"It is not enough to know that there is a shadow government pulling the strings of the visible government- we must also act to expose it, and defeat it!"-Mark Matheny
The proposed Republican tax reform bill will include repeal of Obamacare's individual mandate requiring most Americans to have some form of health insurance or pay a tax penalty, GOP leaders said Tuesday.
The decision means that Republicans, yet again in 2017, will attempt to gut a key element of the Affordable Care Act.
So far, such efforts have failed because not enough Republican senators have backed the idea of repealing the mandate, which would lead to an estimated 13 million more people lacking health insurance.
"We're optimistic that inserting individual mandate repeal would be helpful," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. on Tuesday afternoon after a lunch meeting with the Republican conference.
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said, "I'm pleased the Senate Finance Committee has accepted my proposal to repeal the Obamacare individual mandate in the tax legislation."
"Repealing the mandate pays for more tax cuts for working families and protects them from being fined by the IRS for not being able to afford insurance that Obamacare made unaffordable in the first place," Cotton said. "I urge the House to include the mandate repeal in their tax legislation."
Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Tex., said, "We're going to repeal the tax on poor Americans."
Cornyn said the majority of people who pay the individual mandate tax penalty for not having insurance have lower incomes.
Sen. John Thune, R-SD, told the Washington Post that there are 50 Republican senators willing to support the mandate-repealing tax reform bill. That would be enough to pass it, with a tie-breaking vote from Vice President Mike Pence.
Thune also said the deal agreed upon is to pass that bill alongside another bill, known as Alexander-Murray, which would restore key federal subsidy reimbursements to Obamacare insurers cut off last month by President Donald Trump.
The Trump administration has prepared an executive order that would unravel Obamacare's individual mandate, but has put it on hold to see whether repealing the penalties for going uninsured might be included in the Republican tax bill instead, a GOP senator told the Washington Examiner.
President Trump decided to delay the executive order after Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., pushed for the inclusion of the individual mandate repeal in the tax bill, and has been supportive of its inclusion in statements he has made on Twitter.
After initially declining to comment on the senator's statements, a White House official pushed back on the claims, saying the administration's position is that Congress should resolve the issue.
"Pursuant to the President’s January EO on Obamacare, we are always looking for ways to provide relief from Obamacare," the White House official said. "The long-standing issues with the mandate would be best resolved legislatively."
The senator had told the Washington Examiner that an executive order was sitting with the Office of Management and Budget waiting for approval, but an official from the agency denied it.
"There is no EO on the individual mandate at OMB," the official said.
In response to recent claims by the Obama administration and others that “millions of jobs” have recently been created, I examined the data here at mises.org to see if the claims were true. It turns out that job growth since the 2008 recession has actually been quite weak, and hardly something to boast about.
Nevertheless, our conclusions from these analyses tend to rest on the idea that job growth is synonymous with gains in wealth and economic prosperity.
But is that a good assumption?
In an unhampered market, the answer would be no, for several reasons.
First of all, as worker productivity increases, workers would need to work fewer hours to maintain their standard of living.
Second, as goods become less expensive (as a result of rising productivity) it would also be necessary to work fewer hours to maintain the same standard of living.
This need for fewer man-hours could translate into shorter work weeks and shorter days, but it could also manifest itself at the household level in the form of changes from two-income households to one-income households. Or, people may retire earlier, thus leaving the work force.
In other words, in a well-functioning economy over time, less human labor will be necessary to maintain standards of living, all things being equal. (If consumers wish to constantly increase their standard of living of course, they will choose more labor over more leisure for the sake of more consumption.)
Historical Trends in Work Hours
Even in our hampered and un-free economy, we can still see this basic trend at work. The number of work hours necessary to maintain the standard of living our grandparents enjoyed, for example, is less today than it was in 1950.
If middle-class consumers were satisfied with a two-bedroom residence in an unstylish neighborhood, one car, a single phone line, no air conditioning, and no internet access, many of them would require far fewer work hours than is necessary to maintain a common middle-class standard of living today.
In the 1950s for example, my mother shared a bedroom with three brothers in a two bedroom house in central Los Angeles. She went to a private Catholic school where there were 50 students to a classroom. For her family, there were certainly no European vacations or airline travel to seaside resorts.
And yet, no one would have described this lifestyle as “impoverished” or “lower class.” It was a middle-class lifestyle, but this lifestyle could only be maintained by far more than 40 hours of work at the family business each week, where both parents labored regularly.
This experience was not atypical.
In spite of increases in the standard of living since then, working hours have actually decreased. Indeed, according to Robert Fogel in The Fourth Great Awakening and the Future of Egalitarianism, from 1880 to 1995 the number of hours spent on work during an average day for a male head of household decreased from 8.5 hours to 4.7 hours. Meanwhile, leisure time increased from 1.8 hours to 5.8 hours.
In a separate study by Thomas Juster and Frank Stafford, it was found that from 1965 to 1981 in the United States, “market work” hours per week fell from 51.6 hours to 44 hours for men. For women, market work rose from 18.9 hours to 23.9 hours. We would expect an increase for women over this period as women began to take on “market work” at higher rates than before. This was for wage work only, though, and if we include “housework” we find that “total work” for women during this time period fell from 60.9 hours to 54.4 hours. Women exchanged some housework for market work over this period, but overall, the work hours decreased. Total work for men decreased also, from 63.1 hours to 57.8 hours. (Housework increased for men over this period.)
In yet another study by Mary Coleman and John Pencavel, average weekly hours worked fell for white men from 44.1 hours in 1940 to 42.9 hours in 1988. It fell for white women from 40.6 hours to 35.5 hours over the same period.
The typical standard of living increased over these periods, as the square footage of housing units increased, automobiles became more common, and amenities like telephones, washing machines, personal computers, and climate control became more common. The work itself also became less hazardous over this time period.
President Obama has stoked controversy after he suggested to an audience of Argentinian youth that there was no great difference between communism and capitalism and that they should just “choose from what works”.
Obama responded to a question about nonprofit community organizations and the necessity of attracting funding from both the public and private sectors.
“So often in the past there has been a division between left and right, between capitalists and communists or socialists, and especially in the Americas, that’s been a big debate,” Obama said.
“Those are interesting intellectual arguments, but I think for your generation, you should be practical and just choose from what works. You don’t have to worry about whether it really fits into socialist theory or capitalist theory. You should just decide what works,” he added.
Obama went on to praise Cuba’s socialist system under dictator Raúl Castro, touting the country’s free access to basic education and health care, although he acknowledged that Havana itself “looks like it did in the 1950s” because the economy is “not working”.
Obama concluded his comments by arguing that a market-based system “has to have a social and moral and ethical and community basis”.
Reaction to the remarks wasn’t pretty.
“This man is so destructive, so harmful and so ignorant,” wrote Jim Hoft.
“The Marxist in the White House is erasing the lines between two dangerous ideologies and the one that made the US great, just as he erased our borders. This is a man who would be at home in communist China,” chided the Independent Sentinel.
For a more accurate breakdown of how capitalism beats socialism every time, watch the video below.
On Obamacare’s sixth anniversary, report finds premiums up 28 percent in five years
Health insurance premiums have increased faster than wages and inflation in recent years, rising an average of 28 percent from 2009 to 2014 despite the enactment of Obamacare, according to a report from Freedom Partners.
President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law on March 23, 2010, and Wednesday is the law’s sixth anniversary.
The Obama administration expressed concern in 2009 about skyrocketing health care premiums in a report entitled, “The Burden of Health Insurance Premium Increases on American Families.” They were concerned that premiums had increased by 5.5 percent from 2008 to 2009.
However, from 2010 to 2011 in the first year after Obamacare was enacted, premiums increased by 9.4 percent.
“In 2009, when the [Executive Office of the President] issued its report, states had seen premiums increase on average by 30 percent between 2004 and 2009,” states the Freedom Partners report. “But since 2009, health insurance premiums have continued to grow faster than wages in nearly every state, averaging a 28 percent increase from 2009 to 2014, resulting in a greater amount of disposable income being consumed by rising premiums.”
According to the report, while premiums increased by 28 percent from 2009 to 2014, wages increased by only 7.8 percent. From 2004 to 2009 when premiums increased by 30 percent, wages increased by only 12.2 percent.
In the wake of the devastating attacks in Paris Friday, US intelligence experts have once again issued stark warnings that such terrorism could be imminent on home soil because there is no way to vet refugees coming into the country from the Middle East, and the White House has no strategy to defeat ISIS.
Appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday, the head of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Michael McCaul, said that “There are a lot of holes — gaping holes,” in US defenses.
“We have hundreds of Americans that have traveled” to Iraq and Syria, he urged. “Many of them have come back as well. I think that’s a direct threat.”
McCaul once again said he has spoken with FBI and Homeland Security officials who say that “We don’t have the databases to vet them.”
“They tell me this cannot be properly done.” the Congressman added.
McCaul has consistently warned that ISIS has planned to use the refugee crisis to get operatives into the US.
“This causes a great concern on the part of policymakers, because we don’t want to be complicit with a program that could bring potential terrorists into the United States,” McCaul said.
In a separate appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” the former head of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Mike Rogers, corroborated McCaul’s sentiments.
“I’m not sure why this shocked everybody,” Rogers said. “There is not a vetting process … that can vet every single individual refugee coming in on the refugee program.”
In testimony before the Senate last month, FBI Director James Comey stated that “gaps” remain in the vetting process, owing to a lack of intelligence on the ground in Syria.
Following the attacks in France, Obama announced that the plan to bring in 10,000+ refugees will not be reevaluated in any form, even as it emerged that some of the perpetrators appeared to have entered Europe disguised as migrants.
In appearances on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” both the chairmen of the Senate and House Intelligence committees agreed that the US currently has no strategy to defeat ISIS.
We’ve got to have a strategy. We don’t have a strategy in Syria as it relates to ISIL,” Sen. Richard Burr said. “The president talked the other morning about ISIL was contained. America learned within 24 hours that it’s not contained, it’s rampant.” he added.
Rep. Devin Nunes added that “You can’t fight ISIS unless you are willing to put a strategy together that deals with the failure of Libya, the problems in the Sinai, Iraq and Syria and Afghanistan-Pakistan region.”
“Fifty Special Forces [troops], which we’ve just upped in the last two weeks, that’s not enough to make a big impact,” he added.
Nunes also warned about the influx of undocumented refugees.
“There’s no possible way to screen them. It should be stopped immediately,” he said.
“Bottom line, if you don’t want refugees, you have to go into Iraq and Syria and defeat ISIS.”
Also appearing on “Face the Nation,” the former deputy director of the CIA, Michael Morell, urged that it was time for a re-think on a strategy to defeat ISIS.
“I think it’s now crystal clear to us that our strategy, our policy vis-à-vis ISIS is not working, and it’s time to look at something else,” Morell said.
Morell described the Paris attacks as having “A level of sophistication that we have not seen since the London bombings in 2005.”
He also suggested that rather than going after the Syrian President Bashar al Assad, much as the western coalition did with Gaddafi in Libya, the solution to defeating ISIS may be to work with Assad.
“You know, clearly he’s part of the problem, but he may also be part of the solution, right?” Morell said. “An agreement where he stays around for a while and the Syrian army, supported by the coalition, takes on ISIS may be the best result here.”
—————————————————————-
Steve Watson is a London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.
President also suggests Christians holding back America from doing "big things"
In a somewhat under the radar “interview,” The President made some candid comments that reveal more than usual regarding his end of office agenda, noting that he finds American’s common skepticism of government “paralyzing”.
In what is billed as a ‘conversation’ with with Pulitzer Prize-winning author Marilynne Robinson, for the November issue of The New York Review of Books, Obama bemoaned the notion that Americans’ “conceptions of government can get us in trouble.”
Speaking about his idea of ‘progress’, Obama noted:
“Whenever I hear people saying that our problems would be solved without government, I always want to tell them you need to go to some other countries where there really is no government.”
“Where the roads are never repaired, where nobody has facilitated electricity going everywhere even where it’s not economical.” Obama added.
“If, in fact, you think that government is the enemy. And that, too, is a running strain in our democracy. That’s sort of in our DNA. We’re suspicious of government as a tool of oppression. And that skepticism is healthy, but it can also be paralyzing when we’re trying to do big things together.” Obama stated.
So essentially, the president is saying that anyone who questions or opposes the government is holding back America from doing “big things”.
Perhaps those big things consist of arming known terrorists in Iraq and Syria, and opening the borders to them? Is it “paralyzing” when Americans take umbrage with those “big things”?
In further comments during the discussion, Obama seemed to take a huge swipe at Christianity, suggesting that Christians who take their religion the most seriously are prone to developing a mentality of “us versus them”.
“…sometimes I think you also get frustrated with kind of the wishy-washy, more liberal versions where anything goes,” Obama added.
“How do you reconcile the idea of faith being really important to you and you caring a lot about taking faith seriously with the fact that, at least in our democracy and our civic discourse, it seems as if folks who take religion the most seriously sometimes are also those who are suspicious of those not like them?”
Robinson chimed in, managing to strong arm in a swipe at Christians AND gun owners:
“I mean, when people are turning in on themselves — and God knows, arming themselves and so on — against the imagined other, they’re not taking their Christianity seriously.” she told the president.
So take note, Americans exercising your First and Second Amendment rights, as well as following the Founders’ advice to be skeptical of government, you are “paralyzing” Obama’s agenda.
—————————————————————-
Steve Watson is a London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.
A key part of President Obama’s legacy will be the fed’s unprecedented collection of sensitive data on Americans by race. The government is prying into our most personal information at the most local levels, all for the purpose of “racial and economic justice.”
Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama’s racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document “inequalities” between minorities and whites.
This Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases, which Obama already is using to make “disparate impact” cases against: banks that don’t make enough prime loans to minorities; schools that suspend too many blacks; cities that don’t offer enough Section 8 and other low-income housing for minorities; and employers who turn down African-Americans for jobs due to criminal backgrounds.
Big Brother Barack wants the databases operational before he leaves office, and much of the data in them will be posted online.
So civil-rights attorneys and urban activist groups will be able to exploit them to show patterns of “racial disparities” and “segregation,” even if no other evidence of discrimination exists.
New documents obtained by Judicial Watch confirm that U.S. intelligence agencies knew early on what happened in Benghazi on 9/11/2012 and why. Hint: It wasn’t about a stupid video.
The docs show that in 2012, U.S. intelligence agencies knew that weapons were moving from Libya to Syria before the attack and were already predicting the rise of ISIS and their quest to establish a caliphate. This was 17 months before the president called ISIS “jay-vee.”
Catherine Herridge reported this morning on “America’s Newsroom” that a Defense Intelligence Agency memo from Sept. 16, 2012, concluded that the Benghazi terror attack was planned at least 10 days in advance to coincide with 9/11 and was in retaliation for a drone strike that killed an al Qaeda strategist. The memo was copied to the National Security Council, the State Department and the CIA.
“The intention was to attack the consulate and to kill as many Americans as possible to seek revenge for the [U.S.] killing of Aboyahiye (Alaliby) in Pakistan and in memorial of the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center buildings,” the memo said.
Two and a half years after the attack, Judicial Watch was finally able to obtain the memos by suing in federal court.
“The Obama administration says it was a coincidence that [the Benghazi attack] occurred on 9/11. In fact, their intelligence said it wasn’t a coincidence, and in fact, specifically the attack occurred because it was 9/11,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
The Obama administration knew all of this on September 16, 2012 – yet White House Press Secretary Jay Carney got in front of reporters day after day, spinning tales about a spontaneous demonstration, “bad actors” with heavy weapons and a “disgusting and reprehensible” YouTube video. Instead of answering simple questions he knew (or should have known) the answers to, Carney told reporters the matter was under investigation.
Flash back to a September 19, 2012, press briefing where Carney has trouble convincing skeptical reporters of the White House spin. Note that this was three days after the DIA memos which prove that administration already knew the truth:
Q If the government still maintains that there was no evidence of a preplanned attack, how come –
MR. CARNEY: Bill, let me just repeat now, again, that based on the information –
Q But how is it that the attackers had RPGs, automatic weapons, mortars?
MR. CARNEY: Bill, I know you’ve done a little bit of reading about Libya since the unrest that began under Qaddafi. The place is — has an abundance of weapons, and there are –
Q No question about it. But do you expect a street mob to come armed that way?
MR. CARNEY: There are, unfortunately, many bad actors in that country as there are throughout the region.
Q But that’s not the point, Jay.
MR. CARNEY: And they have — they’re very armed. The point is you can make suppositions about what happened. We prefer to have an investigation that looks very closely into what happened, and assembles the facts and presents them. Based on — all I’m saying –
Q But our people on the ground have seen the fragments of the — the remains of the mortars and the heavy weapons that were used.
MR. CARNEY: We’ve been clear that there were armed assailants who used heavy weapons. We obviously haven’t disputed that. And –
Q So this is just a random crowd that got together with their heavy weapons, insulted by the film, and decided to go –
MR. CARNEY: As I think I just said, there has certainly been precedent in the past where bad actors, extremists who are heavily armed in different countries, in different regions of the world, have taken advantage of and exploited situations that have developed in order to either attack Westerners or Western assets or American assets. That is not –
Q They might plan to do it, don’t you think?
MR. CARNEY: They might or they might not. All I can tell you is, based on the information we had at the time — we have now, we do not yet have indication that it was preplanned or premeditated. There’s an active investigation. If that active investigation produces facts that lead to a different conclusion, we will make clear that that’s where the investigation has led. It’s not — our interest is in finding out the facts of what happened, not taking what we’ve read in the newspaper and making bold assertions that we know what happened. We’d rather investigate it.
__
Q So in the investigations about all the skirmishes and the initial skirmish that happened in Libya, has it been concluded that this was linked to trying to show America something on 9/11, to show anti-American sentiment on 9/11? Is that –
MR. CARNEY: April, I’ve had a lot of questions about what we know about what precipitated the attacks in Benghazi. And I said earlier and have said on previous days that, based on the information we have now, we don’t have evidence that it was premeditated or preplanned.
It is certainly the case that there are a number of bad actors and armed groups of extremists in Libya who might take advantage of a situation that was brought about initially as a response to the video in question. But this is under active investigation and we await the results of that investigation by the FBI before we can reach any firm conclusions about what precipitated the attacks.
Q Right now we should say it’s a coincidence that it all happened on 9/11?
MR. CARNEY: Right now I’m saying we don’t have evidence at this point that this was premeditated or preplanned to coincide on a — to happen on a specific date or coincide with that anniversary. If that changes, we will certainly make you aware of it.
Jay Carney is a shameless liar. But then, so is his successor, their boss, and pretty much everyone else associated with this abhorrent administration.
UPDATE:
Judicial Watch now has their report on the new documents, here.
"And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had twohorns like alamb,and he spake as a dragon." -Revelation 13 Now that Binyamin Netanyahu has an historic victory, Obama and his Politburo are hell-bent on sticking it to the people of Israel. Historically, the United States has been a friend and ally to Israel, but now that Netanyahu has ran and won on hardline policies, Obama and his gang have decided to throw a wrench in that friendship. The White House Gangsters have now decided to shift policy. For decades the White House often would use its Veto in the United Nations Council to protect Israel. Last week, they decided that they could now reverse policy and refuse to veto resolutions relating to the so-called "Palestinians" or introduce their own measure. With the recent attempts by the White House to negotiate with Iran, Netanyahu had promised that their would be no "palestinian" state if he was to be re-elected, stating in a recent interview:
“Whoever today moves to establish a Palestinian state and withdraw from territory is giving attack territory for Islamic extremists against the State of Israel,....Whoever ignores that is burying his head in the sand.”
Yet this is exactly what the White House appears to be doing. Obama is now full of " Wrath, knowing he has but a short time..." and is planning revenge for Netanyahu's recent statement against a palestinian state.
now agree to passage of a United Nations Security Council resolution embodying principles of a two-state solution that would be based on the pre-1967 lines between Israel and the West Bank and Gaza Strip and mutually agreed swaps.
This is no surprise since Obama has called for these same measures in the past:
"We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines, with mutually agreed swaps." -Barack Obama ,May 19th, 2011.
Of course the next day Prime Minister Netanyahu came out against this proposal saying:
"While Israel is prepared to make generous compromises for peace, it cannot go back to the 1967 lines, because ... these lines are indefensible.."
Of course this is the plan of the Obama administration, to fundamentally weaken the Nation of Israel, while funding groups like Al Qeada and ISIS, who want nothing but the complete destruction of Israel!!
Don't believe me? here are just a couple reports confirming this:
A man believed to be a Pakistani commander of Islamic State or Daish, Yousaf al Salafi, has confessed to law enforcement agencies in Pakistan to getting funds via the United States, according to a leading Pakistani newspaper siting its sources.
Members of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIS, were trained in 2012 by U.S. instructors working at a secret base in Jordan, according to informed Jordanian officials.The officials said dozens of ISIS members were trained at the time as part of covert aid to the insurgents targeting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. The officials said the training was not meant to be used for any future campaign in Iraq.
So whether it is overtly or covertly being done - The U.S. Administration is funding ISIS,Al-Qaeda and Hamas on one form or another! All of these terrorist groups have vowed to destroy Israel!!
Keep not thou silence, O YAHWEH: hold not thy peace, and be not still, O ELOHIM.For, lo, thine enemies make a tumult: and they that hate thee have lifted up the head.They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones.They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee:The tabernacles ofEdom, and the Ishmaelites; of Moab, and the Hagarenes;Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre;Assuralso is joined with them: they have holpen the children of Lot. Selah.
These ten nations in Psalm are the ten horns spoken of in Revelation that give their power to the Beast for one hour, in order to destroy Israel:
And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them:-Revelation 17
Please Pray for Israel and Jerusalem!!!
Sha'alu Shalom Yerushalayim!!!
MRC TV November 20, 2014 Matheny's note: the only thing I would like to correct is the portion of the Title which says'Destruction of our Democracy' to say 'Destruction of our REPUBLIC'.... we are a REPUBLIC... not a democracy... "I pledge Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS..."!!!!
"Criminals are becoming more emboldened" by Obama's amnesty plan.
Click to Tweet
Sheriffs from Maryland to Massachusetts warned of the extreme danger of Pres. Obama’s plan to grant executive amnesty to millions of illegal aliens in the U.S.
Speaking out on Monday, they said amnesty would spell the beginning of the end of democracy in America and would embolden both terrorists and violent criminals.
Sheriff Chuck Jenkins, Frederick County, Maryland:
“In my opinion, based on what I’ve seen, every county in America will become a border county. This is absolutely going to worsen the crisis.
What we’re going to see is not only the cost to healthcare, social programs, and education, but the increase in criminals coming into our country, you’re going to see increases in crime, infiltration from transnational gangs, the drug trade and human tracking.”
Sheriff Paul Babeu, Pinal County, Arizona:
“The law applies to you and I as citizens, and yet it appears there is no law when it comes to illegals. The message the President’s action will send is this: if you can get to the border, you’re home free. It completely undermines the rule of law and makes the job of every law enforcement officer – which is already difficult – impossible.
We already have our hands full because the border is not secure: imagine what the situation will look like when the President gives executive amnesty to those already here. It would unleash a tidal wave of illegal border crossings, overwhelming law enforcement. It will be open season for the cartels. Again: the border is not secure now – to give a presidential amnesty would be to make matters dramatically worse for our officers who are trying to do the job the President won’t.”
Sheriff Tom Hodgson, Bristol County, Massachusetts:
“It will dramatically increase the draw for illegal immigrants to come into our country, because you have the President of the United States sending out a message that we have no problem with people ignoring our immigration laws. They’re looking for a wink and nod that says ‘yeah, come on in’ – we’ve seen it with the DACA. It is the worst message you can possibly send. Come in, don’t worry about the laws, don’t wait your turn. You invite people to ignore our laws. We have no knowledge of these individuals’ background or criminal histories. We [have] minors coming in right now who have confessed to murder. We in these communities are left trying to find out: who are these people? If didn’t learn anything else post-9/11, it’s that we need to know who is in our communities and what they’re purpose is. The President’s planned order is a formula for national disaster and public safety.
Every predator who is out to commit crimes is looking for the weakest link in our system. Having large illegal immigrant populations creates a safe haven for criminal activity. Criminals are becoming more emboldened.
I run the homeland security task force in Bristol County. When you start diverting resources with in ICE – this administration has been watering down investigative resources, failing to deport people who need to be deported – you create a very dangerous situation. When the President issues this executive amnesty, you’re going to see people being diverted away from investigating terror threats and towards issuing this amnesty. It’s going to put our communities at much greater risk. The scary part about all of this is that we know that terrorists have been trying to infiltrate the US. It’s opening a gaping hole for terrorists to walk right into the country and strike at innocent people.
When the President of the United States is sending a message that he’s not concerned with lawbreaking, those words are the beginning of the destruction of our Democracy. When you have the President saying you can come in unlawfully without consequence, basically the President is saying to do the world: don’t respect our laws. That’s I worry about: if you don’t protect the framework of Democracy, then you risk losing Democracy itself.”
Sheriff Eddie Guerra, Hidalgo County, Texas:
“We are going to see what I’m seeing here on the border in larger and large numbers, which is a huge increase in illegal immigration coming across our border. An amnesty order is going to create more people an incentive to come into the US. The drug cartel will exploit any opportunity to come into the United States, and this will create the cover for them to continue exploiting our porous border. This will create the opportunity for kidnapping, trafficking, sexual abuse, prostitution, and smuggling. These smugglers have no regard for human life. They destroy private property. They have no respect for law enforcement. They circumvent US checkpoints. It’s a terrible situation.”
Sheriff Sam Page, Rockingham County, North Carolina:
“Human trafficking, drug trafficking and criminal activity are coming through our borders, but not staying near our borders – it’s getting into every part of the United States. This is a public safety issue – a terrorist or any other kind of criminal may cross our borders. We just don’t know who is coming across.
“If the President issue his executive amnesty, you’ll see a dramatic surge of people coming in from all countries, including Central America– and again we won’t know who’s coming in: gangs, drugs, cartels, public health threats, human trafficking. We’re not catching but a small percentage of those coming across. This will place public safety in our communities in danger, and taxpaying citizens will be left picking up the tab.”
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!! News Mark Matheny October 18, 2014 Obama has recently appointed Ron Klain as the New "Ebola Czar". Ron was a former Chief of Staff to Vice President Joe Biden. The problem here is that this guy has no medical or healthcare background whatsoever!!
According to CBS DC Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., slammed the decision on Twitter.
“Worst ebola epidemic in world history and Pres. Obama puts a government bureaucrat with no healthcare experience in charge. Is he serious?” Harris tweeted.
In the video report above you will hear Dr. David Agus say that he believes we need an "Ebola Czar" in order to control the Ebola outbreak in the U.S. Even if that were necessary, why would we choose a guy who has no past experience or knowledge of healthcare or medical procedure?
It seems to me that there is already a position in place called THE SURGEON GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES!
Here is the definition of the office of the Surgeon General:
The Surgeon General of the United States is the operational head of the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps(PHSCC) and thus the leading spokesperson on matters of public health in the federal government of the United States. -emphasis mine
The Surgeon General reports to the Assistant Secretary for Health (ASH), who may be a four-star admiral in the United States Public Health Service, Commissioned Corps (PHSCC), and who serves as the principal adviser to the Secretary of Health and Human Services on public health and scientific issues. The Surgeon General is the overall head of the Commissioned Corps, a 6,500-member cadre of health professionals who are on call 24 hours a day, and can be dispatched by the Secretary of HHS or the Assistant Secretary for Health in the event of a public health emergency. -Wikipedia
It seems more logical doesn't it?
Choosing Ron Klain because he worked for Joe Biden makes no sense.
Here is a video however, that makes more sense as to why Ron Klain was chosen. It turns out he has no knowledge of Ebola, but he did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express!!!! Good call Obama!
(Note: Obviously this isn't him, but isn't the resemblance uncanny?)
