Trump Signs EO, Dems Still Mad, Will Their Hatred Eventually Lead to Violence?

thoughts-and-prayers-600-la

Okay. Folks, I’m just gonna say it here. If the media keeps this up — if they keep up generating this hysteria — somebody’s gonna get killed. I think we’re pretty close to somebody getting killed already, and I’m not being hyperbolic, and I’m not trying to call attention to myself. I’m genuinely worried about the out-of-control aspect of this. The news media’s fanning the flames. The news media is leading the way on this. It’s again an oxymoron. News media? There is no media, and none of this is news. – Rush Limbaugh, 6/20/18

What Rush is referring to is the sphincter-clinching, high-decibel hyperbole that has come over the last several days from the Far left Democratic Party, the Main Stream Media, and the hoi polloi in Hollywood.

In response to the release of the IG Report concerning an out-of-control Hierarchy in the FBI doing the bidding of the Obama Administration in an effort to keep Trump out of office and to get him out once average Americans elected him, the Democratic Party and all of their minions attacked President Trump over the separation of children from their parents once they entered our country illegally.

Of course, the practice originated under a Democratic President named Barack Hussein Obama. However, we’re not supposed to bring that up.

Turning on my local news yesterday morning, they were covering the latest hypocritical action by the Democrats against the president with sadistic glee, adding to an already half-psychotic lynch mob mentality among the Far Left, whose unbridled hatred for the 45th President has been growing steadily since the evening of November 8, 2016 when he ruined their dreams of a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

So out-of-control is the anger of these lunatics that washed-up actor Peter Fonda directed a vulgar tweet to First Lady Melania Trump, calling for someone to “rip Barron Trump from his mother’s arms and put him in a cage with pedophiles.”

Yesterday, President Trump decided to end what the Democrats started and signed an Executive Order calling for the children who crossed our border illegally to be able to remain with their parents.

But, guess what? The Democrats still are not happy.

Per FoxNews.com,

The order Trump signed allows children to stay in detention with their parents for an extended period of time. It does not, however, end the “zero-tolerance” policy that criminally prosecutes adults entering the country without proper documentation.

Trump’s order came after he and other officials repeatedly said only Congress had the power to stop children and their parents from being separated.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., tweeted Wednesday night that the executive order “merely replaces one inhumane act with another.”

“In response to the overwhelming public outrage at his policy of tearing children away from their parents at the border, this administration thinks the appropriate response is to indefinitely detain families,” Sanders said.

The senator said he’s “hopeful … the courts will step in to rein in these unlawful actions.”

Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, of California, shared similar sentiments, tweeting: “It’s extremely troubling that the president’s executive order would require immigrant families with children to be detained indefinitely.”

“This Executive Order doesn’t fix the crisis,” Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., wrote. “Indefinitely detaining children with their families in camps is inhumane and will not make us safe.”

Are you beginning to see a pattern, gentle readers?

It was NEVER about “the children”.

As I mentioned earlier, Democrats desperately needed something to take attention away from the IG Report.

Not only that, they want amnesty for these illegal immigrants so bad they can taste it.

They need more Democratic Party Voters because they are about to be shellacked in the 2016 Mid-term Elections and the 202 Presidential Election.

They have no Party Platform except “Hate Trump”.

This same hatred that has the Liberal Masses whipped up to the point of possible violence has absolutely alienated the Democratic Party from average Americans who now view them as holding our country back from a bright future.

The hatred for President Trump could lead to violence but they need to remember that they are still in the minority in America.

If they continue to ratchet up their hateful rhetoric toward President Trump and average Americans, just like the story of Moby Dick and Captain Ahab, the Democrats’ hatred of President Donald J. Trump will lead to the death of them as a viable political party.

This is 2018. Not 1917.

This time the Bolsheviks will not win.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Amnesty, No! Wall, Si! Trump and the DACA Debacle – A KJ Op Ed

920x920 (2)

Let’s pretend I broke into your house. When you discover me there, you insist I leave. But I say, “I’ve made all the beds, washed the dishes, did the laundry, and cleaned the floors; I’ve done all the work you don’t like to do. I’m hardworking and honest (except for breaking into your house). Not only must you let me stay, you must also add me to your insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide these benefits to my husband, too (he will do your yard work, he’s honest and hardworking too–except for that breaking in part). If you try to force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house and proclaim my right to be there! It’s only fair, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m trying to better myself. I’m hardworking and honest…except for, well, you know. I will live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness and prejudice.

Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.”

Good plan…don’t you think?

Is this a behavior we should be rewarding?

Foxnews.com reports that

President Donald Trump said Thursday that Republican congressional leaders were “very much on board” with negotiations to protect so-called “Dreamers”— hundreds of thousands of young immigrants who were brought into the U.S. illegally — from deportation.  
 
However, the president also vowed “there will be no amnesty” and pushed back against claims by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., that a deal had been reached at a White House dinner Wednesday night. 

“We’re working on a plan subject to getting massive border controls. We’re working on a plan for DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). People want to see that happen,” Trump told reporters in Florida while surveying damage from Hurricane Irma. He added: “‘I think we’re fairly close but we have to get massive border security.”

After Trump landed in Florida, he declared repeatedly, “If we don’t have a wall, we’re doing nothing.”

Schumer and Pelosi issued a joint statement following the dinner announcing a broad agreement on immigration. On the Senate floor Thursday morning, Schumer insisted that both sides were in agreement and there was no dispute.

“If you listen to the president’s comments this morning … it is clear that what Leader Pelosi and I put out last night was exactly accurate,” said Schumer. “We have reached an understanding on this issue. We have to work out details, and we can work together on a border security package with the White House and get DACA on the floor quickly.”

Indeed, in the face of ferocious pushback from conservative lawmakers and media outlets including Breitbart, run by former Trump adviser Steve Bannon, the White House appeared focused more on shaping presentation of the agreement, than on denying it outright.

“By no means was any deal ever reached,” White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters told reporters aboard Air Force One as the president traveled to Florida. “This is something that Congress needs to work on.”

But Breitbart was already labeling Trump “Amnesty Don.”

“The Trump administration will not be discussing amnesty,” Walters said. The president wants “a responsible path forward in immigration reform. That could include legal citizenship over a period of time. But absolutely by no means will this White House discuss amnesty,” she said, although most conservatives would consider “legal citizenship over a period of time” to meet the definition of amnesty.

The House’s foremost immigration hard-liner, Rep. Steve  King, R-Iowa, addressed Trump over Twitter, writing that if the reports were true, “Trump base is blown up, destroyed, irreparable, and disillusioned beyond repair. No promise is credible.”

Schumer and Pelosi said in a statement that the details on border security needed to be negotiated, that both sides agreed “the wall would not be any part of this agreement” and that Trump said he would pursue the wall later.

And soon after, Trump appeared to confirm that approach. “The wall will come later, we’re right now renovating large sections of wall, massive sections, making it brand new,” he told reporters before his Florida trip.

He also said Republican congressional leaders, House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., favored his approach on the immigration program. “Ryan and McConnell agree with us on DACA,” Trump said, adding that he had spoken to them by telephone.

Ryan, meanwhile, was adamant after speaking with Trump and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly that no agreement had been reached.

“The president wasn’t negotiating a deal last night. The president was talking with Democratic leaders to get their perspectives,” he told reporters on Capitol Hill.

Republicans in Congress, meanwhile, tried to make sense of the confusion.

“Slow down the trains, there’s no agreement,” said Rep. Dave Brat, R-Va., who warned” ”You can make a deal all you want, it’s got to get past the House and the Senate.”

In a series of tweets Thursday, Trump expressed empathy for the nearly 800,000 young people — many brought to the United States as toddlers or children — who were protected from deportation and given work permits under DACA.

“Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated and accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military? Really!” he tweeted Thursday.”

Trump announced last week that his administration was rescinding the program, but gave Congress six months to come up with a legislative fix.

The back-and-forth comes as the president has suddenly turned to Democrats to jump-start his legislative imperatives. Only days ago, Trump and the Democratic leaders agreed to back a three-month extension of the debt limit in order to speed hurricane assistance.

The backlash that President Trump has received from Conservative Voters, who are afraid that he is going back on his word that he will not grant amnesty to those who are here illegally, has been “Yuge!” and uglier than Rosie O’ Donnell in a thong bikini.

Hold on. I almost made myself throw up.

If the President were to change his mind and offer blanket amnesty to those whom Barack Hussein Obama named “Dreamers”, he would be intentionally bypassing the normal process of legal Immigration, including one very important part, which all immigrants, who wish to be Americans must pledge:

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

A little over a month after I started Kingjester’s Blog, on May 18, 2010, a young man named Benito wrote me to me in the comments section. Benito, an activist for the cause of Illegal Immigration, insisted that the situation of people in this country illegally, was one of “Civil Rights”. This is how I responded to him:

Benito, I approved your comment to ask you a few questions. First, you write very well. Next, a few questions. What part of the word “illegal” do you not understand? What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, you are not entitled to the same rights as natural-born or naturalized American citizens. You are no better than someone who breaks into someone’s home, does their dishes, cuts their yard, cleans their house, and then helps themselves to their food and drives their car without asking. This is in no way a human rights issue. Freedom is God-given. And with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way. Illegal immigration reminds me of the amorous boyfriend who wants everything a young woman will give him, but will leave her at the first mention of marriage. I wish you no ill, amigo, but understand this: This is not a civil rights issue. Illegals do not have the same rights as American Citizens. With our rights, come the responsibilities of being an American citizen. The Mexican flag, by protocol, will always be flown in a subordinate position to the American Flag in this country. And, the American Dialect of the English language is the language spoken in this country.

Vaya con Dios.

If Trump has a “Read My Lips” moment, his decision will have detrimental consequences for average Americans and our Sovereign Nation.

And, any plans he might have for a reelection bid.

What makes those benefiting from DACA, who wish to stay here forever, exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world?

These “Dreamers” must go through the same immigration process that other generations of immigrants have gone through.

Or, a stringent, controlled pathway to citizenship that will end with them going through the same procedures as all other legal immigrants before them.

As another President wrote, some 110 years ago…

In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people. – Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Mr. President, please listen to those of us who believed in you, supported you, and elected you.

FORGET AMNESTY. BUILD THE WALL.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Putting America First: Donald J. Trump, Illegal Immigration, and the Perpetual Handwringing of the Main Stream Media

Trump-Tool-600-CIThe handwringing Liberal Main Stream Media continues its quest to find something, ANYTHING, with which to stop Republican Presidential Candidate Donald J. Trump from defeating Democratic Candidate Hillary Clinton in this November’s Presidential Election.

Read this article and pay close attention to the tone in which it is written.

CBS News reported this morning that

Donald Trump announced Sunday evening that he plans to deliver a “major speech on illegal immigration” in Arizona on Wednesday.

The GOP presidential nominee shared the scheduled event on his Twitter account.

[I will be making a major speech on ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION on Wednesday in the GREAT State of Arizona. Big crowds, looking for a larger venue.]

This comes after Trump has waffled on his immigration policy position for more than a week, specifically on his plan for dealing with undocumented immigrants already living in the U.S.

Early on in his campaign, Trump advocated deporting the roughly 11 to 12 million immigrants in the United States, and said that they could only re-enter the country through the legal process. Last September, Trump even said that it would take his administration up to two years to deport them all.

On Tuesday however, Trump suggested during a taped town hall hosted by Fox News’ Sean Hannity that he might be open to letting some of the undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. stay. He also told Hannity that there would be “no amnesty” for undocumented immigrants if he’s elected president, but suggested he would be willing to “work with” that community.

On Wednesday, Trump hinted that he plans to announce something new or different regarding his immigration policies over the next two weeks.

Trump told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Thursday that there is “not a path to legalization” for undocumented immigrants under his plan and he described his stance as one that was “hardening” instead of one that was “softening” as he described only two days earlier.

“No, there’s not a path to legalization unless people leave the country, if they come back in and then they have to start paying taxes,” he said, adding that he would first plan to deport “bad dudes” who he estimated would amount to “probably millions…certainly hundreds of thousands.”

At a rally Saturday, Trump appeared to hint more at his position, but didn’t provide details.

On day one, I’m going to begin swiftly removing criminal illegal immigrants from this country,” he said in Des Moines, Iowa.

In an interview with Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday, host John Dickerson pointed out that Trump has advocated deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. and he asked why Trump is shifting on that stance.

“Actually, he’s not, John,” Conway said. “He’s pretty consistent. Immigration is a very complex issue.”

Dickerson then asked Conway if the law is enforced, if that would mean Trump would call for undocumented immigrants to self-deport or if he would create a deportation force.

“That’s really the question here, John,” Conway replied. “He has to deal with those agencies and those individuals are are already responsible for this who aren’t doing the jobs.”

Conway added that Trump would “work with law enforcement [and] immigration agencies” to take care of the issue in a “fair, humane and effective” way.

As a Former Collegiate Radio News Director, it is interesting and borderline funny to watch the Main Stream Media’s desperate attempts to catch Trump changing his stance on issues such as Illegal Immigration.

Their fear of an impending Hillary Clinton loss in November is palpable.

What those among us who see to shape the news and not report it fail to realize is that the overwhelming majority of Americans are fed up with out-of-touch Professional Politicians and their empty promises, given in order to maintain the Washingtonian Status Quo.

The unshakable fact is that the overwhelming majority of Americans side with Donald J. Trump on the issue of Illegal Immigration.

Being an individual among that “overwhelming majority”, and, speaking on their behalf, my opinion concerning these “undocumented individuals” can be summed up in the following allegorical story, which went viral, a few years ago.  You may have seen this already, but it explains illegal immigration as succinctly as anything I’ve come across:

Let’s pretend I broke into your house.  When you discover me there, you insist I leave.  But I say, “I’ve made all the beds, washed the dishes, did the laundry, and cleaned the floors; I’ve done all the work you don’t like to do. I’m hardworking and honest (except for breaking into your house). Not only must you let me stay, you must also add me to your insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide these benefits to my husband, too (he will do your yard work, he’s honest and hardworking too–except for that breaking in part). If you try to force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house and proclaim my right to be there! It’s only fair, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m trying to better myself. I’m hardworking and honest…except for, well, you know. I will live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness and prejudice.

Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.

Good plan..don’t you think?

Why are our representatives so intent on rewarding those who have broken our laws with impunity?

Is this a behavior we should be rewarding?

What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, they are not entitled to the same rights as natural-born or naturalized American citizens.

And, yet, even as I write this, they are in our hospitals, taking advantage of our charity and the finest health care system in the world, and driving our streets, with either forged drivers licenses or those obtained from states who have acquiesced and given them to these “undocumented workers”.

This is in no way a human rights issue.

Freedom is God-given, and with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way.

My concerns about rewarding these lawbreakers with a “Path to Citizenship” or Blanket Amnesty can be divided into three bullet points. (Hey, I used to be a VP of Marketing. What do you expect?)

1. Patriotism – Will these new “citizens” be willing to fly our flag above theirs? Will they be willing, if called upon, to serve in our Armed Forces, at home or abroad? Will they love this country, more than the one they left?

2. Loyalty – When these “new Americans” achieve the right to vote, are they all going to vote Democrat, so that they can receive more FREE STUFF? Is the Republican Party shooting themselves in both feet by pushing an outcome which will simply add new Democratic Voters? As I asked in the first point, will they honestly embrace our sovereign nation as their new home? Or, will they remain loyal to Mexico?

3.  Immigration – Are we rewarding illegal behavior, while at the same time, insulting all of the brave souls who have come here legally, seeking a better life for themselves and their families?

So, what is the solution to this “Humanitarian Issue”, as Obama and all of his hand-wringing hypocritical Liberal sycophants are calling this invasion?

Believe or not, a legendary Democrat Leader agreed with Trump on what should be done with those who have broken our laws by entering our Sovereign Nation illegally.

The last bipartisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform happened during President ill “Bubba” Clinton’s tenure. Bubba appointed former congresswoman and Democratic icon Barbara Jordan as its chair. Jordan came from humble beginnings to become a lawyer and the first Southern black woman elected to the House of Representatives. A DEMOCRAT, she was a leader in the civil rights movement, a professor of ethics, a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and a world-class orator (two of her speeches are considered among the greatest of the 20th century). Her appointment gave the commission instant credibility. According to Jordan, she believed her responsibility as the head of the commission was to restore credibility to the U.S. immigration system. On the issue of illegal immigration, Jordan was very clear and succinct:

Unlawful immigration is unacceptable. Those who should not be here will be required to leave.

Liberals, on both sides of the Political Aisle, have continuously masked their true intentions for the political usefulness, in granting amnesty to illegal aliens, by swathing it in the noble rhetoric of “Civil Rights” and “Social Justice”.

Please indulge me by allowing me the opportunity to wrap up today’s blog with the answer I gave on May 19. 2010,  to “Benito”, who submitted a rather lengthy comment filled with this same camouflage of noble intentions:

Benito, I approved your comment to ask you a few questions. First, you write very well. Next, a few questions. What part of the word “illegal” do you not understand? What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, you are not entitled to the same rights as natural-born or naturalized American citizens. You are no better than someone who breaks into someone’s home, does their dishes, cuts their yard, cleans their house, and then helps themselves to their food and drives their car without asking. This is in no way a human rights issue. Freedom is God-given. And with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way. Illegal immigration reminds me of the amorous boyfriend who wants everything a young woman will give him, but will leave her at the first mention of marriage. I wish you no ill, amigo, but understand this: This is not a civil rights issue. Illegals do not have the same rights as American Citizens. With our rights, come the responsibilities of being an American citizen. The Mexican flag, by protocol, will always be flown in a subordinate position to the American Flag in this country. And, the American Dialect of the English language is the language spoken in this country.

I understand that people want a better life for themselves and their children.  We are all immigrants in this land, except for American Indians, and they got here by crossing the Bering Straight.  But there is a huge difference between immigrating here legally and sneaking in illegally, between assimilating into an existing culture, and insisting on replacing a country’s existing culture with that of the country you left.

I’m all for assisting anyone in becoming a legal citizen of the United States, if that is their wish.  But, it must be done the right way, and they must accept responsibility for their illegal entry, show a willingness to learn our language, and embrace our American way of life, including respecting the American Flag.

So, let’s take this one step at a time.

  1. Elect Donald J. Trump as the next President of the United States of America.
  2. Build the Wall.
  3. Secure our borders.
  4. Enforce the anti-illegal immigration laws.

America became a great nation because it is a melting pot of American-born and legally-immigrated citizens with a shared allegiance, not a multi-cultural United Nations with everyone loyal to their home country.

Too many brave Americans have died to keep our flag flying over our Sovereign Nation for that flag to be flown below any other country’s.

America First.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Head of ICE: “Rubio Absolutely Knowingly Mislead the American People”

cartoonmarcorubiogangof8Listen, I’m a politician which means I’m a cheat and a liar, and when I’m not kissing babies I’m stealing their lollipops. But it also means I keep my options open. – Jeffrey Pelt, “The Hunt for Red October”

The President of ICE, Christopher Crane, recently gave an Exclusive Interview to Breitbart News

in which he detailed his behind-the-scenes interactions with Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), as Crane sought to protect the nation’s ICE officers and national security.  Crane was integral to stopping Sen. Rubio’s amnesty plan from passing the House—which, as Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) recently explained, “was a near-run thing.”

…In his responses, Crane addresses an incident—first detailed by Breitbart News— in which Marco Rubio stood idly by as Crane was ejected from a Gang of Eight press conference for trying to ask a question on behalf of law enforcement.

Crane, an active duty ICE officer, has served as an officer for approximately 13 years and has been elected by his peers as the president of their union, as thus their voice on the national stage. Prior to joining ICE, Crane was a United States Marine.

Here is an excerpt from that interview…

BREITBART NEWS: It is well known that the Gang of Eight reached out to big business groups and amnesty groups in the process of writing the bill. When Sen. Rubio started writing his bill, did he reach out to you and other ICE officers for your ideas and input?

CRANE: Sen. Rubio never reached out to us. He surrounded himself with big business and amnesty groups, most of which were more interested in cheap labor and their own political agendas, and had no real concern for the welfare of immigrants, public safety, or the security of our nation. This while he ignored boots on the ground law enforcement officers who work within our broken immigration system every day and know better than any what’s needed to fix it. Common sense dictates that law enforcement be at the table when creating a bill like this. I think Sen. Rubio knew that, but actively chose to exclude us because of his own personal agenda.

BNN: Did Sen. Rubio meet with you voluntarily or did he have to be pressured into doing so at the last minute? Do you remember how you were ultimately able to secure the meeting? Did it take a long time?

CHRIS CRANE: It was definitely last minute as we met in the evening and they introduced the bill a few hours later that same night. It doesn’t get much more last minute than that. Was he pressured? I definitely think so. Not just by the public, but by some in the media as well. I think appearances on the Greta Van Susteren and Gov. Mike Huckabee shows are what tipped the balance and got us in. I think Gov. Huckabee was especially important in making the meeting happen, he was genuinely concerned that law enforcement was being excluded from the process and reached out to Sen. Rubio on our behalf. Many thanks to him for his attempts to help us.

BNN: What happened in the meeting? Did Sen. Rubio make any promises to you? Did he keep them?

CRANE: To start, even though I had requested to bring someone with me, Sen. Rubio denied the request and demanded that I come alone, which I still believe was highly peculiar and inappropriate.

He, of course, had what appeared to be his entire staff in his office with me. Most of his staff stood behind me as there was no place for them to sit. I raised a series of strong concerns with the bill, and as I raised each issue, Sen. Rubio would look to his staff and ask if that was what the bill said. Each time his staff agreed with my interpretation, and Sen. Rubio would shake his head in disbelief and indicate the bill had to be changed.

Sen. Rubio talked very specifically and very directly to me and his staff saying that the changes I suggested had to be made and specifically said that other Gang of Eight members wouldn’t be happy, but “Oh well.” Obviously the changes I suggested were all serious enforcement related issues, such as establishing a biometric entry-exit system, and cracking down on sex offenders, gang members, violent criminals and other criminal aliens.

When I walked out of his office that night I definitely thought the bill would undergo significant changes, but of course absolutely no changes were made.

BNN: Almost immediately after you met with Sen. Rubio, he introduced bill. Did it include any of the changes you asked for?

CRANE: Not one of the changes we suggested was made to the bill before Sen. Rubio introduced it.

All of his strong statements during our meeting about making the changes we suggested were apparently all just a dodge to get rid of me. It quickly became obvious why he didn’t permit me to take anyone with me to the meeting— he didn’t want any witnesses.

BNN: What happened during the press conference when you tried to ask Sen. Rubio and Chuck Schumer to take a question?

CRANE: I was polite, professional and respectful at all times. I didn’t interrupt anyone or cause a scene. The press was there, but Sen. Rubio and the rest of the Gang of Eight had also filled the large room with amnesty supporters and open borders people to cheer and applaud the Gang of Eight every time they said something. It was a real dog and pony show, sort of a circus.

Because it wasn’t your traditional closed press conference, it didn’t seem at all out of place to me, as an American citizen, to politely ask these elected officials a question about the legislation they were there to discuss. After all, I thought that Congress was the People’s House.

When the floor was opened to reporters to ask questions, I too politely raised my hand and asked, “Will you take a question from law enforcement?”

The amnesty folks immediately started making hateful comments like: you’re not welcome here, you need to leave, you have no right to speak here. A commotion took place on the stage with the Gang of Eight Senators. Sen. Rubio did look directly at me, and it appeared that he told Sen. Flake who I was.

Yet, despite having looked directly at me, Sen. Rubio did absolutely nothing to allow me to ask a question on behalf of the nation’s ICE officers, sheriffs and front line law enforcement.

I was able to ask the same question approximately two more times, before a Senate staffer accompanied by Capitol Hill police approached— demanding that they escort me out.

As I was escorted out by police, some within the amnesty groups applauded, laughed at me, and made hateful remarks. Once police escorted me outside of the main room, police informed me that I was not free to go and that I was to be taken somewhere for questioning.

As a law enforcement officer I knew that their actions met the legal standard for an arrest. At that point I demanded to know the charges against me and why I was being arrested. Television cameras, reporters and microphones came swooping in, and as they did the Senate staffer scurried away like a cockroach, leaving the Capitol Hill police on their own. I was allowed to leave the area, but I think it was only because the police were afraid to handcuff me with reporters filming them.

Senator Rubio and the Gang of Eight stood there and watched it all happen. Anyone of them could have jumped to the mic and yelled for the Senate staffer and the police to stop what they were doing to me, but none did. Sen. Rubio just stood their silently and watched it happen. I am told that Sen. Rubio later stated that I should not have been removed, but he never reached out to me to say that or apologize. To my knowledge he and the Gang of Eight never called for an investigation.

If it had been Mark Zuckerberg in the crowd asking questions the Gang of Eight Senators would have been tripping over themselves to kiss his backside, but as a normal citizen without the means to filter money into their campaigns they had me forced out by police

BNN: What did you mean when you said in Congressional testimony: “Never before have I seen such contempt for law enforcement officers as what I’ve seen from the Gang of Eight”? CRANE: As ICE officers, we wrote a letter to Congress expressing strong concerns with the Gang of Eight bill. The letter was endorsed by approximately 150 Sheriffs, to include Sheriff Sam Page of the National Sheriffs Association Border Security and Immigration Committee, as well the National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers and other law enforcement groups. Law enforcement officers were screaming for help from the Gang of Eight to make changes to the bill that would better provide for public safety and national security, but the Gang of Eight ignored all of them. The Gang of Eight not only ignored law enforcement, but actively fought to keep our input out. Only wealthy special interests like the Chamber of Commerce were permitted to be a part of the process. It was dirty D.C. politics at its worst.

BNN: Sen. Rubio touted his bill as “The Toughest Border Security & Enforcement Measures In U.S. History,” do you believe this was an honest representation of the bill?

CRANE: I think that’s absolutely false – there was no real promise or guarantee of stronger border security. The bill actually relinquished Congress’ authority to establish border security measures to the head of DHS. The head of DHS then had something like so six months to unilaterally develop a border security plan after the Gang of Eight bill passed.

So not only was there no real plan, but Sen. Rubio apparently thought that giving a presidentially appointed bureaucrat god-like powers over America’s immigration system was the answer to border security, this as other Republicans are fighting corrupt and incompetent bureaucrats in agencies like the IRS and Secret Service, not to mention the unlawful policies on immigration enforcement enacted by the current President. Rather than being touted as the toughest border security and enforcement plan in history, it could more accurately be touted as the worst.

BNN: Sen. Rubio pledged his bill would provide enforcement first, do you believe this was an honest representation the bill?

CRANE: No, I don’t believe it was an honest representation. Protection from deportation, a type of de facto amnesty, came almost immediately as the first step in a much broader amnesty like process provided in the bill. There was no real promise of border security in the bill, and the bill provided nothing for interior enforcement, but instead made legalization of criminal aliens and gang members a priority. People need to understand that this bill was written by pro-amnesty and open borders groups that have no concern for America’s borders or the safety of its communities. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the bill was such a lopsided mess.

BNN: Sen. Rubio’s bill legalized sex offenders, drunk drivers, and others with criminal records. From an ICE officer’s perspective, how do you feel about his decision to legalize illegal immigrants with criminal convictions?

CRANE: Under the Obama Administration, ICE released estimates stating that approximately 2 million criminal aliens resided in the U.S. That’s 10 times the size the U.S. Marine Corps, at least when I was in. And I think ICE’s estimates are low.

People need to wake up. We can’t continue to keep taking millions of the world’s criminals without expecting serious repercussions to public safety and expense and burden to our legal system. Local and state jurisdictions are already overwhelmed by the criminal alien problem in our country. To turn this around and get things back under control, the U.S. must take the opposite approach. We must send criminals back to their countries. Especially sex offenders. I can’t understand why any lawmaker or special interest group would support legalizing sex offenders, but it shows how out of control the bill really was.

BNN: In your letter, you specifically protested that the bill would legalize gang members. As an ICE officer, how do you feel that this provision was left in the bill?

CRANE: It disgusts me. Violent street gangs were literally able to lobby Sen. Rubio and the Gang of Eight more effectively than law enforcement, they had more influence on the bill than we did. Gangs were able to get provisions in the law to protect themselves. It’s absolutely insane. What on earth are our lawmakers thinking? I think it’s this type of utterly stupid lawmaking that has caused most Americans to lose faith in Congress.

BNN: Sen. Rubio was on television and radio constantly promoting his bill, which was backed by powerful special interests. What did you learn about Sen. Rubio’s character during that time?

CRANE: In my opinion, Sen. Rubio absolutely knowingly mislead the American people regarding the bill. He was not telling the American public the truth about what that bill contained.

I realize that was a lengthy excerpt. However, I felt that it was important to keep as much of Crane’s remarks intact, as possible.

Marco Rubio , judging by his Campaign Appearances and Stump Speeches, appears to be in the throes of a “mea culpa” as regards his sucking up to the Establishment (Vichy) Republicans…and the Democrats…during his tenure as a card-carrying member of “The Gang of Eight”.

My question to you: DO YOU BELIEVE HIM?

History records that, “The Gang of Eight Bill” came up for a final Senate vote on June 27, 2013. Rubio, as a key author of the legislation, voted for its passage. Cruz voted against it.

Back in January, before the Iowa Caucus, The Washington Examiner filed the following report,

Following his rapid-fire assault on Sen. Ted Cruz’s record during Thursday evening’s debate, Sen. Marco Rubio’s campaign in Iowa kept up his line of attack by calling out Cruz as a follower of the political winds.Rep. Kristi Noem, a South Dakota Republican and Rubio supporter, told reporters after the debate that Cruz is nothing more than a political opportunist who supports “whatever’s popular that day,” continuing Rubio’s line of attack that the Texas senator engages in “political calculation” and not “consistent conservatism.”

“From what I heard come from Donald Trump, from what I’ve seen of actions coming from Ted Cruz, they’re not the right people for the job,” Noem told reporters after a Rubio watch party. “Ted Cruz says whatever’s popular that day. He votes one way, and then a month later will vote another way. He’ll take a position, write an op-ed on something as critical as our economic future and trade with foreign countries, and he’ll change his mind because the political winds are blowing a different direction.”

“I don’t want another president like that. I don’t want a president like the one that we have that knows how to talk, but doesn’t walk the walk,” Noem continued. I want one that will actually follow through on what he says he will do.”

Irony is embarrassed.

There are no angels in the 2016 Presidential Primaries, on either side.

For each and every candidate, including Donald J. Trump, unlike the Syrian Refugees, who Obama is attempting to force on us, there is an abundance of information out there, which shows their past thoughts, words, and deeds (or, lack thereof).

In Rubio’s Case, just as in the case of the current “Political” Pope’s insult of Donald J. Trump, as regards to calling Ted Cruz as “opportunist”, Marcio forgot that

People in Glass Houses should not throw stones.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Obama to Defy Judge and Grant Amnesty By Executive Order

th (8)It appears that Obama is about to create some new Democrat Voters.

Thehill.com reports that

A newly leaked internal DHS memorandum produced for an off-the-record agency conclave reveals that the Obama administration is actively planning to circumvent a federal court injunction that suspended part of last November’s deferral-based amnesty initiative. The document, apparently prepared as follow-up from a DHS “Regulations Retreat” last summer, appears sure to re-ignite concerns in Congress as well as federal judges in the Fifth Circuit. The Administration has already been criticized from the bench for handing out work permits to hundreds of thousands of deferred action beneficiaries, in direct violation of a district court’s order. With the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals deciding any day now whether to deny the Administration’s request to reverse that injunction, this public leak has come at a critical juncture for U.S. enforcement policy. 

Last June, four months after Texas federal judge Andrew Hanen’s order to freeze President’s DAPA and Expanded DACA programs—disclosure: the Immigration Reform Law Institute has filed briefs in these cases—DHS’s immigration policy makers apparently held a “Regulations Retreat” to discuss “different options” for “open market Employment Authorization Document (EAD) regulatory changes.” EAD is the statutory term for work permits. From a memo recording these discussions, we now know that the Obama DHS has, rather than pausing to allow the courts to assess the constitutionality of its enforcement nullification initiatives, been gearing up to roll out one or more of four plans drawn up at the meeting, each one designed to provide EADs to millions of nonimmigrants, including those lawfully present and visa overstayers, crippling the actual employment-based visa system on the federal statute-book.

The internal memo reveals four options of varying expansiveness, with option 1 providing EADs to “all individuals living in the United States”, including illegal aliens, visa-overstayers, and H-1B guest-workers, while option 4 provides EADs only to those on certain unexpired non-immigrant visas. Giving EADs to any of the covered individuals, however, is in direct violation of Congress’s Immigration & Nationality Act and works to dramatically subvert our carefully wrought visa system. 

As mentioned, the first plan the memo discusses basically entails giving EADs to anyone physically present in the country who until now has been prohibited from getting one. A major positive to this option, the memo reads, is that it would “address the needs of some of the intended deferred action population.” Although DHS doesn’t say it expressly, included here would be those 4.3 million people covered by the president’s DAPA and Expanded DACA programs whose benefits were supposed to have been halted in the Hanen decision. On top of working around the Hanen injunction, this DHS plan would also dole out unrestricted EADs to those on temporary non-immigrant visas, such as H-1B-holders (their work authorizations being tied to their employers) and another 5 to 6 million illegal aliens thus far not covered by any of the President’s deferred action amnesty programs. By claiming absolute authority to grant work authorization to any alien, regardless of status, DHS is in effect claiming it can unilaterally de-couple the 1986 IRCA work authorization statutes from the main body of U.S. visa law. While DHS must still observe the statutory requirements for issuing visas, the emerging doctrine concedes, the administration now claims unprecedented discretionary power to permit anyone inside our borders to work. 

The anonymous DHS policymakers state that a positive for this option is that it “could cover a greater number of individuals.” In a strikingly conclusory bit of bureaucratese, they state that because illegal aliens working in the country “have already had the US labor market tested” it has been “demonstrat[ed] that their future employment won’t adversely affect US workers.” The labor market, in other words, has already been stress-tested through decades of foreign-labor dumping and the American working-class, which disproportionately includes minorities, working mothers, the elderly, and students, is doing just fine. Apparently, the fact that 66 million Americans and legal aliens are currently unemployed or out of the job-market was not a discussion point at the DHS “Retreat.” 

Bottom line: The memo foreshadows more tactical offensives in a giant administrative amnesty for all 12 million illegal aliens who’ve broken our immigration laws (and many other laws) that will emerge before the next inaugural in January 2016. According to the authors, one negative factor for granting EADs to illegal aliens, visa-overstayers, etc., is that they’ll still “face difficulties in pursuing permanent residence due to ineligibility or being subject to unlawful presence inadmissibility for which a waiver is required.” This is in reference to the reality that an EAD isn’t a green card and that eventually the EAD-beneficiaries are supposed to apply to ‘adjust their status,’ which cannot be done without showing evidence of lawful status. But this might change, they write. The DHS “macro-level policy goal”, we’re told, is to assist individuals to stay “until they are ready and able to become immigrants.” This would seem to say that DHS, the largest federal law enforcement agency in the nation, is banking on awarding those who’ve broken our laws and violated our national sovereignty.

Will the 26 plaintiff states that have challenged the President’s DAPA program bring this memo to the Fifth Circuit’s attention, before they issue their closely-awaited decision?  If this document is indeed the cutting edge of Obama’s strategy for DHS to circumvent Judge Hanen’s injunction order, it would confirm the Administration’s bad faith and contempt both for the court and the law.

So, with 40% of America’s Workforce giving up on the American Dream and dropping out of our workforce, King Barack the First has once again decided that he will increase the competition for America’s jobs, by issuing a Royal Decree (Executive Order) granting amnesty to those who have illegally entered our Sovereign Nation, to the detriment of legal American citizens.

In 2013, brilliant American Economist and Political Pundit, Dr. Thomas Sowell, was interviewed by Laura Ingraham, on her syndicated radio program. Here is what he had to say about Amnesty and the Economy:

That’s incredible. I mean —first of all to an economist, it is incredible to speak about shortages without talking about prices, in this case wages…You know there, there have been so many predictions of shortages of so many occupations and the shortages don’t materialize. And why not? Because if there is a shortage, the wage rate goes up. That attracts in more people and lo and behold, the jobs are filled.

In agriculture, the farmers would obviously prefer to get workers who get low pay rather than workers they have to pay a higher wage. And as long as there are an unlimited supply of farm workers coming in from Mexico, they will never have to raise the wages very much. They say Americans won’t do these jobs. These are jobs Americans have done for generations, if not centuries. And it’s a time when millions of Americans are out of work, and are looking for any kind of work. And so this is utter nonsense.

…They constantly talk about immigrants in the abstract. You know, there are no such thing as abstract immigrants. There are immigrants from country a, b, c, d. They are radically different. People coming in from some countries almost never go on welfare. Immigrants coming in from other countries go on welfare to a great extent. If we’re going to have a rational immigration policy, then we have to be able to decide what people, what countries, what occupations — things like that, instead of rushing everything through.

The other main thing though is that if we don’t control the borders, we don’t have an immigration policy because regardless of what policy you put on paper, if people can just walk across the border when they darn well please, then your policy means nothing. The other thing that bothers me is the Republicans seem to think we will give — illegal immigrants citizenship if they do a, b or c. Democrats say x, y and z. I don’t know why we need promise anybody citizenship before we get control of the borders and have time to sit down and think and look at the facts, and then try to draw up some rational policy.

What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, they are not entitled to the same rights as natural-born or naturalized American citizens.

And, yet, even as I write this, they are in our hospitals, taking advantage of our charity and the finest health care system in the world, and driving our streets, with either forged drivers licenses or those obtained from states who have acquiesced and given them to these “undocumented workers”.

This is in no way a human rights issue. Freedom is God-given, and with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way.

My concerns about this whole “Path to Citizenship” business, can be divided into three bullet points. (Hey, I used to be a VP of Marketing. What do you expect?)

1. Patriotism – Will these new “citizens” be willing to fly our flag above theirs? Will they be willing, if called upon, to serve in our Armed Forces, at home or abroad? Will they love this country, more than the one they left?

2. Loyalty – When these “new Americans” achieve the right to vote, are they all going to vote Democrat, so that they can receive more FREE STUFF? Is the Republican Party shooting themselves in both feet by pushing an outcome which will simply add new Democratic Voters? As I asked in the first point, will they honestly embrace our sovereign nation as their new home? Or, will they remain loyal to Mexico?

3.  Immigration – Are we rewarding illegal behavior, while at the same time, insulting all of the brave souls who have come here legally, seeking a better life for themselves and their families?

I understand that people want a better life for themselves and their children.  We are all immigrants in this land, except for American Indians, and they got here by crossing the Bering Straight.  But there is a huge difference between immigrating here legally and sneaking in illegally, between assimilating into an existing culture, and insisting on replacing a country’s existing culture with that of the country you left.

I’m all for assisting anyone in becoming a legal citizen of the United States, if that is their wish.  But, it must be done the right way, and they must accept responsibility for their illegal entry, show a willingness to learn our language, and embrace our American way of life, including respecting the American Flag.

So, let’s take this one step at a time.  As Dr. Sowell said: Secure our borders.  Enforce the anti-illegal immigration laws.  And if the Federal Government won’t, the states, like Arizona, will have to pass their own laws.  America became a great nation because it is a melting pot of American-born and legally-immigrated citizens with a shared allegiance, not a multi-cultural United Nations with everyone loyal to their home country.

As the diseases which the Mexican Munchkin Migration brought in with them have warned us, a wide-open Southern Border is as big a threat to the sovereignty of the United States as anything that our enemies can throw at us right now.  All of OUR SERVANTS, up on Capitol HIll, need to quit playing political games.  The safety of America is at stake .  SECURE THE BORDER NOW.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama to Allow Illegals to Stay Here By Executive Order

illegal immigration 7714While Republican Presidential Hopeful and Professional Firebrand, Donald J. Trump, heads toward America’s Southern Border, to talk with the American Citizens under siege down there, President Barack Hussein Obama is making plans to circumvent our System of Checks and Balances, in order to create new Democrat Voters.

The Washington Free Beacon reports that

The Obama administration is moving forward with plans to expand a waiver program that will allow additional illegal aliens to remain in the country rather than apply for legal status from abroad.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a proposed rule on Tuesday that would make changes to a waiver program created by President Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration in 2013. The action created a waiver that primarily allowed illegal immigrants with a U.S. citizen spouse or parent to stay in the country instead of having to leave the United States and be barred from returning for three or 10 years, if they proved their absence would create an “extreme hardship” for their spouse.

The new rule expands eligibility to a host of other categories of illegal immigrants beyond those with citizen spouses and parents.

“DHS proposes to expand the class of aliens who may be eligible for a provisional waiver beyond immediate relatives of U.S. citizens to aliens in all statutorily eligible immigrant visa categories,” the proposed rule stated. “Such aliens include family-sponsored immigrants, employment-based immigrants, certain special immigrants, and Diversity Visa program selectees, together with their derivative spouses and children.”

The waivers allow illegal immigrants to stay in the country while they await visas, and avoid a penalty under U.S. law that bars persons who entered the country illegally from returning for at least three years.

An illegal immigrant who lives in the country for less than a year and then leaves is barred from reentering the United States for three years. Any time spent illegally in the United States over one year results in the illegal immigrant being inadmissible for 10 years. The waiver program allowed individuals to remain in the country and avoid these penalties.

“It’s a very bad policy,” said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies. “It makes it possible for illegal aliens to avoid the consequences established by Congress to deter people from settling here illegally and then laundering their status by adjusting to a green card.”

Vaughan, who has been following the issue for over two years, said the changes to the waiver program would increase fraud.

“It is a slap in the face to the many legal immigrants who abide by the law, follow the process, and wait their turn,” she said. “In addition, it will increase the likelihood of fraud in the marriage categories, which produce tens of thousands of new green cards each year.”

“Green cards are the golden ticket. Once you get a green cards you get welfare, you get tax credits, you get entitlements,” said a GOP Senate aide. “The U.S. hands out one million green cards every year, and these documents are bankrupting the country.”

DHS said it is proposing the rule based on its “broad authority” under the Homeland Security Act of 2002.

The rule would also broaden the category of those whom an illegal alien can claim their absence from the United States would create an “extreme hardship.” Previously, the waiver only could be given if the illegal immigrant has a spouse or parent who is an American citizen.

“DHS also proposes to expand who may be considered a qualifying relative for purposes of the extreme hardship determination to include [legal permanent resident] LPR spouses and parents,” the proposed rule said.

The agency said the rule is intended to “prioritize the family reunification of immediate relatives of U.S. citizens over other categories of aliens.”

“The president should not be issuing executive actions that serve only to expedite the legalization process for those who have ignored our laws,” said Vaughan. “This legalization gimmick is undermining the integrity of our legal immigration system, and Congress should take steps to block it.”

The public will have 60 days to comment on the proposal.

So, with 40% of America’s Workforce giving up on the American Dream and dropping out of our workforce, King Barack the First has once again decided that he will increase the competition for America’s jobs, by issuing a Royal Decree (Executive Order) granting amnesty to those who have illegally entered our Sovereign Nation, to the detriment of legal American citizens.

In 2013, brilliant American Economist and Political Pundit, Dr. Thomas Sowell, was interviewed by Laura Ingraham, on her syndicated radio program. Here is what he had to say about Amnesty and the Economy:

That’s incredible. I mean —first of all to an economist, it is incredible to speak about shortages without talking about prices, in this case wages…You know there, there have been so many predictions of shortages of so many occupations and the shortages don’t materialize. And why not? Because if there is a shortage, the wage rate goes up. That attracts in more people and lo and behold, the jobs are filled.

In agriculture, the farmers would obviously prefer to get workers who get low pay rather than workers they have to pay a higher wage. And as long as there are an unlimited supply of farm workers coming in from Mexico, they will never have to raise the wages very much. They say Americans won’t do these jobs. These are jobs Americans have done for generations, if not centuries. And it’s a time when millions of Americans are out of work, and are looking for any kind of work. And so this is utter nonsense.

…They constantly talk about immigrants in the abstract. You know, there are no such thing as abstract immigrants. There are immigrants from country a, b, c, d. They are radically different. People coming in from some countries almost never go on welfare. Immigrants coming in from other countries go on welfare to a great extent. If we’re going to have a rational immigration policy, then we have to be able to decide what people, what countries, what occupations — things like that, instead of rushing everything through.

The other main thing though is that if we don’t control the borders, we don’t have an immigration policy because regardless of what policy you put on paper, if people can just walk across the border when they darn well please, then your policy means nothing. The other thing that bothers me is the Republicans seem to think we will give — illegal immigrants citizenship if they do a, b or c. Democrats say x, y and z. I don’t know why we need promise anybody citizenship before we get control of the borders and have time to sit down and think and look at the facts, and then try to draw up some rational policy.

In 1903,  Jacob A. Riis,  a reporter who was born in Denmark in 1849 and immigrated to America at the age of 21, wrote the following about the immigrants who landed at Ellis Island,

The railroad ferries come and take their daily host straight from Ellis Island to the train, ticketed now with the name of the route that is to deliver them at their new homes, West and East. And the Battery boat comes every hour for its share. Then the many-hued procession-the women are hooded, one and all, in their gayety shawls for the entry-is led down on a long pathway divided in the middle by a wire screen, form behind which come shrieks of recognition from fathers, brothers, uncles, and aunts that are gathered there in the holiday togs of Mulberry or Division Street. The contrast is sharp-an artist would say all in favor of the newcomers. But they would be the last to agree with him. In another week the rainbow colors will have been laid aside, and the landscape will be poorer for it. On the boat they meet their friends, and the long journey is over, the new life begun.Those who have no friends run the gauntlet of the boarding-house runners, and take their chances with the new freedom, unless the missionary or “the society” of their people holds out a helping hand. For at the barge-office gate Uncle Sam lets go. Through it they must walk alone.

I know that you have heard America referred to as a Melting Pot.

That phrase was actually made popular in the 1908 play, “The Melting Pot,” a stage play by Israel Zangwill that encouraged assimilation into our nation’s culture by the immigrants of the time.

Zangwill was the London-born son of Russian Jewish immigrants. His play made its debut in Washington in 1908 and played in New York for four months the next year. The main character is David Quixano, a Jewish immigrant, orphaned by a pogram, which is a massacre of Jews. Quizano lives with his uncle on Staten Island and becomes smitten with the daughter of a Russian nobleman.

In the end, the good guy(David) gets the girl, which inspires him to shout from the rooftop of a Lower East Side settlement house that “America is God’s crucible” and to proclaim: “What is the glory of Rome and Jerusalem where all nations and races come to worship and look back, compared with the glory of America, where all races and nations come to labor and look forward!”

What Petulant President Pantywaist and his sycophantic Liberal supporters in Washington, the Main Stream Media, and elsewhere fail to realize, is that you can’t buy loyalty to a nation. 

The British found that out with their hired German Mercenaries, the Hessians, during the Revolutionary War.

In their self-absorbed Political Greed, America’s professional politicians are setting the stage for the possible fall of our nation.

Legal Immigrants earned their citizenship. They showed that they were willing to become a part of the Great American Melting Pot (from the Schoolhouse Rock video of the same name).

Illegal Immigrants do not respect the laws of our land, to begin with. Why would that change, if they were given the rights of citizenship?

And, what about the 40% of America’s Workforce, who have dropped out due to frustration, depression, and aggravation?

How about taking care of those whom you are supposed to be serving, first, Mr. President?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama to Give Illegals “Tax Refunds” …And Voting Rights!

illegal immigration AFBranco 71114

Riddle me this, Bat-Fans: How can an individual who never paid taxes in 2014, receive a “Tax Refund”, and that same individual be able to vote in our elections, without being an American Citizen?

Answer: Baracky Clause is coming early this year!

More is being revealed about Obama’s Amnesty Plan…and, all I can say is…I told you so.

The Daily Caller reports that

Illinois Congressman Luis Gutierrez told The Daily Caller Friday that he didn’t know that illegal immigrants are eligible for tax refunds — even if they haven’t paid taxes.

IRS Commissioner John Koskinen told members of Congress Wednesday that illegal immigrants who did not pay taxes will be able to claim back-refunds once they are issued social security numbers.

“I know nothing of the sort,” Gutierrez snapped at a Daily Caller reporter Friday when asked about Koskinen’s testimony.

“Of course it would be like you to raise that sort of question,” the Democrat continued. “Why don’t you ask the commissioner of the IRS?”

The commissioner, of course, had already been asked about it.

“Under the new program,” Koskinen told members of the House oversight committee Wednesday, “if you get a Social Security number and you work, you’ll be eligible to apply for the Earned Income Tax Credit.”

“You will get an amount depending on your situation,” Koskinen added. “If you are an individual working and applying for the Earned Income Tax Credit, the maximum you can get is in the range of 500 to 600 dollars.”

However, according to the IRS’ own website, a filer can receive a check up to $6,143 when they have “three or more qualifying children.”

When asked whether the tax credit program was only eligible to illegal immigrants who has previously filed tax returns, Koskinen conceded that those who haven’t filed before could still be eligible for back-credits.

“It turns out there was a lack of clarity about that,” Koskinen said. “If you get a social security number, you can then file for this year if you’re working and if you earned income in the 3 years you were working before that and filed you’ll be eligible.”

“If you did not file, you’ll have to file a return and you’ll have to file to demonstrate with the same information anybody else would that you actually earned income and were therefore eligible. That’s on the assumption that you would get the earned income tax credit automatically whether you were working or not.”

Despite Koskinen’s widely publicized remarks, Gutierrez seemed blindsided Friday when asked about the commissioner’s statements.

“I knew you were going to bring something negative up,” Gutierrez whined during the press conference. “It doesn’t matter what I say. You will turn it against all of us here at this caucus.  You know it.”

Koskinen also said Wednesday that the White House never asked him or any other IRS official about the tax impact of Obama’s executive action on immigration.

“I haven’t talked to the White House about this at all,” he said.

Don’t touch that dial, Bat-Fans. You ain’t gonna believe this:

The Washington Times reports that

President Obama’s temporary deportation amnesty will make it easier for illegal immigrants to improperly register and vote in elections, state elections officials testified toCongress on Thursday, saying that the driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers they will be granted create a major voting loophole.

While stressing that it remains illegal for noncitizens to vote, secretaries of state from Ohio and Kansas said they won’t have the tools to sniff out illegal immigrants who register anyway, ignoring stiff penalties to fill out the registration forms that are easily available at shopping malls, motor vehicle bureaus and in curbside registration drives.

Anyone registering to vote attests that he or she is a citizen, but Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted said mass registration drives often aren’t able to give due attention to that part, and so illegal immigrants will still get through.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris W. Kobach said even some motor vehicle bureau workers automatically ask customers if they want to register to vote, which some noncitizens in the past have cited as their reason for breaking the law to register.

“It’s a guarantee it will happen,” Mr. Kobach said.

Democrats disputed that it was an issue at all, saying Mr. Obama’s new policy, which could apply to more than 4 million illegal immigrants, doesn’t change anything in state or federal law.

Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia’s nonvoting member of Congress, accused Republicans of an effort at voter suppression.

“The president’s executive order gives immigrants the right to stay — immigrants who have been here for years, immigrants who have been working hard and whose labor we have needed,” Ms. Norton said. “The Republicans may want to go down in history as the party who tried once again 100 years later to nullify the right to vote. Well, I am here to say they shall not succeed.”

Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts Democrat, said he doubted illegal immigrants would risk running afoul of the law — which could get them deported — just to be an insignificant part of an election.

The hearing was the latest GOP effort to dent Mr. Obama’s executive action, announced in November, which grants tentative legal status and work permits to as many as 4 million illegal immigrant parents whose children are either U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents. The president also expanded a 2012 policy for so-called Dreamers, or illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children, granting them tentative legal status and work permits as well.

Republicans say there are a host of unintended consequences, including the chances of illegal voting, a perverse incentive created by Obamacare that would make newly legalized workers more attractive to some businesses than American workers and complications with the tax code.

As the preceding article showed.

So, what it my stance on granting American “Rights” to illegal aliens?

Allow me to break it down for tou…slowly, in case any Liberals are reading this.

Let’s pretend I broke into your house. When you discover me there, you insist I leave. But I say, “I’ve made all the beds, washed the dishes, did the laundry, and cleaned the floors; I’ve done all the work you don’t like to do. I’m hardworking and honest (except for breaking into your house). Not only must you let me stay, you must also add me to your insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide these benefits to my husband, too (he will do your yardwork, he’s honest and hardworking too–except for that breaking in part). If you try to force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house and proclaim my right to be there! It’s only fair, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m trying to better myself. I’m hardworking and honest…except for, well, you know. I will live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness and prejudice.

Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.

Good plan..don’t you think?

Is this a behavior we should be rewarding?

What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, they are not entitled to the same rights as natural-born or naturalized American citizens.

And, yet, even as I write this, they are in our hospitals, taking advantage of our charity and the finest health care system in the world, and driving our streets, with either forged drivers licenses or those obtained from states who have acquiesced and given them to these “undocumented workers”.

This is in no way a human rights issue. Freedom is God-given, and with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way.

My concerns about this whole “Path to Citizenship” business, can be divided into three bullet points. (Hey, I’m in Management. What do you expect?)

1. Patriotism – Will these new “citizens” be willing to fly our flag above theirs? Will they be willing, if called upon, to serve in our Armed Forces, at home or abroad? Will they love this country, more than the one they left?

2. Loyalty – When these “new Americans” achieve the right to vote, are they all going to vote Democrat, so that they can receive more FREE STUFF? Is the Republican Party shooting themselves in both feet by pushing an outcome which will simply add new Democratic Voters? As I asked in the first point, will they honestly embrace our sovereign nation as their new home? Or, will they remain loyal to Mexico?

3. Legal Immigration – Are we rewarding illegal behavior, while at the same time, insulting all of the brave souls who have come here legally, seeking a better life for themselves and their families?

I understand that people want a better life for themselves and their children. We are all immigrants in this land, except for American Indians, and they got here by crossing the Bering Straight. But there is a huge difference between immigrating here legally and sneaking in illegally, between assimilating into an existing culture, and insisting on replacing a country’s existing culture with that of the country you left.

I’m all for assisting anyone in becoming a legal citizen of the United States, if that is their wish. But, it must be done the right way, and they must accept responsibility for their illegal entry, show a willingness to learn our language, and embrace our American way of life, including respecting the American Flag.

So, let’s take this one step at a time. Secure our borders. Enforce the anti-illegal immigration laws. And if the Federal Government won’t, the states, like Arizona, will have to pass their own laws. America became a great nation because it is a melting pot of American-born and legally-immigrated citizens with a shared allegiance, not a multi-cultural United Nations with everyone loyal to their home country.

AMERICA IS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE.

NOT THE TOWER OF BABEL.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Will Republicans Hold the Line on Amnesty Until January?

AFBrancoConsequences111714Are Republicans going to live up to their promise to stop President Barack Hussein Obama’s upcoming Executive Orders, which will grant amnesty to those who have broken the laws of our country?

One Conservative Republican Senator is starting to have his doubts.

NationalReview.com reports that

Senator Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.) suggested that House Republicans are on the verge of breaking their campaign promise to fight President Obama’s administrative amnesty, judging by the legislative text currently being circulated.

Sessions said that the proposed language “fails to meet [the] test” established by Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus, who promised earlier this year that the GOP would do everything possible to thwart Obama’s executive orders.

“The executive amnesty language is substantially weaker than the language the House adopted this summer, and does not reject the central tenets of the President’s plan: work permits, Social Security and Medicare to 5 million illegal immigrants — reducing wages, jobs and benefits for Americans,” Sessions said in the statement expressing his dissatisfaction with the results of a House Republican conference meeting today.

In the meeting, “the lawmakers began coalescing around a two-part plan that would allow a symbolic vote to show their frustration with President Obama’s executive action on immigration, before funding the government ahead of a Dec. 11 deadline,” according to the New York Times.

Sessions wants Congress to attach a rider to the government-funding bill that prohibits Obama from implementing the orders; his office released a list yesterday, compiled with the assistance the Congressional Research Service, of instances in which Congress did just that on a variety of issues last year.

“Congress must respond to the president’s unlawful action by funding the government but not funding illegal amnesty,” Sessions said. “This is a perfectly sound and routine application of Congressional authority. In fact, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service reports that last year’s omnibus spending bill included 16 such funding restrictions on fee-based programs.”

To those inclined to worry that using the spending power would backfire on Republicans, Sessions suggested that economic populism would lead to a GOP victory.

“Polling shows voters believe that Americans should get preference for available jobs by almost a 10–1 margin,” Sessions said. ”Republicans should not be timid or apologetic, but mount a bold defense of struggling Americans.”

If any Republicans join the Democrats in voting for this “get out of jail FREE card”, I hope they have they have a trade to fall back on, Because, the next time that they are up for re-election they will be sent packing.

A couple of years back, the following allegorical story went viral.  You may have seen this already, but it explains illegal immigration as succinctly as anything I have come across:

Let’s pretend I broke into your house.  When you discover me there, you insist I leave.  But I say, “I’ve made all the beds, washed the dishes, did the laundry, and cleaned the floors; I’ve done all the work you don’t like to do. I’m hardworking and honest (except for breaking into your house). Not only must you let me stay, you must also add me to your insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide these benefits to my husband, too (he will do your yardwork, he’s honest and hardworking too–except for that breaking in part). If you try to force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house and proclaim my right to be there! It’s only fair, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m trying to better myself. I’m hardworking and honest…except for, well, you know. I will live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness and prejudice.

Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.

Good plan..don’t you think?

I understand that people want a better life for themselves and their children.  We are all immigrants in this land, except for American Indians, and they got here by crossing the Bering Straight.  But there is a huge difference between immigrating here legally and sneaking in illegally, between assimilating into an existing culture, and insisting on replacing a country’s existing culture with that of the country you left.

Former Texas Democratic Representative Barbara Jordan was a big believer in assimilation. During her time on Capitol Hill, she chaired the US Commission on Immigration Reform.

In their 1997 Report, which they dedicated to Rep. Jordan, published after her passing, they wrote the following principles:

We believe these truths constitute the distinctive characteristics of American nationality:

*American unity depends upon a widely-held belief in the principles and values embodied in the American Constitution and their fulfillment in practice: equal protection and justice under the law; freedom of speech and religion; and representative government;

*Lawfully-admitted newcomers of any ancestral nationality—without regard to race, ethnicity, or religion—truly become Americans when they give allegiance to these principles and values;

*Ethnic and religious diversity based on personal freedom is compatible with national unity; and

*The nation is strengthened when those who live in it communicate effectively with each other in English, even as many persons retain or acquire the ability to communicate in other languages.

As long as we live by these principles and help newcomers to learn and practice them, we will continue to be a nation that benefits from substantial but well-regulated immigration.

The great Michelle Malkin added,

Those principles have been abandoned, scorned, and sabotaged. You have not heard an iota about them from Washington. It is the erosion of Americanization and the ascendancy of the collectivists that helped create the conditions for Election Day.

Amnesty instead of assimilation is a recipe for even greater GOP losses at at the ballot box.

Amnesty instead of assimilation is a recipe for the furtherance of American decline.

I’m all for assisting anyone in becoming a legal citizen of the United States, if that is their wish.  But, it must be done the right way, and they must accept responsibility for their illegal entry, show a willingness to learn our language, and embrace our American way of life, including respecting the American Flag.

The first anti-American President is not even requiring that these illegal aliens, who are about to receive a pardon for their crime, PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO OUR COUNTRY.

You cannot buy Patriotism.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

First Anti-American President Says Americans No Better Than Illegal Aliens

ObamaTransparentBranco852014While the wait for the Ferguson Grand Jury’s decision held America’s attention last Monday, President Barack Hussein Obama was running off at the mouth again.  According to The Daily Caller,

The only Americans who can legitimately object to immigration are native Indian-Americans, President Barack Obama told his Chicago audience Nov. 24, as he made an impassioned ideological plea for endless immigration, cultural diversity and a big government to manage the resulting multicultural society.

“There have been periods where the folks who were already here suddenly say, ‘Well, I don’t want those folks,’ even though the only people who have the right to say that are some Native Americans,” Obama said, rhetorically dismissing the right of 300 million actual Americans to decide who can live in their homeland.

Americans should not favor other Americans over foreigners, Obama demanded. “Sometimes we get attached to our particular tribe, our particular race, our particular religion, and then we start treating other folks differently… that, sometimes, has been a bottleneck to how we think about immigration,” he said in the face of many polls showing rising opposition to his immigration agenda.

Obama denied any moral or practical distinction between native-born Americans and future migrants. “Whether we cross the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we all shared one thing, and that’s the hope that America would be the place where we could believe as we choose… and that the law would be enforced equally for everybody, regardless of what you look like or what your last name was,” said the president.

“That’s the ideal that binds us all together. That’s what’s at stake when we have conversations about immigration,” he declared.

Obama did indicate his approval for some measures to exclude illegal immigrants, even as he works to amnesty 12 million illegals stage-by-stage.  His current amnesty “doesn’t apply to anyone who has come to this country recently, or might come illegally in the future, because borders do mean something,” he said.

You would think that Americans would be used to Obama saying stupid things, by now.

Here are some of his most glaring statements,  courtesy of townhall.com:

“I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions.”

“I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.”

 “To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets. We smoked cigarettes and wore leather jackets. At night, in the dorms, we discussed neocolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism, and patriarchy. When we ground out our cigarettes in the hallway carpet or set our stereos so loud that the walls began to shake, we were resisting bourgeois society’s stifling conventions. We weren’t indifferent or careless or insecure. We were alienated.

But this strategy alone couldn’t provide the distance I wanted, from Joyce or my past. After all, there were thousands of so-called campus radicals, most of them white and tenured and happily tolerant. No, it remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.”

 “I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities, and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manufacturer’s lobby.”

 “Junkie. Pothead. That’s where I’d been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man. Except the highs hadn’t been about that, me trying to prove what a down brother I was. Not by then, anyway. I got high for just the opposite effect, something that could push questions of who I was out of my mind, something that could flatten out the landscape of my heart, blur the edges of my memory. I had discovered that it didn’t make any difference whether you smoked reefer in the white classmate’s sparkling new van, or in the dorm room of some brother you’d met down at the gym, or on the beach with a couple of Hawaiian kids who had dropped out of school and now spent most of their time looking for an excuse to brawl. …You might just be bored, or alone. Everybody was welcome into the club of disaffection.”

“…I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth. This was the moment — this was the time — when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves and our highest ideals.”

“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.”

“The Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home. . . . What I think we know — separate and apart from this incident — is that there is a long history in their country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately, and that’s just a fact.”

 “If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.”

“It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: (White) People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved — such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.”

“The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn’t. But she is a typical white person…”

“I don’t believe it is possible to transcend race in this country. Race is a factor in this society. The legacy of Jim Crow and slavery has not gone away. It is not an accident that African-Americans experience high crime rates, are poor, and have less wealth. It is a direct result of our racial history.”

“That’s just how white folks will do you. It wasn’t merely the cruelty involved; I was learning that black people could be mean and then some. It was a particular brand of arrogance, an obtuseness in otherwise sane people that brought forth our bitter laughter. It was as if whites didn’t know that they were being cruel in the first place. Or at least thought you deserving of their scorn.”

“It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks’ greed runs a world in need, apartheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere…That’s the world! On which hope sits!”

“You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a (flag) pin. Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we’re talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for, I think, true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won’t wear that pin on my chest…”

“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

“I can no more disown (Jeremiah Wright) than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.”

“…I’ve got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

 “You got into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Like the rest of his Far Left Brothers and Sisters, Barack Hussein Obama exhibits the symptoms of a disease that I’ve noticed that most of the Far Left exhibit: Narcissistic-Reality-Denial-Over-Educated-Beyond-Their-Intelligence Syndrome. The patient tends to rely on his self-assumed superior intellect, denying the reality of the world around him to the point of forsaking both his allegiance to and concern for the people of the country that has provided him with both his livelihood and his well-being.

This syndrome seems to be extremely pernicious in academic and political figures. The patient actually believes that he is an expert on everything, to the point where he can write and distribute instructional theses to seasoned professionals while lecturing them in a didactic manner.

The only treatment for Narcissistic-Reality-Denial-Over-Educated-Beyond-Their-Intelligence Syndrome at this time is “refudiation” and isolation. The people who are being affected by these individuals must, in a clear and over-whelming manner, let the patient know that they do not accept their attitude or actions and put them in a “time-out”.

Y’know…at the rate that this educated-beyond-his-intelligence, imperious, golf-playing, gum-smacking buffoon keeps obviously running our nation into the ground, I fully expect him, one day soon, to respond to an economic question at one of his almost non-existent press conferences by answering:

marie-antoinette-obamaLet them eat arugula!

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Attempts to Justify Rewarding Lawbreakers With Citizenship

AFBrancoThe-Stinker11202014Everywhere around the world
They’re coming to America
Ev’ry time that flag’s unfurled
They’re coming to America

Got a dream to take them there
They’re coming to America
Got a dream they’ve come to share
They’re coming to America

They’re coming to America
They’re coming to America
They’re coming to America
They’re coming to America
Today, Today,
Today, Today, Today

My country ’tis of thee (today)
Sweet land of liberty (today)
Of thee I sing (today)
Of thee I sing
Today, Today, Today
Today, today, today…… Neil Diamond,  “The Jazz Singer” (1980)

In his address to the Nation last night, in a vain attempt to justify his proposed usurpation of the Constitution of the United States, President Barack Hussein Obama asked,

Are we a nation that tolerates the hypocrisy of a system where workers who pick our fruit and make our beds never have a chance to get right with the law? Or are we a nation that gives them a chance to make amends, take responsibility, and give their kids a better future?

Are we a nation that accepts the cruelty of ripping children from their parents arms? Or are we a nation that values families, and works to keep them together?

Are we a nation that educates the world’s best and brightest in our universities, only to send them home to create businesses in countries that compete against us? Or are we a nation that encourages them to stay and create jobs, businesses, and industries right here in America?

That’s what this debate is all about. We need more than politics as usual when it comes to immigration; we need reasoned, thoughtful, compassionate debate that focuses on our hopes, not our fears.

I know the politics of this issue are tough. But let me tell you why I have come to feel so strongly about it. Over the past few years, I have seen the determination of immigrant fathers who worked two or three jobs, without taking a dime from the government, and at risk at any moment of losing it all, just to build a better life for their kids. I’ve seen the heartbreak and anxiety of children whose mothers might be taken away from them just because they didn’t have the right papers. I’ve seen the courage of students who, except for the circumstances of their birth, are as American as Malia or Sasha; students who bravely come out as undocumented in hopes they could make a difference in a country they love. These people – our neighbors, our classmates, our friends – they did not come here in search of a free ride or an easy life. They came to work, and study, and serve in our military, and above all, contribute to America’s success.

… Scripture tells us that we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger – we were strangers once, too.

My fellow Americans, we are and always will be a nation of immigrants. We were strangers once, too. And whether our forebears were strangers who crossed the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we are here only because this country welcomed them in, and taught them that to be an American is about something more than what we look like, or what our last names are, or how we worship. What makes us Americans is our shared commitment to an ideal – that all of us are created equal, and all of us have the chance to make of our lives what we will.

That’s the country our parents and grandparents and generations before them built for us. That’s the tradition we must uphold. That’s the legacy we must leave for those who are yet to come.

As a Christian American, I find it extremely hypocritical for a president whose very first act, upon taking office, was to allocate American Taxpayer Money for snatching babies out of their mothers’ wombs around the world, to plead against taking children away from their mothers, and to reference scripture on top of that.

So, what is the actual biblical solution to illegal immigration? Simple…don’t do it, obey the laws.

Liberals like Obama tend to attempt to set the boundaries and to change the teachings of Jesus Christ to fit with their “political collective” mindset. The turning of political situations, such as “Obamacare, “The Mexican Munchkin Migration”, and now, Amnesty, into “humanitarian catastrophies”, are just the most recent examples.

Their claim concerning salvation is framed in similar terms. Liberals, including President Barack Hussein Obama, put forth the opinion that Salvation is a group experience, , likening it to a political movement, which could not be further from the truth, couching their political ideology-driven benevolence behind the term “Social Justice”.

I do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the social justice movement. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the Founders of this cherished land.

It is interesting to me, that the “most caring president evah”, whom, under normal circumstances, wants Conservative American Christians to sit down, shut up, and limit their faith to Sunday mornings from 10 a.m. – Noon, now is attempting to lecture us about how we should support his transparent politically motivated scheme to grant Amnesty to 5 million Illegal Aliens.

Obama is as far from being a “Christian” as he is from being an American President.

What Obama did last night was to give the middle finger, on live TV, to Our Constitution and to the overwhelming majority of Americans , both by birth and through legal immigration, who have sworn their allegiance to this country, and who oppose what Obama did last night.

Yes, Mr. President, we are a nation of immigrants, legal immigrants, who have sworn our allegiance to THIS flag, which is covered by the blood, sweat, and tears of those who fought and died to protect, secure, and defend our Sovereign Nation and the Freedom we enjoy as Americans.

Last night, you dishonored the memory of those patriots and everything which they sacrificed their lives for.

You are a disgrace to the office you hold.

Until He Comes,

KJ