Saturday, May 8, 2010
HILARY, DID YOU HEAR WHAT BILL SAID?
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
THE JAWS ARE WAITING FOR YOU
Thursday, May 7, 2009
A SMORGASBORD FOR YOU
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
IS ARIZONA THE REAL U.S.A?
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
WELCOME TO MEXICO, YANKEE
There is an article in the header that shows why an immigrant is against Driver's Licenses for illegals. Just click it.
I wanted to get your attention for this post. I know it succeeded in a couple of cases.
.
I'm not sure which political party I'm the most disgusted with over this Driver's Licenses (DL) for illegal aliens business. .
The Democrats, in general, seem to feel that it would be ok to give them out to people who are in this country illegally. Some of the Republican candidates agree with this. .
.
I have a problem with this, however. Since the States issue DL's why should they surrender this right to the Federal government?
.
While watching the almost total lack of any action in any sphere by the sitting Senate and House representatives over the past year, it occurred to me that we don't really need any Federal law ordering the states to issue, or not issue, DLs to illegals. It has been stated that far too many bills (laws, acts, whatever) are approved or disapproved by our representatives without that person even reading them. It may sound cavalier on my part, but it has to be an ugly fact. If it isn't true, then why are so many of them bad and totally inadequate for the subject they concern? After all, the majority of our reps are college grads and the majority of them are lawyers. I've heard, from other sites, that the poor dears are so overworked they sometimes don't have time to read what they are voting on.
.
Busy with what? Well, they have to see all the lobbyists and other people with an axe to grind to help individual businesses. And then there are the (paid for) trips to other lands, vacation spots, holiday events and tours and meetings in various locations around the U.S. and the world.
.
But about issuing DLs to illegals. Is it possible that those in power don't grasp the fact that once one has a DL, it is a simple matter to register to vote? Voter registration cards are easy to get, easy to fill out and easy to return to the registrar. If you remember the application you filled out years ago, they don't even ask if you are a citizen. So I guess that means we must be quite willing to allow non-citizens to elect our law makers. Maybe we should send a few millions to China and Iran and Russia and North Korea and any other country that wants them? And let's not forget those countries that our State Department says we shouldn't visit. They'd probably love to help elect a President and Representatives for us.
.
I'm quoting from a comment in http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071115/OPINION03/711150362 "Iowa on its own, however, could issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. It's a matter of public safety. That's why the New Iowans Policy Task Force, created by former Gov. Tom Vilsack, asked the 2007 Legislature to consider doing just that. That idea went nowhere, and it's not likely to go anywhere in 2008, especially after what happened in New York. Ignoring the problem, however, will not make it go away."
.
Iowa, and all our states need to recognize that we, and the illegals, are a mobile country. If I can get a license from Iowa (or any other state) it is a simple matter to then apply for a new license from any other state as a new resident.
.
I seem to remember a famous American who said, unequivocally: "Beware of entangling alliances." I feel like a definite minority accepting that quote.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
BILL RICHARDSON HAS STRANGE HAIR
Among things I can't explain, including this picture, is the governator of New Mexico.
He was on yet another television"debate" amongst Democratic wanna be candidates for the job of President. And he looked fat and puffy and unkempt. I suspect that look was created by his campaign manager.
No self respecting man would want to look as if he'd forgotten how to comb his hair and didn't know how to wear clothes properly. I have a lot of trouble equating his appearance with the idea that he was an Ambassador (or some such) to various foreign countries.
In any case the subject of illegal aliens was bruited about and Bill (who begged for a fence across the N. M. border a little while back) now doesn't want one. Personally I think the environmentalists got to him and pointed out that various wild life (not including Mexican fiestas) had to cross the border or become extinct. He didn't think about fencing the worst holes for human entry in border security. Nah. Just don't do it at all. I agree with the stupidity of the fence all along the border. We are not East Germany. I do, however, think that the well worn and constantly used trails (by illegals) should have some kind of fence. It might help the border guards narrow the entry way through the Rio Grande River. (Now you know why they're called "wets" by the ranchers here.)
Bill seems to think that all we need to do is hire an army of border patrol guards and that'll keep them out. Oh, yeah, he also wants more and more "sophisticated" electronic detection tools. I kid you not. The numbers, costs, support units, etc., etc., have not occurred to him. Maybe he'll start a national lottery to cover expenses? Maybe he'll go on fund raisers?
My guess about the number of human American bodies needed goes into the millions. The cost of this "plan" of his is terrifying. Hell, Bush's war would look bargain basement cheap to us.
He alo supports giving driver's licenses to illegals. He claims that way they'll have insurance and every thing will be hunky dory. I have no idea if he wants to teach them to read and write before they take the driver's written test. (The vast majority, I read on another site, can neither read nor write any language, much less English.) In Mexico, the government wants everybody who drives a vehicle insured. In actual fact, it ain't happening. And I can guarantee their insurance is a whole lot cheaper than ours. Oh, did you know that if you drive your car into Mexico you need a written statement from your insurance company that the policy is valid in Mexico? Yep. You get to pay extra for that coverage.
Speaking of paying extra for car insurance, we had to pay an extra $100 a year a while back so we would be protected from "uninsured" motorists. There are lots of illegals driving without insurance now. Lots of them.
Bill wants to be known as the "Education President". Now, I think he should have kept his mouth shut on that one. The drop out rate in N.M. is right around 40%. Yessiree. Four out of every ten children don't finish even the push courses offered in High School. Or bother to attend school and get a worthless "No Child Left Behind" diploma. That's something Bill should remove from his platform.
Another troublesome thing about him is his stance on the "Pakistan problem". He wants to cut off all American aid to Pakistan until they do something about the terrorist cells there. Now, the very word "terrorist" raises our hackles, our anger levels and creates a feeling of hatred among Americans. He says they are a small group and it should be easy for the Pakistani government to get rid of them. I guess he figures that America should blackmail any government with which he doesn't agree. I also guess that he has learned nothing from history. When the Nazi Party started in Germany, they were a small terrorist group. America put trade restrictions into action. Hitler's party got a lot of mileage out of that. It helped them to grow. And we know what happened then. Bill apparently did not get A's in American history.
A surprise under the header.
Friday, November 2, 2007
ENGLAND AND AMERICA AND CANADA
Oh, how nice to wake up and see this bit of information.
I don't hide my displeasure at America turning into a country where sheer physical numbers can force us into changing our laws to suit a definite minority of law breaking people. We have an established method for changing our own laws and those who ignore these rules are undesireable beings.
But America is not alone. Seems like misery loves company. Sorry, everyone. Any suggestions?
October 25, 2007
Inconvenient Truth re U.K.’s Immigrants.
A TV newsman defends his racially explicit analysis of the economic impact of immigration:
"Most people will be pleased that somebody is prepared to look at the facts. Immigration is a major development of our time. It is a healthy thing to know where it benefits and where it hinders our society."
Question: Was it Lou Dobbs, Bill O’Reilly, or Sean Hannity?
Answer: None of the above.
Jon Snow is anchorman on Dispatches—a program broadcast on the U.K.’s Channel 4.
Snow’s TV documentary, entitled "Immigrants: The Inconvenient Truth," reveals which immigrant communities are a "debit" and a "credit" on "Britain’s Balance sheet." [MPs fear C4 documentary on the cost of immigrants will fuel race hatred By Jonathan Oliver, Daily Mail, (UK) September 30th 2007]
In making his case against certain immigrant groups Snow did not reach out to a Heritage Foundation-type research organization. The data tables cited in the documentary were drawn up for Channel 4 by a left-leaning think tank: the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR).
The IPPR tables reveal that Somalis are the dependency "leaders", with almost 40 percent receiving means-tested public income support. (By contrast, only 4 percent of U.K. natives receive such support.) [Institute for Public Policy Research, Britain's Immigrants: An Economic Profile, September 2007 PDF]
Only 19 percent of working age Somalis are employed. Ten percent of this group are unemployed (i.e., looking for work) while a whopping 71 percent are out of the labor force entirely (i.e., not even looking.) [Table 1.] By contrast, 78% of UK natives are employed;4% unemployed; 18% not in the labor force.
At the other extreme more than 85 percent of working age immigrants from Australia, France, Canada, and Poland are employed and less than 13 percent are not in the labor force.
The IPPR report claims that many Somalis came to the U.K. as refugees with little English, making it difficult to find work.
Our question: how do they know work is hard to find when so many aren’t even looking?
Somali immigrants also top the IPPR housing table—with 80 percent living in subsidized public housing. The next highest group is Turkish immigrants, at 49 percent. Immigrants from Australia, France, and the U.S. are the least likely to be in public housing—at 5 percent. Seventeen percent of U.K. natives live in public housing.
We’ve done similar rankings for immigrant groups in this country—and a comparison is instructive. [Table 2.]
Here we rank immigrant groups on the percent that receive means-tested public benefits:
In the U.K.:
Somalia (39% dependency; 0.14 % of U.K. population)
Turkey (21.0 percent; 0.12 percent)
Pakistan (11.0 percent; 0.62 percent)
Bangladesh (11.0 percent; 0.35 percent)
Iran (10.0 percent; 0.10 percent)
----------------------------------------------
In the U.S.:
Dominican Republic (57% dependency; 0.24 % of U.S. population)
Mexico (43 percent; 3.71 percent)
Russia (40 percent; 0.21 percent)
Honduras (38 percent; 0.13 percent)
Guatemala (36 percent; 0.19 percent)
Our immigrants are significantly more dependent and—thanks to the Mexicans—constitute a larger share of our population than their counterparts in the U.K. In fact, most U.K. immigrant groups have lower dependency rates than U.K. natives. [Table 2.] Of the groups with higher dependency rates, many are disproportionately refugees (e.g., the Somalis and Turkish-born) or are naturalized citizens (e.g., the Pakistanis and Bangladeshis.)
Implication: The British are doing a better job of vetting public charges out of their immigrant influx than we are. (They get fewer illegals, because the English Channel is wider and deeper than the Rio Grande.)
A caveat is in order. Medicaid is the most expensive and widely received means tested benefit available to U.S. immigrants. The U.K. has nothing like it.
The U.K.’s system of universal health care is available, well, universally—to immigrant and native, rich and poor. Had IPPR counted national health care as a welfare benefit, the dependency gap between U.K. and U.S. immigrants would narrow, or even reverse. The economic burden of U.K. immigration would appear even larger than portrayed in the IPPR report. As Nobel laureate economist Milton Friedman famously said: “It’s just obvious you can’t have free immigration and a welfare state”.
--------------------------------------------------
A friend informs me that many, many native New Mexicans have totally dropped out of the health care scene. (She ought to know. She works at the state's biggest free hospital.) It is said they are fed up with interminable waiting, poorly trained doctors and the rudeness of the illegal aliens. That means that these Americans are being out on the back burner while illegal aliens are being tested, treated and given a pat on the back. The illegals have succeeded in driving the people who have paid taxes for years away from their only recourse in this age of over priced medical care.
It's comparatively easy, when one's income is well into the six figure range and medical insurance is paid by your employer, to say that the U.S. (read England, Canada) should take care of everyone in this country whether legal or illegal. It's not so easy when you have two kids and your gross income is in the $25,000 range.
Just think. We might get engaged in these kinds of conversations if we're not careful:
Suffering from a bad case of the flu, the outraged patient bellowed, "Three weeks??? The doctor can't see me for threeweeks??? I could well be dead by then!"
Calmly the voice at the other end of the line replied, "If so,would you have your wife call to cancel the appointment?"
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
A WARNING FROM SOCIAL SECURITY
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, ALREADY
