that we have here despite the effects of the current Administration, which is called the free enterprise system, a free economy and work their way up there.  I see as a model of the systems of our Anglosphere cousins Canada and Australia.  Canada and Australia have high-skill immigration.  They have point systems.  I had a chance to talk here with Senator Sessions and I said to him, let&#8217;s look at how Canada and Australia do this.  Can something like this be adapted to the United States?</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Canadians and Australians don&#8217;t want us to do this.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>Well, a Canadian diplomat in Washington said to me please, please do not adopt our Canadian immigration system.  We want these high-skilled people in Vancouver and Calgary and Toronto and Montreal.  We don&#8217;t want them going to the United States.  We want them in Canada and Australia wants them in Australia.  I have a lot of affection for Canada or Australia but I say let&#8217;s give them a fight.  I think that we should try to restructure this so that instead of extended family reunification of low-skill people we move towards high skilled people that have demonstrated their abilities and so forth in this country.</p>
<p>As I look back over the three things I&#8217;m talking about, let&#8217;s liberate the economy from high taxes, but also incentivize family behavior that we&#8217;re not sure we can fully influence but at least move people towards behavior that tends to maximize human capital.  Present opportunities to growing groups of the electorate like Hispanics and Millennials so to maximize their human capital and to exchange our immigration system and not just tinker with band aids and stuff on the 90-year-old legislation and the 49-year-old legislation but actually reframe our immigration law.  Take this opportunity to proclaim that we are a land of the free, home of the brave and we have open arms to people who come here with high skills and want to contribute to the United States and the world through becoming Americans.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>I think that, Michael, microphones are going to be going around in a second.  I&#8217;m going to ask a quick question.  Having just moved out from my parents&#8217; basement, thanks Ally and Paul, and being Hispanic and a Millennial, I&#8217;d like to talk kind of specifically about some of those policies the Republicans just took to Congress, both houses.  If you were in a room advising John Boehner and Mitch McConnell and the leadership in the Republican Party, what would you advise them they should do going out the gate in 2015 and what would you advise them not to do?</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Well the first thing, how many of you have been following this issue, this esoteric issue of corporate inversions of companies that are leaving and I say this is actually a real crisis in this country, and I don&#8217;t think a lot of the politicians quite understand what&#8217;s going on here.  If we don&#8217;t fix our corporate tax system &#8212; and most Americans have no idea about the corporate tax system and I don&#8217;t think Barack Obama understands this either.  Our corporate tax, as most of you in this room know, we have the highest statutory corporate tax in the world.  We&#8217;re at 40 percent and it&#8217;s interesting.  If you look over the last 25 years it used to be, Michael, if you go back to 1990 the rest of the world was at about 45 percent.  You know what&#8217;s happened over the last 25 years?  The rest of the world is adopting Reaganonics – Ireland, England, Canada, they are cutting their rates very sharply and so it used to be we were 5 percentage points below the world average.  Today we&#8217;re 15 to 20 percent above the world average.  That doesn&#8217;t work anymore.  I describe this as a Head Start program for every country that we compete with, right?  It&#8217;s true and I would even make the case it is unpatriotic to support a 40 percent corporate tax.  The people who are harmed by this tax are not big, rich Wall Street fat cats who own stock, although it does reduce returns to sharers, but there&#8217;s a lot of really good evidence by some of my friends at the American Enterprise Institute and some of my colleagues at Heritage, that the people that are hurt the most by this high corporate tax when companies leave is American workers.  This affects their wages and affects their job opportunities, so I would make the case by that and if I could do one thing overnight I would say, let&#8217;s just get rid of the corporate income tax, right?  Let&#8217;s just get rid of the corporate income tax and tax it to the shareholders when they earn it as capital gain.</p>
<p>But if we can&#8217;t do that there is a mandate in my opinion, there is a necessity we get that corporate tax rate down to 20 to 25 percent because if we do not do this and if we do not act quickly &#8212; you&#8217;ve seen what&#8217;s happened in the last nine months.  Think about the companies.  Burger King. Burger King is leaving the United States.  Walgreen&#8217;s wants to leave.  Pfizer wants to leave.  I could name four or five other major Fortune 100 companies that are essentially renouncing their United States citizenship and leaving the United States and as you said, going to Canada, going to Ireland.  In Ireland the highest corporate tax rate is 4½ percent.  That means you can change your location from, say, New York to Dublin, and you can cut your corporate income tax by two-thirds.  Companies have a charge to maximize their return to their shareholders so that would be the number one thing – get rid of the corporate income tax and then number two, let&#8217;s just blow up the whole income tax and start over with a flat tax.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>I agree with both of those things and I think you know that, but how to Republicans send that credibly to Obama when he spent his entire Presidency demonizing corporations and saying they&#8217;re the Devil.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Let me just make one quick comment about this.  I believe one of the biggest, one of the turning points in this election &#8212; and correct me if I&#8217;m wrong you guys because you know politics better than I do.  That imbecilic comment that Hillary Clinton made seven days before the next.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>When she was giving her Elizabeth Warren imitation?</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Exactly.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>No there is going to be a very spirited competition if those two run against each other because we don&#8217;t know who&#8217;s going to carry Salem.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>My only point in bringing that up is I do believe Brian that the big problem with the Democrats today, the Democrats today are anti-business, right?  They are anti-business.  My old boss Dick Army, you know Dick Army was the House Majority Leader, he used to say, and he said it so perfectly, liberals love jobs and they hate employers.  Liberals love jobs and they have employers.  You can&#8217;t have one without the other.  This is where I think it gets to your point about Millennials saying, wait a minute, the Democrats said they were going to create all these jobs.  When is the last time?  Just a thought I want to put in your head.  When is the last time this President in the last six years said anything good about business?  When has he said, he is the same President who said two years ago, &#8220;you didn&#8217;t build that,&#8221; so that anti-business sentiment is the ruination of the Democratic Party in my opinion.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>Well, Steve starts off right with the populist to appeal and cut the corporate income tax.  You&#8217;re absolutely right on the arguments intellectually and I think there is a political avenue to do this and an openness to do this.  There is a lot of low-hanging fruit off there – the Keystone XL Pipeline, vote on a bunch of things where you&#8217;re going to get, by the way, a bunch of Democrats, 31 House Democrats voted for the Keystone Pipeline last week and so forth, that it&#8217;s a 70 percent issue.  You&#8217;ve got a bunch of 70 percent issues, but I guess I would just reiterate my thinking on the immigration thing.  I really think that we have an opportunity to change the trajectory of incoming immigration and so forth in the world in the years ahead.  I wrote this book, <i>Shaping Our Nation:  How Surges in Migration Transformed American Politics</i> and it&#8217;s about internal migrations and it&#8217;s about immigration migrations.  We&#8217;ve had these unexpected surges of migration.  Nobody in 1965 was predicting huge migration from Latin America.  We actually imposed a limit of something like 60,000 Mexicans a year in the &#8217;65 Act, did you know that?  It didn&#8217;t turn out to be very effective because of family reunification provisions and because of illegal immigration.  Migration from Mexico was ten times that approximately between 1982 and 2007 and then it stops and that&#8217;s a historic pattern too.  You get these surges that last one or two generations, they stop.  I want the next surges to be high-skilled people from around the world.</p>
<p>One of the statistics that I saw recently and perhaps appropriate of last night&#8217;s meeting was that the percentage of people in the United States &#8212; like some of President Reagan&#8217;s statistics this may be wrong, so I want to be fact checked on this.  The data was that of people born in Africa, that doesn&#8217;t include the President, people born in African in the United States today is something like 47 percent of them have college degrees and moving on to their accounting degree and getting that and we see that in Washington, DC.  Michelle Obama, that Minnesota gets the Somalians, we&#8217;ve got the Ethiopians and it&#8217;s better for our metro area.  But anyway, that&#8217;s an interesting data point.  Let&#8217;s get the high-skilled people across the world because it&#8217;s better for our country and a more prosperous, more creative America is better for the world.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>You know Michael I was in &#8211;</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>It&#8217;s better for people all over the world because they in many ways have often been free riders on advances made in the United States and the people of the United States who make advances, who have economic success are also major supporters, not only through taxes and foreign aid but much more importantly through voluntary activities that have helped people around the world.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>I was just going to say, I got in a taxi in Washington, DC about two weeks ago and the driver was an Ethiopian and he kept staring at me, and he kept looking back at me, he had this big smile on his face, &#8220;You&#8217;re on Fox News, aren&#8217;t you.  I watch Fox News every day.&#8221;  I&#8217;m like these are our kind of people.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>All right let&#8217;s go to some questions from the audience.  We have a microphone in the back.</p>
<p><strong>Rep. Michele Bachmann: </strong>Thanks.  You guys are so brilliant and I want to thank you and I just want to see me too to Steve.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Michele you are irreplaceable in the United States Congress.  We love you.  You are awesome!  We need you to run against Mark Dayton for Governor of Minnesota.</p>
<p><strong><strong>Rep. Michele Bachmann</strong>: </strong>No I just want to say how much I love and underscore exactly what you said – in my former life I was a federal tax litigation attorney, before I came to the U.S. Congress and I think again this is a plus-up area where Republicans can go on offense in the next two years against Hillary Clinton or whoever the nominee is, because this is a job creations tax.  That&#8217;s what the Corporate Tax Code is, it&#8217;s a tax on job creation and we need to frame it in such a way so that people know that what we want to do is get rid of these job killing taxes and have job creation taxes and I&#8217;ll give you one perfect example based upon inversions.  Two weeks before the 2012 Election I sat down with all of the medical device industry in Minnesota from the baby startups all the way to the King Daddy which was Medtronic and all of them could be predictive.  They saw that this could very well go the way of Barack Obama and the way of the medical device tax and so they&#8217;d been out looking in Europe and other countries to see where they could move their industries, and they were very frank.  They said if we don&#8217;t take this election in 2012, we&#8217;re out of here because we&#8217;ve got better places to go for industry and so Medtronic is one of those companies that announced an inversion and then the Treasury Department came back and was basically going to cancel all those inversions but it&#8217;s human nature.  People go where they can make the income so I think this is a target rich environment for us to go on offense and I think we&#8217;ll get Millennials.  I think that we should compete for every bit of space for every voter because it&#8217;s about every voter, their job.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Let me make a broader point because I think that what you said is so important.  Tell me if you think I&#8217;m wrong about this, Michele, but I think Republicans have an incredible opportunity right now with the old Reagan blue collar industrial union workers; because think about that.  Put it like this, Michael.  How can Tom Steyer coexist in a party with unionized blue collar workers? Tom Steyer is trying to deindustrialize America.  He wants to destroy the jobs of pipe fitters, welders, electricians – he wants to destroy the jobs of Teamsters.  Your and my party, Michele, you&#8217;re the person to do this.  We ought to be going into these union halls, I&#8217;m serious, and we should be saying, we&#8217;re the ones who are trying to save your jobs.  It&#8217;s these wacko Green Environmentalists who are trying to destroy your jobs, right?  That should be our message.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>A question from Senator Sessions.</p>
<p><strong>Sen. Jeff Sessions: </strong>Thank you, just briefly.  I recall having met with a Canadian who runs their system of immigration.  They are very happy with it. They are very pleased.  At a hearing two years ago in the Judiciary Committee, the Microsoft representative and group pushing for high-tech visas praised the Canadian system.  I said, well, Mr. Microsoft, I&#8217;ll adopt the Canadian system today.  Do you agree to that?  What do you think his answer was?  He had this rueful smile, and the reason was they made a deal.  They got their deal on the big bill.  La Raza and the businesses who want lower-skill workers and the political groups that want family reunification.  They made a partnership so that the package itself was unacceptable, in my opinion, so I guess I would say if we can break this bunch from their unholy comprehensive alliance and focus on the Canadian-type system, which gives points if you &#8212; millions of people speak English in the world.  If you&#8217;ve got two people to apply to American, why not choose the one who already speaks English?  Have we got two young people in Honduras and one has two years of college and one is a high school dropout, why not let the scholar get in?</p>
<p>We&#8217;ve got data to show that people with two years of education who come to America almost always succeed.  Data shows that people who come to American without a high school degree, without language skills, almost always remain in poverty for generations.  So I guess, Michael, I think you&#8217;re on the right track.  I also am dubious about some of the things they say.  Microsoft just laid off 18,000.  Facebook, Mr. Zuckerberg, they only have 7,000 people.  This is not a big job industry.  If you travel the state like I do, and go in to business after business, it&#8217;s incredible the amount of robotics we&#8217;ve got.  We&#8217;re going to have more widgets made with fewer people every year for the next 30 years.  So we&#8217;ve got to think about how our people can be able to take the few jobs that exist out there, and we want to have their pay go up and not down.  So anyway, I&#8217;ve gone too long.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>I think that this is a great example, Senator, that we are in an area where we need good policy instead of good lobbying.  There&#8217;s a lobby for H1Bs because they stay with my company and you got indentured servitude or something like it.  But high skill hasn&#8217;t got a lobby.  It has got to find one.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>Why don&#8217;t we get a question over here and let&#8217;s walk to this side of the room too so there are a couple of questions over here.</p>
<p><strong>Audience Member: </strong>Yeah, one thing you haven&#8217;t mentioned and please address it, is the toll on human beings of the Green Agenda.  The world and our country came into fruition on oil, on energy.  Nothing works, no one gets a better life without the energy to propel it.  If you look at the Green Agenda, as a matter of fact I live in Austin.  We have a little tabloid that&#8217;s called <i>The Austin Chronical.</i>  Yeah you laugh, but it&#8217;s amazingly effective.  They had some smartly groomed black kids calling green the new black, displayed on the cover of last&#8217;s week&#8217;s <em>Chronical</em>.  This is a lie.  It&#8217;s all a lie.  If you take away the energy, Africa stops.  They have no chance of ever getting out from under the chains of and if you look at China, what has propelled them forward at break neck speed?  Energy, energy, energy and they take that all away and would you please address that because that&#8217;s one of the human tolls of the Green Agenda.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>So I just got back my, it&#8217;s a great point.  I just got back from Zimbabwe.  My niece is a Peace Corps volunteer in this little village really out in the middle of nowhere.  When you were talking I was thinking about this because this village, they are incredibly great people.  I just fell in love with these people but you know, they&#8217;re living almost literally like it&#8217;s the 16<sup>th</sup> Century and you know what they don&#8217;t have in this town?  Electricity, electricity. You can&#8217;t do anything if you don&#8217;t have electric power, and for our government, for Barack Obama to run around the world telling these countries they should use fossil fuels, use less fossil fuels, that&#8217;s immoral, right?  He&#8217;s basically saying he wants to keep these countries poor and that&#8217;s a message we need to get through to people.</p>
<p>Just one other quick little story: we lost our electricity last summer when we had a big storm in Northern Virginia and I wrote a piece in the <i>Wall Street Journal, </i>and it got a huge response, and I just said what happened when the Morris electricity went out.  I have three kids, two teenagers who I don&#8217;t like very much and then I have an 11 year old but my teenagers when the electricity went out, they thought the first few hours were really cool. We had a fire and we had candles and so on and I&#8217;ve got to tell you.  After the first day, because we were without electricity for 72 hours, my kids were like screaming how do people live without electricity, my God they didn&#8217;t have any screen, they didn&#8217;t have cell phones.  The point is if we let the Green Agenda go forward as these people want to do, we&#8217;re going to have rolling brownouts and blackouts in this country.  If you want to see the American people get angry, it&#8217;s going to be when that happens.  If you turn out the lights, people get pretty upset.</p>
<p><strong>Audience Member: </strong>Good morning, two quick points.  I find myself not surprised that once again I agree with Senator Sessions.  Good morning Senator.  Alan Greenspan testified before Chuck Shumer on April 30, 2009.  It&#8217;s just two sentences, I want to read this because I think we have too many high-tech workers from foreign countries competing with American high-tech workers which disincentivizes kids from going into those fields.  This is from Greenspan&#8217;s testimony.  &#8220;Greatly expanding our quotas for the highly skilled with lower wage premiums of the skilled over the lesser skilled.  Skill shortages in America exist because we are shielding our skilled labor force from world competition.  Quotas have been substituted for the wage pricing mechanism and in the process&#8221; &#8212; this word amazes me &#8212; &#8220;we have created a privileged elite whose incomes are being supported at non-competitively high levels by immigration quotas on skilled professionals.  Eliminating such restrictions would reduce at least some of our income and equality.&#8221;  We need to get more American kids into those high tech industries, item number one.  Item number two, if you go to the UN web site you will find that they predict the two fastest ways of increasing remittances flowing from the U.S. to the Third World, sustainability, green, and in that comprehensive reform. We need to understand that our laws were based on the concept of protecting American lives and American jobs, first and foremost.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>Michael, what are your thoughts.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>I&#8217;m not sure I&#8217;m so concerned about protecting high-skill people from competition.  I think high skills are not are zero sum game.  Andrew Carnegie did not suffer because John D. Rockefeller was successful in business.  You got one immigrant and the other is the son of a confidence man.  You can make an argument I think particularly at the stage of employment that we have now.  Steve would not agree with it, but that low-skill employment is the zero sum game for the people and you let in more low-skills from other countries you drive down wages of low skill people in this country.  I think there&#8217;s something at least marginally to that.  High skill people are going to create and do things that you central planners didn&#8217;t think up.  They&#8217;re going to actually figure out new things and Andrew Carnegie figured out new things, the poor boy from Scotland.  So I&#8217;m for letting a lot of competition bloom with high-skilled people and I don&#8217;t think they ever crowd each other out.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Here&#8217;s why that&#8217;s completely wrong to say that our high-skilled workers or immigrants are taking jobs from American high-skilled workers.  There&#8217;s a very simple reason why that&#8217;s completely wrong.  It&#8217;s because 36 percent of the businesses in Silicon Valley that hire American high-tech workers were founded by immigrants.  So if the immigrants didn&#8217;t come here a lot of those businesses wouldn&#8217;t exist in the first place.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>What we&#8217;ve seen with a lot of Hispanic voters &#8212; the one seriously contested Senate race was a state with above national average Hispanic percentage, was in Colorado and in Colorado the Democrats, partly through an effort of very rich people putting together a pretty smart political operation that&#8217;s won the major offices there, they imposed a gentry liberal, my friend Joe Cochran&#8217;s phrase, a gentry liberal program: gun control.  Hispanic voters recalled one of the state senators that voted for it in Pueblo County, 42 percent Hispanic county.  They were going to have an anti-fracking referendum.  They decided to take that off the ballot because it was polling so badly they were going to get licked 80/20 or something like that.  Abortion absolutism, Senator Mark Udall became known by the liberal media as Mark Uterus, ran half his ads, the NARAL pro-choice ad said that there would be no contraceptives available in Colorado if Cory Gardner was elected to the U.S. senate.  We now have a chance to fact check that prediction since Gardner was elected and we&#8217;ll see if there are any condoms available in Colorado.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>Along with their marijuana.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>Well I&#8217;m not going to go there.  They are rejecting that agenda.  The question is do Republicans have an agenda that can go forward and that can help them maximize their human capital.  Help them achieve their dreams.  Help them earn success.  I think we&#8217;ve been trying up in the platform, a lot of you in the audience are working at this sort of thing.  Can&#8217;t give you a fast formula but I think there are Republicans working on it.  I think that we&#8217;ve got to get going and the other low hanging fruit.  What Michele mentioned, the medical devices tax.  We have these wonderful industries that produce things like prosthetics that enable wounded veterans to live full lives in a way that wouldn&#8217;t have ever been possible before and what does this crowd do? They want to tax it.  I think that there are a lot of opportunities here.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Well Michael let me just give you one, Hispanics are an obvious one but let me just put up one thought about black Americans.  Anybody in this room from Illinois?  A few.  What a great race, Bruce Rauner won one of the most important races in the country this year, and what&#8217;s interesting about Bruce Rauner, this is a near billionaire hedge fund manager.  They tried to run their own Mitt Romney campaign against him.  Here&#8217;s what interesting about Bruce Rauner.  I think every Republican in the country should take a page out of his book.  You know what he did?  Bruce Rauner spent a lot of his time going into black churches, black neighborhoods, black schools and he had a couple of messages.  One of the things he said, which every Republican should do when we&#8217;re talking to black audiences.  What have the Democrats done for you?  Really, what have the Democrats done for black American?  Nothing.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>No, I&#8217;m from Detroit and I&#8217;ve seen what happens.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>Yeah, right, exactly.  That was his point and what Bruce Rauner said is you elect me Governor of this State – I&#8217;m going to clean up your neighborhoods, I&#8217;m going to give you school choice, I&#8217;m going to clean up your schools, I&#8217;m going to give you jobs and you know what?  Bruce Ronner got 20 percent of the black vote in Illinois, so we can win a bigger percentage of black Americans with a message of economic growth.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Barone: </strong>Well, and here&#8217;s an Hispanic message.  California and Texas, we&#8217;ve been looking at the number of jobs.  Both of those states in the 2010 census were about 36 percent Hispanic.  Texas Hispanics get better test scores than California Hispanics.  Texas is non-union, non-ed run schools do a better job than California&#8217;s Teacher Union runs schools, okay?  Texas Hispanics make more money than California Hispanics.  Texas Hispanics have lower unemployment than California Hispanics.  We have a test case on whose policies help Hispanic people in American and I think also there&#8217;s a spirit of, well there&#8217;s a spirit of enterprise.  There&#8217;s also a cultural spirit.  When you go to Texas the people in Texas look at somebody that&#8217;s got stereotypical Latino features, they say that&#8217;s a Texan.  When rich Californians see somebody with that figure they hand them the keys to the car because they assume it&#8217;s a valet parking attendant.</p>
<p><strong>Stephen Moore: </strong>So the message here, folks, is we have to make America look more like Texas and less like New York and California.</p>
<p><strong>Brian Calle: </strong>Except for the weather, except for the weather.  Thank you all very much for taking the time to listen to us and let&#8217;s give one more round of applause to our great panel.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>.</b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/steve-moore-michael-barone-at-restoration-weekend/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Talking About ‘the Moroccan Issue’ Is Not a Crime</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/geert-wilders/talking-about-the-moroccan-issue-is-not-a-crime/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=talking-about-the-moroccan-issue-is-not-a-crime</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/geert-wilders/talking-about-the-moroccan-issue-is-not-a-crime/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2014 05:20:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Geert Wilders]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morocco]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wilders]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=247966</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A democracy must allow for the frank discussion of the problems it faces.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="zonedModule" data-module-id="6" data-module-name="article.app/lib/module/articleBody" data-module-zone="article_body">
<div id="wsj-article-wrap" class="article-wrap" data-sbid="SB10912639172741004777804580345643490257412">
<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/wilders-marked.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-247969" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/wilders-marked.jpg" alt="wilders-marked" width="174" height="259" /></a><strong>Reprinted from <a href="http://online.wsj.com/home-page">wsj.com</a>.</strong></p>
<p>Four years ago I was taken to court in the Netherlands on hate-crime charges. After a trial that lasted almost two years, I was finally acquitted. But the case cost me a lot of time and energy that, as an elected politician, I would rather have devoted to my parliamentary work.</p>
<p>Now, just as my Party for Freedom (PVV) is taking the lead in the polls and the Dutch government is facing serious political difficulties, the public prosecutor is again bringing me to court, this time for asking my party supporters, during a PVV electoral meeting in March, whether they want more or fewer Moroccans in the country.</p>
<p>This question needs to be understood in proper context.</p>
<p>In the Netherlands, as in many other Western European countries right now, problems arise when Muslim immigrants refuse to assimilate and integrate into the wider community. In our case I referred specifically to the Moroccans not because I have anything against them generally but because they are one of the largest immigrant groups here and are overrepresented in our crime and welfare statistics.</p>
<p>Moroccans are suspects in violent robberies 22 times as often as indigenous Dutch. Between 1996 and 2010, more than 60% of the Moroccan male youths born in 1984 had at least once been suspected of a crime, a rate three times as high as their indigenous counterparts. Meanwhile, 14% of the Moroccan population between ages 15 and 64 is dependent on welfare, compared with 9% for the Turks and 3% for the indigenous Dutch. According to Dick Schoof, the Dutch national coordinator for counterterrorism and security, Moroccans also account for three-quarters of all Dutch Muslims who leave for Syria to wage jihad.</p>
<p>The Dutch often refer to this problem as the “Moroccan issue.” If instead the Americans were the largest group of immigrants refusing to assimilate in the Netherlands, we would no doubt be referring to it as “the American issue.”</p>
<p>For almost a decade, my party has proposed three measures to address this issue. First, we want an end to immigration from Mulslim countries. Second, we want to expel all criminals of foreign nationality and, for those offenders who have dual nationality, deprive them of their Dutch citizenship, sending them back to the country of their other nationality. Third, we want to encourage the voluntary repatriation of non-Western immigrants.</p>
<p>These three measures don’t target any particular ethnic group, but given the demographics in our country it would immediately entail the presence of fewer Moroccans. Hence my question: “Do you want more or fewer Moroccans?” I never advocated that all Moroccans should leave. Nor do I object to every Moroccan. The decision to prosecute me for insulting an ethnic group and inciting hatred and discrimination is preposterous.</p>
<p>The prosecutor’s decision can’t be seen as being anything but politically motivated, especially when he has refused to prosecute two leading politicians of the governing Labor Party, Diederik Samsom and Hans Spekman, for similar statements on Moroccans. Mr. Samsom said that Moroccans have an “ethnic monopoly” on street crime, while Mr. Spekman said that Moroccans who don’t abide by the law have to be “humiliated in front of their own people.”</p>
<p>Polls have indicated that more than 43% of Netherlanders agree with me. I was thus expressing the feelings of millions in my country. In a democracy, a public debate about important political issues, such as “the Moroccan issue,” shouldn’t be restricted by criminalizing the expression of certain problems and policy proposals.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, political debate is now being increasingly restricted, not just in the Netherlands but across many European countries. Laws limiting freedom of expression, including the freedom of political debate, are introduced to protect subjective rights such as the right of certain groups to not feel offended, preventing the open discussion of pressing problems like those that arise from large-scale immigration across Western Europe. The unwillingness to address such problems is leading to the growth of parties, similar to my own PVV, in many other Western countries.</p>
<p>And existing laws are being applied ever more vigorously. Earlier this month, the Dutch Supreme Court ruled that the existing Dutch penal laws not only criminalize incitement to hatred and discrimination but also “incitement to intolerance.”</p>
<p>I don’t believe in political self-censorship. During the past 10 years, I have drawn attention to the problems that Dutch citizens experience related to integration, immigration and the Islamization of our society. And I have paid, and continue to pay, a very high price for it. For more than a decade now I have lived under constant police protection because I am on the death list of several Islamist terror groups. However, I will never let anyone silence me, no matter the consequences. My voters have elected me to express their concerns, and that is what I will do.</p>
<p>Prosecuting me as an elected politician for expressing the opinions of my constituents is absurd. Excluding certain problems from the political debate by making it a crime to discuss them won’t lead to the disappearance of these concerns, let alone contribute to a solution. This prosecution, moreover, is also dangerous. People will begin to lose their trust in the democratic process. Festering political problems do not go away simply because they are kept in a dark corner. I wish the Dutch public prosecutor had been wise enough to see that.</p>
<p>*</p>
<p><em>Don’t miss <strong>Geert Wilders</strong> on the <strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang">Glazov Gang</a></strong> discuss <strong>&#8220;The West&#8217;s Battle for Freedom&#8221;</strong>:</em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/69-nah7rIOc" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>.   </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
</div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/geert-wilders/talking-about-the-moroccan-issue-is-not-a-crime/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>49</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Robert Spencer Announces Candidacy for President</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-announces-candidacy-for-president/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=robert-spencer-announces-candidacy-for-president</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-announces-candidacy-for-president/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2014 05:43:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[muslim brotherhood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=247693</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Scholar of Islam lays out his plan for American victory against jihad at Restoration Weekend. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong style="color: #232323;">Below are the video and transcript to Robert Spencer’s keynote speech at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 20th Anniversary Restoration Weekend. The event took place Nov. 13th-16th at the Breakers Resort in Palm Beach, Florida. </strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/114633623" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer: </strong>This a momentous occasion actually, because I&#8217;ve decided to take this opportunity as I stand before so many patriots and lovers of freedom to announce my candidacy for the Presidency of the United States. Now, you might think this is a joke and of course it is. I have no political experience, I&#8217;ve never held elected office, never even run for office. I have no organization, no staff and no money. I am not now and have never been a member of the Washington establishment. In other words, I&#8217;m just the man for the job.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a serious point that I&#8217;m making here. The point is that the problem is not Barack Obama. The problem is not the Democrats. Barack Obama and the Democrats are just symptoms of the problem. The problem is an entrenched Washington establishment that keeps failing again and again and yet it keeps on applying the same failed solutions to problems. Presidents come and presidents go, but this establishment is forever and no matter how many times its remedies fail, it keeps on applying them without an ounce of self-reflection.</p>
<p>What we need is a massive housecleaning. What we need is a genuine outsider elected with a mandate to do this housecleaning, to really open up the windows in the State Department and let in the sunlight and clear out all these failed ideas that are doing nothing less than leading this nation into disaster.</p>
<p>The entrenched establishment is operating, of course in all areas but I&#8217;m going to concentrate on foreign policy because if we don&#8217;t stop making some of the major foreign policy mistakes that we are making, then we won&#8217;t have to worry about domestic policy before too long.</p>
<p>Chief among these is the millions that we are showering upon the Palestinians and the so-called peace process. Obama of course blames Israel for failing to make peace and blames the failure of peace talks on the so-called settlements in the West Bank and gives the impression that he believes or wants us to believe that if this settlement construction is stopped then peace will ensue and everything will be okay.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s just one word to show that that is obviously howlingly false and that one word is Gaza. We heard this song before. In 2005, we were told that the occupation was the problem and if Israel withdrew from Gaza the Gazans would pursue peace. Mortimer Zuckerman spent $14,000,000 to buy the greenhouses that the Israelis had constructed in Gaza in order to give them to the Palestinians so they would have gainful employ. The Palestinians gratefully received the greenhouses and immediately gutted them and converted them into weapon smuggling tunnels between Sinai and Gaza to get weapons to Hamas.</p>
<p>Obama and John Kerry want us to withdraw, want Israel to withdraw from Judea and Samaria, that is the West Bank, and they say the same things that we heard about Gaza. This will bring peace. This time, this withdrawal from this occupation, this is the one that&#8217;s going to do it and everything that will happen after that will be the result of the good benefits that come from this occupation. In other words, it will take the wind out of the Jihadi sails all together.</p>
<p>We saw that this didn&#8217;t work and yet keep trying it again. Why would the establishment of a Palestinian state now after the Muslims rejected it in 1948, rejected it in 2000, rejected many other times, why is it going to bring peace now? How could it when the goal of Israel&#8217;s total destruction which Hamas has repeatedly and recently reiterated still remains? Why would another Israeli withdrawal accomplish what the others never have?</p>
<p>And of course, Israel is not the only victim of our fantasy-based policy making. Another one is us, the American taxpayer. Another false assumption that is the basis of policy after policy is that poverty causes terrorism. Late in 2013 the U.S. and Turkey announced what they call the global fund for community engagement and resilience and John Kerry said that this will provide more economic opportunities for marginalized youth at risk of recruitment into Jihad groups.</p>
<p>Now look, we just saw on the news this morning another beheading of the U.S. hostage, Peter Kassig, Abdul-Rahman Kassig, whose conversion to Islam did not save him because he was still considered as a military veteran to be an American Crusader. The people who beheaded him, the people who were standing there in that video and issuing warnings to the United States and the free world, they were considering themselves to be the warriors of the law. They were considering that they were at the vanguard of a global revolution that will bring the law of God to the world and defeat the enemy infidel powers. Do you really think that if we gave them an opportunity to say, “Welcome to McDonald&#8217;s, may I take your order please,” that they would give it all up? That they would turn away from what they think is a glorious struggle in which they are the soldiers of God for a job at Walmart? It&#8217;s not going to happen. This is just going to be more hundreds of millions of dollars down the drain.</p>
<p>Not only that, but study after study has shown that terrorists are actually better educated and wealthier than their peers. Just yesterday the news came that another doctor from the UK fled the country and has joined the Taliban. He&#8217;s a doctor. He was well off, even with the socialized healthcare system in Britain. But nonetheless he went to Jihad.</p>
<p>Beyond the waste of money, our foreign policy is characterized these days by an appalling incoherence. Take Obama on Syria. The president of course has long wanted to take out Bashar Assad, but he&#8217;s been stymied by the fact that the only significant opposition to the Assad regime are, of course, Islamic Jihadis. The so-called vetted moderates. Some of the vetted moderates last year ransacked churches and drove Christians out of their homes in three Syrian towns. But now Obama is actually pursuing the strategy of removing Assad because he thinks that Assad is causing the Jihadi recruitment. So if we take out Assad then the Islamic State will melt away. We won&#8217;t even have to fight it. The raison d&#8217;être for the terrorists will be gone. Now he actually thinks this despite the fact that the Islamic State has made it clear that they don&#8217;t intend to stop with toppling Assad but they want to control not only all of Syria, but all of Iraq as well as Kuwait, Lebanon, Israel and Jordan and continue on after that. And so, the main problem with this idea is this. If he removes Assad he creates a power vacuum. What is the force that is the only one in position to take advantage of that power vacuum? The Islamic State. And so what he&#8217;s saying is in order to defeat the Islamic State we have to give the Islamic State what it wants and let it win. This is insane. And this is the policy of the United States government.</p>
<p>Now, this is all part of the idea that if we bring democracy to the Middle East, then peace will once again ensue, and so the United States decided to pursue a policy of toppling the dictators that we had previously supported in the Middle East. Saddam Hussein of course was first to go, and then Ben Ali in Tunisia, Mubarak in Egypt, Gaddafi in Libya. Of course, he was never a friend of the United States, but the idea was the same. That if these people were gone and the people in those countries had self-determination, then they would establish Western-style secular republics and once again there would be peace. Instead, of course there&#8217;s been chaos. The people that Barack Obama turned out to be supporting in Egypt and Libya were Muslim Brotherhood. They are in Syria as well. They did not want to establish western style secular republics but Sharia regimes. They did do so in Egypt for a year and they so alienated their own people that 30 million took to the streets and toppled them at that point. And yet, this policy is still in place and we are still pursuing it.</p>
<p>So, when I get to the Oval Office on January 20, 2017, and I promise never to put my feet on the desk, I will begin to sweep away all this and implement new policies.</p>
<p>First of all, no more aid, no more U.S. aid, not a penny to countries that engage in Sharia oppression. Just recently a Muslim mob murdered a Christian couple accused of blasphemy in Pakistan. And a Pakistani Christian leader called on Obama to make U.S.A. to Pakistan contingent upon the repeal of Pakistan&#8217;s blasphemy laws by which so many innocent people have been victimized, brutalized, murdered. Of course Obama ignored it but he should not have ignored it. He should have implemented it immediately and gone farther than that. There should be no more aid to any country or group that allows for or advocates the Sharia oppression of women and non-Muslims and that curtails the freedom of speech in accord with Islam&#8217;s prohibition on criticism of Islam.</p>
<p>And as for the Palestinians, they should get nothing at all, nothing, until they stop the genocidal incitement on Palestinian TV, teach their children that Israel must exist, that they have a right to that land, that it&#8217;s their land and that they must live peacefully with the Israelis. There is appalling genocidal incitement on Palestinian TV on a regular basis and it&#8217;s funded by us. This has to stop.</p>
<p>My second executive order will be to require that government intelligence and law enforcement agencies speak honestly and tell the truth about the threat we face. Of course, we know, as Geert Wilders reminded us yesterday, that immediately after a Jihad plot or a Jihad attack these days, Barrack Obama, John Kerry, David Cameron in the UK, a host of other leaders rush to the airwaves to tell us this has nothing to do with Islam. Well, they have nothing to do with rationality and common sense. And the problem is that this fantasy kills people. In Fort Hood the superiors of Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the Ford Hood Jihad murderer. They knew that he was in touch with Anwar al-Awlaki, the Jihad leader in Yemen. They knew that he himself was preaching Jihad and frightening his coworkers by preaching it. What did they do? Did they reprimand him? Did they fire him? Did they demote him? Did they prosecute him? No, they promoted him and praised him and said U.S. troops can learn a lot from him about Islam. And you know what? They did. But the lesson has still not been learned and the unreality still prevails.</p>
<p>Also, the Boston Marathon. The FBI disregarded, as Michele Bachmann told us yesterday, disregarded intelligence it received from the Russians about the bombers. The Russians said they were Jihadis. Right around this time, the FBI on orders from the Obama administration was removing all mention of Islam and Jihad from counter-terror training materials and had fired people who trained FBI members, including me, about the motives and goals of the Jihadis. And so they were being taught that Jihad is a benign spiritual struggle that ought to be encouraged. The Russians said this guy, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, is a Jihadi and they probably thought, oh how nice, and didn&#8217;t do a thing. And so more people were killed and some people were maimed for life and it is the result of this unreality.</p>
<p>We also have to end the exaggerated deference being paid toward mosques and the fact that the Islamic Society of Boston, which was not only where the Tsarnaev brothers went, but where you saw the Jihad video yesterday that Michele had, and that video was produced by a member of the Islamic society of Boston. Aafia Siddiqui went there. She&#8217;s serving 86 years for plotting to murder American soldiers in the name of Islam and Jihad. Tarek Mehanna went there. He&#8217;s doing 17 years for aiding al Qaeda, and the mosque itself was founded by Abdurrahman Alamoudi who is now in prison for funding al Qaeda. And yet the only time the FBI had been there was for outreach. Outreach. In other words, reassuring Muslims that the U.S. government is not Islamophobic. People are dying because of these things.</p>
<p>I will likewise as president call upon Muslim groups to renounce the aspects of Sharia that contradict constitutional freedoms. The U.S. government should call upon advocacy groups like the Council on American Islamic Relations to renounce in a sincere and genuine manner any intention at any point in the future to replace the U.S. Constitution with Sharia. And to implement in American mosques and Islamic schools, in a transparent and open way that is easily able to be inspected, programs to teach against this understanding of Islam that these groups ostensibly reject but have done nothing to counter. Did you know that the United Arab Emirates is more realistic about this threat right now than the United States? The UAE is cracking down on Muslim Brotherhood groups, and yesterday it listed as terrorist organizations a number of Brotherhood-linked groups around the world, including the Council on American Islamic Relations. Meanwhile, CAIR is meeting with FBI agents and with administration officials and is the go-to group for the mainstream media about Islamic issues. The UAE knows better.</p>
<p>Coming to an abrupt end on January 20, 2017 will also be all U.S. government cooperation with such groups and with any groups linked to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. As Wilders said yesterday, we also have to end immigration from Muslim countries into the United States. This is a simple matter of national security. It will of course be condemned as racism, but the harsh reality is that you cannot tell peaceful Muslims from Jihadis in any discernible manner. And so it is simply ridiculous and suicidal to continue to import whole communities of Muslims from hot Jihad areas like Somalia and Syria and Pakistan into the United States and drop them down into American communities. The strife has already begun in those communities and it&#8217;s going to get worse.</p>
<p>We need to reconfigure our internal alliances, which are based on old and outmoded cold war models. I mean, for example, we&#8217;re depending on Turkey to do so much to aid in the fight against the Islamic State, and yet the Turkish government has actually refused when John Kerry asked them to stop the oil sales by the Islamic State, which is financing their Jihad, the Turks said no. And the Turks are allowing ready passage of Jihadis through Turkey into the Islamic State and from the Islamic State through Turkey into Europe. And ultimately, no doubt into the United States.<br />
And finally, we must begin a Manhattan Project to find new sources of oil and viable and new energy sources so that we end our foreign policy dependence upon states that aid and support Jihad. And of course, this means all of the options that are available. Offshore drilling, pipelines from Alaska and Canada, fracking, concerted research to find alternatives to petroleum. This should have been done on September 12, 2001, and every day we don&#8217;t do it is another day we lose that we could have started to turn this thing around.</p>
<p>And for the truth to prevail, there&#8217;s one more thing above all that we have to fight against. It&#8217;s a stronger enemy than the Islamic Jihadis, and stronger than Russia and China. And that is, of course, the entrenched culture that comes from the left, the culture of self-hatred that denigrates everything American and exalts the most inveterate America haters as heroic and underdogs striving valiantly against brutal behemoths like Israel. That entrenched culture is the foremost obstacle to our defense against Jihad terror, and it&#8217;s a never-ending tale of obfuscation about a genuine threat and slander of those who call attention to it. And we need to call upon the educational establishment to reject the revisionism and self-hatred that dominates textbooks today and more and more comes out every day about this. And to teach that Western civilization and culture are seriously threatened and worth defending. Islamic Jihadis are counting upon and calculatingly employing the rhetoric of inclusion and multiculturalism to gain for themselves <span style="color: #404040;">entrée</span> into highest levels of influence in the United States government, in the media, as well as the final edit of discussion on these issues in American textbooks. We have to demand a stop to this, relearn our own history, value it and teach it to our own children, teaching them to revere and not find new ways to deride those who built the political and legal institutions of this country.</p>
<p>Since I&#8217;ll never get a chance actually to deliver an Inaugural Address, I&#8217;ll end with an excerpt from the one I had prepared: We do not seek war with Muslim nations. If war is brought to us however, we will defend our nation, our allies, our freedom and our families. We will not be subjugated. We will never be subjugated. This is a different kind of war from the wars we&#8217;ve fought in the past. It is an ideological war and a war fought by believers in certain ideas rather than by soldiers from particular nations. And so we will, therefore, fight this new kind of war in a new kind of way. No nation of the world will be a friend to the United States if it holds the beliefs that led to the heinous attack on this nation on 9/11 and others after it. I invite and call upon the Muslims of the world to choose a society based on the principles of the freedom of speech and the equality of rights before the law of which the United States has been the foremost exponent. And make no mistake, we will defend those principles and we will prevail. Thank you.</p>
<p>Question over here? Richard?</p>
<p><strong>Questioner: </strong>First of all, I want to let you know that you have five pledged delegates from the new Red State of Illinois.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> The bandwagon is moving!</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> Okay. The description before by Mike Finch of what groups are comfortable and where our people might be comfortable, there is a group within the Republican Party that wouldn&#8217;t be comfortable here. That&#8217;s the Grover Norquist wing which accomplished some serious infiltration during the Bush administration and David, really, and his organization, were the first to point that out and make that an issue. I would make a serious suggestion which is you draft what you have, put it in the form of a statement and provide that to all the potential Republican candidates for president and let&#8217;s see who&#8217;s serious about this issue.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Thank you, Richard. You know, that&#8217;s actually the idea of my framing it in this way. I&#8217;m hoping that these things, it seems to me this is just common sense matters of policy that should have been implemented right after 9/11 and I would hope that some candidates will have the courage to take them on. Yes, sir.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> Good morning, Robert.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Good morning, Mr. Cutler.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> Thank you so much, sir. I just want your forbearance instead of asking a question, just a fast comment. You were talking about the Tsarnaev brothers. And you know, yesterday I spoke about immigration. What most people don&#8217;t know &#8212; and this is why I&#8217;m so concerned about the single-minded focus on the Southwest border &#8212; the Tsarnaev brothers apparently committed fraud when they applied for political asylum. Yet their sister was first arrested about one month ago for threatening, it seems to be a family pattern, of blowing up her ex-boyfriend. Now, this isn&#8217;t lowhanging fruit. This is fruit in the basket. Why in the world were these folks still out and among us when they could have all been rolled up for having committed apparent fraud.</p>
<p>What I want people to understand is that if we don&#8217;t go after the integrity of the immigration system, not only admitting them, but providing political asylum and other abilities to embed themselves, we&#8217;re in deep trouble.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Absolutely.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> So what I suggest is don&#8217;t limit it to the Southwest border, folks. Think of immigration as a system and that&#8217;s where we&#8217;ve got to hammer the politicians. Don&#8217;t let them give you the copout of just looking at the border. They need to address the entire system. And thank you for indulging my comment.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Thank you. I couldn&#8217;t agree more. That&#8217;s extraordinarily important. The refugee resettlement program, which heavily favors Muslim communities and brings, as I said, whole communities and puts them in the middle of American towns and cities. That has nothing to do with the Southern border at all. It&#8217;s a matter of people flying in to the country by the sanction and invitation of the immigration service and the State Department and so on. And this has to be addressed.</p>
<p>Yes sir.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> Ken Abramowitz. Thank you for your comments. You didn&#8217;t mention anything about Iran. Iran has promised to kill everyone in America. Death to America. Death to America. Do you see any non-military solution to the Iranian situation?</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> A military solution to the Iranian situation would be very difficult.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> Do you see a non-military solution?</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Oh, a non-military solution. No. I think that the strategy that the Israelis are apparently pursuing of strange accidents happening to Iranian nuclear scientists and strange technical failures at Iranian nuclear plants is very good and I hope that it continues on a larger scale. Militarily it would be very difficult to go into Iran. It&#8217;s a lot more formidable than Iraq or Syria or Afghanistan. And of course, now, with the impossible rules of engagement that the military is saddled with and the weakness of the military as has been explained here at this point after 13 years of war, it would be very difficult to get involved in Iran at this point. But I do think that there are other ways and ultimately will probably need to bomb some of the nuclear facilities as well.</p>
<p>Yes ma&#8217;am.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> So much of what&#8217;s happening with the Jihadis is related to social media and my question is does anybody have the authority to require this social media to shut down and is that a good idea in your opinion?</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Does any &#8212; I didn&#8217;t hear.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> Does anybody have the authority to request that the social media shut this down and in your opinion is that a good idea?</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s a good idea. I know that they are recruiting in social media and in Facebook and Twitter you can see Islamic State supporters and, of course, I was just this morning working on Jihad Watch and saw the video of the beheading readily there. You Tube took it right down, but it was up at another site and I&#8217;m not sure that this should be stopped. Because I&#8217;m a strong advocate of freedom of speech in general but, this is not really a matter of freedom of speech, it is propaganda from an enemy during wartime. The problem is that I&#8217;m afraid that if you say to Facebook and Twitter that you need to stop the accounts of extremists, that they&#8217;ll stop mine. And those of people like us, rather than those of the Islamic State and other Jihadis. If we had a sane society and a sane group of people at the head of those organizations then it might be different, but not in the present climate.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> Does Islam exist without Jihad and Sharia?</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Islam does not exist without Jihad and Sharia. There has never been a form of Islam that did not include the teaching that Muslims must fight against non-Muslims and impose Islamic law upon them and Islamic law denies them basic rights. There is no sect, no school of law, no understanding of Islam that has ever been in history that did not teach that. And so the idea that this is a tiny minority of extremists who have twisted and hijacked the teachings of the religion is absolutely false on the face of it.</p>
<p>Yes sir.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> As we have a head of the CIA who is a self-admitted Muslim, do we have a Muslim in the White House?</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Well, you know, the head of the CIA is not actually a self-admitted Muslim. He is apparently a Muslim. John Guandolo, who was an FBI agent for many years, he says that when he was in the Bureau it was an open secret and it was well known that Brennan had converted while he served in Saudi Arabia. But Brennan has never actually publically addressed this either to confirm or deny it. And there was a story in, I believe, the <em>New Yorker</em>, a lengthy story about our counter terror apparatus a few years ago that identified a high level counter terror official as a convert to Islam, and that&#8217;s probably Brennan, but he has not openly admitted this. In any case, is Barack Obama a Muslim? I don&#8217;t know. He doesn&#8217;t answer my emails or return my calls. But I can tell you that, of course, in terms of Islamic law he is a Muslim because his father was a Muslim and his stepfather was a Muslim. He himself says that he got in trouble for making faces during Quran class. In one of his autobiographies he says this. In Quran class. In Indonesia you only went to Quran class if you were a Muslim. The Christians didn&#8217;t go to Quran class. Later on, of course he joined Reverend Wright&#8217;s church and during the 2008 campaign somebody called Reverend Wright&#8217;s church and said I&#8217;m a Muslim but I&#8217;d like to join your church. Is it okay? Can Muslims be members of your church? And they said, oh yes, absolutely.</p>
<p>And so, the thing is, ultimately though we do not know what Barack Obama&#8217;s personal beliefs are and I&#8217;m not sure he has any except for certainly Marxism and socialism. But there&#8217;s no doubt that everything about his foreign policy has been in line with the Muslim Brotherhood agenda, every aspect of it. And you can say, well no, he killed Bin Laden and al-Awlaki. Well sure. The Muslim Brotherhood has a different strategy.   They do not generally pursue violence. They won the election in Egypt and took power. They didn&#8217;t bomb everything in Egypt and take power. It was a difference of strategy however, not of goal. And everything about the Muslim Brotherhood&#8217;s goal to bring Islamic law to various countries, Barack Obama has aided. So, whether he&#8217;s doing that because he is himself a Muslim or just because he thinks that Islamic law is a good thing for societies and that seems to be clear. I don&#8217;t think it makes really a difference in terms of his policies.</p>
<p>Yes ma&#8217;am.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> When Hillary runs do you think it&#8217;s a good idea that our side would introduce her connections to the Muslim Brotherhood, Huma Abedin, that whole section and would that be a beneficial route to take against her?</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Well, the first way I&#8217;ll answer that is to say that if the Republicans bring up Hillary&#8217;s connections to the Brotherhood and Huma Abedin&#8217;s connections to the Brotherhood during the campaign, it will backfire on them and they will be denounced as racists and bigots and hate-mongers  and so on. And so that is never going to happen. But what does need to happen in a larger sense is that there needs to be a general challenge to the idea that any talk about this is racism and bigotry and hatred and we have to stop tolerating it on the right. And all too often we do and people in the Republican establishment, they&#8217;re either with Grover Norquist as has been said and Grover Norquist is tied to the Brotherhood, or they are too afraid because they don&#8217;t want this controversy and they don&#8217;t want these charges of racism and bigotry so they&#8217;re too afraid to touch this issue. But that comes with a high price. As I said before, people are being killed because of our refusal to confront this issue honestly and so if we do not take it on, then it is only going to make things worse in the long run. It has to be confronted sooner or later.</p>
<p>Yes sir</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> Good morning. Thank you very much for that very informative presentation.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Thank you.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> I come here to learn a lot more than what I get from other places, but as I listen to your presentation, why isn&#8217;t this the same as what happened to our country regarding communism which started slowly and Congress finally had open hearings to bring it the forefront of the American people? Why don&#8217;t we have something like that now? Because it seems to me the only way to get the Americans on board is to get Congress to have open hearings. Now certainly there are going to be those on the left that disagree and those on the right that are going to be different, but this is not different to me than communism but for one thing. These are groups that are not attached to countries. Communism was. So why not have open hearings in Congress to bring it to the American people?</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Well, the answer is because it actually is a lot like the communist threat in the sense that the left was in terms of the communist threat and is in terms of the Jihad tied in with the enemy. And you know, you say there were congressional hearings and of course there were. But then, after that came the demonization of every opposition to communism as McCarthyism. And that persisted until the Berlin wall fell. And I remember all the time I was growing up and until I was 27 when it fell, knowing that fierce opponents of communism were stigmatized in the American mainstream and demonized and David Horowitz knows that very well from his own experience.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> But that&#8217;s the boldness of leadership. That&#8217;s the boldness of a Michele Bachmann. People like her that can do that.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Yeah. Well, we don&#8217;t bold have leaders now.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> And once you have a people that take [inaudible] of the world who give this after and don&#8217;t hear the demonization and characterization.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> I couldn&#8217;t agree more. We need them. We do not have them. I hope that such leaders will emerge. But the sophistication of the propaganda apparatus to demonize and stigmatize anyone who speaks out about this threat and to marginalize them in the mainstream, it is much more sophisticated now than it was even during the Cold War. And so, I think that&#8217;s one of the reasons why these leaders have not emerged. That it is just political suicide to take on this problem. Pamela Geller and I had a conference at CPAC a few years ago that we called Jihad: The Political Third Rail. You know, the third rail in the New York subway is the one if you touch it you die. And that&#8217;s how most of our politicians regard this. But I do believe that&#8217;s wrong. They should not be playing this game and letting these people get away with this. We need a Reagan. I hope he emerges.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> We have time to make one more question? How about Sandy Usher up front.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> There it is.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> Oh. Thank you. Robert, I liked the idea over here of you putting it in a bulletin point. So in putting it on your web site so that I can download it and pass it around.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> I will.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> And I also want to tell everybody let&#8217;s pass it around. We&#8217;ve heard it. Let&#8217;s get it out there. We don&#8217;t have those bold leaders. And I send loads of Christmas cards every Christmas. I never send one without some bullet point information. There&#8217;s too much ignorance going on out there. That stamp costs a lot of money. I want to make it worthwhile. And, Robert, even you dear Robert, use the word mistake. This is no mistake, it&#8217;s design.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> Oh yes. Absolutely.</p>
<p><strong>Questioner:</strong> Yes. Thank you.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Spencer:</strong> It&#8217;s a mistake in application but I have no doubt that it is on purpose. And actually Thomas Patrick brought this up a couple days ago in the same connection. I don&#8217;t know if he&#8217;s here now, but in any case, the fact is that during the 2008 campaign Barack Obama was seen reading The Post-American World by Fareed Zakaria, and he was very much engrossed in the book. He was carrying it to one airplane to wherever else he was going with his finger in his place. He wasn&#8217;t going to miss a minute in reading this book. Now, I don&#8217;t know if you know the book, but The Post-American World is about how if we want world peace, we have to weaken America, militarily, politically and economically and bring it down to the level of all the other countries and not have any super powers in the world and then there will be peace.</p>
<p>When Pamela Geller and I wrote the book The Post-American Presidency about Obama in 2010, we were arguing that that was the strategy he was pursuing, the Post-American World strategy to weaken America in order to bring about this chimera of world peace. And I think we&#8217;ve been abundantly proven correct in the four years since then.</p>
<p>Thank you very much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/robert-spencer-announces-candidacy-for-president/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>28</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ben Shapiro: Republicans Secretly Want Obama&#8217;s Amnesty</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/truthrevolt-org/ben-shapiro-republicans-secretly-want-obamas-amnesty/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=ben-shapiro-republicans-secretly-want-obamas-amnesty</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/truthrevolt-org/ben-shapiro-republicans-secretly-want-obamas-amnesty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2014 05:50:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TruthRevolt.org]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=247194</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Truth Revolt video. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="color: #000000;"><strong>Ben Shapiro explains why establishment Republicans aren&#8217;t using the power of the purse to stop Barack Obama&#8217;s executive amnesty: They don&#8217;t want to stop it. See the video and transcript below. </strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/3DHJ-CbOGQA" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p style="color: #000000;">TRANSCRIPT:</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">There is the only one way to explain the new proposal by Speaker of the House John Boehner and other top Republicans for stopping President Obama’s executive amnesty: they don’t want to stop it at all.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Here’s the story.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Republicans have two options: the smart option and the stupid option.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">The smart option would be for Republicans to pass a short-term continuing resolution to fund the government through January. That would allow Republicans to come into office and take power in the Senate. Then Republicans could do what Congresses have done for centuries: avoid passing omnibus spending bills, which tie all spending together and lead to shutdowns, and instead fund the government through separate appropriations bills, one per department. That de-links funding for the Defense Department, for example, from funding for Obama’s executive amnesty. Obama would have a tough time vetoing a standalone Defense funding bill that has nothing to do with executive amnesty.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Then there’s the stupid option.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Republicans could push forward an omnibus spending bill that would completely fund the government through next September, but fund the Department of Homeland Security – and Obama’s amnesty –through next March. That would effectively allow 60 days of funding for Obama’s program to give work permits to illegal immigrants.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Now, Obama probably won’t accept the deal, and will shut down the government over the failure to fully fund his executive amnesty. Speaker Boehner will then cave, and fund the entire program. We know this because that’s exactly what he did regarding Obamacare two years ago, during the infamous government shutdown.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">But let’s say Obama signs the bill. There’s no guarantee Speaker Boehner will fight over DHS funding in March, either. In fact, certain Republican congresspeople have already indicated he won’t.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">Naturally, Boehner is pursuing the stupid option. Why? Not because he’s stupid, but because he likes Obama’s executive amnesty. President Obama’s executive amnesty allows him to sign off on the establishment Republican soft-on-immigration policy while simultaneously complaining about Dictator Obama. He can win points with the base by bashing President Obama, and at the same time, greenlight Obama’s immigration policy – which Republican establishment types from the Wall Street Journal to Jeb Bush to the Chamber of Commerce have been pushing relentlessly as “comprehensive immigration reform.” Obama has given them cover. All they have to do now is whine about Obama being a Big Bad Tyrant, then fund his tyranny. They can pop the cork in the back offices secretly while hypocritically blasting Obama for seizing their power in public.</p>
<p style="color: #000000;">They’re playing conservatives for suckers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/truthrevolt-org/ben-shapiro-republicans-secretly-want-obamas-amnesty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>43</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is a Country Merely Empty Space?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/fjordman/is-a-country-merely-empty-space/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=is-a-country-merely-empty-space</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/fjordman/is-a-country-merely-empty-space/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2014 05:00:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Fjordman]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fredrik Reinfeldt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Multiculturalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sweden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[West]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=247103</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Amid immigrant turmoil, Swedish politician reveals what he really thinks of his country. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/article-1351251-053BF13A0000044D-321_634x558.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-247229" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/article-1351251-053BF13A0000044D-321_634x558-397x350.jpg" alt="article-1351251-053BF13A0000044D-321_634x558" width="328" height="289" /></a>Fredrik Reinfeldt was Prime Minister of Sweden from 2006 to 2014. His center-right coalition government suffered a defeat in the general elections of September 2014. Allegedly conservative Prime Minister Reinfeldt stated that the native Swedish culture was merely <a href="http://www.dn.se/nyheter/politik/reinfeldt-det-ursvenska-ar-blott-barbari"><span style="color: #0433ff;">barbarism</span></a>; everything good was imported from abroad. He said this in 2006 following a visit to the town of Södertälje, near Stockholm.</p>
<p>In September 2005 a police station in Södertälje was hit by shots from an automatic weapon, following a confrontation between aggressive immigrant youths and the local police. The trouble started after a Swedish girl was called a “whore” and reacted negatively to the epithet.</p>
<p>If a leading politician had said that African, Asian or Islamic culture was “merely barbarism,” there would have been a huge public outcry and calls for his immediate resignation due to “racism.” His career might have been over. Yet disrespecting and mocking the traditions of Europeans is apparently no problem.</p>
<p>Suburbs in Stockholm and other Swedish cities were rocked by major immigrant riots in the spring of 2013. There are fears that similar riots could return at any moment. The underlying problems have not gone away. Despite this, the ruling elites stubbornly reject any suggestion that mass immigration should be curtailed.</p>
<p>Eleven young men and boys were detained in December 2014 after <a href="http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&amp;artikel=6039140"><span style="color: #0433ff;">rioting</span></a> in a Stockholm suburb. The <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aac8w14cook&amp;feature=player_detailpage">police were attacked</a> with stones and Molotov cocktails, a park was vandalized and several cars were torched. The eleven are suspected of arson, vandalism, violent rioting and attempted severe assault. &#8220;They are still being questioned,&#8221; police spokeswoman Kia Samrell told news agency TT. Police spokeswoman Elisabeth Wernsten told Swedish Radio News: “A witness saw a large gathering of younger individuals who marched towards the center of Rågsved, where the school is. The witness suspected that the youths were going to smash the school up.” When the police gathered to confront them, they started throwing stones and firebombs. Another police spokeswoman, Eva Nilsson, said that the incident appears to have been premeditated. Police still had no explanation as to why they had been attacked. “This gang simply decided to get together to commit crime. There is no good reason for wanting to attack the police in this way. Nothing provoked the incident,” said Wernsten.</p>
<p>The Rågsved school is one of the poorest performing schools in the country. Just 29 percent of pupils received high enough grades to be admitted to senior high school.</p>
<p>In late 2014, former Prime Minister and outgoing Moderate Party leader Fredrik Reinfeldt once again ruled out any cooperation with the Sweden Democrats, who want to restrict mass immigration to Sweden. In a major interview with the left-wing daily <a href="http://politiken.dk/magasinet/interview/ECE2476627/de-aabne-svenske-hjerters-far/"><span style="color: #0433ff;"><i>Politiken</i></span></a> in Denmark, Reinfeldt rejected the notion that Sweden offers a safe haven for more refugees than the country can cope with, saying that there is plenty of room in the Scandinavian and Nordic countries for more human beings fleeing oppression and war. “<a href="http://www.thelocal.se/20141207/no-home-for-swe-dems-on-centre-right-reinfeldt"><span style="color: #0433ff;">What does</span></a> the word ‘enough’ mean? Sweden is full? The Nordic region is full? Are we too many people? We are 25 million people living in the Nordic region. I often fly over the Swedish countryside and I would advise others to do the same. There are endless fields and forests. There&#8217;s more space than you might imagine. Those who claim that the country is full, they should demonstrate where it is full.”</p>
<p><span style="color: #0433ff;"><a href="http://politik.tv2.dk/2014-12-07-df-om-reinfeldt-interview-en-trussel-mod-danmark">Søren Espersen</a></span> from the Danish People&#8217;s Party (DF) warned that the very liberal Swedish immigration policies now constitute a threat to Denmark and other neighboring countries. The declaration by Sweden’s former Prime Minister Reinfeldt that “there is plenty of space for more refugees” in the Nordic countries was slammed by Danish leaders. “<a href="http://www.thelocal.se/20141207/no-home-for-swe-dems-on-centre-right-reinfeldt"><span style="color: #0433ff;">This is</span></a> the first time I’ve heard that a country’s geographic size should determine how many people from distant lands can fit in. That’s a new one for me. But space is not the problem – the problem is that we have huge economic and cultural challenges,” Martin Geertsen, the integration spokesman for the opposition party Venstre, told Danish media. Mette Reissmann of the ruling Social Democrats also dismissed Reinfeldt’s criticism, adding that Denmark doesn’t share Sweden’s goal of being seen as a “humanitarian superpower.”</p>
<p>Sweden is larger than Germany, but has a much smaller population. <a href="https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sw.html"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Sweden</span></a>’s total land area is about 450,000 square kilometers. <a href="http://www.photius.com/rankings/geography/population_density_persons_per_sq_km_2014_0.html"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Macau</span></a>’s population density is currently 20,674 persons per square kilometers. If you populate Sweden with the same population density as Macau, you have room for 9.3 billion people. Theoretically, you could move the entire planet’s human population to Sweden. Yet there is even more open space in Antarctica.</p>
<p>Is a country simply empty space, waiting to be filled by shopping and human rights? Are all cultures equal? Can you replace Swedes with Somalis and expect to get the same result? That seems to be the view of transnational and globalist Western elites, although this view is rarely articulated as clearly as Mr. Reinfeldt does.</p>
<p>Much to the annoyance of Western ruling elites, many normal Europeans disagree. They see their countries as the homeland of a distinct nation. They do not believe that all cultures are equal and do not celebrate being gradually displaced in their homeland by foreign tribes. Is a nation merely an idea, or is it an organic unit of people with a shared history and heritage? That is the crucial question underlying the rising tensions over mass immigration throughout the Western world.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/fjordman/is-a-country-merely-empty-space/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>92</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rep. Louie Gohmert: How Conservatives Defeated the Amnesty Bill</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/rep-louie-gohmert-how-conservatives-defeated-the-amnesty-bill/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=rep-louie-gohmert-how-conservatives-defeated-the-amnesty-bill</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/rep-louie-gohmert-how-conservatives-defeated-the-amnesty-bill/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2014 05:36:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[louie gohmert]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=246956</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A tireless defender of America takes us inside the battle for immigration sanity at Restoration Weekend. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Below are the video and transcript to Congressman Louie Gohmert&#8217;s keynote address at the David Horowitz Freedom Center&#8217;s 20th Anniversary Restoration Weekend. <strong style="color: #232323;">The event took place Nov. 13th-16th at the Breakers Resort in Palm Beach, Florida. </strong></strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/113182777" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Rep. Louie Gohmert:</strong> Wow, you all are amazing, but even more amazing, my wife just stood up too. Wow, Kathy. So thanks, Kathy. I don&#8217;t remember seeing you stand up and clap for me before, but thank you. Anyway, I have been looking so forward to being with you this weekend. You would think after a great victory like we had Tuesday, you know, we&#8217;d all be so fired up, but you know we did have a great victory Tuesday night, but we&#8217;re up against a president that doesn&#8217;t observe the sanctity of the Constitution, and he doesn&#8217;t believe in following the law if he doesn&#8217;t like it, and he has, at his disposal, the largest, most expensive criminal defense firm in the whole world. You know it as the Department of Justice. But wow, what a defense firm he has, and they protect him at all cost.</p>
<p>So I know there have been times that you, from talking to so many of you, you&#8217;ve been down like John and I have, like Jeff and I have, but we&#8217;re not giving up, but sometimes you just go what do we gotta do? How do we win? How do we stop this thing that just is so big and so mean, so dishonest, and I thought about that whole story, and none of y&#8217;all except Kathy knew my late mother. She was brilliant. She loved to tell stories, and because she was so smart and she was so funny and told such great stories, I asked her one time, what lineage do we have? Do you have any Jewish blood? What do we got? And she said &#8212; yeah &#8217;cause she&#8217;s so smart and tells such great stories &#8212; and she said, well son, on my side of the family we&#8217;re a Duke&#8217;s mixture. I said, oh, I like the sound of that. What does that mean? She said well it means if we were in the dog world, you&#8217;d be called a mutt. Oh, well not so good.</p>
<p>But anyway, so sometimes I remember old stories mom said. But I was thinking about, gosh, how do you beat this big, mean thing, and thought about the guy who had genetically alter-bred this incredible dog, big as a Great Dane, meaner than a Rottweiler and Pit Bull, all these lines in this dog, and he had a standing offer of $1,000.00 for anybody that could whip his dog, anybody had a dog that could whip his dog. Nobody&#8217;s dog could whip his dog. One day he gets a knock on the door, and he opens the door, and a little elderly lady said I&#8217;m so sorry but my dog has killed your dog, and he said yeah, right, that didn&#8217;t happen. She said, no I&#8217;m really serious. And he said, well, what kind of dog do you have? And she said, she&#8217;s a Pekinese. He said, yeah there&#8217;s no Pekinese that&#8217;s ever gonna kill my dog, and she said, well, no he&#8217;s, he&#8217;s dead, it just – so how would your little Pekinese have killed my dog? And she said, well, she got stuck in his throat. Anyway, sometimes you may lose one of your group but you can take these folks out, you know? So you just can&#8217;t give up hope. And I tell you even before the election this past week there was a neat victory.</p>
<p>Now, if you go back a year and a half, our Republican leadership had been saying they didn&#8217;t want to use the word &#8220;amnesty,&#8221; but basically that we were gonna pass a bill that legalized people that were here illegally. We had to do it. We could start with the so-called &#8220;DREAMers&#8221; and when they say DREAMers, they&#8217;re not talking about your children, my children, those who sit in school, study hard, have great dreams of doing great things. No, they&#8217;re talking about people whose parents bring them or send them illegally into the country, and they just forget about the children that are here that had dreams of their own, dreams besides being overwhelmed with indebtedness and massive bureaucracy that pries into every area of their private lives. Those aren&#8217;t the dreams these guys are talking about. But there was a small group of us that started meeting back spring of 2013 because our leaders were saying basically we needed to do some kind of what we knew would be amnesty, whether they called it that or not. And they wanted it done by May of 2013, and we were able to continue rallying troops around the country like you &#8212; contact your Congressmen, contact your Senator &#8212; and I&#8217;m telling you, it&#8217;s no better feeling than to know you got not just a great soldier, you have a soldier, a warrior and a leader in the Senate like Jeff Sessions and our friend Ted Cruz.</p>
<p>So hopefully this will be a little bit of encouragement to you. It was a total frustration to me until the very end of the week. But we have been able to put off having any kind of legalization bill, and our Speaker hired John McCain&#8217;s staffer. They&#8217;ve been working on amnesty for years and years, and so that caused some concern amongst some of us. And it was pretty sharp. The Speaker appointed seven people to a task force who were going to put all of our principles that we would want to see in an immigration bill on paper and come to a consensus, something that all the Republicans could agree on. And they actually did a pretty good job. They did better than pretty good. It was a very good job, and I could agree on all of them. A couple of them were pretty esoteric BS, but basically they were principles we could all agree on. You know, things like, if you come in illegally then you must be deported and forced to come back legally. I mean just basic stuff.</p>
<p>So everybody in our conference agreed on the principles. They were good principles. And yet people were being whipped, you know, in other words, asked how are you gonna vote on the bill, and we had a majority of our conference that said, based on our principles, I&#8217;m 100 percent, I&#8217;ll vote for a bill that&#8217;s based on our principles. Some of us had the gall to say, yeah, I agree on the principle, I really need to see the bill. Could I see the bill? We won the majority in 2010, and I would bet that every one of our Republicans that got elected in 2010 at one time or another said you put us in the majority, we&#8217;ll read the bills. But well, gee, if they&#8217;re based on our principles, we ought to be covered, right? But let us see the bill. But Tuesday of the last week of July before the August recess &#8212; and I hope y&#8217;all don&#8217;t end up being some of those, you guys ought to be working through August. Look, as I told my dear friend, I love him like a brother, Eric Bolling, &#8220;Eric, I heard you berating Congress because we&#8217;re not in session more days of the year. Are you nuts? You really want us in session more days of the year?&#8221; I mean the best days in Congress are the week we come back after a month of being in our district being fussed at. Those are good days. You know, &#8217;cause everybody&#8217;s fresh from being fussed at. That&#8217;s good. That&#8217;s a great way to run Congress. So it&#8217;s the last week, Tuesday. They&#8217;ve got a majority of our guys that I&#8217;m voting for the bill and you guys need to get on board, and it got kinda nasty for people that were saying I&#8217;d really like to see the bill, please.</p>
<p>Well, Tuesday evening we got a copy of the bill that we were gonna vote on Thursday. Now you might say, wait a minute, you got it on Tuesday, it was filed and you&#8217;re voting on Thursday. You guys promised that you would have 72, never vote on a bill that wasn&#8217;t filed for less than 72 hours. Well if you look carefully at what our leadership promised, they said three days. Some of us interpreted that to mean 72 hours, but they took the approach that Christians take on Jesus being crucified on Friday and on the third day, Sunday, resurrected. So I think that&#8217;s fine to count it that way from the Bible, but some of us really need more time than that to read a bill. A day and a half really doesn&#8217;t do it.</p>
<p>So anyway, I read the bill. I finished at 2:00 a.m., and I do highlighting on my computer, but I like a hard copy, and I&#8217;ve got my highlighter, I&#8217;ve got my black pen for notes in the margin and interlineations, and then I&#8217;ve got my blue pen for things I want to spot real quick when I pick it up, and so I&#8217;m making notes, I&#8217;ve got underlining, highlighting, all this stuff. I laid down for three hours, got back up at 5:00, re-read it; yep, it was as bad as I thought it was. And some of it I didn’t even catch on the first reading. But one of the principles we agreed on is, for example, the over 90 percent that don&#8217;t show up for an immigration hearing, they should be deported. Well there it was at the bottom of Page 18. It said if an immigrant fails to appear for his or her hearing, the immigration judge shall immediately issue an order of deportation. Well, as a former judge, you didn&#8217;t show up for a hearing, you were out on bond, I immediately issued a warrant for your arrest. People would get arrested and I found generally they&#8217;re quicker ready for trial when they&#8217;re in jail than when they&#8217;re out gallivanting. One of those things.</p>
<p>So anyway, I thought, okay that adheres to the principles, but then instead of being a little dot called a period, there was a space and the two-letter word &#8220;if.&#8221; If? If what? Well, you turn the page and over at the top of 19 it says the government is successful in proving that the immigrant&#8217;s failure to appear was the immigrant&#8217;s fault. What? Yeah. See you guys weren&#8217;t even judges and you picked that up. But you have to read that. Well what does that mean? That means it&#8217;s a de facto amnesty provision because it you&#8217;re an immigration lawyer advising a client who has come in illegally, you say look don&#8217;t ever appear for a hearing, and if you don&#8217;t, and in fact don&#8217;t leave a forwarding address, go somewhere different than where you first went because if you don&#8217;t ever show up, the worse they can do is issue another notice to appear that you&#8217;ll never get. They can never prove it was your fault &#8217;cause, gee, you didn&#8217;t know. So just keep failing to appear. I mean it&#8217;s a de facto amnesty in that one little provision.</p>
<p>Well, there were things like that throughout, and one that really got my attention &#8212; a first-degree felony in Texas you can sentence not only to 99 years or life but you can also add up to a $10,000.00 fine. Well, that&#8217;s not so much in this world, and then here was a provision that immigration judge in order to enforce any order the immigration judge feels appropriate, necessary, can assess and enforce any amount of fine that he felt appropriate. Yeah, okay so say you&#8217;re here in Palm Beach. Well, gee, this is a pretty wealthy area so maybe it needs to be a million dollars a day until we get them to rezone, whatever. And rezoning that&#8217;s in some of the HUD block grants. Now that&#8217;s a whole other issues. But there were these things throughout that were a little bit scary. And so the next morning, a few of us were meeting, and I&#8217;d made a few copies of my notes &#8217;cause Michele Bachmann said, hey, can we get copies of your notes? We don&#8217;t have time to go through this like you did. So I passed those out and said, fine, use them however. And by the time I thought of it, Rush was going on the air, &#8217;cause I thought we need to get this out to people that can tell the public. And I knew if I emailed it to Shawn he didn&#8217;t have time to read it before his show started.</p>
<p>So I thought about one of the smartest guys in the country, guy named Mark Levin, and so I emailed it to Mark with a PDF copy attached so he had all my notes and stuff, and said, Mark, here&#8217;s the bill they filed. We need people being educated across the country as to exact words to what it says. He emails right back, says, Louie, I don&#8217;t have time to read this bill before my show. And then about ten minutes later he goes, oh, I&#8217;m finding your notes. Oh this is great, I can do this. And that night, Mark didn&#8217;t mention my name, but by golly he went through that bill page by page and just ripped into all those different sections where there were just major problems. So across the country, millions of people were getting the idea, wow. They heard the actual language, and just like you, you figured out that&#8217;s not good. That&#8217;s not what we believe in. That&#8217;s wrong.</p>
<p>And so people started burning up the phone lines. Numbers USA, Tea Party Patriots, all these groups were calling their representatives, and on Wednesday, one of our leaders told me they had the votes to pass it on Thursday morning. John and I were already there, but we started having people from other states saying, hey, I just had to go tell the Speaker I know I said yes, but I thought it was in accordance with our principles, and my phone line&#8217;s burning up. I got a primary coming up in Tennessee or here, there, and then I also had a number of people from Alabama and Mississippi who said Senator Sessions has really made it uncomfortable. Our constituents are upset and they don&#8217;t want me to vote for this bill, and if I go against Senator Sessions I&#8217;m probably not going to win another. I mean, isn&#8217;t that awesome? I mean, isn&#8217;t it great to have that kind of warrior over there?</p>
<p>So they began debate on the bill, and shortly after they began debate on the bill, they had lost dozens of people. They never would tell us how many they lost; they couldn&#8217;t pass the bill. So the Speaker is ready to just say, well, obviously we&#8217;ll never be able to pick up all these lost votes so we might as well go home. But a bunch of our members said, wait a minute, let&#8217;s have a conference and talk about it. So 3:00 p.m. we had a conference, and the majority said, look, obviously there are people here that have read this bill and know what we need to do to fix it. Instead of being out for the month of August and going home with our tail between our legs, let&#8217;s let the people that know what&#8217;s wrong with this bill get in a room and fix it so we can vote on something decent before we go home.</p>
<p>One of the things I didn&#8217;t catch on the first reading, that we all agreed on as a principle: if a state calls up its own National Guard to help secure the border, then the federal government should reimburse them. There was a provision in there that said that. I didn&#8217;t catch it on first reading because it cited a federal law that allowed for the National Guard to be called up, but it was the provision that required the Secretary of Defense to approve the calling up before you could get reimbursed and any reimbursement had to be approved by the Secretary of Defense. I didn&#8217;t read that law the first time. I didn&#8217;t realize that it sounded good, sounded like it did what we wanted, but it didn&#8217;t. It was a de facto amnesty bill.</p>
<p>That night a bunch of us got in a room, about 12 to 15, for about 2 ½ hours. We knocked out 18 of the most offenses pages that would have made it de facto amnesty. We got in some good, tight language and at 10:00 p.m. the next night, Friday night before we recessed for the month of August, we passed a decent border bill. And it was because Americans were paying attention and let their Congress members know this isn&#8217;t what we want to do.</p>
<p>Now I know it took a long time to tell you that, but I wanted to tell you that so you understand you can still make a difference. We can still keep disastrous things from happening. Now we were told if we passed this, the Senate will never take it up &#8217;cause it&#8217;s so tough. If I were Harry Reid, I would&#8217;ve taken it up like that, if we&#8217;d passed it, &#8217;cause it would&#8217;ve hamstrung us and been a de facto amnesty. You know the question was asked, who wrote the original one? I asked that question, and I said if it was the staff member that got hired from John McCain&#8217;s staff then I&#8217;m very concerned because I know the Immigration Subcommittee did not write this. I know that&#8217;s a subcommittee under judiciary. I know judiciary did not write this. I wanna know who it is. And we never were given the answer.</p>
<p><strong>Audience Member:</strong> So we&#8217;re fighting the Democrats and our own Republicans?</p>
<p><strong>Rep. Louie Gohmert:</strong> Well now &#8212; she&#8217;s saying we&#8217;re fighting the Democrats and our own Republicans. Well, yes, I guess that&#8217;s true. But I wanted to give you a little encouragement and by the same token encourage myself. &#8216;Cause I need encouragement. So I&#8217;m telling you encouraging things so hopefully it&#8217;ll encourage me. &#8216;Cause this has been a bummer of a week. I&#8217;m running for Republican State Committee Chair and even one of my dearest friends yesterday said, you know, Louie, and he literally said that I think you may be the smartest guy in Congress, but you are such a firebrand. You stand up in conference, you tell &#8216;em how it is, you&#8217;re such an honest man. You stand up alone and you&#8217;re not afraid of doing that, and we really need to keep you there. So I&#8217;m not supporting you for RSC Chair. He said, but you&#8217;re like a Jeremiah, you just tell it like it is. I said, so basically you want me as a Jeremiah to continue yelling out in the wilderness by myself instead of helping us get where we need to go? Well, no I wouldn&#8217;t say it that way. Well, I would.</p>
<p>But anyway, so it&#8217;s been a frustrating week. I&#8217;ve looked forward to being here. Let me just add a couple things to encourage you. Tom may be here this morning but Judicial Watch and Breitbart hired Kellyanne Conway to do really accurate polling. They weren&#8217;t trying to skew people. They weren&#8217;t trying to get the answer they wanted. They wanted real answers. Where did the American people stand that have gone out and voted on Election Day and the accurate numbers. When asked whether illegal aliens should receive discounted in-state tuition rates, subsidized by taxpayers, 76 percent of the voters disagreed with that, 65 percent strongly. Among minorities, 58 percent of blacks, 59 percent of the Hispanics disagreed with that. How do you lose on that issue? You know by doing what we believe is right. A majority of voters, 58 percent, believe we should enforce current laws that require illegal immigrants to return to their home countries. How do you lose when that&#8217;s our position? That&#8217;s what we got elected to do. Some reason our leadership doesn&#8217;t get it, but thank you for getting it, and I&#8217;ve got excerpts from what the media&#8217;s calling the &#8220;new law&#8221; that our Monarch spoke into being yesterday, and the purpose is, from the State Department, I&#8217;m quoting, &#8220;provide a safe, legal and orderly alternative to the dangerous journey that some children are currently undertaking to the United States.&#8221; How about telling them don&#8217;t take the dangerous journey? Huh? Wouldn&#8217;t that be a better policy? But it doesn&#8217;t begin until December of 2014, and you can request a refugee – and I&#8217;m reading this, this is State Department words &#8212; &#8220;refugee resettlement interview for unmarried children under 21 in El Salvador, Guatemala or Honduras. The second parent may be added to the child&#8217;s petition and considered for refugee status and if denied, refugee status be considered for parole. Approved refugees will be eligible for the same support&#8221; &#8212; y&#8217;all know that means money, right? &#8212; &#8220;provided to all refugees resettled in the United States.&#8221;</p>
<p>So it is a disastrous policy and that is just the start. It&#8217;s important you&#8217;re here because this is the kind of place where we can get our thoughts together. We talk together, we&#8217;ll be around and we can strategize how we stop this disaster to the country. And just remember &#8212; and we got great people here that I need to shut up and let take over &#8212; but keep in mind it&#8217;s absolutely true, the old saying in Washington: no matter how cynical you get, it&#8217;s never enough to catch up. Thank you.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/rep-louie-gohmert-how-conservatives-defeated-the-amnesty-bill/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Immigration Wars</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/immigration-wars/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=immigration-wars</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/immigration-wars/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2014 05:40:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illegal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sessions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=246545</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An all-star panel takes on America's immigration crisis at Restoration Weekend. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong style="color: #232323;">Below are the video and transcript to the panel discussion “Immigration Wars,” which took place at the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s 20th Anniversary Restoration Weekend. The event was held Nov. 13th-16th at the Breakers Resort in Palm Beach, Florida. </strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/113190066" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Sen. Jeff Sessions:</strong> For 40 years really, the American people have been right and just in pleading with their Congress to create a lawful system of immigration that&#8217;s fairly enforced and that serves the national interest.  It&#8217;s the politicians and the establishment that one time after another, that it always succeeded somehow in keeping the will of the people from being effectuated.  It&#8217;s just amazing.  I said in 2007 we&#8217;d offer amendments and they would offer things that would pass and we&#8217;d offer things, it wouldn&#8217;t pass, and I finally realized this was the test.  If it worked they wouldn&#8217;t pass it.  If it wouldn&#8217;t work, they&#8217;d pass it.  You&#8217;ve seen that, Louie, I know, and the bills that come through. If they&#8217;re moving and got a lot of support you&#8217;d read it carefully and there&#8217;s one loop hole after another and it doesn&#8217;t work.  So first the American people are right, decent and just in making that demand of their government.</p>
<p>Are we a sovereign nation or not?  A sovereign nation controls its borders.  If you have laws it should set forth criteria for entry that are objective and ascertainable and they ought to be followed.  People who apply that don&#8217;t qualify should not get in, and those who qualify should get in.  This is the right way America&#8217;s always thought about its business, and that&#8217;s the way we ought to do now, and that&#8217;s the biggest problem we&#8217;ve got.</p>
<p>The executive amnesty is one of the most breathtaking things I&#8217;ve seen since I&#8217;ve been in Washington.  I do believe it is a constitutional crisis.  It&#8217;s an overreach.  It&#8217;s an attempt by the President to do what a lot of liberal federal judges used to do.  This is the way they explain it.  Well, Congress won&#8217;t act, so I have to act.  When if Congress votes and rejects a bill, it is active.  It has made a decision.  This idea that just because you won&#8217;t pass the bill I want I&#8217;m now able to do it through my executive powers, is so far from the heritage of America, the constitutional order that we&#8217;re so proud of and served us so well is just beyond my comprehension.  So I hope people will push back on that.</p>
<p>So in the first executive amnesty that we probably did not hammer enough with the American people, the people that were here illegally now up to 30/31 years of age, they are given an I.D. card with a Social Security number and it says work authorization across the top of it.  Now the law of the United States is you enter the country unlawfully businesses cannot hire you, they commit an offense, and you&#8217;re not able to work.  Simple enough, first thing you do is you come to a country illegally you don&#8217;t let people start extracting money from the country and so that deal was a presidential overreach, really.  Because the President doesn&#8217;t have the power to authorize somebody to work in contravention of established law passed by the Congress of the United States.  He&#8217;s the chief executive officer.  He&#8217;s supposed to see the laws are enforced, not violate them by the millions, and now he&#8217;s talking about 5 to 6 million more, all of which would put us in a position I think of just collapsing any moral integrity that we have in the legal system.</p>
<p>So if the President, the chief executive, the prosecutor appoints immigration officers and ICE officers, if he just basically says, not only are we not going to deport anybody anymore, we are just gonna give you the right to work in the country, then I think we&#8217;ve reached a point in immigration law that&#8217;s really dangerous.  I just think it&#8217;s, the American people that need to know the enormity of it. And what about the people who didn&#8217;t get it? So there&#8217;s 11 million here, and now we do 5.  Is anybody going to deport the other 5 million?  Oh, you didn&#8217;t get in somehow, you didn&#8217;t make the cut?  There&#8217;s no plan to deport anybody else.  They&#8217;re not going to deport anybody else.</p>
<p>Then finally I would mention this point, and the polling data is very strong on it. Asked a simple question.  Should, at a time of high unemployment, millions of people unemployed, should we attempt to get our people working rather than bringing in people from abroad to take the jobs?  And this is an 80 percent polling number.  I mean we&#8217;ve got to get our people working.  Wages are down since 2000, wages are down about $3,000.00, median household income, $2,300.00 for a family since 2009.  This is not a healthy trend out there.  Dr. Borjas at Harvard has studied this meticulously and has demonstrated how much of that was caused by this very large, unprecedented historically, flow of immigrants into our country.  We are at about the highest level we have ever been and it&#8217;s continuing upward.  So I wanted to say that.</p>
<p>Republicans stopped it.  Not all Republicans, but Republicans did stop it.  You guys in the House, Louie and John, and the others were just heroic because they were trying to pass this thing and they just stood up and read the bill, fought back and were able to stop it right before we recessed for the election and I pleaded with them to also pass language that would block funding to execute the executive amnesty.  So you have to have money to buy I.D. cards, to process all these people.  Congress has the power of the purse.  We barred the President from spending any money to close Guantanamo Bay and he can&#8217;t close Guantanamo Bay because it cost money to close it.  And we do that all the time, every defense bill has things in it like that and other bills to do too, so we should simply say to the President &#8212; so the House passed it right before they left and I think it was a significant factor in the Senate elections that our candidates were demanding of Democrats, why are you blocking simple legislation that would block this President from executing an unlawful order?  And that exit polling that Louie mentioned showed that 80 percent of the American people opposed executive amnesty, who voted in this last election. 80 percent. And so the way it would work in my mind, you fund an entire government of the United States or a portion of it and you simply say also, but you can&#8217;t spend any money to execute the President&#8217;s dream of unlawful amnesty.</p>
<p>Finally it was a near run thing, Louie.  I really think it would have been bad, bad, bad had that bill passed without other things happening as it did on the your, and John&#8217;s leadership and others over there.  It was a battle, there was a lot of courage, there was a lot of pressure came on.  The last day they made Congress stay another day, people had their planes hooked up ready to fly and you all just shut it down and helped, I believe, put us in a position to preserve the rule of law.  Thank you.</p>
<p><strong>Moderator:</strong> Thank you, Senator.  Congressman Fleming</p>
<p><strong>Rep. John Fleming: </strong>Yes, thank you.  It was great to be with you here for my first freedom session.  First word about my two friends and colleagues to my left, Louie Gomer talks about speaking truth to power but trust me I&#8217;ve been there many times.  He really does speak truth to power.  Yeah, absolutely.  Sometimes I slink down because I&#8217;m afraid something&#8217;s going to get thrown, but he&#8217;s very courageous when it comes to that, and his great leadership.  He really does, he&#8217;s often times, may times, if not all the time, ahead of many of us in the House when it comes to where we&#8217;re going and what we need to do to stop that forward motion.  Senator Sessions, vanguard on this and many other subjects, if you know anybody from Alabama you know just how highly respected Jeff Sessions is, so much so that I believe you didn&#8217;t have an opponent for your recent reelection.  And members of the House, and I have a lot of good friends from Alabama, we kind of work together as kind of a southeastern &#8212; they all look to Jeff Sessions for leadership, so he continues to be a vanguard on this and many other issues.</p>
<p>You may recall Milton Friedman, the famous 20<sup>th</sup> century economist.  He really said it best.  He said you can have open borders, but you can&#8217;t have a welfare system.  Now you can have a welfare system but you can&#8217;t have open borders, and that&#8217;s playing out today because really these were no problems until our welfare system, the infrastructure was put in place about 1965.  That&#8217;s when we began to have border problems.  Now it&#8217;s true that we all come from immigrants in one or way another, but the way it worked traditionally in America is it was the best and the brightest.  The people who were willing to take the risk who came here for greater opportunity, and still many do.  But what we also find is two important factors.  No. 1, if they don&#8217;t find that opportunity they find a very comfortable safety net system here, upon which to stay.  The other thing is that folks who immigrate here today, most of them come from countries where they look to the government.  That&#8217;s their tradition, is the government takes care of him.  Now when it destroys their civilization, when it destroys their economy, they look for another place to go and where do they come? They come here.  But then what you see is a progressive lowered standard of living.  Well, have we have seen that?  Well look at California today.  California today is not the California that we knew a generation ago and it&#8217;s going down rapidly, so these are all important factors.</p>
<p>Now Senator Sessions, we are pretty sure, is going to be our next budget chairman in the Senate and he will tell you that back in 1997 when we had the last balanced budget, two thirds of our budget was discretionary spending.  That is what we plan to spend each year on defense and on our agencies and departments out there, things that we could cut spending or increase spending from year to year.  Only a third was what we call automatic pilot spending, which is of course entitlement spending, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and all of these things.  Today it&#8217;s reverse.  It&#8217;s almost two thirds built in infrastructure spending which we can&#8217;t change from year to year and the other third is discretionary and it&#8217;s shrinking rapidly.  The point being that if you were entitled to a benefit we have to pay you whether we have the money or not.  We don&#8217;t plan that spending and so if we continue to grow our entitlement society we will eventually completely displaces discretionary spending and our ability to amount a defense, a common defense and to operate our government.  Remember we&#8217;re $18 trillion in debt and so there&#8217;s no way we can have open borders, accepting peoples with our arms open, allowing them then to fall back on our safety net system and think that we&#8217;re ever, ladies and gentlemen, going to balance our budget.  It just isn&#8217;t going to happen.  So it&#8217;s important that we get honest about the situation.  We do have a right to have sovereign borders; we do have a right to ask of people who come here that they carry their own weight.  Otherwise this nation, as we know it, not because we dislike them, not because we&#8217;re xenophobic, but only because there&#8217;s only so much taxpayers can do to support people from other nations who come here.  Many of them now when they come they refuse to learn our culture, they refuse to learn our language, they refuse to have or build the skills necessary to be successful in America. And as a result of that, that&#8217;s just an economic reality we have to understand, and if we&#8217;re going to remain the only super power in the world and our rightful place in leadership around the world, for what is good and what is generous, and to keep this world a peaceful place, we can&#8217;t allow our economic situation and the opportunities that come from that to diminish.</p>
<p>So I look forward to responding to questions as well but I think it&#8217;s important that we understand that there really is a serious economic issue behind this that even Republicans seem unable to understand.  I understand why Democrats want to do this.  Because as immigrants come into this country, they&#8217;re going to vote.  Usually they&#8217;re going to vote two to one Democrat.  I understand why they do it.  I don&#8217;t understand why Republicans want open borders and amnesty.  We hear that maybe it&#8217;s the Chamber of Commerce that somehow businesses want cheaper labor.  I&#8217;m a business owner; I have 500 employees still today in my private business.  I can tell you I&#8217;m not interested in that.  I want to have good American workers who are skilled and trained.</p>
<p>And finally I will tell you that we actually had a debate about a year ago.  Cato Institute said that it&#8217;s going to help our economy to really have open borders and amnesty.  Okay fine, then Robert Rector, who as you may recall from the Heritage Foundation, the guy who led the effort to put work requirements into Welfare, Welfare reform under Clinton that really dramatically improved the situation in those days, which since have been wiped away by President Obama.  And we have a debate between the two and Robert Rector went through line by line and in great detail to show how open borders are going to destroy our economy and our future and our opportunities that we hope are going to leave a better nation to our children.  The Cato Institute every time their answer was this, we have computer models that tell us that it&#8217;s going to make our economy better.  Well folks you can make a computer model say anything you want, it&#8217;s always garbage in and garbage out.  So once again thank you and I look forward to this important discussion.</p>
<p><strong>Moderator: </strong>Thank you Congressman.  And Mike Cutler</p>
<p><strong>Michael Cutler: </strong>It&#8217;s absolutely a pleasure to be here and a privilege to share the stage with three true leaders in the Congress.  For all the complaints we hear about Congress we do have some real good guys and Jeff Sessions in particular.  I&#8217;m going to tell a quick anecdote and then we&#8217;re going to get into what I want to say, but after 911 I started doing everything in my power to try to wake people up to the immigration issues, the immigration component to the terror attacks.  The ashes landed on my home.  My neighbors died and I had testified four and a half years earlier before a House Immigration Subcommittee Hearing on the nexus between visa fraud, immigration benefit fraud and terrorism.  Yes we had two terror attacks in &#8217;93 and it was because of those two failures of the immigration system that those attacks were possible.  And my wife and I &#8212; as you know, if you&#8217;re married you know how the back and forth goes &#8212; kept thinking, well, what are you doing? You&#8217;re spending all this time and effort and it&#8217;s going nowhere.</p>
<p>And I wrote an op-ed for the Washington Times back in &#8217;07 that I had testified before three House and one Senate hearing about comprehensive reform.  And I wrote a commentary with bleary eyes and I decided to rename it.  I&#8217;m working on my candor, but you tell me if I&#8217;m being successful.  I called it the &#8220;Terrorist Assistance and Facilitation Act.&#8221;  I think we&#8217;re getting somewhere but I think Senator Sessions liked it so much that he quoted me on three separate occasions.  The last time you did this, Senator, I got a frantic phone call from one of the 911 family members, a former New York City police officer whose son-in-law was obliterated on 911.  I&#8217;m getting a little choked up.  He said Mike, quick, put the TV on and go to C-SPAN.  I said, Bruce, I&#8217;m in my car, I can&#8217;t.  He said shut up and listen and he held the phone next to his TV and there was Senator Sessions from the floor of the United States Senate quoting me by name, urging his colleagues to take my advice and telling them that I had referred to comprehensive reform as the &#8220;Terrorist Assistance and Facilitation Act.&#8221;  My wife gets into the car, I&#8217;m in Brooklyn, and she looks at me and says, &#8220;Are you okay?&#8221;  I said, &#8220;Why?&#8221;  She said, &#8220;I&#8217;ve never seen that weird look on your face.&#8221;  I said, &#8220;You mean more than usual?&#8221; and she said, &#8220;What happened?&#8221; and I told her the story, and a couple of days later &#8212; so many people love to plagiarize and we&#8217;ve all experienced it, but not Senator Sessions.  This man is a class act from square one to whatever square you want to go to, sent me a certificate to commemorate this.  So this package comes, my wife opens it, it&#8217;s from Washington and her eyes get bigger and bigger and bigger and she turns to me and says, &#8220;My gosh, do you see what this is?&#8221;  I said, &#8220;Yes.&#8221;  I said, &#8220;Are we done arguing?&#8221;  She said, &#8220;Yes,&#8221; and she ran out and framed it and it hangs on the wall in my home and I want to thank you for that, Senator.  So when I heard I was going to be here and I heard that Senator Sessions was going to be here, I said, &#8220;Well, I hope I get to see him,&#8221; never thinking that I would have the privilege of sharing the stage with these three amazing leaders, so I thank all of you for all your dedication and hard work on our behalf.</p>
<p>Our immigration laws are not a single issue, but a singular issue because they impact every challenge and threat that America faces today.  I started working for the INS in 1971 as an immigration inspector at Kennedy Airport.  Did that job for four years, for one of the four years I was assigned as an adjudications officer doing the marriage interviews, like you&#8217;ve seen in the movies. And when I worked with the law firm retained by Governor Jan Brewer to defend that state against the outrageous lawsuit over SB1070, I said that for that four-year period that I had that inspector&#8217;s badge I had my eye to the peep hole on America&#8217;s front door.  Houses come equipped with doorbells, peepholes and door locks so we make certain not to allow people into our homes to pose a threat to our safety or wellbeing.  Why in the world shouldn&#8217;t the United States as a minimum do that for us and our nation today?</p>
<p>I happen to be registered as a Democrat, I&#8217;ve always voted as an Independent.  I think anybody who votes a straight party line without paying attention to who the person is, is an idiot.  I have campaigned for conservative Republicans.  I don&#8217;t care if you&#8217;re with the Hopping Kangaroo Party, there&#8217;s only one question for me in this day and age.  Do you stand with America and do you stand with Americans?  I became a special agent in 1975.  In 1976 I tripped over a PLO plot to blow up an Israel oil refinery.  Thank God we prevented it.  For the balance of my career I had a wonderful relationship with the Israeli National Police.  It was my introduction to the nexus between immigration and international terrorism.  1988 I was assigned to the Unified Intelligence Division of DEA as the first INS agent assign to that position and in &#8217;91 I became a senior special agent with the Drug Task Force, Organized Crime, Drug Enforcement Task Force.  I spent the next ten years there.  And I want you to understand something, with all the nonsense about the arrest statistics &#8212; I was on with Neil Cavuto and Neil said, &#8220;Well, if arrests are down it means that there&#8217;s fewer here,&#8221; and on and on and on.  I said, Neil, I don&#8217;t trust the arrest statistics and it&#8217;s just not the Mexican border.  I don&#8217;t know why we&#8217;re so fixated on that one border.  I wrote an article for Front Page Magazine.  I&#8217;m honored to be a columnist for Front Page, and I called the border security the immigration colander.  This notion that if we halfway, kind of, sort of plug one hole in the bottom of the colander that you use to drain pasta that now we can use it as a bucket to carry water is nuts.  We are a country of 50 border states.  In fact there&#8217;s an excellent film that just came out by the Tea Party Patriots.  I&#8217;m very pleased to be in it, Jeff Session, Louie Gohmert are also in that film, and it&#8217;s called the &#8220;Border States of America,&#8221; and they borrowed my tag line, the subtitle is &#8220;Every State is Now a Border State.&#8221;  See, we have 50 border states.  Any state with an international airport, any state that has access to our coastline, any state that lies along the northern or southern borders are all border states.  Now when aliens run our borders they don&#8217;t come by the way Neil Armstrong went to the moon.  They&#8217;re not coming to stand on our side of the border, plant a flag, grab a couple of rocks and go home.  They&#8217;re headed for the rest of the country, and people that are evading the inspection process know they&#8217;re excludable, and we&#8217;ll get into it in one moment about who we&#8217;re trying to exclude and who we&#8217;re supposed to exclude, but I said to Neil, this notion of figuring out who&#8217;s here based on arrest statistics is kind of like trying to take attendance by asking people not present to raise their hand.  It doesn&#8217;t work.</p>
<p>You want to know if the border is secure, do you want a really great solid metric that can&#8217;t be screwed around with?  Look at the price and availability of heroin and cocaine. Those poisons are not produced inside the United States.  Every gram of heroin, every gram of cocaine present in the United States provides graphic evidence of a failure of border security and they fund the cartels, the proceeds, those proceeds fund terrorism.  Those proceeds are funding the people who want us destroyed and those drugs are a big part of the violent crime we&#8217;re facing in cities across America and in destruction of American lives. So let&#8217;s come back to a primary idea.  America&#8217;s immigration laws and America&#8217;s borders exist for two primary reasons.  Protect innocent lives and the jobs of American workers.  What is unreasonable about that?  And now you mention the 911 Commission, so I want to read two quick sentences, and this is from the 911 Commission Staff Report on terrorist travel, and you should know that I provided testimony to the 911 Commission.  I&#8217;ve arrested several terrorist in my career in fact.  This is to be found in the preface, the very beginning of the 911 Commission Staff Report.  These are the agents and attorneys who worked with the 911 Commission.  It starts out by saying,</p>
<blockquote><p>It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country.  Yet prior to September 11 while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal.  Indeed even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. Visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy.  We believe for reasons that we discussed in the following pages that it must be made one.</p></blockquote>
<p>Now I want you to know on 911 there were 26 visa waiver countries.  They warned us that the way that visas were processed created vulnerabilities.  Today we have 38 visa waiver countries. Chili became number 38 March 31 of this year in large measure of pressure being applied by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, they created a program known as the Discover America Partnership.  They&#8217;ve joined with hotel hospitality travel industries, and they&#8217;re pushing for it and they&#8217;re spending a ton of money.  Isn&#8217;t it nice to know that the people responsible for room service are now making national security decisions for the United States of America?  Think about it.</p>
<p>Now this is on Page 98 of that 911 Commission Staff Report:</p>
<blockquote><p>Terrorists in the 1990s, as well as the September 11 hijackers, needed to find a way to stay in or imbed themselves in the United States if they&#8217;re operational plans were to come to fruition.  As already discussed, this could be accomplished legally by marrying an American citizen, achieving temporary worker status [think of the DREAMers] or applying for asylum after entering.  In many cases the act of filing for immigration benefits sufficed to permit the alien to remain in the country until the petition was adjudicated.  Terrorists were free to conduct surveillance, coordinate operations, obtain and receive funding, go to school and learn English, make contacts in the United States, acquire necessary materials and execute an attack.</p></blockquote>
<p>The DREAMers are not even being interviewed, folks.  We&#8217;re giving identity documents to people who could be as old as 31 years of age and the magic word is &#8220;I came in when I was 15.&#8221;  They&#8217;re in.  There&#8217;s no field investigations. What could possibly go wrong? Please understand what we&#8217;re talking about. And when I&#8217;m accused of being anti-immigrant I&#8217;ll end by saying this, and I hope you guys have some great questions so we can go further with the conversation, but let me tell you something: If you look at how bad it is right now, if we go down this path of providing these documents and we allow ourselves to be intimidated &#8212; when people say to me you&#8217;re anti-immigrant, there&#8217;s a very easy answer.  I am pro enforcement.  The same laws that tell us who to kick out and who to keep out also tell us who to let in.  Every year this country admits more than a million lawful immigrants, more than the rest of the world combined.  Every year this year provides naturalization, citizenship, to more than a half-million new citizens.  These are the laws that I support, that I enforced and administered for 30 years.  How in the world can you be anti-immigrant when you support the laws by which we admit more immigrants legally than the rest of the world and we are now admitting more foreign workers legally entitled to work in the United States each month than the number of new jobs we&#8217;re creating?  My suggestion is this, rather than create jobs, we need to liberate our jobs and get Americans back to work.  Thank you.</p>
<p><strong>Rep. Louie Gohmert: </strong>I can&#8217;t emphasize it enough. You heard me, you&#8217;ve heard everybody up here.  John Fleming and I border, we share the Louisiana-Texas line and he&#8217;s an MD. Wouldn&#8217;t you have loved to have a doctor with his demeanor?  He&#8217;s brilliant.  His integrity is impeccable.  You&#8217;ll never tempt him to break his word, to be dishonest, and I can&#8217;t tell you what an honor it is to serve with a guy like that.  Just methodical, brilliant and impeccable integrity.  And then Mike has said many times, and it&#8217;s caught on big, but every state is a border state, and some of us, I think everybody up here, is pushing to have an analysis done of the enterovirus strain, that all of a sudden just appeared in all these different states at the same time.  It happened to be states where ironically our health and human services department shipped people without proper bedding medically all over the country and then all of sudden this enterovirus that&#8217;s killed more people in the U.S. than Ebola.  It is a danger, and then quickly, just so you understand, even though we have a lawless President, there are people that believe in following the law that are still able to come up with ways to enforce it around our President.  Spent many days and nights on the border in the last months, and you&#8217;ve seen on the news there&#8217;s a place, Anzalduas Park, south of McCallen.  There&#8217;s a big park on the Mexican side, a park on the American side, and people buy guys on jet skis to bring them across, and I&#8217;ve seen several guys do that.  The last one was a Chinese national.  Why he was there, but anyway, he paid them to bring them across.  But each time they come across a constable &#8212; they don&#8217;t come if they see any border patrol trucks or anything, but they come across and then all of a sudden the constable appears and arrests them.  And so I asked the constable, I&#8217;ve seen you do this a number of times.  You know after the Supreme Court case in Arizona, case said you can&#8217;t, local and state law enforcement, can&#8217;t enforce federal law.  I&#8217;m thrilled that you&#8217;re doing that &#8212; and they turn them over to the border patrol &#8212; but what&#8217;s your basis since the Supreme Court said that?  And the constable said, &#8220;Did you pay $4.00 to get in the park?&#8221; and I said, &#8220;Yeah,&#8221; and he said they didn&#8217;t, they&#8217;re trespassing.</p>
<p><strong>Moderator: </strong>Thank you, Congressman Gohmert.  We&#8217;re going to start the questions.</p>
<p><strong>Audience Member: </strong>I&#8217;m Bob Lawn. I&#8217;m from California, and my question is, just direct to the panel is, I&#8217;d like to, instead of talking about policy, I agree with policy, but I&#8217;d like you to talk about strategy.  We know that Barrack Obama doesn&#8217;t care about policy.  He only cares about winning the presidency for the next Democrat and that the reason that he&#8217;s doing what he&#8217;s doing is to activate the Hispanic base &#8217;cause he knows that they often don&#8217;t vote, but the one thing that activates them is that you can, everybody&#8217;s distracted by this issue, and I wonder what things can be done by Republicans to strategically tell people in the Hispanic base or find ways to counter his tactics in this situation?  He knows that we will come in and talk policy and do what we do in order to turn off that base.  Are there ways for us to let the Hispanic American voters who have Hispanic heritage know that we care about them and kind of counter what he&#8217;s trying to do?</p>
<p><strong>Moderator: </strong>And just again to save time I&#8217;m going to ask our Republican Congressmen and Senator here to caucus and pick one of them to answer that question, just to save time.</p>
<p><strong>Rep. John Fleming: </strong>Apparently I&#8217;ve been chosen for that.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Cutler: </strong>Congatulations.</p>
<p><strong>Rep. John Fleming: </strong>Let me first of all say that the thing we haven&#8217;t done as Republicans and what we should do really as Americans is attack the myth that we have to be pro-amnesty, pro-open borders in order to win elections.  The data doesn&#8217;t support that.  Even when you, and Louie was quoting this a few moments ago, if you ask the immigrants, people who are here already, they don&#8217;t want to be displaced by other immigrants.  What&#8217;s important to them is again kitchen-table issues just like everything else, so somehow somebody has gotten into the heads of Republicans, again I told you, Democrats, we know why they&#8217;re doing what they&#8217;re doing, but we need to get Republicans turned around on this issue to say look, this is not popular with the American people, it&#8217;s not even popular with recent immigrants and that what we really need is, again, a nation where people can have jobs and an economy again and get off this idea that we have to have open borders to win elections and that we&#8217;ll never get a President again.  That is absurd, folks.  Just look at the pyramid we have today.  We have more Governors, more State Houses than we&#8217;ve ever had in probably a hundred years.  We have the largest House majority than we&#8217;ve had since 1929 or 8, it depends on what number you land on, and in the Senate we&#8217;ve regained just in a few short years.  The American people are with us on these issues. &#8230; I&#8217;ll toss this, but I really think that&#8217;s a myth.  I think that people of color are with us as well.  We just don&#8217;t recognize it.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Cutler: </strong>I just want to take 30 seconds.  You know it&#8217;s amazing that the same journalists who jump up and down and talk about race, politics and police officers that profile, when you can say that everybody who&#8217;s last name is Rodriguez thinks and votes the same way, or every Jew thinks and votes &#8212; I&#8217;m Jewish.  I get crazy when I hear this.  It&#8217;s an insidious form of racism and profiling and they need to be talked about, and by the way, immigration laws don&#8217;t distinguish by race, ethnicity or religion and the members of the ethnic immigrant communities, Russian, Asian, Latino, Caribbean, doesn&#8217;t matter, they&#8217;re at the greatest risk from illegal immigration because that&#8217;s where the gangsters and the fugitives set up shop, set up houses of prostitution and peddle narcotics.  If you want to win their votes, tell them the truth, that this is about protecting them.  The grounds for exclusion are aliens with dangerous diseases, mental illness, convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminals, spies and terrorists.  Who do you want living next door to you if we fail on that mission?</p>
<p><strong>Louie Gohmert: </strong>During those nights I&#8217;ve spent down on the border, I was talking to an Hispanic Border Patrolman, and this is follow up to what you&#8217;re saying, and you&#8217;ve heard there are so many tens of thousands of children that come across unaccompanied &#8212; not a single child, young child, ever comes across unaccompanied. I&#8217;ve watched them separate after they get over to our side, but they don&#8217;t cross that river unaccompanied. But this Border Patrolman said we&#8217;ve got all these form questions we ask, and he said, I will ask, we&#8217;re supposed to ask, why did you leave your home country, Guatemala, El Salvador, and come here, and he said over 90 percent of the time they say to get away from gang violence. And he said since I speak better Spanish than a lot of them I don&#8217;t let them get away with it and I bear down on them and I say, now you may find some Gringo that buys that stuff, but you and I, you paid a gang to bring you into this country, so don&#8217;t tell me you came to escape gang violence, and he said then of those 90 percent that say that, 90 percent of them say well, you&#8217;re right, but we were told to say we&#8217;re coming to escape gang violence.  They know the game and we need to get engaged.</p>
<p><strong>Moderator: </strong>Thank you Congressman and thank you everybody for attending today.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/immigration-wars/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Amnesty Showdown</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/amnesty-showdown/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=amnesty-showdown</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/amnesty-showdown/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2014 05:54:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arnold Ahlert]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[executive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=246547</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How will the GOP respond to Obama's executive power grab? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="color: #232323;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/obama-immigration.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-246550" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/obama-immigration-401x350.jpg" alt="Barack Obama" width="343" height="299" /></a>On Tuesday, Republicans <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/12/01/Scalise-Boosts-Yoho-Bill"><span style="color: #1255cc;">met</span></a> behind closed doors to plot their response to President Obama’s unilateral decision to grant de facto amnesty and work permits to five million illegal aliens. That response centers around the House’s control of government spending, and according to sources that contacted Breitbart news, the GOP rank-and-file will be setting the agenda. “It&#8217;s not just for show,” said Rep. Matt Salmon (R-AZ). “[Party leaders] don&#8217;t want to get something to the floor and then have some big rebellion, they really want to get it right the first time. And they&#8217;ve learned the hard way that the way to do that is to build everything from the bottom up instead of shoving it from the top down.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">A number of different options are being considered, but all of them are seemingly aimed at avoiding a government shutdown. That’s because a government shutdown of any kind, regardless of who initiated it, is invariably blamed on the GOP, according to inside-the-beltway thinking.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Columnist Charles Krauthammer <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/01/krauthammer-to-gop-see-a-psychiatrist-for-rage-over-exec-amnesty-dont-vote-for-govt-shutdown-video/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">illuminated</span></a> that reasoning Monday on Fox’s “Special Report” with Bret Baier. &#8220;There’s reality, and there’s the way reality is reported in the media,” he explained.</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">We know that you’re right, if there were a government shutdown under these circumstances, it would be Obama being the one shutting it down with a veto. However, we also know that as night follows day, it will be reported everywhere as a Republican shutdown and they will suffer as they suffered last October, 2013, and it was a disaster. Republicans are finally ahead of Democrats in the poll about who do you favor, and this would be the worst time to blow it.</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">However, one cannot discount the impact the previous government shut down had on the 2014 elections &#8212; which was seemingly not very much. The GOP <a href="http://www.electionprojection.com/2014-elections/races/2014-senate-races.php"><span style="color: #1255cc;">picked</span></a> up at least 8 Senate seats to capture a majority and 11 House seats to strengthen one.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">On the other hand, there is little doubt the media would indeed blame Republicans for any shutdown. Most Republicans apparently understand this and were said to be discussing a normal “omnibus” spending bill, a hybrid “cromnibus” bill that provides a temporary funding extension for immigration, and a number of options for each. The omnibus part of the package would fund most of the government at current spending levels for ten months through September 15, while the cromnibus portion provides the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the government agency that oversees service related to immigration, funding for only a few months. House Speaker Boehner (R-OH) envisions a <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/house/225690-boehner-backs-two-step-plan"><span style="color: #1255cc;">two-step</span></a> process for passage, holding a vote on the omnibus bill this week, and the cromnibus bill next week.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">One of the options being considered was introduced late last month by staunch conservative Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL). The sophomore lawmaker <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/11/20/Republicans-Leave-Town-Without-A-Plan-To-Fight-Obama"><span style="color: #1255cc;">proposed</span></a> a bill that would rescind the discretion by the executive branch to exempt entire categories of illegal aliens from prosecution and deportation. Though the gesture is chiefly symbolic, Boehner and other GOP leaders have reportedly embraced it as a way to simultaneously assuage conservative GOPers concerns with Obama’s unconstitutional overreach, and move them away from demanding a government shutdown.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">In addition, Salmon wants to add language to the omnibus bill preventing the president from issuing work visas to illegals. It is an omnibus package House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY) said would include 11 appropriation bills, with the separate funding for the DHS maintained on a continuing resolution (CR) that would last until “sometime in March.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Time is of the essence. The current emergency funding keeping the government open expires on Dec. 11, giving the GOP six more days to get their strategic ducks in a row. And despite their cleverness, they still must contend with the reality that outgoing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) will scuttle any effort that would accrue to the GOP’s benefit. While Reid <a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/house-gop-unveils-omnibus-plan-to-keep-immigration-pressure-on-obama-20141202"><span style="color: #1255cc;">agreed</span></a> to consider a spending package that only funds DHS through March, he said he would only do so if the deal didn’t include any riders unacceptable to his party.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Reid stood in stark contrast to the position taken by Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY), the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee. She insisted it would be &#8220;dangerous and irresponsible to engage in stunts and gimmicks affecting funding for the agencies under the Department of Homeland Security.” She was echoed by DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson, who testified at a House hearing Tuesday morning. He claimed temporary funding would make it harder to run his department in an efficient manner. As for Obama, White House Press Secretary John Earnest said the president would prefer a bill covering all spending for the entire year. But he <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/02/us-usa-congress-shutdown-boehner-idUSKCN0JG1MH20141202"><span style="color: #1255cc;">refused</span></a> to say whether the president would veto a bill with short-term funding for the DHS.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Both Houses of Congress are scheduled to go on recess December 12, but Reid <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/225597-reid-senate-might-work-the-week-before-christmas"><span style="color: #1255cc;">warned</span></a> the Senate that it might be necessary to extend their time in Washington through Dec. 19. “We have a lot to do and not a lot of time to accomplish it,” Reid said.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">One effort is aimed at passing a <a href="http://online.wsj.com/articles/lawmakers-divided-over-renewing-tax-breaks-1417481046"><span style="color: #0433ff;">short-term extension</span></a> of approximately 50 tax breaks benefiting businesses, individuals and nonprofits. The vast majority of them expired at the end of 2013. The extension would last only until the end of the year, but that would allow those breaks to be claimed during next year’s tax-preparation period. The move was precipitated by a veto threat from Obama, <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/finance/225584-house-moves-toward-vote-on-expired-tax-breaks"><span style="color: #1255cc;">undermining</span></a> a two-year, $400 billion deal being worked out between Reid and House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI). It would have extended some of those tax breaks for two years and others indefinitely. “We were making really good progress until the president issued a veto threat,” Camp said Monday. “That brought a halt to everything,”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Obama objected to the deal because he considered it too favorable to business, and because it failed to extend an expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit set to expire in 2017. The GOP contends those tax breaks have been illegally exploited by taxpayers and illegal aliens fraudulently claiming those credits, further insisting Obama’s recent action on immigration exacerbated the problem. Hence the House&#8217;s $45 billion extension, which could be voted on as early as today.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Democrats have mixed feelings regarding the proposed legislation. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-OR) remained non-committal, Committee member Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WVA) was adamantly against it, and Rep. Sandy Levin (D-MI), the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, was in favor.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">In other words, like everything else being proposed here, the outcome remains in limbo.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Some GOP conservatives still remained wedded to addressing Obama’s lawlessness, regardless of the consequences. Rep. Steve King (R-IA) wants even a short-term extension for the DHS to cut off funding for the president’s immigration agenda, even if the government shuts down as a result. &#8220;It isn’t us bringing about a shutdown,” he insisted. &#8220;We fund everything else, and then the president has to argue that he’s going to shutdown the government in order for him to carry out his lawless, unconstitutional act.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) wasn’t buying it. &#8220;We need to quit, you know, kind of rattling the economy with things that are perceived by the voters as disturbing,&#8221; he told a Washington conference.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Voters themselves apparently agree. A Qunnipiac <a href="http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/us/us11252014_uh2ddgk.pdf"><span style="color: #1255cc;">poll</span></a> released Nov. 25 shows they oppose shutting down “major activities of the federal government&#8221; as a means of blocking Obama’s agenda by a 68-25 percent margin. Even Republican voters oppose the idea by a 47-44 percent margin. “Americans seem divided on immigration, but they agree on one thing: They don’t want a government shutdown over President Obama’s action on immigration,” said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Those same voters, however, mostly oppose Obama’s immigration agenda. Democrats favor it by a 74-18 percent margin, but Republicans and independent voters oppose it by margins of 75-20 percent, and 51-40 percent, respectively. In short, ambivalence prevails.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">How long it prevails is hard to say. Much of it depends on how far next year&#8217;s GOP congressional majority is willing to go to illuminate the ideological differences between the two parties, and whether they are willing to frame an agenda, or continue reacting to the one proposed by Obama and a Democrat minority.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Immigration aside, it is worth noting that on Monday, America’s national debt <a href="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-01/total-us-debt-rises-over-18-trillion"><span style="color: #1255cc;">reached</span></a> $18 trillion. That number represents a 70 percent increase in the debt amassed during Obamas’s tenure. On Tuesday it was revealed Social Security will become <a href="http://www.mrctv.org/blog/chart-social-security-s-end-date-fast-approaching-far-earlier-expected"><span style="color: #1255cc;">insolvent</span></a> by 2024. That’s 34 years earlier than originally projected. In other words, we remain on an unsustainable trajectory, one driven overwhelmingly by the exponential expansion of government championed by Democrats. Spending cuts aren’t popular, but genuine statesmen propose ideas that put the good of the nation above the good of the party. Embracing such statesmanship seems like a pretty good point of departure for next year’s GOP majority. If nothing else it would stand in stark contrast to the president’s me-first agenda and a Democratic party extremely comfortable with putting its own interests above those of the nation.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/amnesty-showdown/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top 10 Lies from Obama&#8217;s Nullification Speech</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/danielhorowitz/top-10-lies-from-obamas-nullification-speech/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=top-10-lies-from-obamas-nullification-speech</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/danielhorowitz/top-10-lies-from-obamas-nullification-speech/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2014 05:13:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Horowitz]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[executive action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illegal Aliens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[speech]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=246243</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The falsehoods of a Radical-in-Chief.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/barack_obam.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-246249" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/barack_obam-450x299.jpg" alt="U.S. President Obama announces executive actions on immigration during nationally televised address from the White House in Washington" width="309" height="205" /></a><strong>Reprinted from <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/">ConservativeReview.com.</a></strong></div>
<div></div>
<div>“The one [a president] can confer no privileges whatever; the other [the king] can make denizens of aliens, noblemen of commoners; can erect corporations with all the rights incident to corporate bodies.”</div>
<div>    – Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 69</div>
<div></div>
<div>Lie #1: Every President has Taken Executive Action on Immigration: No other president has ever issued an amnesty of anywhere near this scope, created it out of thin air, or built it upon a prior executive action instead of a statute. And in the case of President Eisenhower, his executive action was to deport 80,000 illegal immigrants.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Lie #2: Illegal Immigrant Crossings are Down: Actually, this is the third straight year that border crossings have gone up, not to mention the entirely new wave from Central America.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Lie #3: It does not grant citizenship or the right to stay here permanently: Under the royal edict, the work permits can be renewed every three years, and most likely, they will be renewed at the same 99.5% acceptance rate as DACA applications.  And once they get Social Security cards, they are going nowhere.  So yes, this is permanent.  And yes, they will be able to get green cards, which puts them on an automatic path to citizenship: “we are reducing the time that families are separated while obtaining their green cards.  Undocumented immigrants who are immediate relatives of lawful permanent residents or sons or daughters of US citizens can apply to get a waiver if a visa is available.”</div>
<div></div>
<div>Lie #4: Only 5 Million: Make no mistake about it.  Obama’s illegal amnesty will not just apply to 5 million individuals.  It will apply by default to all 12-20 million illegals in the country as well as the millions more who will now come here to enjoy the permanent cessation of borders and sovereignty.  Given the numerous options for people to become eligible for amnesty, ICE and CPB will be restricted from enforcing the law against anyone because each individual has to be afforded the opportunity to present themselves and apply for status.  There is no way those who were here for less than 5 years will be deported and there’s no way the new people rushing the border and overstaying their visas will be repatriated.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Lie #5: Deport Felons: Obama claims he is going to focus on deporting felons. Yet, he has done the opposite.  36,000 convicted criminal aliens were released last year, 80,000 criminal aliens encountered by ICE weren’t even placed into deportation proceedings, 167,000 criminal aliens who were ordered deported are still at large, 341,000 criminal aliens released by ICE without deportation orders are known to be free and at large in the US.  Again, this is cessation of deportations for everyone. They are leaving no illegal behind.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Lie #6: Don’t deport families: Obama is playing the family card. It works like this: people are encouraged to come here illegally, Obama grants them amnesty, then their relatives all get to come, even though they would otherwise be ineligible under public charge laws.  Yet, at the same time, because the bureaucracy will be flooded with applications of illegals, and those are the applications that will be prioritized, those families who came here legally will have to wait longer to be united. There is no longer an incentive to enter the legal immigration process.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Lie #7: They have to pay taxes to stay: Aside from the absurd notion that they would turn someone away for not paying taxes, almost every one of these illegal immigrants lacks a high enough income to incur a net positive tax liability.  Hence, by paying taxes, he actually means they will collect refundable tax credits!</div>
<div></div>
<div>Lie #8: Background Checks: Just the thought of a criminal background check of people coming from the third world on a lawless program is a joke.  But the reality is that Obama has already done this with DACA, and 99.5% of applications were approved, including those of criminals.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Lie #9: Cracking Down on Illegal Immigration at the Border: Obama promises to beef up resources at the border.  But as we’ve seen over the past few years, what good are more agents if they are explicitly intimidated into turning a blind eye.  Moreover, there is no promise to build a fence or implement a visa tracking system, so any talk of enforcement is an insult to our intelligence.  Moreover, he is unilaterally abolishing the Secure Communities program, the only successful interior enforcement program left after he abolished 287g state-federal cooperation in 2012.  At a time when we are facing threats from Islamic terror and deadly diseases, this invitation to the world will present a security nightmare.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Lie #10: Scripture tells us, we shall not oppress a stranger: It’s great to see him quoting the Bible for once, but nice try.  There are different variations of this verse throughout the Bible, but each one uses the Hebrew word “Ger” to describe what Obama translates as “stranger.”  A Ger is a convert to Judaism.  The commandment was not referring to people who illegally migrate to a nation state.  And more importantly, it is downright offensive to Americans to insinuate that not granting them benefits is tantamount to oppression, especially given the fact that they have been the biggest recipients of our generous legal system.  Moreover, if there is oppression taking place it is to the American taxpayer and worker and those who suffer from gangs like MS-13.</div>
<p><em>Daniel Horowitz is Senior Editor of Conservative Review. Follow him on twitter @RMConservative.</em></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>.   </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/danielhorowitz/top-10-lies-from-obamas-nullification-speech/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama &#8216;Solves&#8217; Immigration Crisis by Ordering &#8216;Shields Down&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/michael-cutler/obama-solves-immigration-crisis-by-ordering-shields-down/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama-solves-immigration-crisis-by-ordering-shields-down</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/michael-cutler/obama-solves-immigration-crisis-by-ordering-shields-down/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2014 05:11:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Cutler]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[announcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=246041</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The catastrophic impact Obama's immigration power grab will have on America. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/6364423ec44b012d660f6a70670060f2.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-246042" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/6364423ec44b012d660f6a70670060f2-417x350.jpg" alt="6364423ec44b012d660f6a70670060f2" width="311" height="261" /></a>That we live in a perilous era is hardly a headline &#8212; this is a well established fact.  America and Americans face an existential threat posed by terrorist organizations.  Additionally, huge quantities of heroin and cocaine have flooded across our borders, smuggled by pernicious drug trafficking organizations that have set up shop in communities across the United States.  There is a strong nexus between narcotics trafficking and narcotics use and crime, especially violent crime.</p>
<p>The tens of billions of dollars, the annual proceeds from the drug trade, flow into the coffers of transnational drug trafficking organizations and international terrorist organizations.</p>
<p>Finally, our nation&#8217;s economy continues to falter and struggle as do tens of millions of American workers and their families find that their incomes shrink as their expenses rise as more foreign workers enter the United States each month than the number of new jobs that are being created.</p>
<p>All of the above-noted issues have a clear nexus to failures of our nation to secure its borders and enforce the immigration laws effectively.  In point of fact our immigration laws were enacted with two primary goals, protect American lives and the jobs of American workers.</p>
<p>In point of fact, our borders and our immigration laws are supposed to shield America and Americans.  Given all of the threats and challenges confronting America and Americans those shields should never be more important.  However, you would never know it to listen to the President and, frankly, to all too many of our nation&#8217;s politicians from both sides of the political aisle in Washington and on the state and local levels.</p>
<p>On November 20, 2014 President Obama went before the cameras at the White House and laid out his plans to unilaterally “fix” the broken immigration system.  That there are millions of illegal aliens present in the United States indicates that our immigration system is failing.  That terrorists have been able to enter the United States and embed themselves in the United States provides further evidence of failures of the immigration system.  Consider, if you will, that the Tsarnaev brothers were able to gain lawful entry into the United States and apparently game the political asylum program. This provides a graphic example of a failure of that component of the immigration system.</p>
<p>“The Social Contract” published my article in its Summer 2013 edition, on how fraud in the political asylum program currently enables our enemies to see in America&#8217;s compassion, weakness. The title of my article was <span style="color: #386eff;"><a href="http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc_23_4/tsc_23_4_cutler.shtml">&#8220;Political Asylum: Where Compassion and National Security Intersect.&#8221;</a></span></p>
<p>What has never been explained, by President Obama or others who claim that the immigration system is <i>broken,</i> is how their proposals will greatly reduce the number of illegal aliens present in the United States.  What has never been explained is how the proposed “fixes” will create integrity to the processes by which aliens are granted visas or immigration benefits such as gaining lawful immigrant status or United States citizenship.  These are critical issues that were identified by the 9/11 Commission.</p>
<p>Traditionally when laws are violated our leaders call for enhanced enforcement efforts to combat and deter the crimes.  Because of concerns about those who have trespassed on New York City landmarks, Senator Chuck Schumer has proposed that a law be enacted that would subject those trespassers to a period of imprisonment of five years rather than the maximum of one year currently on the books.  He stated in part:</p>
<blockquote><p><i>“While individuals like this (trespassers) may have meant no harm, their acts put commuters and first responders at risk,” Schumer said. “They also inspire copycats who may have much more evil plans in mind.”</i></p>
<p><i>Critical infrastructure is defined by the Patriot Act as systems and assets so vital to the U.S., that the incapacity or destruction to them would have a debilitating effect.</i></p>
<p><i>“That would be a bridge, a power plant, the air vents to one of our tunnels,” Miller said.</i></p>
<p><i>Miller and Schumer said </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/13/sen-schumer-proposes-bill-to-make-trespassing-on-critical-infrastructure-a-federal-crime/"><span style="color: #011480;"><i>the new legislation</i></span></a><i> will help serve as a deterrent.</i></p>
<p><i>“When stunts like this occur, the New York City trespassing law has a maximum of one year and it’s often three months,” Schumer said. “That’s not enough punishment to deter this behavior. It’s time to change that.”</i></p>
<p><i>Schumer said this legislation is based on another federal law protecting railroads.</i></p></blockquote>
<p style="color: #011480;"><span style="color: #000000;">His statements were reported upon in an October 14, 2014 CBS News report, <a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/14/mayor-de-blasio-heads-to-d-c-for-meetings-on-nyc-security-and-counter-terrorism/">&#8220;Mayor De Blasio Heads To D.C. For Meetings On NYC Security And Counter-Terrorism.&#8221;</a></span></p>
<p>However, Senator Chuck Schumer has been the staunchest advocate for providing a pathway to United States citizenship to illegal aliens who have trespassed on America by running our nation&#8217;s borders and evading the crucial screening process conducted by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors at ports of entry.  This serves to encourage, not deter, aliens to run our nation&#8217;s borders.</p>
<p>Where our broken immigration system is concerned, the obvious questions not being asked or answered is, “Where is the deterrent?”  “How is the lack of integrity in the immigration adjudications program being addressed?”</p>
<p>President Obama&#8217;s tone has been defiant, claiming that if members of Congress wanted to stop him from taking his actions that they should pass an immigration bill that he agreed with.  It was a stunning statement especially considering that Obama was a constitutional law instructor.  On numerous previous public appearances he made it clear that he did not have the authority to act alone to take the actions that he is now taking to deal with immigration.  Yet, for reasons never articulated, he has now made it clear that he will now do what he had previous claimed he lacked the legal authority to do.</p>
<p>He has also never explained how his actions would curtail future illegal immigration or address the recommendations and findings of the 9/11 Commission.  But then, these are critical questions that virtually no journalists have ever asked or members of the Republican Party have ever addressed, either.</p>
<p>Obama is attempting to extort immigration legislation by using the sort of “strong arm” technique of Tony Soprano rather than the conciliatory and constitutionally mandated technique befitting the President of the United States, who leads the most powerful democratic republic on the planet.</p>
<p>While the media has fixated on the procedural issues of whether or not what Obama is promising (threatening?) to do is within the bounds of his legal authority as the President of the United States, what has never been discussed to any great degree is the other procedural question &#8212; how would USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) implement this massive amnesty program involving millions of illegal aliens with even a sliver of integrity?</p>
<p>On November 30, 2013 Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS) posted my commentary, <span style="color: #011480;">&#8220;Political Asylum Fraud: Where America&#8217;s Compassion Becomes Vulnerability&#8221;</span>that was predicated on a hard-hitting report posted by ABC News on November 20, 2013, <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131"><span style="color: #386eff;">&#8220;Exclusive: US May Have Let &#8216;Dozens&#8217; of Terrorists Into Country As Refugees.&#8221;</span></a></p>
<p>The number one priority of the government of the United States is national security and, with it, public safety.  How on earth could the administration successfully administer that program in a manner that would not undermine national security and public safety?  Let us remember that America&#8217;s borders and immigration laws are its shields, its first line of defense and last line of defense against international terrorists, transnational criminals and other foreign nationals whose presence in the United States would undermine national security, public safety, public health or otherwise compromise the well-being of America and Americans.</p>
<p>On September 10, 2014 the New York Post published a disturbing report, <a href="http://nypost.com/2014/09/10/homeland-security-we-cant-stop-isis-from-coming-into-us/"><span style="color: #011480;">&#8220;Homeland Security: We can’t stop ISIS from coming into US.&#8221;</span></a></p>
<p>Here is an important quote from this report:</p>
<blockquote><p><i>‘Terrorists could be just one visa-free flight away from arriving in the United States.’</i></p>
<p><i>-Rep. Candice Miller</i></p>
<p><i>Members of Congress cited estimates that 12,000 foreigners have traveled to Syria to engage in the civil war, including more than 1,000 Europeans and more than 100 Americans, with a dozen Americans believed to be fighting alongside ISIS.</i></p>
<p><i>“ISIS is a threat to the United States and to the people of the United States,” said Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas).</i></p>
<p><i>“We may be reminded on 9/11 the count was approximately 19 who created the most heinous terrorist attack, killing more than 3,000.”</i></p>
<p><i>One Frenchman who trained with ISIS went to Brussels to murder four people at a Jewish museum in May, authorities say.</i></p>
<p><i>State Department and Homeland Security leaders said they’ve been working diligently with the tools at their disposal, including constantly upgrading border security procedures, reviewing the terror watch list and vetting visas.</i></p>
<p><i>“Though we currently have no credible information to indicate that ISIL is planning to attack the homeland, we remain concerned in the long term that their access to Westerners … will allow them to plan and coordinate attacks in the US,” Lasley said.</i></p></blockquote>
<p>On November 10, 2014 Newsweek published a report about how the CIA is unable to effectively vet just 5,000 Syrians who claim to be moderates who want to help fight ISIS.  Realize that these are people who are in their country of citizenship and the CIA is able to conduct in-person interviews and are able to conduct investigations in the towns and villages where these people live, yet the vetting process is a disaster.  If it is virtually impossible to effectively screen 5,000 Syrians within their own country, how on earth could USCIS properly vet 5 million or, likely, many more aliens in the United States without an interview or field investigation?</p>
<p style="color: #011480;"><span style="color: #000000;">The Newsweek article, <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/2014/11/21/moderate-rebels-please-raise-your-hands-283449.html">&#8220;Inside the CIA&#8217;s Syrian Rebels Vetting Machine,&#8221;</a> begins with this passage:</span></p>
<blockquote><p><i>Nothing has come in for more mockery during the Obama administration’s halting steps into the Syrian civil war than its employment of “moderate” to describe the kind of rebels it is willing to back. In one of the more widely cited japes, The New Yorker’s resident humorist, Andy Borowitz, presented a “Moderate Syrian Application Form,” in which applicants were asked to describe themselves as either “A) Moderate, B) Very moderate, C) Crazy moderate or D) Other.”</i></p>
<p><i>After Senator John McCain allegedly posed with Syrians “on our side” who turned out to be kidnappers—a report later called into question—Jon Stewart cracked, “Not everyone is going to be wearing their ‘HELLO I’M A TERRORIST’ name badge.”</i></p>
<p><i>Behind the jokes, however, is the deadly serious responsibility of the CIA and Defense Department to vet Syrians before they receive covert American training, aid and arms. But according to U.S. counterterrorism veterans, a system that worked pretty well during four decades of the Cold War has been no match for the linguistic, cultural, tribal and political complexities of the Middle East, especially now in Syria. “We’re completely out of our league,” one former CIA vetting expert declared on condition of anonymity, reflecting the consensus of intelligence professionals with firsthand knowledge of the Syrian situation. “To be really honest, very few people know how to vet well. It’s a very specialized skill. It’s extremely difficult to do well” in the best of circumstances, the former operative said. And in Syria it has proved impossible.</i></p></blockquote>
<p><span style="color: #386eff;"><a href="http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/911_TerrTrav_Monograph.pdf">The 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel</a></span>was prepared by the staff that assisted the 9/11 Commission.  The preface of that document began with this paragraph:</p>
<blockquote><p><i>&#8220;It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.&#8221;</i></p></blockquote>
<p>That report also detailed numerous examples of instances where terrorists not only made use of visa and immigration benefit fraud to enter the United States, but to also embed themselves in the United States. Page 47 of this report noted:</p>
<blockquote><p>“<i>Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States. Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.”</i></p></blockquote>
<p>It is significant to note that the Seasonal Agricultural Program, also known as the Special Agricultural Program (SAW), were major components of the 1986 amnesty and that New York&#8217;s then-Congressman Chuck Schumer was one of that program&#8217;s major architects even though there were absolutely no farms in his congressional district when he concocted it.</p>
<p>This paragraph is found on page 98 of the report, under the title “Immigration Benefits”:</p>
<blockquote><p><i>Terrorists in the 1990s, as well as the September 11 hijackers, needed to find a way to stay in or embed themselves in the United States if their operational plans were to come to fruition. As already discussed, this could be accomplished legally by marrying an American citizen, achieving temporary worker status, or applying for asylum after entering. In many cases, the act of filing for an immigration benefit sufficed to permit the alien to remain in the country until the petition was adjudicated. Terrorists were free to conduct surveillance, coordinate operations, obtain and receive funding, go to school and learn English, make contacts in the United States, acquire necessary materials, and execute an attack.</i></p></blockquote>
<p>The program that the administration is about to create violates the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission yet, incredibly, this issue is never raised in the mainstream media or members of either political party in either the House of Representatives or the Senate.</p>
<p>While Obama and others have stated that the program being by the administration would involve five million illegal aliens, there is no assurance that humongous as that number is might not quickly swell to double or triple that number.  In 1986 the Reagan administration predicted that roughly one million illegal aliens would participate in the amnesty program that was a part of the Immigration Reform and Control Act. By the time that the bureaucratic dust had settled between 3.5 and 4 million aliens had gained lawful status.</p>
<p>While the majority of these illegal aliens are not likely to have serious criminal histories or affiliations with terrorist organizations, the sheer magnitude of this program would create a monstrous haystack in which some truly deadly needles will easily be able to conceal themselves.  Because of the huge number of applications that will likely be filed, there would be no capacity to conduct routine face-to-face interviews with the applicants.  There would be no capacity to conduct routine field investigations to seek to verify information contained in the applications.</p>
<p>Furthermore, because of the huge number of applications and relatively sparse numbers of USCIS adjudications officers, applications will need to be processed quickly.  This raises yet another area of concern.  It takes just minutes for an adjudications officer to approve an application but may take hours, days or even weeks for those adjudicators to deny an application.  Adjudications Officers will be required to process a minimum number of applications per day or week to satisfy the standards established in their evaluations which are prepared periodically.  This will force these dedicated employees to be pressured to approve the great majority of the applications that they are given to adjudicate.</p>
<p>On November 1, 2013 CAPS (Californians for Population Stabilization posted my commentary: <a href="http://www.capsweb.org/blog/speed-kills-uscis">&#8220;Speed Kills at USCIS”</a></p>
<p>USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) is the woebegone division of the DHS that would be tasked with administering this program. As it is, this beleaguered and inept agency cannot keep up with its workload without “rubber-stamping” approvals on many applications where this slipshod approach enables fraud to often go undetected.  It only takes minutes for an Adjudications Officer to approve an application for a benefit such as lawful status or citizenship, but it may require hours or days to deny an application.</p>
<p>The adjudications officers will be pressured to “get to yes” as was reported by the media about instructions given to these USCIS officials.  Furthermore, their evaluations contain productivity requirements (quotas).  A diligent adjudicator will find his/her career imperiled for not meeting quotas that all but preclude denying more than a very few applications.</p>
<p>I wrote an article about the plight of these officials in my article for CAPS, <a href="http://www.capsweb.org/blog/immigration-bon-bon-factory"><span style="color: #011480;">&#8220;The Immigration Bon Bon Factory.&#8221;</span></a>  In my piece I noted that a <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnbNcQlzV-4"><span style="color: #011480;">hilarious episode of &#8220;I Love Lucy&#8221;</span></a> found the hapless Lucy and her comedic side-kick Ethel working in a candy factory and were assigned to wrap morsels of bon bons. They were unable to keep up with the pace of candy hurtling at them on a conveyor belt that started slowly but quickly accelerated to warp speed.  They were warned that if they failed to keep pace with the candy they would be fired.  To keep from losing their jobs they began stuffing the candy down their clothing and eating them, but to no avail.</p>
<p>While the situation Lucy and Ethel found themselves in were designed to entertain their audience, there is nothing amusing about the plight of the employees of USCIS or what it means for national security.</p>
<p>This is not just speculation on my part but is, in fact, based on the current reality in terms of how the hundreds of thousands of applications for DREAMERS are being adjudicated now.  Indeed, the approval rate for the DREAMERS under the DACA (Deferred Action- Childhood Arrivals) Program now exceeds 95%.</p>
<p>Because of this illegal aliens, who, for reasons only known to them, evaded the inspections process that is supposed to prevent the entry of aliens whose presence would be problematic for America and Americans, will see an opportunity to secure lawful status and official identity documents by committing fraud that is most likely to go undetected.  Aliens will be able to succeed in lying about their identities, including potentially their true countries of citizenship.  They will also likely be able to successfully make false claims concerning their dates and methods of entry into the United States.</p>
<p>That these aliens evaded the inspections process is all but ignored in the media and in the statements made by our supposed political leaders.  Aliens who run our borders entered the United States by evading the inspections process conducted at ports of entry by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors that is supposed to prevent the entry of aliens into the United States whose presence would be dangerous to the safety and well-being of America and Americans.</p>
<p><span style="color: #011480;"><a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182">Title 8, United States Code, Section 1182</a></span><span style="color: #0d2f87;"> </span>enumerates the categories of aliens who are to be excluded. Among these classes are aliens who suffer from dangerous communicable diseases or extreme mental illness. Additionally convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminals, terrorists and spies are to be excluded, as well as aliens who would seek unlawful employment thus displacing American workers or driving down the wages of American workers who are similarly employed and aliens who would become public charges.</p>
<p>It should be obvious that aliens who evade that inspections process do so because they know that they belong to one or more categories of aliens who are to be prevented from entering the United States.  What is not obvious about these aliens is any information as to what would prevent them from being lawfully admitted.  There is no way to readily determine their true identities or backgrounds.  This means that they may successfully lie about their countries of citizenship as well as their names and dates of birth.  Their is no way to even know when or how they actually entered the United States.</p>
<p>The National Review Online posted an article that coincided with the New York Post Post article, <b> </b><span style="color: #011480;"><a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/389829/isis-fighters-getting-caught-coming-across-us-mexican-border-jim-geraghty">&#8220;ISIS Fighters Getting Caught Coming Across the U.S.-Mexican Border?&#8221;</a></span></p>
<p>Here is the text of this relatively short and disconcerting report:</p>
<blockquote><p><i>From the midweek edition of the </i><a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/newsletters"><span style="color: #011480;"><i>Morning Jolt</i></span></a><i>:</i></p>
<p><b><i>Say What? ‘At Least Ten ISIS Fighters Have Been Caught Coming Across the Border’</i></b></p>
<p><i>Rep. </i><a href="http://hunter.house.gov/"><span style="color: #011480;"><i>Duncan Hunter</i></span></a><i>, Republican of California, does not seem like a nut job or prone to wild exaggerations. But </i><a href="http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2014/10/stunner-rep-duncan-hunter-r-ca-ten-isis.html"><span style="color: #011480;"><i>last night he said something that should make jaws drop</i></span></a><i>:</i></p>
<p><b><i>Van Susteren:</i></b><i> Hold on. Stop for one second.</i></p>
<p><b><i>Hunter:</i></b><i> They are going to be bombing American cities coming across from Mexico.</i></p>
<p><b><i>Van Susteren:</i></b><i> Let me ask a question. You say that they are coming in the southern border, which changes all the dynamics Do you have any information that they are coming in through the southern border now?</i></p>
<p><b><i>Hunter:</i></b><i> Yes.</i></p>
<p><b><i>Van Susteren:</i></b><i> Tell me what you know.</i></p>
<p><b><i>Hunter:</i></b><i> At least ten ISIS fighters have been caught coming across the border in Texas.</i></p>
<p><b><i>Van Susteren:</i></b><i> How do you know that?</i></p>
<p><b><i>Hunter:</i></b><i> Because I’ve asked the border patrol, Greta.</i></p>
<p><b><i>Van Susteren:</i></b><i> And the border patrol just let’s ISIS members come across the border?</i></p>
<p><b><i>Hunter:</i></b><i> No. They caught them at the border. Therefore, we know that ISIS is coming across the border. If they catch five or ten of them, you know that there are going to be dozens more that did not get caught by the border patrol. That’s how you know. That’s where we are at risk here, is from ISIS and radical Islamists coming across the border. Once again, they don’t have a navy, air force, nuclear weapons. The only way that Americans are going to be harmed by radical Islam — Chairman Dempsey said the same thing. He said that’s where the major threat is here, that’s how these guys are going to infiltrate through America and harm Americans.</i></p></blockquote>
<p>Providing millions of illegal aliens with lawful status and official identity documents would not provide a deterrence to millions of aspiring illegal aliens from around the world and with the abject lack of integrity to the process, could potentially wind up with the additional consequences of providing terrorists with official identity documents in false names.</p>
<p>Mr. Obama&#8217;s plans could be the ultimate bad news.</p>
<p>Given the foregoing, Star Trek&#8217;s Captain James T. Kirk would likely command, “Shields up!”</p>
<p>Incomprehensibly, Mr. Obama is ordering just the opposite and the focus of attention of the media and politicians from both parties is solely on whether or not the President&#8217;s executive orders are constitutional, certainly a major issue.  However, what is being ignored is the impact this will have on our nation and our citizens in this particularly perilous era.</p>
<p>*</p>
<p><em>Don&#8217;t miss <strong>Jamie Glazov&#8217;s</strong> interview with <strong>Michael Cutler</strong> on <strong>“The Immigration Crisis”</strong>:</em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/pXthT43Cbok" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/michael-cutler/obama-solves-immigration-crisis-by-ordering-shields-down/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama the Tyrant</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/bruce-thornton/obama-the-tyrant/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama-the-tyrant</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/bruce-thornton/obama-the-tyrant/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 05:46:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bruce Thornton]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[executive order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illegal Aliens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Left]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=245833</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A presidential overreach that undermines the most important foundation of the Western political tradition. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/sa.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-245837" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/sa-450x281.jpg" alt="sa" width="317" height="198" /></a>Obama’s executive order granting amnesty to 4 million illegal aliens exposes yet again the hypocrisy and cynicism of the most partisan administration in recent history. Typical of a president who seemingly can’t remember or doesn’t care what he has publicly told the people, Obama went ahead and took action that more than 20 times he had publicly said he couldn’t legally take­­. And he did so not because of some pressing “crisis” of illegals living “in the shadows,” a rationale that ignores the <em>real</em> crisis–– illegal deadbeats and thugs serially passing though a porous border in order to create mayhem and disorder in our communities. Rather, this action was a rank partisan gift to vocal activists and clients of the Democratic Party.</p>
<p>More important, however, this latest instance of presidential overreach undermines the most important foundation of the Western political tradition going back to the ancient Greeks––the suspicion of any necessarily flawed man’s excessive power that inevitably flouts the limits imposed by the supreme law of the land.</p>
<p>In ancient Athens, for example, the <em>turannos</em> or “tyrant” was the exemplar of the dangers that flow from excessive power vested in one person. It wasn’t that the tyrant was completely evil and oppressive. Many Greek tyrants, like the Athenian Peisistratus, benefitted their communities. Yet given human nature, even a well-meaning leader given excessive power often will abuse it to gratify his own selfish desires, ambitions, and interests at the expense of the law and the freedom of his fellow citizens. In ancient Greek political thought, the tyrant became the monitory example of power’s ability to corrupt, and thus often was depicted as violent, paranoid, and excessive in his actions.</p>
<p>The American founders were intimately familiar with this tradition. For them a generalissimo like Julius Caesar, who violated the Roman Republican constitution and ruled as an autocrat until his assassination, was the warning against creating a too powerful executive. One of the most popular Romans of the pre-Revolutionary period was Cato the Younger, who committed suicide rather than submit to Caesar. Joseph Addison’s play <em>Cato</em> was the most popular theatrical production of this period. George Washington had it produced for his troops during the grim winter at Valley Forge, and Patrick Henry’s “Give me liberty, or give me death” was a paraphrase of a line from the play.</p>
<p>Thus when the Declaration of Independence says of George III, “The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States,” the word “Tyranny” is not used lightly or metaphorically. George III is being placed into the long tradition of the tyrant whose oppressive rule, as Aristotle wrote, is “arbitrary power . . . which is responsible to no one, and governs all alike, whether equals or betters, with a view to its own advantage, not to that of its subjects, and therefore against their will. No freeman willingly endures such a government.” That’s why our political ancestors fought the Revolution, and then wrote the Constitution as a safeguard against a future tyrant.</p>
<p>Indeed, in the debates of the delegates to the Constitutional convention, the fear that “power is of an encroaching nature,” as George Washington and others said, guided their crafting of the office of chief executive. In the debate over whether the President should be compensated for his service, Benjamin Franklin feared adding money to the attractions of power the chief executive would possess, “for the love of power and the love of money” when united in one office have “the most violent effects.” Presidential power will attract “the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits.” Hence the Constitutional order checks the power of the executive by the legislature and the judiciary, with Congress given the power to make laws and impeach the executive, and the most democratic assembly, the House of Representatives, given the power of the purse in order to deny an overweening president the funds necessary to advance his ambitions. Finally, the states choose the presidential electors who elect the president, giving the states yet another check on presidential power through term limits and the ballot.</p>
<p>The 22<sup>nd</sup> amendment limiting the president to 2 terms is testimony to this traditional distrust of power, particularly because it was passed by Congress in 1947, a few years after the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt, who was a popular president elected 4 times. As Thomas Jefferson said in 1807, when the 2-term limit was a custom initiated by George Washington rather than established by law, “if some termination to the services of the chief Magistrate be not fixed by the Constitution, or supplied by practice, his office, nominally four years, will in fact become for life.” This healthy fear of power continuing in one man’s hands for too long reflected the long tradition of the distrust of power based in turn on a tragic view of a flawed human nature. It explains the great care Alexander Hamilton takes in <em>Federalist</em> 69 to set out the differences between the president and a king, mainly because the former is subjected to numerous limitations on his power, making “difficult to determine whether that magistrate would, in the aggregate, possess more or less power than the Governor of New York.” Most important, this fear of power is the central assumption behind the mixed government and balance of governmental powers characterizing our Constitution.</p>
<p>Obama, of course, has rejected this venerable tradition and embraced that of the Progressive movement. Social and technological change, the Progressives argued, have rendered the Constitutional order an anachronism, making necessary a more powerful executive and federal government. Woodrow Wilson’s 1908 <em>Constitutional Government in the United States</em> set out the arguments for this idea. He complained that the chief executive was “only the legal executive, the presiding and guiding authority in the application of law and the execution of policy . . . He was empowered [by the veto] to prevent laws, but he was not to be given an opportunity to make good ones.” That complaint leads directly to Obama’s eagerness to make “good laws” as defined not by the people through their representatives, but by himself and his political faction.</p>
<p>And just as Obama, by legislating via executive order fiat, has proven he is impatient with the mixed government that puts limits on his policy ambitions, Wilson rejected the balancing of power and conflicting factions codified in the Constitution. Government, Wilson wrote, “is a living, organic thing, and must like every other government, work out the close synthesis of active parts, which exist only when leadership is lodged in some one man or group of men.” Here we see the imperial president’s preference for unaccountable technocrats and “experts” like the mendacious Jonathan Gruber, instead of working with the legislators elected by the people and subject to electoral accountability.</p>
<p>Finally, Obama has governed based on the Wilsonian preference for concentrating executive power rather than submitting it to Constitutional checks and balances. “You cannot compound a successful government out of antagonisms,” Wilson wrote. Of course, in Wilson’s view “successful” is defined as solving technical problems or achieving an ideologically biased “social justice,” unlike the Founders, who thought a successful federal government is the one that keeps separate the executive, legislative, and judicial powers and thus protects the freedom of the citizens. And instead of the Constitution’s realist acknowledgement that a vast country of various interests cannot be unified in one leader without risking the people’s freedom, Wilson wrote that we must “look to the President as the unifying force in our complex system, the leader both of his party and of the nation.” The question begged, of course, is unified around what? Which interests or ideals? In reality, they will be reduced to those of one faction that will come to dominate the others, backed by the coercive power of the federal government and its cadres of unelected administrators and bureaucrats.</p>
<p>Obama has governed explicitly as such a “leader.” On every issue from the environment and health care to immigration––87 pages worth of executive diktats–– he has reduced the various and conflicting interests and ideals of the citizens and states to those of his own party and its progressive ideology. But this usurpation of power has come at the expense of state and individual political rights and freedom, not to mention the undermining of the Constitutional order designed explicitly to protect those rights and freedoms.</p>
<p>Obama has set a precedent that, if left unchecked, will be tempting for other presidents to follow, taking us even further down the road of tyranny. From ancient Athens to the Founders to those traditionalists today who understand the primacy of freedom in the architecture of our political order, such a leader has been characterized by one word––tyrant.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>.   </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/bruce-thornton/obama-the-tyrant/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Video: Michael Cutler on &#8220;The Immigration Crisis&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/jamie-glazov/video-michael-cutler-on-the-immigration-crisis/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=video-michael-cutler-on-the-immigration-crisis</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/jamie-glazov/video-michael-cutler-on-the-immigration-crisis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 05:10:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jamie Glazov]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cutler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[threat]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=245815</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Former Senior Special Agent of the INS unveils a hazardous threat facing our nation. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/kl.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-245817" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/kl-450x260.jpg" alt="kl" width="286" height="165" /></a>Former Senior Special Agent of the INS unveils a hazardous threat facing our nation:</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/pXthT43Cbok" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>.   </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/jamie-glazov/video-michael-cutler-on-the-immigration-crisis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>To Amnesty 5 Million</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/to-amnesty-5-million/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=to-amnesty-5-million</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/to-amnesty-5-million/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2014 05:55:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matthew Vadum]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[address]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[television]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=245773</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The lawless Obamnesty has arrived.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/obama2.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-245774" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/obama2-450x281.jpg" alt="President Obama Delivers Remarks On Executive Action Immigration Reform" width="388" height="242" /></a>Ignoring the brutal, historic slap-down angry American voters gave his party this month, President Obama unveiled plans for a unilaterally imposed amnesty that will shield an estimated 5 million illegal aliens from deportation.</p>
<p>Whether Republicans, now in possession of a thunderous mandate to fight Obama tooth and nail, will fight this despotic usurpation of the lawmaking powers of Congress remains to be seen.</p>
<p>Obama doesn&#8217;t care. He is pressing on, hoping to fill America with millions of new Democrat voters. And he&#8217;s going to kill American jobs in the process.</p>
<p>&#8220;We expect people who live in this country to play by the rules,&#8221; said the president. The address from the White House came yesterday, which just so happened to be Revolution Day (also known as Civil War Day) in Mexico.</p>
<p>&#8220;We expect those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded,&#8221; the president continued. Yet Obama went on to propose just such a reward in the form of a special &#8220;deal&#8221; for unlawful immigrants:</p>
<blockquote><p>So we’re going to offer the following deal: If you’ve with been in America more than five years. If you have children who are American citizens or illegal residents. If you register, pass a criminal background check and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes, you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily without fear of deportation. You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. That’s what this deal is.</p></blockquote>
<p>Strangely, Obama, who routinely flouts the Constitution, still acknowledges some limits to his power. The deal, he said, does not apply to recently arrived illegal aliens or illegals who have yet to sneak into the country.</p>
<p>&#8220;It does not grant citizenship or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive,&#8221; Obama said. &#8220;Only Congress can do that. All we’re saying is we’re not going to deport you.&#8221;</p>
<p>Whether the benefits illegal aliens receive are as generous as benefits that citizens receive is beside the point. Illegal aliens are already eligible for extensive benefits from the government and Obama is a big believer in getting poor people addicted to welfare. No serious person believes illegals won&#8217;t have access to social programs.</p>
<p>In the address Obama played semantic games. What he&#8217;s doing is not an amnesty, he said:</p>
<blockquote><p>Amnesty is the immigration system we have today. Millions of people who live here without paying their taxes or playing by the rules, while politicians use the issue to scare people and whip up votes at election time. That’s the real amnesty, leaving this broken system the way it is. Mass amnesty would be unfair.</p></blockquote>
<p>The former part-time adjunct constitutional law lecturer has it wrong. A failure to enforce a law isn&#8217;t tantamount to amnesty. Amnesty is an official governmental act of forgiveness that excuses a violation of the law. Being in a state of legal limbo in which law enforcement hasn&#8217;t yet called your number isn&#8217;t the same as amnesty.</p>
<p>Nor is the immigration system broken, at least not in the way Obama means.</p>
<p>When progressives say the system is broken, they mean it is functioning in a less than optimal manner, failing to capture every single prospective illegal alien available to wade across the Rio Grande or walk across the nation’s largely undefended border with Mexico. To them, immigration policy is a taxpayer-subsidized get-out-the-vote scheme for Democrats and the best reform they could imagine would be to abolish America’s borders altogether. Obama&#8217;s new amnesty plan is a step in this direction.</p>
<p>It is also a profoundly cynical move that rewards lawbreaking and begets future immigration amnesties. It will spell electoral death for the Republican Party in coming years because Latinos, who are believed to comprise the bulk of the illegals, have traditionally shown a strong preference for the Democratic Party and its left-of-center public policies. The amnesty for 5 million illegals is likely just the beginning. The government recently issued a procurement order seeking a contractor to make as many as 34 million immigration documents over the coming five years.</p>
<p>During his address, Obama quoted the Book of Exodus, saying:</p>
<blockquote><p>Scripture tells us that we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger &#8212; we were strangers once, too. My fellow Americans, we are and always will be a nation of immigrants. We were strangers once, too.</p></blockquote>
<p>But the immigrants in question are not the legal immigrants of the past who followed the rules when they came to this country. They are invaders who broke the law and who continue to break the law by being here. America is not, nor has it ever been, a nation of illegal immigrants.</p>
<p>To qualify for relief from deportation, individuals will have to register with the government, pass criminal and national security background checks, pay their taxes, and pay a processing fee, according to a White House handout. Applications can&#8217;t be filed until early next year.</p>
<p>Parents of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents as of the date of the announcement are eligible, provided that they are not &#8220;enforcement priorities&#8221; and have been present in the U.S. since Jan. 1, 2010. Also eligible are individuals who arrived in this country before Jan. 1, 2010 and before turning 16 years old, regardless of how old they are now. Processing times for certain categories of green card applicants will be accelerated. Recent arrivals who entered the country after Jan. 1 of this year will not be eligible to apply.</p>
<p>Obama lapdogs were ecstatic about the planned amnesty.</p>
<p>Echoing Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) who absurdly compared Obama&#8217;s executive order to the Emancipation Proclamation, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) asked, &#8220;Does the public know that the Emancipation Proclamation was an executive order?&#8221;</p>
<p>Except that the Emancipation Proclamation freed categories of slaves, innocent people victimized by an abhorrent institution, not illegal aliens who took it upon themselves to invade the country and abuse the goodwill of Americans. The only thing the two executive orders have in common is that a president signed them.</p>
<p>Republicans are deeply split on the amnesty issue so anyone expecting Republican lawmakers to give Obama a well-deserved rhetorical mauling two weeks after the GOP crushed Democrats in midterm elections will be disappointed in coming days. That&#8217;s not what the emasculated party of Lincoln does because it is terrified of being called racist for opposing the nation&#8217;s first (half) black president.</p>
<p>Despite running a virtually content-free campaign, on Nov. 4 the GOP flipped control of the 100-seat U.S. Senate, winning at least 53 seats as of this writing. The House GOP increased its majority, winning at least 244 out of 435 seats. In the new year Republicans will control at least 31 state governors&#8217; mansions and at least 68 of the 99 state legislative chambers across the country (Nebraska&#8217;s legislature has only one chamber). In at least 23 states Republicans will control the governorship and both houses of the state legislature. Democrats can make the same claim about only 7 states.</p>
<p>The election was arguably, depending on the psephological metrics used, the worst showing for the Democratic Party in its history.</p>
<p>Despite the newly enfeebled status of the Democrats, the House GOP&#8217;s response was predictably weak. Instead of righteously inveighing against the grave threat that Obama&#8217;s actions pose to the republic, on Twitter the official House Republican feed meekly exhorted the president to cooperate with them.</p>
<p>&#8220;We need a real fix, not a quick fix. Let&#8217;s fix our broken immigration system together,&#8221; read one GOP tweet. Another said, &#8220;Mr. President, stop acting alone. Let&#8217;s work together.&#8221; Maybe the GOP&#8217;s communications professionals would like to roast some s&#8217;mores and sing Kumbaya with the president.</p>
<p>And Obama must be quaking in his jackboots. Even after six years of getting beaten to a pulp, constantly sucker-punched by the nation&#8217;s Alinskyite president, congressional Republicans still aren&#8217;t anywhere close to grasping what he really is. They continue to treat Obama as if he&#8217;s a legitimate, sincere president who actually wants to do what&#8217;s best for America. They foolishly believe Obama cares about his falling public approval numbers and his presidential legacy. They refuse to acknowledge that he is a radical revolutionary figure hellbent on destroying, or in his own words, fundamentally transforming, the U.S. They actually seem to think Obama is interested in negotiating with them to find policy solutions that benefit the country. Many elected GOPers appear not to have an inkling that embracing amnesty is the same as signing a death warrant for the Republican Party.</p>
<p>House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), who supports amnesty in principle but is under intense pressure from conservative lawmakers, is trying to put down a rebellion in his own House GOP conference. Although Obama has previously protested that he is not a king or an emperor, &#8220;he&#8217;s sure acting like one,&#8221; Boehner, who may face a challenge to his speakership in January, said yesterday.</p>
<p>Incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was characteristically vague.</p>
<p>&#8220;If President Obama acts in defiance of the people and imposes his will on the country, Congress will act,&#8221; he said.</p>
<p>Retiring Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) told <i>USA Today</i> earlier this week that Obama&#8217;s amnesty could spark civil unrest. &#8220;The country&#8217;s going to go nuts, because they&#8217;re going to see it as a move outside the authority of the president, and it&#8217;s going to be a very serious situation.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;You&#8217;re going to see &#8212; hopefully not &#8212; but you could see instances of anarchy &#8230; You could see violence,&#8221; Coburn said. Obama will be behaving like &#8220;an autocratic leader that&#8217;s going to disregard what the Constitution says and make law anyway.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Instead of having the rule of law handling in our country today, now we&#8217;re starting to have the rule of rulers, and that&#8217;s the total antithesis of what this country was founded on,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Here&#8217;s how people think: Well, if the law doesn&#8217;t apply to the president &#8230; then why should it apply to me?&#8221;</p>
<p>House Appropriations Committee chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/393119/hal-rogers-obama-republican-mark-krikorian"><span style="color: #0433ff;">appears to have taken the wrong lesson</span></a> from the electoral bloodbath this month that set Democrats back 150 years. Although voters delivered the message that they want Obama stopped, Rogers interprets the election as a mandate for surrender.</p>
<p>&#8220;I believe a major consequence of this election is a loud and clear mandate from the American people for Washington to stop the gridlock, work together across ideological lines and start producing real accomplishments on their behalf,&#8221; Rogers wrote in an op-ed.</p>
<p>Rogers wants Congress to pass a long-term funding bill called an omnibus appropriations bill before the government&#8217;s authority to spend money expires on Dec. 11. It would keep the government operating for the rest of the federal fiscal year which runs to Sept. 30, 2015.</p>
<p>There will be &#8220;an extraordinary amount of work to do when the new Congress convenes in January &#8230; but there simply won&#8217;t be the political bandwidth available to address these pressing issues if Congress is bogged down in old battles and protracted to-do lists.&#8221;</p>
<p>Some Republicans have proposed defunding the parts of the government that would process amnesty-related paperwork.</p>
<p>Separately, Rogers has made the absurd suggestion that Congress approve a big, all-encompassing spending bill now and then rescind amnesty-relating funding next year. Rescissions happen but they&#8217;re relatively rare. Why bother giving Obama a green light to proceed with the amnesty now in the hope of slamming on the brakes in the new year?</p>
<p>The real problem with enacting an omnibus spending bill, <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/393119/hal-rogers-obama-republican-mark-krikorian"><span style="color: #0433ff;">according to</span></a> Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, is that such a funding measure &#8220;would enable Obama to complete his lawless amnesty scheme.&#8221;</p>
<p>Rogers insists that the amnesty cannot be stopped through the appropriations process.</p>
<p>It would be &#8220;impossible to defund President Obama&#8217;s executive order through a government spending bill,&#8221; House Appropriations Committee spokeswoman Jennifer Hing said yesterday, explaining that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is funded by user fees.</p>
<p>It is a facile, easily disproved argument. USCIS, an agency within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is part of the federal government. It was created by Congress and Congress can do anything it wants to it. It can give it money, take money away from it, give it a spanking, or order it to stand on one leg and bark like a dog.</p>
<p>In a development overshadowed by the unveiling of the amnesty, DHS <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/20/us-usa-ebola-immigrant-protection-idUSKCN0J41JS20141120"><span style="color: #0433ff;">announced</span></a> yesterday that it will grant &#8220;temporary protected status&#8221; to up to 8,000 people from the Ebola-afflicted African countries of Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. These visitors may apply for work permits for 18 months. Unlike ordinary recipients of temporary protected status, these Ebola refugees will not be allowed to travel to their home countries and then return to the U.S., in order to prevent the spread of Ebola.</p>
<p>Or so the story goes. If Obama can find a way to let them stay in the U.S., he&#8217;ll do it.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/to-amnesty-5-million/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1644</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama Deports American Jobs</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/obama-deports-american-jobs/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama-deports-american-jobs</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/obama-deports-american-jobs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2014 05:55:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illegal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Votes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=245614</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Democrats want to trade American jobs to illegal aliens for votes.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Obama.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-245617" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Obama-450x318.jpg" alt="Obama" width="300" height="212" /></a>Obama’s excuse for his illegal amnesty will be that the immigration system is “broken” forcing him to act. But when Obama says that the system is broken, he means that some parts of it still work and so he intends to break immigration all the way through to benefit his own corrupt political allies.</p>
<p>That will hurt his own voters the most, but the Democratic Party has a notoriously masochistic relationship with its voting base. It beats them up and then it gaslights them by hugging them and telling them that it was really the mean Republicans who punched them in the face.</p>
<p>When African-American unemployment rates rise, the workers who can’t find jobs because of all the brand new DREAMERs won’t blame the White House, they’ll blame the evil Republicans for income inequality, assuming Sharpton manages to read the term correctly from his MSNBC teleprompter.</p>
<p>According to Obama our immigration system is broken because it doesn’t allow illegal aliens who illegally crossed the border to take American jobs. That’s not a broken system, that’s what the system is supposed to do.</p>
<p>When illegal aliens aren’t allowed to legally take American jobs, that’s how you know the immigration system is working.</p>
<p>In the language of progressivism, helping means ruining and fixing means breaking. A system that fulfills any useful purpose must be reformed out of all usefulness. If the tattered shreds of the immigration system still keep a single Democratic voter from legally cashing a welfare check and casting a vote, then immigration must be reformed and helped and fixed until it is completely destroyed.</p>
<p>The immigration system is broken because it was reformed so many times that it makes as much sense as an outhouse on a space shuttle. Its main function now is to bring millions of people without jobs to a country where millions are out of work. Obama wants to fix that by adding millions more people.</p>
<p>Our system of immigration is a perfectly good system for importing lots of low wage workers. The only problem is they’re being imported into a country where there are a lot more low wage workers than there are jobs. The cost of providing food stamps and social services for the immigrants and the Americans they put out of work is passed on to the shrinking middle class which kills more jobs.</p>
<p>Some Republicans would like to modify it to help Mark Zuckerberg bring cheaper third world programmers and engineers to replace the Americans over at Facebook. Why settle for just wiping out the working class, when you can also take out chunks of the middle class?</p>
<p>Our immigration system made perfect sense back when we were opening factories everywhere. It made sense when new ranches needed hands and land needed working. It makes a lot less sense when the government is fighting a war on carbon, when ranches have to get out of the way of the spotted red toad and farms are starved of water in the name of the environment.</p>
<p>The million immigrants a year are not entering booming industries, but serving as cheap labor in declining ones. And they’re doing it in a country where declining industries and poor workers are already being subsidized by taxpayers in a dozen different ways. Why then should taxpayers also be subsidizing the replacement of American workers with Somali and Honduran workers?</p>
<p>Who benefits from that except the Democratic Party which not only killed the industries, but is now managing to kill the American workforce? The glorious future of the new economy is a government subsidized Chinese factory using foreign workers to make subsidized solar panels in Oklahoma while taxpayers remain on the hook for the subsidies which used bonds sold to Chinese investors.</p>
<p>Declining industries tighten their belts by cutting costs. They find the cheapest employees they can. Those cheapest employees become a constituency for the nanny state. The nanny state makes it even more expensive to operate. The cycle spins on until the only industries left are state subsidized and everyone directly or indirectly works for the state. And the only items of collateral with which to borrow more money to subsidize them with are the land and the people. That’s not America. That’s Africa.</p>
<p>The Obama economy has created mostly low wage jobs. Those jobs continue to be filled by immigrants. There still aren’t enough jobs so Obama is proposing to create even less jobs by adding more immigrants by legalizing more illegal aliens.</p>
<p>There is something broken here, but it’s not so much immigration as Obama and his party.</p>
<p>Last week I spoke to a British immigration lawyer who described how difficult it was for seniors in the United Kingdom to retire in the United States. While most countries welcome wealthy retirees, our system makes it difficult for them to move and bring their money over here.</p>
<p>Meanwhile in his 2013 State of the Union address, Obama had praised Desiline Victor, a 102-year-old Haitian woman who had moved to the United States at around 80 and never learned to speak English, but did spend hours waiting in line in Florida to vote for Obama. There are <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/the-coming-collapse-of-the-welfare-state/">plenty of senior immigrants</a> coming through family reunification for a big bite of a social welfare system they never paid into.</p>
<p>But the Democratic Party would rather have a voter than a worker. And so what we have is not an immigration system, but a migration system.</p>
<p>That’s why Obama and his people fought so hard against an Ebola travel ban. It’s why the <em>New York Times</em> editorialized against allowing Cuban doctors to defect because of the “brain drain” but instead urged that “American immigration policy should give priority to the world’s neediest refugees.”</p>
<p>America certainly takes in plenty of needy people, but what the <em>New York Times</em> is emphasizing is that we should be taking in people with nothing to contribute and keeping out those who do. Its ideal immigrant will at best be a low wage worker and at worst a permanent welfare case. We don’t want Cuban doctors. We want Somali muggers and Liberian Ebola cases and Pakistani terrorists.</p>
<p>Immigration is not meant to serve American interests. America is meant to serve immigration.</p>
<p>The end result of this immigration policy will be a stratified society with a permanent lower class and a thin upper class whose leftists can always start a riot by shouting about income equality without ever being able to offer it. Without social mobility what we will have left is social instability. There will be lots of young men with time on their hands to build bombs or throw stones.</p>
<p>If the left doesn’t win through the system, they’ll have their revolutionary constituency standing by.</p>
<p>The only way we can afford the immigration policy that we have now is with a lot more industry and a lot less welfare. Instead our immigration rates were widened and rerouted to the Third World even as our actual industries declined. We kept on taking workers we didn’t have jobs for. We built ghettoes and rust belts and our politicians kept on reciting robotic speeches about being a nation of immigrants.</p>
<p>Immigration requires opportunity. We still have it, but less of it than we used to. Our immigration system is not based on opportunity. It’s based on a migratory flow of Democratic Party voters.</p>
<p>What broke the system was making it as open as possible to those who had the least to offer while closing it tightly to those who had the most to offer. Now Obama wants to import illegal aliens while deporting American jobs. He wants to trade American jobs to illegal aliens for Democratic votes.</p>
<p>If the immigration system is to work again, it should work for America… not for Obama.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </strong><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank"><strong>Click here</strong></a><strong>.   </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf"><strong>Subscribe</strong></a><strong> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <em>The Glazov Gang</em>, and </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>LIKE</strong></a><strong> it on </strong><a href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang"><strong>Facebook.</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/obama-deports-american-jobs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>78</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Geert Wilders: Islam&#8217;s War Against the Free West</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/geert-wilders-islams-war-against-the-free-west/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=geert-wilders-islams-war-against-the-free-west</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/geert-wilders-islams-war-against-the-free-west/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2014 05:50:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frontpagemag.com]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Geert Wilders']]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISIS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jihad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Restoration Weekend]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=245609</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A warrior for freedom delivers truth at the Freedom Center's 20th Anniversary Restoration Weekend.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="color: #232323;"><strong>Below are the video and transcript to Geert Wilders&#8217; speech at the David Horowitz Freedom Center&#8217;s 20th Anniversary Restoration Weekend. The event took place Nov. 13th-16th at the Breakers Resort in Palm Beach, Florida. </strong></p>
<p><iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/112171703" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">It is always a pleasure to be in the United States. And it is an honor to be at Restoration Weekend again. Especially at this moment when a new Congress and a new majority in the Senate are preparing to lead this great country and change it for the better.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">I am a politician from Europe. I am a member of the House of Representatives in the Netherlands and the leader of the Party for Freedom, the leading party in the Dutch opinion polls today.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Before I continue, let me tell you something about my life as a European politician.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">I am not a President, nor a Governor, nor even a member of Cabinet, just a member of Congress. For over ten years now, I have been living under 24/7 police protection. I lived with my wife in army barracks, prison cells and safe houses until this very day, just to be safe.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Wherever I go, armed policemen accompany me to protect me against Islamic jihadis. Al Qaida, the Taliban, ISIS and many others threatened to kill me because I tell the truth about Islam and speak out against the Islamization of our free Western societies.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">In Europe we have made a terrible mistake. During the past decades, our politicians foolishly allowed millions of Islamic immigrants to settle within our borders. Everywhere the Islamic culture was welcomed as an enrichment. Nowhere was the demand made that the immigrants assimilate.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Not a single European leader had the guts to state the obvious and tell the truth: Our Western culture based on Christianity, Judaism and Humanism, is far superior to the Islamic culture and immigrants have to adopt our values.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">And now, we in Europe are paying the price for this folly. Islam is eating away our Judeo-Christian and humanist civilization and replacing it with intolerance, hatred and violence. And our so-called leaders allow it.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">25 years ago, the Berlin Wall fell and the Iron Curtain was dismantled. Thanks to President Ronald Reagan, America’s greatest and best President ever, the totalitarian ideology of Communism was defeated in Europe and my continent was liberated. But now another totalitarianism has nestled itself in the heart of Europe.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Last Summer, my home town, The Hague, witnessed scenes which brought back memories of the darkest period in our history, the Nazi era. Sympathizers of the Islamic State paraded in our streets. They carried swastikas, they carried the black flags of the Islamic State. They shouted “Death to the Jews&#8221; and &#8220;Oh Jews, the army of Mohammed is coming for you&#8221;. In the streets of The Hague in broad daylight. And instead of rounding up these hatemongers, the Dutch authorities did nothing.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">When we in Europa warn against Islam, the authorities call it hate speech and bring us to court. But when the grim forces of hatred march down our streets, the police look on and do not interfere. It is a disgrace. It is a scandal. It is intolerable.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Islam is waging war against the free West. Only fools can deny it. The Islamic State has declared war on us. We have already had our share of beheadings in Europe. And it has started here, too.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">America and its allies are currently bombing the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. Excellent. My party supports this offensive. I am glad that Dutch and American F16s participate in it and that our two nations stand shoulder to shoulder in this endeavor. We should liquidate Abu Bakr Al-Bagdadi and the other criminals who are leading the Islamic State.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">But we have to do more than that. Far more important than fighting Islamic State abroad, is the fight to preserve our own security in our own countries. In the Netherlands, in America, in Canada, in Australia, in all the other European and Western countries. It is our homes that we must protect first and foremost. And we are not doing that.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Recently, the Dutch authorities prevented over 50 jihadis to leave our country, when they attempted to go to Syria to fight for the Islamic State. Their passports were seized. But they were sent home instead of jailed. Can you believe it? These criminals now freely walk our streets and make them unsafe.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The jihadis who last month murdered soldiers in Canada were also people whom the authorities had previously prevented to leave for Syria. What I suggest is that we either detain every jihadi or let them leave and never return. Once you’re out, you’re out!</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">My friends, let us be brave. That is what we must do. That is our duty.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Let me ask you: Do our leaders tell us the truth? Unfortunately not. They even lie to us.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Everyday, we hear them repeat the sickening mantra that Islam is a religion of peace. Whenever an atrocity is committed in the name of Islam, whenever someone is beheaded in Syria or Iraq, Barack Obama, David Cameron, my own Dutch Prime Minister and many of their colleagues rush to the television cameras to tell the world that it has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam. How stupid do they think we are?!</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The Koran is full of verses such as sura 47 verse 4: “When ye meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks and cause a bloodbath among them.” How much more Islamic do you want it, Mr. Obama?</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">With every new terrorist crime, with every new attack, with every new beheading, it becomes clear to ever more people what the true nature of Islam is. With every Islamic assault on our values, more and more people realize that Islam wants to conquer the world, that it is prepared to terrorize, kill or enslave anyone who refuses to submit. And that it is ready to commit the biggest atrocities to achieve this goal.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Of course – I repeat it wherever I go – of course, there are many moderate Muslims. I believe in moderate people, but I do not believe in a moderate Islam. There is only one Islam – the Islam of the Koran, the Hadith and the life of Muhammad, who was a terrorist and a warlord. But even though there are many moderate Muslims, it is wrong to think that the moderates are a majority. They are not.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">This week, a terrifying poll was published in my country. We already knew that three quarters of all the Muslims in The Netherlands say that Dutch Muslims who go and fight in Syria are heroes. Can you believe it? Heroes!</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">But now it appears that 80% of our Turkish youths do not consider it wrong to use violence against non-believers. And they also support the armed combat of Hamas against our ally Israel – the only democracy in the Middle East. My friends, we cannot tolerate within our borders extremists who not only want to destroy our nations but also the Jewish homeland.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">We stand with Israel. We defend Israel. Israel is one of us. We are Israel. If Israel falls, the West falls.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">A few years ago, I called on Muslims to liberate themselves from the yoke of Islam, to choose for freedom. I wholeheartedly support Muslims who love freedom. So, I told them “Free yourselves. Leave Islam.” And I still stand by this appeal. But this does not blind me to the terrible reality that we are facing today.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The day before yesterday, there was a quarrel in our parliament in The Netherlands. That is nothing remarkable of course. As you know, Congressmen quarrel all the time. They do it here, they do it even in my country. They do it everywhere. But this time something extraordinary happened.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">We had one Dutch Congressman, a Turk, threatening another – a Morrocan – shouting “May Allah punish you!” And that is not all. They also demanded special washing rooms for Muslims in Parliament and they do not accept being contradicted by female members of Congress.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">That is the parliament of the Kingdom of the Netherlands today. Politicians invoking Allah, threatening each other with Islamic curses, demanding special washing rooms, and treating women as inferior beings. Meanwhile the Dutch public prosecutor is going after me again.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">You may have heard that three years ago, I was taken to court on hate crime charges. A court case that lasted almost 2 years. Fortunately, I was acquitted on all charges. But now, they want to bring me to court again. They do not see Islam or jihadis as a problem; they see me as the problem.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">They try to silence the messenger. But they will never succeed. Because I will always speak out and tell the truth about Islam. We will never be silent or silenced.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Because we love our country. Because we love our freedom. Because we believe that without liberty, life is not worth living.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">We celebrate life; jihadis celebrate death.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">My friends, when politicians become appeasers of evil, the people must speak. This is why I have established the International Freedom Alliance IFA. It is an international organization to fight for freedom and oppose Islam. Here in America, in Europe, in Israel, in Canada, in Australia, everywhere in the free world. IFA aims to be a network of resistance in all the countries threatened by Islam.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Our mission is to stop all immigration from Islamic countries, to stimulate voluntary remigration of Islamic people, and to expel criminals and jihadis. Our mission is to preserve and save our Judeo-Christian civilization and values.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Because there is nothing more precious than liberty and freedom. There is a path we will never choose, and that is the path of submission. We are neither prepared to collaborate with evil, nor to appease it. We must shout this so loud that even President Obama and political leaders all over the West will hear it.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Let us cry a river for every innocent victim of the Islamic State, for every poor girl abducted by Boko Haram in Nigeria, for every Jew, Christian, Yezidi persecuted in the Islamic world. But let us make sure that no-one will ever have to cry for our children. No-one. Never!</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">My friends, we have a duty. We are the torchbearers for freedom. We are the torchbearers for a civilization that is far superior to any other civilization on earth. We are the torchbearers for a better future – a future without Islamic intolerance and violence. As you sing so proudly in your beautiful national anthem, your country, the great America, it is “the land of the free, the home of the brave.” So, be brave, America, and keep your land free!</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Avoid all the mistakes Europe made. Protect America against Islam. Stop the immigration from Islamic countries. Go forth with courage. Keep the light of liberty shining. Save freedom! Save America.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Thank you.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">*</p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><em>Don&#8217;t miss <strong>Geert Wilders</strong> on <strong>The Glazov Gang</strong> discussing </em><span id="eow-title" class="watch-title long-title" dir="ltr" title="The Glazov Gang - Geert Wilders on “The West’s Battle for Freedom.”"><em><strong>The West’s Battle for Freedom</strong>:</em> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/69-nah7rIOc" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/frontpagemag-com/geert-wilders-islams-war-against-the-free-west/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>35</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Washington Braces for Amnesty</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/washington-braces-for-amnesty/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=washington-braces-for-amnesty</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/washington-braces-for-amnesty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2014 05:58:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matthew Vadum]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amnesty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[executive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illegal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=245356</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Republicans weigh counter-strategy options. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/pic_giant_111014_SM_Barack-Obama-G.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-245357" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/pic_giant_111014_SM_Barack-Obama-G-450x340.jpg" alt="pic_giant_111014_SM_Barack-Obama-G" width="377" height="285" /></a>Republicans in Congress are struggling to put together a strategy to combat President Obama&#8217;s expected unilateral immigration amnesty as the administration moves closer to pulling the amnesty trigger by year&#8217;s end.</p>
<p>Their deliberations came as Vice President Joe Biden <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/15/readout-vice-presidents-central-america-events-today"><span style="color: #0433ff;">met</span></a> Saturday with Guatemalan President Otto Perez Molina, Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, and Salvadoran President Salvador Sanchez Ceren. One of the topics was how to facilitate even more immigration from those poor Third World countries to the United States.</p>
<p>Biden said next month the U.S. would create what the White House called &#8220;an in-country refugee/parole program in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, to allow certain parents who are lawfully present in the United States to request access to the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for their children still in one of these three countries.&#8221;</p>
<p>Although fighting President Obama&#8217;s unprecedented threatened power grab by allowing a shutdown of the federal government is a possibility, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/16/us-usa-immigration-congress-idUSKCN0J00U320141116"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Republican lawmakers acknowledge</span></a> they haven&#8217;t warmed to the idea.</p>
<p>&#8220;It doesn&#8217;t solve the problem,&#8221; Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said on &#8220;Fox News Sunday.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;But look, we&#8217;re having those discussions&#8230; We&#8217;re going to continue to meet about this. I know the House leaders are talking about, the Senate leaders are talking about it,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Republicans are looking at different options about how best to respond to the president&#8217;s unilateral action, which many people believe is unconstitutional, unlawful action on this particular issue.&#8221;</p>
<p>On ABC&#8217;s &#8220;This Week&#8221; House Deputy Majority Whip Tom Cole (R-Okla.) was cool to the idea of a shutdown. &#8220;I think the president wants a fight. I think he’s actually trying to bait us into doing some of these extreme things that have been suggested. I don’t think we will.&#8221;</p>
<p>U.S. Rep. Bill Flores (R-Texas) is opposed to a shutdown. &#8220;There’s a wide diversity of thought as to how effective that would be,&#8221; he said. A shutdown &#8220;is not a good solution.&#8221;</p>
<p>One of the less appealing suggestions is to sue Obama. There is a huge problem with legal standing and is it by definition an abdication of the constitutionally-stipulated power of the purse held by Congress. Lawmakers don&#8217;t have to go to court to stop Obama.</p>
<p>Many House conservatives <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/14/us-usa-immigration-republicans-idUSKCN0IY2H320141114"><span style="color: #0433ff;">want Congress to ban</span></a> the funding needed to implement Obama&#8217;s executive amnesty. Others would attempt to keep the agencies implementing the amnesty on a short leash by appropriating funding for them on a short-term basis, theoretically allowing them to withhold immigration funds without shutting down the government.</p>
<p>&#8220;The power of the purse is what&#8217;s given to the House,&#8221; said Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.). &#8220;That’s the check that we have against the White House. To the extent that that&#8217;s the lever we have, that&#8217;s the lever we&#8217;ll use.&#8221;</p>
<p>Most elected Republicans still seem blissfully unaware that the the last shutdown in October 2013 was an unmitigated public relations success for Republicans even though it might not have felt that way at the time. Setting aside the relentless media propaganda that falsely painted the shutdown as a massive Democratic tactical victory, the episode sent the unmistakable message that GOPers were champions of freedom of choice in health care.</p>
<p>The shutdown boosted GOP public approval numbers all the way through the election this month, helped to revive the fight against Obamacare as millions of Americans were having their health insurance policies abruptly canceled, and helped to set the stage for the Republicans&#8217; historic trouncing of the Democrats in congressional elections. The shutdown was an extended, cost-free infomercial for the GOP that reminded Americans that Republicans were on their side on an issue that mattered to them. In other words, it derailed what had seemed like an unstoppable leftist narrative that the always-unpopular Obamacare was a done deal and that resistance to it was futile.</p>
<p>Those gun-shy Republicans who oppose a government shutdown at all costs are never quite able to explain why, if the shutdown was so bad for the GOP, Republicans are now on the march.</p>
<p>On Nov. 4 the GOP flipped control of the 100-seat U.S. Senate, winning at least 53 seats as of this writing. The House GOP increased its majority, winning at least 244 out of 435 seats. In the new year Republicans will control at least 31 state governors&#8217; mansions and at least 68 of the 99 state legislative chambers across the country (Nebraska&#8217;s legislature has only one chamber). In at least 23 states Republicans will control the governorship and both houses of the state legislature. Democrats can make the same claim about only 7 states.</p>
<p>Republican leaders have been talking out of both sides of their mouths on the amnesty issue for months.</p>
<p>Acting unilaterally on immigration would be &#8220;a big mistake&#8221; akin to &#8220;waving a red flag in front of a bull,&#8221; McConnell said. Such action &#8220;poisons the well for an opportunity to address a very important domestic issue.&#8221;</p>
<p>But McConnell also said he&#8217;s not willing to use Congress&#8217;s spending power to stop amnesty. Right after the election he seemed adamant that he would not abide a  government shutdown.</p>
<p>House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), whose speakership is likely to be challenged by conservative lawmakers in January, also said unilateral action would &#8220;poison the well.&#8221; Boehner warned Obama, &#8220;when you play with matches, then you take the risk of burning yourself, and he&#8217;s going to burn himself if he continues to go down this path.</p>
<p>On the weekend Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/224304-dhs-chief-obama-immigration-order-in-final-stages"><span style="color: #0433ff;">confirmed</span></a> that planning for Obama&#8217;s executive amnesty, along with other changes to the immigration system, is almost complete.</p>
<p>&#8220;We’re in the final stages of developing some executive actions,&#8221; Johnson said. &#8220;We have a broken immigration system. The more I delve into it, the more problems I see.&#8221;</p>
<p>Of course, it is a leftist lie to say that the immigration system is <i>broken</i>. When progressives say the system is broken, they mean it is functioning in a less than optimal manner, failing to capture every single prospective illegal alien welfare case available to wade across the Rio Grande or walk across the nation&#8217;s largely undefended border with Mexico. To them, immigration policy is a taxpayer-subsidized get-out-the-vote scheme for Democrats and the best reform they could imagine would be to abolish America&#8217;s borders altogether.</p>
<p>The system is doing what it was designed to do: Flood America with people who don’t share Americans’ traditional philosophical commitment to the rule of law, limited government, and markets, in order to force changes in society. The radicals’ goal today is to use immigration to subvert the American system, just as it was in the 1960s when the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) shepherded leftist reforms of that era’s immigration laws through Congress.</p>
<p>The current immigration system is congested, overwhelmed, and under attack by the sheer volume of illegal aliens that Democratic policies have been bringing to the U.S. The problem isn&#8217;t so much the legal regime governing immigration but the years of non-enforcement at the border, coupled with Obama&#8217;s brazen attempts to recruit illegals from Latin America, luring them with promises of government largesse such as food stamps.</p>
<p>Most analysts haven&#8217;t noted that if Obama acts unilaterally on immigration, he is likely to do long-term damage to the electoral prospects of the Democratic Party. The voters of Oregon, a longtime Democrat stronghold, <a href="http://apnews.myway.com/article/20141116/us-immigration-oregon-3fe495c4ab.html"><span style="color: #0433ff;">delivered a stark warning</span></a> on illegal immigration to the president&#8217;s party in the election a fortnight ago.</p>
<p>Even as Oregonians easily approved Measure 91, a ballot proposition legalizing possession, cultivation, and recreational use of marijuana, and added to Democrat majorities at the state level, they overwhelmingly rejected Measure 88 which would have sustained a state law giving driver&#8217;s licenses to illegal aliens.</p>
<p>The vote to legalize pot was 55.6 percent in favor to 44.4 percent against but the vote to overturn the statute providing driver&#8217;s licenses was a lopsided 66.4 percent to repeal compared to just 33.6 percent to uphold the law. The statute was approved last year without much opposition by state lawmakers and signed into law by Gov. John Kitzhaber, a Democrat.</p>
<p>As of a month ago, the illegal alien lobby <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/20/Voters-61-in-Progressive-Libertarian-Oregon-Likely-to-Reject-Driver-s-Licenses-for-Illegals"><span style="color: #0433ff;">had outspent</span></a> the other side by a 10-to-1 margin.</p>
<p>&#8220;It was really the epitome of a grassroots effort,&#8221; Cynthia Kendoll, an activist for the successful &#8220;No&#8221; side told reporters. &#8220;There&#8217;s such a disconnect between what people really want and what&#8217;s happening.&#8221;</p>
<p>Mark Krikorian of the respected nonpartisan Center for Immigration Studies said the thumping voters gave Measure 88 was proof that the groups supporting endless accommodations for the illegal aliens invading this country are hopelessly out of touch. &#8220;It really highlights how this issue is not a Republican-liberal issue like, say, taxes and abortion, but an up-down issue, elites versus the public.&#8221;</p>
<p>As if on cue, left-wing elitist Marshall Fitz of the Center for American Progress (CAP), dropped by to smear those who voted against Measure 88 as racist, monobrowed, dimwits.</p>
<p>&#8220;Is there an instinct toward security, hunkering down and against welcoming the other?&#8221; Fitz said. &#8220;That&#8217;s part of human nature. But that doesn&#8217;t mean instincts can&#8217;t be overcome by reason.&#8221;</p>
<p>Decent, patriotic Americans are infuriated by the kind of smugness and condescension exuded by open-borders radicals like Fitz and Obama who glibly equate opposition to illegal immigration to xenophobia and racism. They are intensely angered when they are told by the leftists of the media day in and day out that if you support enforcement of immigration laws you&#8217;re a bad person. The accusation grates because Americans are among the most tolerant and generous in the world, and beyond any doubt the most accepting of immigrants.</p>
<p>People like Fitz and his former boss CAP founder John Podesta, who is now a senior advisor in the Obama White House, seem unable to fathom just how disgusted law-abiding Americans, including legal U.S. immigrants, are by illegal immigration and the coddling and granting of special privileges to illegals.</p>
<p>The issue of illegal immigration isn&#8217;t a powder keg ready to blow both major political parties to bits. It&#8217;s more like a stage coach in an old Western movie loaded with liquid nitroglycerin. One bad bump on the road and &#8212; <i>kaboom</i>! &#8212; those guiding it across the frontier are vaporized. Obama&#8217;s hugely unpopular executive amnesty threatens to render Democrats a spent force for decades. Whether Republicans will be smart enough to stay clear of the Obama-created debacle-in-waiting remains to be seen.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b> <a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to </strong></p>
<p><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;">Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/washington-braces-for-amnesty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>92</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Palestinian Terrorist and Former ObamaCare Worker Found Guilty of Immigration Fraud</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ari-lieberman/palestinian-terrorist-and-former-obamacare-worker-found-guilty-of-immigration-fraud/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=palestinian-terrorist-and-former-obamacare-worker-found-guilty-of-immigration-fraud</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ari-lieberman/palestinian-terrorist-and-former-obamacare-worker-found-guilty-of-immigration-fraud/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:04:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ari Lieberman]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deported]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obamacare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Palestinian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rasmieh Yousef Odeh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorist]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=244980</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[University student killer Rasmieh Odeh faces jail and deportation -- but remains a leftist hero.  ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Odeh1.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-244981" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Odeh1-408x350.jpg" alt="Odeh1" width="324" height="278" /></a>The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they do grind, and convicted Palestinian terrorist Rasmieh Yousef Odeh learned that the hard way on November 10 when a Detroit jury <a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/former-palestinian-terrorist-found-guilty-in-us-immigration-case/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">found her guilty</span></a> of committing immigration fraud. She faces up to 10 years in a federal penitentiary and deportation following her incarceration.</p>
<p>The story began on Friday, February 21, 1969 when two unsuspecting Israeli university students, Leon Kaner, 21, and Edward Jaffe, 22, stopped at a Jerusalem supermarket to pick up some last minute provisions for a hike the two were planning to take. They never made it and were blown to bits by a bomb placed in coffee cans on a shelf. Nine others were injured in the blast. Jaffe and Kaner, as well as the nine injured civilians, were targeted for no other reason other than the fact that they were Jews with the temerity to live in their ancestral land.</p>
<p>A second bomb, timed to go off just as first responders arrived, was diffused by security forces. A third bomb placed near the British consulate office in Jerusalem was also discovered and destroyed in a controlled detonation, though another bomb placed near the same vicinity some days later did manage to cause structural damage.</p>
<p>The terrorists had chosen Friday to carry out their act of depravity because they knew the supermarket would be packed with civilians shopping for the upcoming Sabbath. It was their intent to cause a bloodbath and inflict maximum civilian casualties. In a <a href="http://www.jta.org/1969/02/24/archive/jerusalem-supersol-re-opens-for-business-2-young-bombing-victims-are-buried"><span style="color: #0433ff;">testament to Israeli resiliency</span></a>, the supermarket, belonging to the “Supersol” supermarket chain, opened for business just two days later.</p>
<p>On March 1, 1969, Odeh, her sister and three others were arrested for the bombings. All were members of the notorious Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a Marxist group designated by the United States as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).</p>
<p>Odeh was convicted of all charges and spent the next 10 years in an Israeli prison.  She was released in 1979 as part of a prisoner exchange with the PFLP and spent the next four years living in Lebanon. Following that, she moved to Jordan and then made her way to the United States where her father lived.</p>
<p>In 1995, Odeh, who, according published reports has as many as 9 aliases, <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/2541.pdf"><span style="color: #0433ff;">filled out an application</span></a> for an immigrant visa and alien registration and falsely checked off “no” when asked if she was ever convicted of a crime. She also falsely stated that she resided exclusively in Amman Jordan since 1948 when, in fact, she spent at least 10 years in Israel and another four in Lebanon.</p>
<p>In 2004, she applied for US citizenship and filled out an <a href="http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/2538.pdf"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Application for Naturalization</span></a> where she again lied about her prior arrest, conviction and incarceration. She also checked off “no” when asked if she ever belonged to a terrorist organization. Her application was approved and she was sworn in as a United States citizen in December 2004.</p>
<p>In 2013, Odeh secured employment as an <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/372065/convicted-terrorist-worked-obamacare-navigator-illinois-jillian-kay-melchior"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Obamacare navigator</span></a> in Illinois, a job that required her to assist people with healthcare options, but her employment was revoked once federal authorities commenced proceedings against her. In October 2013, she was indicted on charges relating to immigration fraud, to wit, lying on her 1995 and 2004 applications.</p>
<p>The high-profile case took a number of odd twists and turns. A plea deal that would have involved just six months of incarceration and would have permitted Odeh to remain in the United States for another six months following her release was rejected by the defendant.  Then, the initial presiding magistrate, Judge Paul Borman, <a href="http://www.timesofisrael.com/trial-set-for-jerusalem-terror-convict-who-moved-to-us/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">recused himself</span></a> from the case because some of his family members owned shares in Supersol and Borman wished to avoid the appearance of impropriety.</p>
<p>Despite the hitches, trial was set for November 4, 2014. Odeh took the stand and claimed that when she filled out the applications she thought the questions referencing arrests, convictions and incarcerations referred to criminal acts on U.S. soil. Her testimony however, was soundly refuted by documentary and testimonial evidence. She also acknowledged somewhat paradoxically that while her answers were erroneous, they were not lies.</p>
<p>Of course, Odeh was not without her supporters. The usual assortment of Islamists and radical leftists who always manage to find common ground when it comes to killing Jews rallied to her defense. They hooted and hollered, claiming that Odeh was a model citizen who was the victim of a US-Israeli conspiracy. Odeh’s cult-like devotees and <a href="http://mondoweiss.net/2014/11/travesty-despite-israeli"><span style="color: #0433ff;">terrorist apologists</span></a> risibly noted that “the immigration charge was nothing but a pretext to attack this icon of the Palestine liberation movement.”</p>
<p>The jury, however, saw it otherwise and cut through Odeh’s pernicious lies and the shenanigans of her supporters and found her guilty of committing immigration fraud. Odeh served a paltry 10 years for participating in a heinous crime that resulted in the murder of two young university students and the maiming nine other civilians. While another 10 years won’t bring back the victims, it does send a powerful deterrent message to terrorists seeking entry into the United States. As <a href="http://www.fbi.gov/detroit/press-releases/2013/naturalized-u.s.-citizen-charged-with-immigration-fraud-for-failing-to-disclose-terrorism-conviction"><span style="color: #0433ff;">William Hayes</span></a>, Acting Special Agent in Charge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, aptly noted, “The United States will never be a safe haven for individuals seeking to distance themselves from their pasts.”  In this case, Odeh’s murderous, terrorist past finally caught up with her.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ari-lieberman/palestinian-terrorist-and-former-obamacare-worker-found-guilty-of-immigration-fraud/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Immigration Politics: Where Facts and Commonsense Are Ignored</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/michael-cutler/immigration-politics-where-facts-and-commonsense-are-ignored/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=immigration-politics-where-facts-and-commonsense-are-ignored</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/michael-cutler/immigration-politics-where-facts-and-commonsense-are-ignored/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2014 04:48:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Cutler]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[border]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illegal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sanctuary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trespassing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=243979</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The deceptive tactics the Left uses to undermine border security. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="color: #232323;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/51533286_custom-d3a6c58e870df3bee1f4b9bd0ce279d571233bb3-s6-c30.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-243982" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/51533286_custom-d3a6c58e870df3bee1f4b9bd0ce279d571233bb3-s6-c30-450x296.jpg" alt="51533286_custom-d3a6c58e870df3bee1f4b9bd0ce279d571233bb3-s6-c30" width="307" height="202" /></a>On October 22, 2014 CBS News, New York posted a brief report, <a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/22/city-council-bill-seeks-to-protect-jailed-immigrants-from-feds/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">&#8220;City Council Votes For Bills To Protect Jailed Immigrants From Feds.&#8221;</span></a> This report illustrates the unholy alliance forged between many politicians and news agencies to skew the truth about immigration. The article begins with this excerpt:</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;"><b><i>NEW YORK (CBSNewYork)</i></b><i> — Bills passed by the City Council Wednesday aim to </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/02/lawmakers-to-introduce-legislation-to-only-honor-immigration-detainers-with-federal-warrant/"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><i>keep detained immigrants from being deported by the federal government</i></span></a><i>.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>The City Council voted in favor of the legislation 41-6 Wednesday.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>As WCBS 880’s Rich Lamb reported, the measures, supported by </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/09/18/nyc-municipal-id-cards-to-offer-free-incentives/"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><i>Mayor Bill de Blasio</i></span></a><i>, would prohibit correction officials and police from handing over detainees to immigration officials.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The report went on to note:</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">“<i>The law will only allow the city to honor the detainer if the subject has been convicted of a violent or serious felony in the last five years or if the person is a possible match on the federal terrorist watchlist,” she said.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>The bill would also shutter the federal immigration office </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/22/ap-rikers-island-deaths-suggest-poor-medical-treatment-of-inmates/"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><i>on Rikers Island</i></span></a><i>.</i></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">First of all, let&#8217;s consider that the title of the CBS article incorporates the phrase, “Protect the Jailed Immigrants From the Feds.” There are two key words that paint a deceptive image and both evoke a strong emotional response and virtually create the illusion that the efforts to impede the effective enforcement of our immigration laws against aliens who have been arrested for allegedly committing crimes is no less than <i>heroic.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The term “protect” is a term that engenders a sense of an appropriate action taken to make certain that no harm comes to someone, especially an innocent person. Police departments around the United States adopted the phrase “to protect and serve” as their mission statement. In considering this infuriating news report, the question that must be asked is: “Who is being protected and who is being served?”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Our nation&#8217;s borders and our immigration laws are America&#8217;s first line of defense and last line of defense to protect America and Americans from aliens whose presence poses a threat to the safety and well-being of our nation and our citizens.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Our immigration laws are utterly blind as to race, religion or ethnicity and were enacted to achieve two primary goals: <i>protect</i> innocent lives and <i>protect</i> the jobs of American workers. While the CBS report focuses on how the majority of the members of the City Council are seeking to protect illegal aliens who have been arrested from being deported, the article neglects to mention that this proposed action would fail to protect Americans and others present in the United States by blocking ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents from being able to identify and take into custody aliens who are subject to being removed (deported) from the United States.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">It would be wrong-headed to shield any illegal alien from detection by ICE (although ICE is no longer mounting a meaningful effort to enforce our immigration laws). However, in this instance we have the great majority of the members of the NYC Counsel seeking to prevent the removal of aliens who have been arrested by the NYPD and other law enforcement agencies.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The term “immigrant” as used in the headline is currently being used deceptively throughout the United States to describe all foreign nationals (aliens) who are present in the United States, irrespective of their status. The term “alien” has come to be (falsely) equated with a slur, not unlike the “n-word.” In reality, under the immigration laws of the United States, which are encompassed within the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), the term <i>alien</i> simply means, “any person, not a citizen or national of the United States.” There is no insult of any sort in that definition &#8212; only clarity. Clarity is something that must be avoided at all costs when a con artist attempts to swindle his (her) intended victim. This is no different from the dreaded and infamous “small print” contained in contracts designed to confuse the person signing the contract to get them to agree to terms that they would never knowingly agree to.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">By using the term “immigrant” to describe all aliens present in the United States it then becomes easy to talk about the wonderful contributions that immigrants have made to the United States. After all, they remind us, “We are a nation of immigrants!” Of course this fails to note that among illegal aliens are criminals, fugitives from justice in foreign countries and others whose presence is harmful or even dangerous.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">By hammering away at the lie that all aliens should be deemed “immigrants” immigration anarchists have set the stage to label as “anti-immigrant” anyone of wanting our borders to be secured against those who would evade the inspections process that is supposed to prevent the entry of aliens whose presence would pose a threat to national security, public safety, public health or otherwise be detrimental to the well-being of America and/or Americans. They go on to attack anyone seeking effective immigration law enforcement branding them “bigots,” “racists” and “nativists.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">In my effort to provide clarity to this issue I have come to say that the difference between an immigrant and an illegal alien is comparable to the difference between a houseguest and a burglar. It is not anti-social or uncharitable for a person to lock his (her) doors at night to make certain that burglars or criminals do not enter their homes as they sleep. It is only prudent and commonsense.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">In point of fact, our immigration laws not only establish the grounds by which aliens are to be prevented from entering the United States and the grounds under which aliens should be deported from the United States, but also establish the lawful means by which more than one million aliens legally immigrate to the United States, are granted Alien Registration Receipt Cards and are immediately placed on the pathway to United States citizenship. These laws also provide for the naturalization of hundreds of thousands of lawful immigrants each year, conferring United States citizenship upon them.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Furthermore, the most likely victims of crimes committed by transnational criminals are the members of the ethnic immigrant communities of the same origins of the criminal aliens. This holds true for all ethnic communities, not just from Latin America. As an INS agent I investigated and arrested many such individuals from countries around the world.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Therefore, how on earth can supporting the effective enforcement and administration of our immigration laws constitute an anti-immigrant position?</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Let us briefly revisit the notion of “protecting immigrants” as noted in the headline. The more appropriate phrase should be “shielding and harboring.” Theses terms appear in the section of the Immigration and Nationality Act that addresses alien smuggling.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Consider that under <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1324"><span style="color: #386eff;">8 USC § 1324 &#8211; Bringing in and harboring certain aliens</span></a>, a section of law that is comprehended within the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), it is a felony to aid, abet, encourage or induce aliens to enter our country illegally or remain in our country illegally and a crime to harbor, shield or conceal such aliens from detection.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Here is an excerpt from that section of law:</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324(a) Offenses</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324(a) defines several distinct offenses related to aliens. Subsection 1324(a)(1)(i)-(v) prohibits alien smuggling, domestic transportation of unauthorized aliens, concealing or harboring unauthorized aliens, encouraging or inducing unauthorized aliens to enter the United States, and engaging in a conspiracy or aiding and abetting any of the preceding acts.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Subsection 1324(a)(2) prohibits bringing or attempting to bring unauthorized aliens to the United States in any manner whatsoever, even at a designated port of entry. Subsection 1324(a)(3).</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Harboring &#8212; Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) makes it an offense for any person who &#8212; knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals harbors, shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Encouraging/Inducing &#8212; Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) makes it an offense for any person who &#8212; encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Conspiracy/Aiding or Abetting &#8212; Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(v) expressly makes it an offense to engage in a conspiracy to commit or aid or abet the commission of the foregoing offenses.</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">On February 25, 2014 Californians for Population Stabilization published my article <a href="http://www.capsweb.org/blog/nyc-mayor-determined-give-illegal-aliens-id-cards"><span style="color: #1255cc;">&#8220;NYC Mayor Determined to Give Illegal Aliens ID Cards&#8221;</span></a> that addressed the program being created by New York City&#8217;s Mayor Bill de Blasio to provide illegal aliens with identity documents, violating commonsense and the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commmission.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">I focused on the nexus between immigration and the threat of terrorism and how the creation of “sanctuary cities” undermines national security in my September 24, 2014 article for FrontPage Magazine, <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/michael-cutler/sanctuary-cities-or-safe-havens-for-terrorists/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">‘Sanctuary Cities’ or ‘Safe Havens’ for Terrorists?</span></a></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">What is truly incomprehensible is how New York Senator Chuck Schumer recently railed against those who have trespassed on important landmarks such as the Brooklyn Bridge and the new World Trade Center Tower. Consider the October 14, 2014 CBS News report on de Blasio heading to Washington to participate in meetings focusing on city security and counter-terrorism, <a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/14/mayor-de-blasio-heads-to-d-c-for-meetings-on-nyc-security-and-counter-terrorism/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">&#8220;Mayor De Blasio Heads To D.C. For Meetings On NYC Security And Counter-Terrorism.&#8221;</span></a></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The article noted that the meetings would be held the day after, “<a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/13/schumer-wants-tougher-bridge-trespassing-laws/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">Sen. Charles Schumer</span></a> proposed making trespassing on critical infrastructure like major bridges or important buildings punishable by up to five years in prison.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Here is the brief report in its entirety:</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;"><b><i>NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) –</i></b><i> Mayor Bill de Blasio is heading to Washington, D.C. Tuesday for meetings about city security and counter-terrorism.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>De Blasio, Police Commissioner Bill Bratton and NYPD Deputy Commissioner of Intelligence and Counter-Terrorism John Miller are set to meet with the heads of Homeland Security and the FBI.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>The meeting comes a day after </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/13/schumer-wants-tougher-bridge-trespassing-laws/"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><i>Sen. Charles Schumer</i></span></a><i> proposed making trespassing on critical infrastructure like major bridges or important buildings punishable by up to five years in prison.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>The proposal was made in the wake of several recent trespassing cases in the city.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>Over the summer, two German artists climbed the Brooklyn Bridge, switching the American flags with white washed versions.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>Berlin-based Mischa Leinkauf and Mattias Wermke said they replaced the flags on top of the bridge </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/08/08/bratton-says-nypd-has-idea-of-who-was-involved-in-brooklyn-bridge-flag-swap/"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><i>with bleached-out versions</i></span></a><i> as a tribute to public art.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">“<i>The stuntman placed aluminum pans over the floodlights to keep them from being seen and for awhile, it was scary,” Schumer said Monday.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>A Russian tourist was then arrested in August after </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/09/19/russian-tourist-facing-charges-for-climbing-brooklyn-bridge-signs-up-for-community-service/"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><i>climbing the Brooklyn Bridge</i></span></a><i>.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>Yaroslav Kolchin was seen walking back and forth on the landing, taking photos with his iPhone, police said. They said once a police aviation unit was hovering at an altitude next to the tower, Kolchin began to descend safely down the same way he had climbed up.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>He was met by police at the security gate, where he was taken into custody without further incident.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>Also in August, an activist group </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/08/20/police-investigate-after-palestinian-protest-flag-is-unfurled-on-manhattan-bridge/"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><i>unfurled a Palestinian flag</i></span></a><i> on the span of the Manhattan Bridge.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>In March, 16-year-old Justin Casquejo was charged after climbing to the top of the World Trade Center. He </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/07/30/nj-teen-pleads-guilty-in-1-world-trade-center-climb/"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><i>admitted in July to breaking a city misdemeanor law</i></span></a><i> against scaling tall buildings without permission.</i></p>
<p style="color: #1255cc;"><span style="color: #232323;"><i>About a week after his trade center climb, </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/03/25/port-authority-wtc-parachute-jump-lawless-selfish/"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><i>three extreme-skydiving fans were arrested for a leap off the tower last year.</i></span></a></span></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">“<i>While individuals like this may have meant no arm, their acts put commuters and first responders at risk,” Schumer said. “They also inspire copycats who may have much more evil plans in mind.”</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>Critical infrastructure is defined by the Patriot Act as systems and assets so vital to the U.S., that the incapacity or destruction to them would have a debilitating effect.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">“<i>That would be a bridge, a power plant, the air vents to one of our tunnels,” Miller said.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>Miller and Schumer said </i><a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/10/13/sen-schumer-proposes-bill-to-make-trespassing-on-critical-infrastructure-a-federal-crime/"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><i>the new legislation</i></span></a><i> will help serve as a deterrent.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">“<i>When stunts like this occur, the New York City trespassing law has a maximum of one year and it’s often three months,” Schumer said. “That’s not enough punishment to deter this behavior. It’s time to change that.”</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>Schumer said this legislation is based on another federal law protecting railroads.</i></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">This is the same Schumer who, as a member of the “Gang of Eight,” has championed providing a pathway to United States citizenship for millions of illegal aliens who evaded the vital inspections process designed to prevent the entry of aliens who would pose a threat to public health, public safety and, indeed, national security by <b><i>trespassing</i></b> on the United States. There can be no greater example of a lack of mouth-ear coordination than that demonstrated by Mr. Schumer.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">In case you missed it, this is the next to last paragraph of the news report, quoting Schumer:</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">“<i>When stunts like this occur, the New York City trespassing law has a maximum of one year and it’s often three months,” Schumer said. “That’s not enough punishment to deter this behavior. It’s time to change that.”</i></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">Schumer&#8217;s own ears apparently are unable to hear the words he utters from his own mouth when the issue of immigration is raised. Clearly, he understands that undesired behavior can be deterred by tougher laws coupled with tougher enforcement, particularly where the crime of trespassing is concerned.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Schumer, however, is hardly the only politician to be afflicted with a lack of mouth-ear coordination. On September 27, 2012 New York City&#8217;s then mayor, Michael Bloomberg, was the focus of a New York Post article, <a href="http://nypost.com/2012/09/27/bloomberg-blasts-bronx-da-for-not-prosecuting-trespassing-arrests/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">&#8220;Bloomberg blasts Bronx DA for not prosecuting trespassing arrests.&#8221;</span></a> It must be pointed out that Bloomberg continued the immigration sanctuary policies of the previous administration.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The continuing sanctuary policies were, in fact, the subject of a hearing conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims on February 27, 2003 on the topic, <a href="http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju85287.000/hju85287_0f.htm"><span style="color: #1255cc;">&#8220;New York City&#8217;s &#8216;Sanctuary&#8217; Policy and the Effect of Such Policies on Public Safety, Law Enforcement and Immigration.&#8221;</span></a></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">I was one of the witnesses called to testify at that hearing, more than a decade ago. As the saying goes, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">We are continually told that the immigration system is broken. The reality is that what is broken is the moral compass of this administration and all too many politicians. The administration lacks the will to effectively secure our borders, enforce our immigration laws and follow the advice Schumer provided concerning trespassing: increase the penalties for such crimes and effectively enforce the laws.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">There is an old Yiddish expression that translated declares, “When the fish goes bad, it smells from the head!” The lack of moral leadership in Washington permeates our nation and is being felt from coast to coast and border to border.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/michael-cutler/immigration-politics-where-facts-and-commonsense-are-ignored/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Time for a New Ellis Island?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/michael-cutler/time-for-a-new-ellis-island/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=time-for-a-new-ellis-island</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/michael-cutler/time-for-a-new-ellis-island/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2014 04:37:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Cutler]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disease]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ebola]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ellis Island]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[quarantine]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=242408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lessons from America's former defensive bulwark against foreign diseases. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="color: #232323;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/aborder.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-242409" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/aborder.jpg" alt="aborder" width="290" height="192" /></a>The open borders/amnesty advocates whom I have come to refer to as the “immigration anarchists,” regularly complain bitterly that Ellis Island was closed. Indeed, Ellis Island was closed on November 12, 1954. However, this hardly meant that the United States was no longer permitting aliens to be legally admitted into the United States which was the message that I suspect those bemoaning the closing of that government facility wanted people to infer.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The reality is that while Ellis Island had nearly 70 years ago, other ports of entry scattered across the United States were open and facilitating the entry of aliens into the United States. These ports of entry are to be found along both the northern and southern borders of the United States, at seaports along the coastlines of the United States and at international airports. This coincides with a point I have often made about the United States having 50 “border states.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Last year approximately one million aliens were lawfully admitted into the United States by presenting themselves for inspection at those numerous ports of entry and provided with Alien Registration Receipt Cards (also known as “Green Cards”) to signify their lawful immigrant status in accordance with the alien registration requirement of the Immigration and Nationality Act. These aliens, from virtually every country on this planet, were, upon their day of being granted lawful immigrant status, immediately placed on the pathway to United States citizenship. The number of aliens who were lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States was greater than the number of all immigrants legally admitted by all other countries around the world.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">So much for the wailing about the shuttering of Ellis Island!</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">However, what is almost never discussed by anyone &#8212; especially the immigration anarchists, is that Ellis Island was a <i>quarantine station</i> that was operated by the United States Public Health Service in conjunction with immigration authorities. The fact is that the inspection facility was intentionally located on an island of the shore of New York City to make certain that aliens could not set foot on the U.S. mainland unless they were admitted into the United States and transported to the mainland. This was done to make certain that aliens who suffered dangerous communicable diseases could not sneak into the United States and create an epidemic.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Recently the hospital located at the Ellis Island complex of buildings has opened as a new exhibit at the Ellis Island Museum. CNN published a report about the hospital on October 1, 2014 with the appropriate title, <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/01/business/ellis-island-hospital-art-exhibition/"><span style="color: #1255cc;">&#8220;New York&#8217;s hospital of immigrants: Where hope and pain collide.&#8221;</span></a> The timing of the opening of that component of the museum at Ellis Island could not have come at a more appropriate time.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Concerns about the potential for dangerous diseases crossing our borders have been tremendously elevated in the wake of the recent Ebola outbreak in Africa that has reach historic proportions and with the discovery that a Liberian citizen, Thomas Eric Duncan, had traveled to the United States by commercial airline flight and lied about his exposure to patients who were suffering from the Ebola virus.</p>
<p style="color: #1255cc;"><span style="color: #232323;">The October 3, 2014 report, <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/02/health/ebola-us/index.html"><span style="color: #1255cc;">&#8220;Ebola patient&#8217;s leaving Liberia was &#8216;unpardonable,&#8217; its President says,&#8221;</span></a> provided some important details.</span></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Here is how the report begins:</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;"><b><i>(CNN)</i></b><i> &#8212; Days before he became the first person diagnosed with Ebola on American soil, Thomas Eric Duncan answered &#8220;no&#8221; to questions about whether he had cared for a patient with the deadly virus.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>Before leaving Liberia, Duncan also answered no to a question about whether he had touched the body of someone who died in an area affected by the disease, said Binyah Kesselly, board chairman of the Liberia Airport Authority.</i></p>
<p style="color: #232323;"><i>Witnesses say Duncan had been helping Ebola patients in Liberia. Liberian community leader Tugbeh Chieh Tugbeh said Duncan was caring for an Ebola-infected patient at a residence in Paynesville City, just outside Monrovia.</i></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">That single lie on that piece of paper was all that was needed for Duncan to board that airliner and enter the United States through a port of entry, potentially putting countless lives in the United States at risk.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The immigration inspections process conducted by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors is supposed to prevent entry of aliens who pose a threat to national security and the safety and well-being of Americans. For this vital mission to succeed, our borders must be made truly secure to make certain that aliens cannot evade that inspections process.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">The list of such aliens is contained in the following section of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA): <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182"><span style="color: #1255cc;">Title 8 U.S. Code § 1182 &#8211; Inadmissible aliens</span></a>. It includes various grounds of excludability including criminals, spies, terrorists, human rights violators and others. None of the grounds of excludability make any reference to race, religion or ethnicity. What is not generally known however, is that the list of these grounds for exclusion begin with public health concerns.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Here is how this section of law begins:</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">(a) <b>Classes of aliens ineligible for visas or admission</b></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, aliens who are inadmissible under the following paragraphs are ineligible to receive visas and ineligible to be admitted to the United States:</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(1) <b>Health-related grounds</b></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(A) <b>In general</b></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Any alien—</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(i) who is determined (in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services) to have a communicable disease of public health significance; <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182#FN-1"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><sup>[1]</sup></span></a></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(ii) except as provided in subparagraph (C), who seeks admission as an immigrant, or who seeks adjustment of status to the status of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, and who has failed to present documentation of having received vaccination against vaccine-preventable diseases, which shall include at least the following diseases: mumps, measles, rubella, polio, tetanus and diphtheria toxoids, pertussis, influenza type B and hepatitis B, and any other vaccinations against vaccine-preventable diseases recommended by the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices,</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(iii) who is determined (in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in consultation with the Attorney General)—</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(I) to have a physical or mental disorder and behavior associated with the disorder that may pose, or has posed, a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the alien or others, or</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(II) to have had a physical or mental disorder and a history of behavior associated with the disorder, which behavior has posed a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the alien or others and which behavior is likely to recur or to lead to other harmful behavior, or</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(iv) who is determined (in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services) to be a drug abuser or addict, is inadmissible.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(B) <b>Waiver authorized</b></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">For provision authorizing waiver of certain clauses of subparagraph (A), see subsection (g) of this section.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(C) <b>Exception from immunization requirement for adopted children 10 years of age or younger</b></p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Clause (ii) of subparagraph (A) shall not apply to a child who—</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(i) is 10 years of age or younger,</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(ii) is described in subparagraph (F) or (G) of section <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101"><span style="color: #1255cc;">1101</span></a> <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/usc_sec_08_00001101----000-#b_1"><span style="color: #1255cc;">(b)(1)</span></a> of this title; <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182#FN-1"><span style="color: #1255cc;"><sup>[1]</sup></span></a>and</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">(iii) is seeking an immigrant visa as an immediate relative under section <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1151"><span style="color: #1255cc;">1151</span></a> <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/usc_sec_08_00001151----000-#b"><span style="color: #1255cc;">(b)</span></a> of this title,</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">if, prior to the admission of the child, an adoptive parent or prospective adoptive parent of the child, who has sponsored the child for admission as an immediate relative, has executed an affidavit stating that the parent is aware of the provisions of subparagraph (A)(ii) and will ensure that, within 30 days of the child’s admission, or at the earliest time that is medically appropriate, the child will receive the vaccinations identified in such subparagraph.</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="color: #232323;">All sorts of proposals to prevent the spread of the Ebola virus to the United States have been made by our political leaders including ending flights from countries in which patients suffering from Ebola have been found, including Liberia and Sierra Leone, where according to some reports, the Ebola virus is spreading like “wild fire.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Of course people who are determined to leave those countries will likely manage to cross the borders of neighboring countries, potentially further spreading this deadly disease, and then seeking to board airliners for flights to the United States and other countries.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Recommendations are being made about how CBP inspectors and other government officials should modify the inspections process at ports of entry. Certainly this makes sense. However, no matter how effective the screening process may be at America&#8217;s ports of entry, we need to remember that our nation&#8217;s borders exist on maps but not in the “real world.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Our nation has, as I have noted on ever so many occasions, 50 “border states.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Our borders must be made secure against those who would smuggle aliens and contraband into the United States. In addition to concern about narcotics and weapons into the United States, even seemingly prosaic substances as meat may provide a deadly threat.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">On August 21, 2014 Newsweek Magazine published a worrying report, <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=Smuggled+Bushmeat+Is+Ebola's+Back+Door+to+America&amp;ie=utf-8&amp;oe=utf-8&amp;aq=t&amp;rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&amp;client=firefox-a&amp;channel=np&amp;source=hp"><span style="color: #1255cc;">&#8220;Smuggled Bushmeat Is Ebola&#8217;s Back Door to America.&#8221;</span></a> Talk about the expression that “One man&#8217;t meat is another&#8217;s poison.”</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">High-ranking officials of the DHS of both the Bush and Obama administrations repeatedly claimed our “borders are secure” while blithely ignoring the massive tsunami of illegal aliens entering the United States each day along with record quantities of narcotics which provide an irrefutable metric that makes the failures of border security crystal clear. The United States is in the midst of the worst heroin epidemic in decades &#8212; perhaps ever. Police departments across the United States have taken to the unprecedented measure of providing their officers with the antidote to heroin overdoses.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Heroin and cocaine are not produced in the United States. If our borders were truly secure those substances could not get into the United States.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">For years our politicians and even high-ranking officials of the DHS have claimed that running our borders is not a crime. The reality is, of course, far different.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">While it is true that the first time an alien evades the inspections process and, in the jargon of immigration enforcement personnel is an EWI (<b>E</b>ntrant <b>W</b>ithout <b>I</b>nspection), an alien who has been previously deported and then unlawfully re-enters the United States is most definitely committing a felony. The provisions of this section of the Immigration and Nationality Act are contained in <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1326"><span style="color: #1255cc;">Title 8 U.S. Code § 1326 &#8211; Reentry of removed aliens</span></a>.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Under this statute, the maximum penalty a previously deported aliens faces if he (she) has no criminal history and illegally re-enters the United States is 2 years in federal custody. However, an alien who was deported subsequent to being convicted of committing “aggravated felonies” faces a maximum of 20 years in a federal prison. Certainly any crime that carries a 20-year maximum penalty is a very serious crime, indeed.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">I am particularly proud of that last violation of law; in the early 1980s I worked with then-U.S. Senator Al D&#8217;Amato to create that particular law and took special delight in making the first arrest of an alien (a convicted narcotics dealer) for violating that statute.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Today&#8217;s concerns about our borders being breached by transnational criminals and international terrorists from al-Qaeda, ISIS or Khorasan have been expanded to people entering the United States who are infected with the Ebola virus and other such contagious diseases that are truly the stuff of nightmares. These concerns may even transcend the issue of whether or not an alien evading the inspections process is committing a crime. Given the current circumstances, the bigger issue may turn out to be whether or not by malevolent intent in the case of criminals or terrorists or by being infected with a deadly communicable disease, an alien&#8217;s ability to evade the inspections process may result in massive numbers of casualties in the United States.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Our leaders, including event the most ardent open borders advocates, must finally accept the reality that our borders, no matter where they are to be found, are our first and last line of defense against criminals, terrorists and deadly epidemics.</p>
<p style="color: #232323;">Given the magnitude of the dangers, where our borders are concerned, “secure enough” is not secure enough.</p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/michael-cutler/time-for-a-new-ellis-island/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>President Ebola</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/president-ebola/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=president-ebola</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/president-ebola/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2014 04:50:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AIDS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Borders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disease]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ebola]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=242427</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why open borders are the real disease.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Obama_Ebola_P1k_t618.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-242428" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Obama_Ebola_P1k_t618-450x295.jpg" alt="Obama_Ebola_P1k_t618" width="331" height="217" /></a>In 2009, Obama lifted the ban on AIDS cases entering the United States. Describing HIV as “a virus that has touched lives,” he announced that he was ending a ban based on “fear rather than fact.”</p>
<p>Obama didn’t specify what new facts about AIDS had been discovered that made it no longer infectious or a threat to public health. Instead he just had the CDC remove HIV from the list of “communicable diseases of public health significance.” Was HIV no longer of “public health significance”? The amount of money being lavished on it indicated otherwise. Was it then suddenly no longer communicable?</p>
<p>The CDC awkwardly tried to explain why syphilis, gonorrhea and other sexually transmitted diseases were still on the list, but HIV wasn’t. The answer <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugeehealth/laws-regs/hiv-ban-removal/qa-technical.html"><span style="color: #0433ff;">could be summed</span></a> as “because Obama said so.” The CDC did promise to “consider other diseases, including sexually transmitted diseases, for scientific review.” But most STDs don’t have their own billion-dollar lobby that can make or break politicians.</p>
<p>In a cage match between public health and politically correct cash, the winner was AIDS. And so the ban was lifted and immigrants no longer had to be tested for HIV.</p>
<p>But Obama was not a one-disease politician. He was also open to being touched by other viruses. The same year that his CDC decided that AIDS was no longer a communicable disease, <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/03/president-ebola-in-2010-obama-administration-scrapped-cdc-quarantine-regulations-aimed-at-ebola/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Bush era quarantine regs</span></a> were also scrapped.  The regs had been part of an Avian Flu response that <a href="http://ace.mu.nu/archives/352220.php"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Senator Obama had demanded</span></a> when he was cynically maneuvering for political advantage. But that was then. This is now.</p>
<p>In a bid for amnesty, Obama opened the southern border and flooded America with dangerous diseases.</p>
<p>The commitment to open borders had clear viral consequences. Border agents <a href="http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=1105359"><span style="color: #0433ff;">have already come down</span></a> with antibiotic resistant infections carried by illegal aliens and in some cases <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/border-patrol-agents-brought-home-diseases-to-their-children/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">passed these diseases on</span></a> to their children. Also <a href="http://freebeacon.com/national-security/outbreak-on-the-border/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">along for the ride was Swine Flu</span></a>, a potentially fatal and communicable disease.</p>
<p>Obama had declared Swine Flu a “national emergency” around the same time that he was putting out the welcome mat for AIDS. But in his push for amnesty, he <a href="http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/swine-flu-illegal-immigrant/2014/06/28/id/579816/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">also welcomed Swine Flu into</span></a> the country.</p>
<p>And that was just the beginning.</p>
<p>An <a href="http://sharylattkisson.com/polio-like-outbreak-claims-fifth-life-in-u-s?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SharylAttkisson+(Sharyl+Attkisson)"><span style="color: #0433ff;">Enterovirus D68 outbreak</span></a>, that has now claimed the life of an American child, followed. The death took place in New Jersey, which has one of the highest rates of unaccompanied alien minor placements and possibly the highest rate when accounting for territorial size. Some D68 cases appeared to be linked to a mysterious condition in Colorado causing paralysis and spinal cord abnormalities in children.</p>
<p>As horrifying as these public health crises caused by Obama’s open borders policy are, the real nightmare may still be coming.</p>
<p>Even though Ebola doesn’t have its own lobby yet, it’s getting the AIDS treatment. The White House has been firm about rejecting any Ebola travel ban. Instead arriving visitors from Ebolaland are getting flyers at airports telling them to report any symptoms to their doctor. The CDC is claiming that the source screenings, which can be fooled by an Ebola carrier taking Advil, are good enough.</p>
<p>And if not, well, the Democratic Party’s voters have to come from somewhere. Who cares if they happen to be vomiting up blood while they’re casting their vote?</p>
<p>If AIDS can magically stop being a “communicable disease of public health significance,” why not Ebola? Why not any and every epidemic that might potentially keep a future Democrat out of Chicago?</p>
<p>As with AIDS, Obama is taking the line that Ebola has to be stopped at its source in Africa and that keeping the infected out of America will somehow interfere with this mission. It’s the sort of reasoning that makes a lot of sense to someone who views borders and nations as outdated relics. It doesn’t, however, make much sense to most Americans who still think there is such a thing as the United States.</p>
<p>The media, which can stir up a mass panic over a fly in a restaurant, is warning of “Ebola-phobia” and assuring the country that there’s no reason to fear an outbreak. Ebola isn’t really all that contagious, say all the same media outlets which have been claiming that AIDS and leprosy aren’t all that contagious. But then again no disease carried by Democratic Party voters can be considered truly contagious.</p>
<p>Except maybe leftism.</p>
<p>Now that we know that we don’t have to worry, it’s only a question of which outbreak we don’t have to worry about first.</p>
<p>Due to Obama’s policies, we have so many contagious and deadly diseases waiting in line to infect Americans that it’s not clear which outbreak we should be worrying about the least. Should we be getting unready for an Ebola outbreak, a Swine Flu outbreak or an Enterovirus B68 outbreak?</p>
<p>But that’s what happens when the border security of a nation vanishes into thin air.</p>
<p>ISIS fighters who returned to the United States were allowed in. Illegal aliens with every possible disease were allowed in. Any other course of action would be Islamophobia and Ebolaphobia.</p>
<p>ObamaCare has a menu of exotic disease outbreaks to cope with. Even as Ebola enriches our airports, Virginia has become “Ground Zero” for Chagas disease which kills 11,000 people a year, a mysterious paralyzing virus is spreading across Colorado and the border patrol <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/381101/texas-immigration-center-magnet-disease-ryan-lovelace"><span style="color: #0433ff;">even caught a case of leprosy</span></a>.</p>
<p>Where does one go to find leprosy in the age of Obama? New York City. While the United States is overwhelmed with foreign leprosy cases, it is now possible to be born in New York City and live your entire life there and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/18/health/leprosy-a-synonym-for-a-stigma-returns.html"><span style="color: #0433ff;">still come down with leprosy</span></a> because <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3164768/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">it’s become an endemic disease</span></a>. Leprosy cases really took off after Ted Kennedy’s Immigration and Nationality Act did to public health what he had done to Mary Jo Kopechne. The top source countries for the disease are Mexico, Vietnam and Cuba.</p>
<p>So much for socialized medicine.</p>
<p>Open borders means a constantly shifting menu of diseases and terrorist threats that never go away because the door is open. It’s as open to an Ebola patient as it is to an ISIS Jihadist. AIDS is as welcome as the next Anwar Al-Awlaki. They are all part of the great multicultural future of the Democratic Party in which Islamic terrorists and Third World diseases battle it out for the opportunity to destroy America.</p>
<p>If an Ebola outbreak does happen, this disastrous administration and its leader may go down in history as President Ebola. But even if it doesn’t, there’s always President Swine Flu or President B68.</p>
<p>And there are always the classics. Three years after Obama took down the HIV travel ban, foreign-born Latinos AIDS cases in New York had <a href="http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/health/2013/01/31/health-officials-deal-with-growing-aids-epidemic-in-latino-community/"><span style="color: #0433ff;">risen to 31%</span></a>. There’s a lot of talk about the importance of spreading awareness of the disease, but we could start by spreading awareness of the fact that allowing people with infectious diseases into the United States has deadly consequences.</p>
<p>*</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><em>Don&#8217;t miss Shillman Journalism Fellow <strong>Daniel Greenfield</strong> on The Glazov Gang discussing <strong>&#8220;ISIS Rising&#8221;</strong>:</em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/9E8gGysQZzU" width="460" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/president-ebola/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>88</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 1407/1427 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 01:56:58 by W3 Total Cache -->