Ken Nelson

Who is the dunce in this story?

http://takimag.com/article/the_obama_family_circus/print#axzz1X6ksy9BA

Sure his family is full of leeches, illegal immigrants, and shysters. So Barry is the successful one, being only 2 out of 3 on those counts. 

I’m convinced there story says more about us than him.

We let them be illegal here. We let them drive drunk repeatedly. We PAY them to live in our free housing.

It proves… we are stupid I guess.

H/T Bro

Next… Israeli sniper kittens…

Israel is getting grief from Palestinian loving journalists about the use of dogs in the DMZ between the West Bank and Israel.

They shouted at us to stop, then the dogs attacked, injuring some of us while others managed to get away," he told AFP, saying he was bitten on the hand and on other parts of his body.

Boo hoo. Good dog. Give him a pet and a ScoobySnack!

Apparently because they are mostly illegal workers crossing over to try and get a job, and only a few are actual terrorists, then the dog use is over the top.

Argh…. wrong.

Good dog!  And when can we get kennel full of these on our border?

Fancy way of saying the church wants members
and its business members want cheap labor.

The Center on Immigration Studies just released an interesting paper on the LDS’s church role in the national illegal immigration debate.

You can read it here:

http://www.cis.org/mormon-church-and-illegal-immigration

CIS is an anti-illegal immigration group, and this paper is written from the view point of someone who doesn’t like illegal immigration. But it is also written by a believing, participating, “active” LDS member.

He brings up the core contradictions:

• Conflicting duties to the Articles of Faith that all LDS members adhere too.
  First, to compassion to others (Article 13). Second, adherence to the laws of the nation you live in (Article 12).

  Where a church member stands on immigration can usually be tied to which Article of Faith they prioritize.

  Some, however, feel it consistent to honor the law, and send them home. I’m in that category. I think it helpful to send talented illegal members of the church back to their home countries, both to spread the word and to spread their entrepreneurial nature. Compassion need not ONLY be to a specific individual at the expense of many.

• There are also conflicting scriptures consider, including 2 Nephi 1:6 which states that:

  Wherefore, I, Lehi, prophesy according to the workings of the Spirit which is in me, that there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord.
  And who are we to turn away people brought by the hand of the Lord?  Tough question. It depends on what was meant here and I’m sure opinions will vary!

• Aggressive missionary work in Spanish speaking missions here in the US generally means baptizing, and even having Bishops and other high church positions held by, illegal aliens.  This means that the Church is actively working with people committing Federal felonies, and personal crimes like identity theft and fraud.

  As you can see… it ain’t easy to be LDS and sort out the illegal immigration thing…

The authors main point, and I agree with him, is that whatever the church policy is, they ought to state it clearly and live with the consequences of it.  Instead the church tries to placate members that feel strongly about illegal aliens while basically moving towards the social justice/sanctuary policies of other churches (Catholic, Judaism, etc…).

I’d prefer a Church policy that satisfied all the Articles of Faith. One that recognized it isn’t compassionate to help people break the law, especially when those people hurt others in breaking those laws.  If that comes at the expense of missionary work, so be it. It seems wrong, even cruel, to baptize people that then violate the basic tenants of the church on day one. That hardly sets them on the Celestial path.

But that is just my view. I’d urge the Church to publically and clearly state what they want, and to ensure it meets all the Articles of Faith.  With that, I’m satisfied.

It is an interesting read, if just so you know just how much control the Church has in the Utah legislature.  Hint… a lot. 

Home of the Best Legislature Resort Money Can Buy

Recently, the Utah Legislature passed a Guest Workers Program that is basically an amnesty. Why? Well, in order to qualify for it you have to BE HERE ILLEGALLY.

(1) To be eligible to obtain or maintain a guest worker permit, an undocumented
individual shall:
  (a) (i) be 18 years of age or older; or
      (ii) if younger than 18 years of age, have the permission of a parent or 
            guardian;
(b) live in Utah;

The program permits residence by the workers family, including grandparents and siblings, nephews and nieces.

In return for this gift of amnesty those of us concerned about illegal immigration the police must check the illegal status of those arrested for felony or serious misdemeanors. SOMETHING THEY SHOULD BE DOING ANYWAY!.

Republicans in Utah need a serious revamp, Tea Party style. They need to go down.

And that includes our Governor too… if he signs this monstrosity.

BTW: If you visit the Legislature site you will NOT find voting records. At least, I couldn’t. They may be there, but they are hard or impossible to find.

St. Louis vs El Paso…. It’s ON.

El Paso is the “safest” large city in the U.S.  And it highlights why we have to control immigration – El Paso had 4 murders, across the river, 2700 in Ciudad Juarez.

Meanwhile, St. Louis beat out Camden, NJ as the unsafest city.

Interestingly, El Paso has only 15% Non-Hispanic Whites, and 80% Latino, and 3% Black. Some might say this invalidates my immigration point, but I’d point out that El Paso lives as an Hispanic dot in a sea called Texas, which has Republican, small government tendencies.  They can’t be corrupt, the rest of Texas won’t let them.  It is key we don’t’ let unchecked immigration, in turn, unleash the corruption here that is so prevalent in Mexico.

But… let’s go to the stats….  St. Louis has 51% black. And Camden 50% black.  Continuing on in this mornings “insult culture” theme, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the the unsafe cities list correlates highly to black population ratios.  Black culture, with incredibly high single mother birth rates, does not have effective controls over its adolescent  male youth populations, and in many ways (rap music, for instance) eggs on bad or criminal behavior.

Informal sampling of the 2009 list shows that having > 10% black population is a great way to move up the list.

Should I mention this?  Is it racist?  No. I think this link to violence is culturally not racially driven. I’ve known many spectacular African Americans – of high achievement and unblemished honesty and kindness.   But, frankly, I do not think it an accident that our first black President was raised in white culture.   If not, he would statistically be in prison.

Culture matters. A lot. We may all be human, and “equal”, but how we band together affects so much, and it is a shame more people do not feel safe discussing it.

The 14th amendment covers citizenship like this:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

The author of the amendment did not mean to make citizens of children born to foreign citizens currently residing on US soil:

The author of the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause, Senator Jacob M. Howard, stated, in reference to the Amendment, "This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the family of ambassadors, or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."

But as with most other things Washington and our courts touch, plain common sense has been corrupted so that now children of illegal aliens become citizens. This is wrong on many fronts, rare in the world (only about 30 countries and hardly any modern Western countries do this), and provides a tempting incentive to break U.S. immigration law.

Those who want to change this talk about tweaking the 14th amendment itself. Good luck with that. There are enough blue states legislatures that want future Democrat voters that this approach will go nowhere. Better, and sufficient, would be to have Congress define who is subject to its jurisdiction for purposes of the 14th Amendment.

Some say that wouldn’t survive a court challenge. I suspect it would face trouble in plaintiff shopped lower courts, but do just fine at the Supreme Court.

We need to do something, and since a Constitutional amendment isn’t feasible, passing a law is the correct next step.

New ICE agent uniform

It is bad enough that Obama doesn’t want our immigration and customers enforcement (ICE) folks to do their jobs.  But having them make immigration detention into “Club ICE” just twists the knife:

Some of the changes the White House is ordering include:

• § dance classes
• § movie nights
• § art classes
• § cooking classes
• § tutoring and computer training
• § free and unmonitored phone service
• § free email access
• § bingo
• § arts and crafts
• § more variety in dining options
• § self-serve beverage stations
• § fresh vegetable bars
• § fresh carrot sticks
• § hanging plants
• § recreation in natural setting
• § robust aerobic exercise

Also, ICE is expected to eliminate pat-down searches, lockdowns, and light-out for low-risk detainees, as well as provide vastly expanded visitation rights (up to 12 hours per visit) in its facilities

It’s not like they are breaking the law and ought to be in prison.

Our current “leadership” apparently hates all things American, except, of course, other people’s American dollars.

Heading elsewhere

Apparently, illegal aliens are fleeing Arizona. This is what happens when immigration laws look like they will be enforced. If only our Federal government would show similar resolve.

But alas, it doesn’t look like their homeland is where they are heading:

Juan Carlos Cruz, an illegal immigrant who has worked in plant nurseries for 20 years, huddled with dozens of relatives over the Memorial Day Weekend in the backyard of his brother’s Phoenix-area home to plot out the family’s next move to avoid what they say will be harassment by police. Virginia and California are the front-runners.

20 years hear illegally… that says a lot about our government doesn’t it?

The next step, naturally, is for more states to do as Arizona did.

Begging to get shot

Parents lose their right to bitch about their kid being shot when he is throwing rocks at federal officers. Don’t they?  Throwing rocks is deadly force and officers have a right, and duty, to protect themselves and their colleagues.

Wouldn’t it be refreshing for the parents to say, instead, “I wish I’d done a better job. Watched him closer”. And then add “I’m sorry an agent trying to protect America now has the death of a child on his conscious, my family extends condolences.”

I wouldn’t want to be in the Border Patrol. Not under the last three illegal loving Presidents we’ve had.

This weekend:

Last month alone, just in one patrol region, we had sixty-four pursuits.  That means people who were driving a vehicle, failed to yield, took off like a bat out of hell, running red lights, creating traffic wrecks, numerous people were killed in these wrecks over the last several months, and who are these people?  Not one of them was a U.S. citizen.

Sheriff Paul Babeu
Pinal County, Arizona

I don’t recall liberals bitching, like they do now about Arizona’s immigration law,  when California and other states took on federal roles regarding global warming and C02 emissions.  These are actions that clearly affect outside state lines.

I know it’s too much to ask for no hypocrisy, but could you at least make it less obvious?

The ONLY common factor in what liberals bitch about is if the law in question is good for America.   It’s almost like they hate us and want us to fail.

Arizona here I come!

Fear of losing future illegal voters drives the liberal hysteria over Arizona’s new immigration law.  They don’t care a rats ass about civil rights – just try and not recycle and see how many of your rights they trample.

I’m ignoring boycotts and, instead, starting my own “visitcott”.

That’s right…  I’m heading to good old Arizona tomorrow for a few days. I’m darned sure my civil rights won’t be violated.  But I hope I’m racially profiled… I tend to fair well when people make snap judgments about my civility, honesty and integrity.

Profile me!

Let’s turn Arizona and Utah pink.

Elitists hate it. Old time big business Republicans hate it.  That means, of course, it is a great idea that is long overdue.

Republicans remain idiots if they think they can outbid Democrats for Mexican immigrant votes. They should fight on territory they can win on – like family values, economic opportunity, and lower taxes.  Buying off Mexicans just makes folks like me wash my hands of the Republicans – like what happened during the last Presidential election.

Those who claim that “federal” law trumps state law miss the point. There are many things that are illegal at both the state and federal level.  They don’t mind, for instance, for marijuana, where defendants face state/federal double jeopardy every day.  

Is this law perfect?  No, I’d take it exactly as is PLUS add in employer punishment provisions.  I’d work on the demand side. But I understand that it might not help as much since many of these illegals are just passing through Arizona.

I hope Utah passes a similar law.  Utah’s laws are skewed heavily by Mormon’s being gullible and nice. That is, I suppose, a worthy price to pay for living around gullible and nice people. 

But, as a one famous advisor said, “no crisis should got to waste”. And may be our current economic crisis will shake away Utahan’s normal gullibility and prompt action to stiffen immigration enforcement AND get rid of Jim Matheson.

This is a good idea, unfortunately necessary because the political class in Washington D.C. is too corrupt (Democrats) and feckless (Republicans) to actually defend the country.

Now is the time to pass laws like this on the state level because fewer people are making money off illegals now, but we still pay their social costs. Now is an opportunity that may disappear should the economy somehow overcome the Obama brake.

I don’t know how police “suspect” someone is illegal without just deciding to stop any Mexican heritage person they see. So I’m sure some namby pamby judge will stop this, as ordered by his socialist higher command elements.

If I were Jan Brewer, I’d sign the law, and state that it WILL be enforced vigorously no matter what any judge says, and that when the Federal government did their job, we in Arizona might pay attention to what idiot Federal judges say.

Vive’ la revolucion!

25 years later the headline is finally right

I hope Obama is more like Ronald Reagan than Jimmy Carter.

Why?  Reagan was a good talker but was ineffective at changing the long term course of the country. Carter was a dope but managed to ruin foreign policy for us perhaps permanently.

I don’t like Ronald Reagan. I don’t idolize him. I think he was a good talker but ineffective. He compromised and set the nation on the path to ruin.

Reagan’s peak ineffectiveness came in 1986…

But Ken… he lowered tax rates. Well, sure, the rates might have been higher early in Reagan’s terms, but there were lots of deductions and loopholes. Only dopes paid the actual printed rate.

Then it all changed. 1986 came. A cruddy year. The Space Shuttle crashed and our income tax rates were cut along with most deductions/loopholes. Simplification.

He got rolled on this. They lowered the rates, and took away the deductions. But now they’ve raised the rates again, but where can you hide money now?  My financial guys show me things that make my eyes bleed they are so complicated and expensive.

Federal spending, as a percentage of GDP and debt as a percentage of GDP, have all risen dramatically since Reagan and 1986.

Also in 1986, Senator Alan Simpson, recently resurrected to further screw the country on Obama’s “don’t’ cut the deficit” panel, sponsored a bill to let illegal’s become citizens. Reagan signed it and with the stroke of a pen gave California and its 56+ electoral votes to the Democrats.

He got rolled again!  He’d already given government a path to more money. And then he ensured the people most likely to grow government would have the California Assembly and Governors office, as well as a much better shot at being President. We see the result now as we worry if California’s expected financial failure  will ruin just it, just its region, or the entire country.

1913’s income tax set up the long term ruin of the country. Ronald Reagan’s terms weren’t a speed bump on the way to ruination – they were  gas on a fire.

So the next time someone goes on about Reagan, tell them to shut the hell up, they don’t know what they are talking about.  A cult of personality isn’t endearing even if nominally conservative.