“Sanctuary Cities” Receiving Government Grants For Breaking the Law

obamaillegalimmigrationThe last bipartisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform wrangled with the hot topic of Illegal Immigration for six years. President Clinton 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.

I wonder what Rep. Jordan would think of her beloved Democratic Party, now that they have embraced and are welcoming the same illegality, which she was so clear about ?

And, how would she feel about the fact that innocent Americans are being murdered by these uninvited guests?

Breitbart.com reports that

The murder of a young woman on a San Francisco pier at the hands of an illegal immigrant has highlighted the dangers of sanctuary cities policies, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) explained in an interview with Brietbart News.

“A random act like that… kind of just brings to light, brings home, you have some dangerous criminal aliens and nobody is doing anything about it. Nothing. You have cities that are complicit. It is kind of crazy,” Hunter said.

The California lawmaker is introducing legislation Thursday to target sanctuary cities to encourage their compliance with federal immigration laws.

His bill, the “Enforce the Law for Sanctuary Cities Act,” would eliminate Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, State Criminal Alien Assistance Program grants, and Community Oriented Policing Services Program grants to sanctuary jurisdictions.

“Why give federal money to law enforcement agencies in these municipalities that are not obeying federal law, in fact flouting federal law by releasing folks that are criminals?” Duncan asked.

“It hits them where they hurt,” he said of the bill. “The only way to get their attention is to take their funding.”

Hunter has introduced different iterations of this bill in past Congresses. According to the California Republican, while House leadership expressed an interest in his bill this time around, he says leadership did not show a need for haste to get the bill passed.

“[Leadership] hasn’t shown any interest in my bill until now. Unfortunately it has taken this tragedy to get their attention,” he said.

The legislation comes following the shooting death of Kate Steinle by an illegal immigrant with a lengthy criminal record who had been deported at least five times. The illegal immigrant — Francisco Sanchez — had been released from the San Francisco Sheriff Department less than three months prior due to the city’s sanctuary policies.

The murder, at a popular San Francisco tourist destination, has sparked debate about sanctuary city policies across the country.

“If a city is not going to comply with federal law and put the public in danger, at risk, then they should not get federal money to do that,” Hunter said.

In FY 2015, Congress allocated $376 million for Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, $185 million for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program grants, and $208 million for the Community Oriented Policing Services Program grants.

So, we are paying cities to ignore our laws and house murderers, who, if our Immigration Laws were being properly enforced, would not be here killing innocent Americans.

Compassion is one thing. Sanctuary Cities are an exercise in blatant, law-breaking stupidity.

All Government Grants to these cities, who are breaking the law, must be stopped now.

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 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.

This is not a new political stance of mine. I have been feeling this way, since I started this blog in April of 2010.

I gave the following answer to a comment made by “Benito”, who submitted a rather lengthy comment to a blog I wrote about Illegal Immigration on May 19, 2010. 

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.

OUR FOUNDERS ESTABLISHED AMERICA AS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE.

NOT THE TOWER OF BABEL.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Obama Wants to Forcibly “Desegregate” Wealthy Neighborhoods Through Socialism…AKA…”Government Grants”.

littlepinkhousesFrom the get-go, President Barack Hussein Obama’s motto has been “Share the Wealth”. Not his, of course, but, ours.

This “Quest for Equality”, i.e., lack of individualism, i.e., forming a collective society, if you will, springs from his love for the teachings of Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky, and his upbringing within an American Communist Family, which led to his association with people who wanted, with all their hearts to “radically change” America…by any means necessary.

Obama wants to limit our freedom…by making our choices for us.

And, by taking away individual achievement.

For example…

Thehill.com reports that

The Obama administration is moving forward with regulations designed to help diversify America’s wealthier neighborhoods, drawing fire from critics who decry the proposal as executive overreach in search of an “unrealistic utopia.”

A final Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rule due out this month is aimed at ending decades of deep-rooted segregation around the country.

The regulations would use grant money as an incentive for communities to build affordable housing in more affluent areas while also taking steps to upgrade poorer areas with better schools, parks, libraries, grocery stores and transportation routes as part of a gentrification of those communities.

“HUD is working with communities across the country to fulfill the promise of equal opportunity for all,” a HUD spokeswoman said. “The proposed policy seeks to break down barriers to access to opportunity in communities supported by HUD funds.”

It’s a tough sell for some conservatives. Among them is Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), who argued that the administration “shouldn’t be holding hostage grant monies aimed at community improvement based on its unrealistic utopian ideas of what every community should resemble.”

“American citizens and communities should be free to choose where they would like to live and not be subject to federal neighborhood engineering at the behest of an overreaching federal government,” said Gosar, who is leading an effort in the House to block the regulations.

Civil rights advocates, meanwhile, are praising the plan, arguing that it is needed to break through decades-old barriers that keep poor and minority families trapped in hardscrabble neighborhoods.

“We have a history of putting affordable housing in poor communities,” said Debby Goldberg, vice president at the National Fair Housing Alliance.

HUD says it is obligated to take the action under the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which prohibited direct and intentional housing discrimination, such as a real estate agent not showing a home in a wealthy neighborhood to a black family or a bank not providing a loan based on someone’s race.

The agency is also looking to root out more subtle forms of discrimination that take shape in local government policies that unintentionally harm minority communities, known as “disparate impact.” 

“This rule is not about forcing anyone to live anywhere they don’t want to,” said Margery Turner, senior vice president at the left-leaning Urban Institute. “It’s really about addressing long-standing practices that prevent people from living where they want to.”

“In our country, decades of public policies and institutional practices have built deeply segregated and unequal neighborhoods,” Turner said.

Children growing up in poor communities have less of a chance of succeeding in life, because they face greater exposure to violence and crime, and less access to quality education and health facilities, Turner suggested.

“Segregation is clearly a problem that is blocking upward mobility for children growing up today,” she said.

To qualify for certain funds under the regulations, cities would be required to examine patterns of segregation in neighborhoods and develop plans to address it. Those that don’t could see the funds they use to improve blighted neighborhoods disappear, critics of the rule say.

The regulations would apply to roughly 1,250 local governments.

Hans von Spakovsky, a fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, called the Obama administration “too race conscious.”

“It’s a sign that this administration seems to take race into account on everything,” Spakovsky said.

Republicans are trying to block the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule. Before passing HUD’s funding bill this week, the GOP-led House approved Gosar’s amendment prohibiting the agency from following through with the rule.

Though segregationist policies were outlawed long ago, civil rights advocates say housing discrimination persists.

HUD is looking to break down many barriers, but Gosar suggested the regulation would have negative repercussions.

“Instead of living with neighbors you like and choose, this breaks up the core fabric of how we start to look at communities,” Gosar said. “That just brings unease to everyone in that area.”

“People have to feel comfortable where they live,” he added. “If I don’t feel comfortable in my own backyard, where do I feel comfortable?”

Critics of the rule say it would allow HUD to assert authority over local zoning laws. The agency could dictate what types of homes are built where and who can live in those homes, said Gosar, who believes local communities should make those decisions for themselves rather than relying on the federal government.

If enacted, the rule could depress property values as cheaper homes crop up in wealthy neighborhoods and raise taxes, Gosar warned.

It could also tilt the balance of political power as more minorities are funneled into Republican-leaning neighborhoods, he suggested.

The Supreme Court is expected to weigh in on housing discrimination in a related case in the coming weeks. At issue is whether government policies that unintentionally create a disparate impact for minority communities violate federal laws against segregation.

The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs is facing accusations that it makes low-income housing funds more readily available in minority neighborhoods than in white neighborhoods. This promotes segregation, critics argue, by encouraging minorities to continue living in poor communities where government assistance is available.

Court observers say the case could have a profound impact on HUD’s rule.

“Government-Funded Upward Mobility”?

Are we still in America?

How does that work in cities that are already 90 % minority population, like Detroit or Memphis?

As Charles Barkley pointed out a while back, Racism is not just a one-way street. How do you think that these cities go this way? Not all of their White citizens moved out because they wanted to.

But, I digress.

On a Sunday, in October of 2008, outside of Toledo, Ohio, Democratic Presidential Nominee Obama met a plumber named Joe Wurzelbacher. Joe, who owned his own plumbing company, dared to ask Obama about his proposed tax hikes. In fact, he told Obama that he did not want to pay higher taxes, he was already paying enough. Obama told him,

Now, I respect the disagreement. I just want you to be clear – it’s not that I want to punish your success – I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you – that they’ve got a chance at success too.”

…I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.

Evidently, the “fairness” Obama seeks, includes making everyone’s housing “fair”, too.

No individuality allowed in the Proletariat.

Welcome to the USSA, “komrades!”

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Pushes 40% Tax Rate on Small Businesses. Karl Marx Smiles.

obamabiggovernmentPresident Obama delivered another speech in his Economic Campaign Tour on Tuesday, where he continued “playing his greatest hits”….or misses, depending on your point-of-view.

The Weekly Standard posted yesterday that,

The New York Times reports that President Obama is reviving an old proposal to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 28 percent (and 25 percent for manufacturers). Obama’s push to lower the corporate tax rate to 28 percent comes less than a year after he raised the top individual income tax rate, paid by many small businesses, to 39.6 percent.

In a speech delivered Tuesday afternoon, Obama did not explain why he thinks it’s a sound economic idea to raise the top marginal tax rate on small businesses but lower it for corporations.

“Right now, our tax code is so riddled with wasteful loopholes that many companies doing the right thing and investing in America pay 35%, while the corporations with the best accountants stash their money abroad and pay little or nothing at all,” Obama said, according to the text of his prepared remarks. “I’m willing to simplify our tax code in a way that closes those loopholes, ends incentives to ship jobs overseas, and lowers rates for businesses that create jobs right here in America.”

Neither Obama’s Tuesday speech nor his February 2012 corporate tax reform plan explained in detail which loopholes would be closed. During the 2012 presidential campaign, the Obama campaign hammered Mitt Romney for not saying which loopholes he would close to pay for a proposed reduction in individual income tax rates.

Obama was singing a different tune last November, as thehill.com reported.

President Obama and his daughters visited an independent bookstore on Saturday to participate in “Small Business Saturday.”

Obama is urging Americans to shop at neighborhood stores as an alternative to big Black Friday and Cyber Monday sales by national chains. He also dispatched top White House aides to do holiday shopping at local small businesses on Saturday.

Obama has made a tradition of marking Small Business Saturday by visiting a non-franchise bookstore with Sasha and Malia. Last year, the president and his two daughters visited Kramerbooks & Afterwards Café in Dupont Circle.

This year, the trio visited One More Page Books in Arlington, Va., a short trip across the river from Washington, D.C. They stayed in the bookstore for just over half an hour, according to a White House pool report, and immediately returned to the White House.

Despite a lack of browsing, the president bought 15 children’s books during the stop. The White House reported the purchases will be given as gifts to family this year for Christmas. Obama explained that he prepared ahead, apparently consulting a Christmas shopping list on his BlackBerry.

“Preparation,” the president told shop owner Eileen McGervey, according to the report. “That’s how I shop.”

The federal government is offering stores free Small Business Saturday marketing materials and promoting the event on social and paid media in a partnership with American Express.

“From the mom-and-pop storefront shops that anchor Main Street to the high-tech startups that keep America on the cutting edge, small businesses are the backbone of our economy and the cornerstones of our nation’s promise,” Obama said in a statement Friday. “Through events such as Small Business Saturday, we keep our local economies strong and help maintain an American economy that can compete and win in the 21st century.”

As a matter of fact, Obama was on the side of Small Business Owners, as late as last February…

During the 2013 State of the Union Address on February 12th, Obama said,

Now is our best chance for bipartisan, comprehensive tax reform that encourages job creation and helps bring down the deficit. (Applause.) We can get this done. The American people deserve a tax code that helps small businesses spend less time filling out complicated forms, and more time expanding and hiring — a tax code that ensures billionaires with high-powered accountants can’t work the system and pay a lower rate than their hardworking secretaries; a tax code that lowers incentives to move jobs overseas, and lowers tax rates for businesses and manufacturers that are creating jobs right here in the United States of America. That’s what tax reform can deliver. That’s what we can do together.

We know that all of Obama’s promises have expiration dates. However, in a horrible economy, why is Obama trying to tax America’s Small Business Owners out of business?

You remember them…the people who actually create jobs for you and me.

That’s not the only problem America’s Entrepreneurs are facing.

Adding to Small Business Owners’ Burden will be ObamaCare, and the penalties for non-compliance.

Cato.otg explains,

If our small-business owner has 50 or more employees — or fewer full-time employees and lots of part-timers — he faces the prospect of tens of thousands of dollars in penalties under ObamaCare’s employer mandate if he does not provide “adequate” coverage to his workers.

The worst part is that these penalties will be triggered by factors that are unpredictable, unobservable, and totally beyond the control of our small-business owner. He could get hit with those penalties simply because a worker’s spouse loses or changes jobs. Or if a worker’s spouse moves out or dies. Or if an employee’s parents move in.

This creates so much uncertainty that a small-business owner with 55 employees may have to fire six of them just to eliminate that potential liability.

But if he splits his 60-employee small business into two 25-employee businesses, then the federal government — maybe the IRS — will start snooping around to determine whether he did so for legitimate business reasons or just to avoid the mandate.

Why is he doing this to the Backbone of Our Economy? I have a theory. (I know. You’re shocked.)

Remember the Obama-Biden Tax Plan?

The 40% tax rate on Small Businesses, which the Weekly Standard is referring to, was a part of that original plan, which Obama got passed during the Congressional negotiations over raising taxes on America’s “Wealthy”, the other folks who hire Americans.

Our Petulant President, like a little kid throwing a temper tantrum was determined to get what he wants. And, it appears that, what he wanted, was to tax America’s Small Business Owners out of existence…and replace them with those who he can control through Government Grants.

Think about it…if the Administration  can get rid of those Business Owners who are not obliged to them, say, those who vote Republican, and replace them with those who are indebted to Uncle Sugar for giving them the money to start their business, isn’t that, basically, creating a new voting bloc for Obama and the Democrats?

Just thinking out of the box, you understand…

And now, with his “Middle Out” Economic strategy failing miserably, because he’s taxing the Middle Class out of existence, he’s talking about lowering the Corporate Tax Rate, in order to get Corporations who have left the country due to the tax burden he and his fellow Democrats placed on them, to move back home, and bail him and his Political Party out.

Will expatriated American Businesses tell him to take his “Bargain” and shove it?

Does Moochelle like lobster?

Until He Comes,

KJ