3SOF

Soros sued by ex-girlfriend for real estate jilt...

Chairman of Soros foundation George Soros attends the Avoided Deforestation Partners organization conference on a sidelines of the UN climate talks in Cancun December 8, 2010. REUTERS/Jorge Silva
On Thursday August 11, 2011, 12:59 pm EDT
By Jonathan Stempel

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The octogenarian billionaire George Soros has been sued for $10 million by a former Brazilian soap star who said he reneged on promises to give her an expensive apartment on Manhattan's Upper East Side. SORRY BABY, HE GAVE IT TO OBAMA,HIS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR PUPPET OF A PRESIDENT !

Adriana Ferreyr, 28, said Soros had twice during the five years they dated promised to buy her apartments, but never followed through, according to her complaint filed on Wednesday in the New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan.

Ferreyr said she and Soros, who turns 81 on Friday and is among the world's most admired investors, had been dating for more than three years when he promised on January 1, 2010, to buy her an apartment worth nearly $2 million two blocks from his home.

The pair broke up two months later and soon reconciled, but Soros told her as they lay in bed in August 2010 that he had given the apartment to a new girlfriend, the lawsuit said.

An argument ensued, resulting in Soros slapping Ferreyr on the face and trying to choke her and throwing a lamp that smashed on the floor, cutting Ferreyr's foot and requiring stitches, the lawsuit said.

Nonetheless, the pair rekindled their romance and Soros told Ferreyr while they vacationed in St. Barts that he would give her another apartment, only to renege again, it said.

Ferreyr is seeking damages for fraud, infliction of emotional distress, assault and battery and other claims.

William Zabel, a lawyer for Soros, called the lawsuit frivolous and without merit and said he will seek dismissal.

"Mr. Soros did have an on-again, off-again and nonexclusive relationship with Ms. Ferreyr," Zabel said in a statement. "The proposed complaint is riddled with false charges and is obviously an attempt to extract money from my client who is known to be a very wealthy man."

Zabel also said police investigated the August 2010 incident and found that no assault occurred.

"George Soros did not slap, choke or throw a lamp at her," he said.

Neither Ferreyr, now studying economics at Columbia University, nor her lawyer immediately responded to requests for comment.

Soros is worth $14.5 billion, Forbes magazine said in March. Last month, he decided to return roughly $1 billion from outside investors in his $26 billion Quantum hedge fund and instead manage money only for himself and family. That decision lets Soros avoid pending increased U.S. hedge fund regulation.

The case is Ferreyr v. Soros et al, New York State Supreme Court, New York County, No. 109256/2011.

"Obama Doesn't Get It":
More Stimulus Won't Help, Stockman Says – And We Can't Afford It

Seeking to revive the economy (and his reelection prospects) President Obama has been on Midwest swing this week, talking about jobs. Today, the White House announced the President will make a major speech after Labor Day focused on (what else?) job creation.

The White House says the Sept. 5 speech will include new ideas beyond those already mentioned, including an extension of the payroll tax cut, tax credits for hiring veterans, a further extension of unemployment benefits and the like.

But "it's too late for stimulus," according to David Stockman, former budget director for Ronald Reagan. "Even though it's nice; you can't afford it. The credit card is maxed out — it's done."

America has "reached the end of the road" when it comes to deficit spending and "I believe Obama doesn't get it," Stockman says.

What's different between today and the early 1980s, when the Reagan administration used deficit spending to pay for the arms race vs. the USSR even while cutting U.S. tax rates, is the state of America's balance sheet, he says.

"If you were at 30% debt-to-GDP like in 1980, it's one thing to add a little more," but not when the debt is at 100% of GDP and projected to rise from here, he says. "It's time for a wake up call — you can't keep burying yourself in debt."

Instead of throwing more money at the problem, the best thing the government can do right now is "get out of the way and let the private economy slowly heal itself," according to Stockman.

The former Congressman says it's also time for elected officials to level with the America people: "We had a party for 30 years [and] now we have the hangover. It's going to be painful [and] difficult but we have to work our way through."

Obama Takes a Pounding from GOP Over Vacation

Thursday August 18, 2011, 11:29 am EDT
It's become a rite of summer--bashing the president for going on vacation. The criticism erupts regardless of the president's party, ideology or personality, and no chief executive is immune.

With President Obama scheduled to leave today for a family holiday on Martha's Vineyard, the Republican National Committee is using the occasion to raise money. In a "Dear Republican" fund-raising message e-mailed to potential contributors this morning, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said, "He sure needs a break after a long year criss-crossing the country raising money to save his job--all the while over 14 million Americans are out of work and even more are suffering because of his policies."

And Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney called on the president to cancel his vacation and stay in Washington to work with Congress to create jobs. "The first thing I'd do is go back to my office immediately," said Romney in an interview with WLS-AM in Chicago. "If I were president today, I wouldn't be looking to go spend 10 days on Martha's Vineyard." The former Massachusetts governor added: "If you're president of the United States, and the nation is in crisis, and we're in a jobs crisis right now, then you shouldn't be out vacationing. Instead, you should be focusing on getting the economy going again. And yeah, go back to the office yourself, pull back members of Congress, and focus on getting the job done." [See a collection of political cartoons on the 2012 GOP hopefuls.]

Romney, however, is scheduled to attend a fund raiser on the Vineyard Aug. 27.

President Obama has been the target of escalating criticism for leaving Washington on vacation. The problem, say the critics, isn't so much that Obama is skipping town. After all, Congress is away on vacation, too. Rather, the problem is "the optics"--how the vacation looks. And visiting a summertime playground for the rich, famous, and elite isn't the best image for a president who wants to come across as sensitive to the hardships Americans are facing at a time of high unemployment, a weak housing market, soaring national debt, two wars, and widespread concern about the future.

Martha's Vineyard is an island off the Massachusetts coast. The Obamas will be staying at Blue Heron Farm, a 28-acre estate that the family is leasing. Similar properties rent for $50,000 a week but White House officials won't say how much Obama is paying. [See a collection of political cartoons on the economy.]

Taking some of the edge off the situation is the fact that Obama isn't a particularly frequent vacationer compared with his predecessors. He has taken 61 vacation days so far, which is expected to reach 71 after his current holiday, This compares with 180 days at a similar point for George W. Bush at his Texas ranch and 112 days for Ronald Reagan at his California ranch, according to CBS Radio's Mark Knoller, who compiles records of presidential vacations. At this point in his presidency, Bill Clinton had taken only 28 days off.

When did so many people suddenly start thinking that politicians care about them?



Why the Obama Payment Plan Falls Flat.. 

He kept America waiting for 26-minutes to hear a 21-minute campaign speech. That was pretty much my takeaway from President Obama's Rose Garden jobs/deficit reduction speech. I take no joy in saying my stance is a "plague on both your houses." Regardless of political affiliation, I am critical of the president because he's an ineffectual leader in a time of crisis.

America literally can't afford both Republicans and Democrats starting their campaign efforts 14 months ahead of the elections. But a campaign speech is what we got earlier today, once the president got around to delivering it. So let's break it down as best we can given the dearth of details provided:

Tax Loopholes: Citing a tax code more than 10,000 pages long and 5-feet high, the president vowed to make tax reform a high priority. Obama also said his plan called for lowering the corporate tax rate while creating tax breaks for companies that manufacture and hire in the United States. Despite being depicted as Scrooge McDucks, CEO's are generally in favor of both of these moves. In fact, Rex Tillerson of Exxon Mobil (XOM) and Jeff Immelt (GE) have come out in support of paying higher taxes if the rate is the same for all companies. Then all we'd have to do is find work for the untold thousands of accountants and tax lawyers working in corporate America. There were no actual "details" given but the putting tax code reform on the table was and remains the highlight of the American Jobs Act to date.

Medicare/ Medicaid/ Social Security: The president is not, in fact, in favor of gutting benefits for aged and ill. This is obviously a shot across the box of Republican Presidential candidate Rick Perry and his comment that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. The president says he will not cut Social Security. Medicare and Medicaid won't be "gutted" without tax hikes on the rich. Nothing was said about rich people being willing to pay higher taxes to actually shore up medicare.

Warren Buffett Presents The Millionaire Tax: Warren Buffett made billions off the financial crisis by getting Goldman Sachs (GS) and General Electric (GE) to pay him usurious rates in exchange for what amounted to endorsement deals. Buffett is giving his entire estate to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation because he is of the opinion that the government is a poor allocator of capital. Buffett would like me to pay higher taxes to the very government he's opting to stiff.


Mr. Buffett has never met a preferential deal he didn't like and has 56,000 times as much money as someone with $1 million. The only reason the White House is using Buffett to promote this tax hike is because the administration thinks voters are ignorant regarding who Buffett really is. Buffett has no more place in a Jobs Act conversation than does the ghost of Cornelius Vanderbilt.

Improving Scientific Investment, Airports, Schools: Another triple crown of ideas that'll never happen. Everyone is in favor of better science programs, airports and schools. The problem is this Administration is a demonstrably bad technology investor. Nothing will ever get done on airports unless we build new runways, which we won't do because no one wants planes running over their house. Also, our school systems are dominated by unions, and much more about local governments than Federal in terms of deploying capital. These are soundbites, not policy proposals. There is no one who is anti any of these three items; it just sounds good for the President to say he's in favor of more science, better airports and nicer schools. It's the rhetorical equivalent of shaking hands and kissing a baby.

-

The Right's rebuttal, in effect whining about Obama's insinuations and vowing to never raise taxes, isn't much better than the president's campaign stumping. These are dark days for the economy, yet our leaders lack the will to improve the plight of our unemployed and impoverished.

It would seem the presidency is there for the taking for anyone who can run the electoral gauntlet. Whomever that candidate is, he or she has yet to make their presence known.

Chi Trib Columnist: Hillary Should Replace Obama
Monday, 19 Sep 2011 11:34 AM

By Martin Gould


President Barack Obama's got a decidedly downbeat message from his hometown newspaper on Monday – please don't run for re-election.

The message did not come directly from the Chicago Tribune, but from a distinguished member of its editorial board, veteran columnist Steve Chapman.

Even so, the fact it was printed in the Windy City's most prominent newspaper – which endorsed Obama in 2008 – is a major blow to the president.

"Someone said that when a man is smitten with a beautiful woman, he should remember that somebody somewhere is tired of her. Likewise, the most inspiring presidents get stale after years of constant overexposure," wrote Chapman, who said that Democrats have a more-than-able replacement candidate in Hillary Clinton.

"Her husband presided over a boom, she's been busy deposing dictators instead of destroying jobs, and she's never been accused of being a pushover.

"Not only that, Clinton is a savvy political veteran who already knows how to run for president. Oh, and a new Bloomberg poll finds her to be merely 'the most popular national political figure in America today.' "

Clinton has said repeatedly that she has no intention of standing for the presidency, saying she is done with elective politics.

Reaction to the piece was swift. Writing on Hot Air, Ed Morrissey said, "I've said repeatedly that I think a withdrawal by Obama is a low-probability event at best, and I still believe it to be a long shot. However, when the home-town papers are starting to make the call for retirement, it's maybe not quite as much of a long shot as before."

Chapman's column, entitled "Why Obama Should Withdraw," started by pointing out that when Ronald Reagan ran for re-election in 1984, his slogan was "Morning in America." Obama's slogan in 2012 should be "Midnight in a Coal Mine," Chapman suggested.

"The sputtering economy is about to stall out, unemployment is high, his jobs program may not pass, foreclosures are rampant and the poor guy can't even sneak a cigarette.

"His approval rating is at its lowest level ever," added Chapman, who has sat on the Tribune's editorial board for 30 years. "His party just lost two House elections — one in a district it had held for 88 consecutive years. He's staked his future on the jobs bill, which most Americans don't think would work."

The Harvard-educated columnist pointed out that there is nothing in the Constitution that forces a president to run for a second term. Obama, he said, "can scrap the campaign, bag the fundraising calls and never watch another Republican debate as long as he's willing to vacate the premises by Jan. 20, 2013.

"That might be the sensible thing to do," he added. "Why not leave of his own volition instead of waiting to get the ax?"

Chapman said that too often a president's second term is difficult anyway.

"Richard Nixon was forced to resign in disgrace, Reagan had the Iran-Contra scandal, and Bill Clinton made the unfortunate acquaintance of Monica Lewinsky.

"Administration officials get weary after four years and leave in droves. The junior varsity has to be put into service. New ideas are hard to come by."

And with the likelihood of the GOP holding both Houses of Congress, a second-term could be a nightmare for Obama. "Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner will bound out of bed each day eager to make his life miserable.

"If he runs for re-election, Obama may find that the only fate worse than losing is winning. But he might arrange things so it will be (Hillary) Clinton who has the unenviable job of reviving the economy, balancing the budget, getting out of Afghanistan and grappling with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor.

"Obama, meanwhile, will be on a Hawaiian beach, wrestling the cap off a Corona."


© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Schoen: Obama's Speech Designed to Rally His Base
Monday, 19 Sep 2011 02:13 PM

By David A. Patten


In a sharply partisan speech widely viewed as a bid to shore up his left-wing support, President Barack Obama attacked House Speaker John Boehner for taking a "my-way-or-the-highway" attitude to budget negotiations, while threatening to wield his veto pen against any Republican budget reforms that he deems unfair.

Obama also rejected the notion that his proposed "Buffett rule" to tax wealthier Americans amounts to class warfare.

"Either we gut education and medical research or we've got to reform the tax code," he says. "This is not class warfare — it's math. The money has to come from someplace."

"Obama is now just as concerned with politics as he is with substance," Democratic pollster and Fox News commentator Doug Schoen told Newsmax after the president's speech today. "This is as much about the election next year as it is about balancing the budget and creating jobs this year.

"Class warfare and tax increases are all about setting up the Republicans for political attacks, not bipartisan cooperation — as the rhetoric in today's speech made clear," Schoen said.

Schoen's view that Obama's speech, in which the president promised to shave $3 trillion over the next decade from the deficit, in part by raising $1.5 trillion in new tax revenue mostly on the backs of wealthier Americans, was a political exercise rather than a viable policy proposal was widely echoed across the political spectrum.

Center for Politics Director Larry J. Sabato of the University of Virginia tells Newsmax: "There's no question the speech was fundamentally political. The White House knows there is no chance most of this package can pass the Republican House, maybe even the Senate. So why do it?

"If Obama is to win a second term, he has to re-energize his Democratic base, which has been in a funk, and also attract back millions of Independents that have left his camp," Sabato explains. "Polling shows the millionaire's tax strongly appeals to both groups."

The Washington Post reported that it "amounts more to an opening play in the fall debate over the economy than another attempt to find common ground with the opposing party."

Politico.com said the speech "reads more like a blueprint for shoring up his restless Democratic base than a vehicle for reaching across the aisle in search of bipartisan compromise."

In part, that was because of the strident tone the president took toward Republican rival Boehner. The speaker has maintained the so-called "grand bargain" to reform taxes and entitlements blew up when Obama tried to add in additional tax increases in the 11th hour of negotiations.

But today, Obama blamed Boehner, saying he had "walked away" from a deal that would have addressed the nation's most fundamental balance-sheet issues.

Obama said he was encouraged last week when Speaker Boehner said the nation's problems could not be resolved with a "my-way-or-the-highway" approach. But then, he said, Boehner ruled out tax increases in the same speech.

"So the speaker says you can't have it my way or the highway, then says it's got to be my way or the high way. That's not smart. It's not right," Obama said.

In keeping with the political tone of the speech, Republicans fired back. Boehner said Obama "has not made a serious contribution [to the congressional debt committee's] work today." Speaking of the president's apparent strategy for re-election, he added: "Pitting one group of Americans against another is not leadership."

Boehner held out hope there could be some common ground for agreement on efforts to grow jobs, however. He said Republicans were interested in moving forward with free-trade agreements, and perhaps some additional infrastructure spending.

President Obama's rhetoric has grown progressively sharper as his standing in the polls has plummeted. A new CBS/New York Times poll Monday showed that his approval had reached an all-time low of just 43 percent, compared to 50 percent who disapprove. Other surveys have the president's approval as low as 39 percent.

Also, Rasmussen Reports on Monday released a poll with even more worrisome numbers for all the president's men: Only 34 percent of self-identified undecided voters approve of the president's job performance, compared with a whopping 64 percent who disapprove.

In addition to $1.5 trillion in new taxes, the deficit-reduction package the president outlined this morning proposes to save $1.1 trillion from the drawdown of U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, $430 billion from interest savings, and $580 billion in "cuts and reforms across all mandatory programs."

Neither raising the eligibility age for Medicare or Social Security nor entitlement cuts are among the president's proposals.

Obama, who has presided over the most rapid increase in the national debt of any U.S. president ever, over $4 trillion and counting, also blamed "profligate spending in Washington" for the nation's budget woes. Democrats are expected to applaud the president's decision not to address the mounting fiscal problems facing Social Security and Medicare.

Republicans have gone on record warning those programs must be reformed in order to preserve their viability for future generations. Despite the rising flood of trillions in red ink the entitlements are projected to create in the future, Democrats see the issue as a political winner for them in next year's elections.

Obama threatened to veto GOP reforms if they don't meet his standards for fairness. "I will not support any plan that puts all the burden for closing our deficit on ordinary Americans," he said.




© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Black Caucus Leader: We Won't March Against Obama
Monday, 19 Sep 2011 01:27 PM

By Jim Meyers


Congressional Black Caucus members unhappy over African-American unemployment "probably would be marching on the White House" if Barack Obama were not the president, according to the group's Chairman Emanuel Cleaver.

"If Bill Clinton had been in the White House and had failed to address this problem, we probably would be marching on the White House," the Missouri Democrat told The Miami Herald on Sunday.

"There is a less volatile reaction in the CBC because nobody wants to do anything that would empower the people who hate the president."

Joblessness among blacks is nearing 17 percent, almost twice as high as the overall unemployment rate. The caucus wants Obama to do more to foster employment in the black community.

© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Obama's Scripture Reading Turns My Stomach...


I watched the 9/11 dedication ceremony on Sunday and got sick to my stomach when President Obama started reading Scripture.  I wanted to shout out: HYPOCRITE!  FAKE!  and FRAUD!

I'm sure you're all familiar with the saying, 'actions speak louder than words'.  Since taking office, Obama's actions have been overtly anti-Christian and pro-Muslim.  He professes to be a Christian, yet everything he says and does is Muslim.

On top of his Muslim affinity, his lack of sincerity also came through as he stood before the crowd.  He had that typical smug Obama look as if to say, 'hey everybody, look at me and what I'm doing'.  Michelle Obama was at his side with an equally smug look on her face as she absorbed all of the attention.

On the flip side, you could see the emotions on the faces of former President George W. Bush and Mrs. Bush, as she wiped tears from her eyes.

The difference between the two couples was so obvious that no one could miss it.  Besides, what did Obama do for the 9/11 victims and families of victims other than support the building of a mosque next to the site where Muslim terrorists murdered their loved ones?

I was so glad when the coverage of the ceremony ended and I no longer had to view the arrogance of the Obama's and listen to any more of his hypocrisy.

This I will agree with...

Obama endorses ending one day of mail delivery
Monday, September 19, 2011

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama said Monday the U.S. Postal Service should be allowed to reduce mail delivery to five-days-a-week to help cut its massive losses.

The Postal Service lost $8.5 billion last year and is facing even more red ink this year as the Internet siphons off large amounts of first-class mail and the weak economy reduces advertising mail.

While the post office has cut more than 100,000 workers in the last few years it needs to cut more, close offices and find other ways to reduce costs to keep operating.

In his economic growth and debt reduction plan unveiled Monday, Obama endorsed the idea of dropping one day of mail delivery — it is expected to be Saturday — and urged other changes in postal operations

He agreed that nearly $7 billion the post office has overpaid into the federal retirement system should be refunded to the agency, urged that its payments for advance funding of retiree medical benefits be restructured, and said the post office should be allowed to sell non-postal products and raise postage rates.

Currently the post office cannot raise rates more than the amount of inflation.

Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe said the president "has offered helpful recommendations to stabilize the Postal Service's financial crisis."

Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., who has proposed a bill including many of the same suggestions, welcomed the president's statement.

"I have been saying for some time now that Congress and the administration need to come together on a plan that can save the Postal Service and protect the more than seven million jobs that rely on it," he said in a statement.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who has his own postal reform bill in the House, responded that "the president's proposal is not what taxpayers or the Postal Service needs."

He asserted that Obama's plan "will certainly cost taxpayers money." Currently the post office does not receive tax funds for its operations.

Meanwhile, 75 members of Congress led by Reps. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., and Don Young, R-Alaska, called on the independent Postal Regulatory Commission to block the post office's plans to close as many as 3,700 local offices across the country.

The proposed closures, most in rural locations that do little business, are currently under review.

The letter called for establishment of a new business model for the post office without closing offices and cutting its work force.

THE MOST FAILED PRESIDENT IN U S A HISTORY...
IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE RE-ELECT THIS THAT WILL SHOW ME JUST HOW STUPID AN UNEDUCATED MY FELLOW CITIZENS ARE!
THIS MANS AGENDA IS TO DESTORY THIS COUNTRY AND ANY ONE THAT FOLLOWS HIM.

Illegal Aliens Receive Billions in IRS Tax Benefits
Friday, 23 Sep 2011

On July 7, 2011, the U.S. Department of Treasury's inspector general for tax administration issued a startling report entitled "Individuals Who Are Not Authorized to Work in the United States Were Paid $4.2 Billion in Refundable Credits."

No wonder the nation's finances are in turmoil.

According to the Treasury report, foreign nationals not authorized to work in the United States and ineligible for a Social Security Number (SSN) are nevertheless receiving government help from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The IRS currently issues undocumented aliens an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) to facilitate their filing of tax returns.

Many illegal workers are paid in cash "under the table" and thus file no tax forms at all; but a number of undocumented workers, according to the Treasury report, are receiving public benefits contrary to federal and state laws.

For example, the Child Tax Credit (CTC) and the Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC) allow payment of federal funds as tax benefits to undocumented aliens. Add to these the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), and the result is tax refunds that provide incentives for foreign nationals to enter, reside, and work in the United States without authorization and in violation of current U.S. immigration law.

The CTC, ACTC, and EITC have come under review because of the significant volume of Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) returns filing for these credits using fraudulent data, such as names and SSNs.

The Treasury report notes that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) temporarily increased ACTC eligibility by changing the income threshold for calculating the credits in 2009 and 2010. The result was that in 2010, undocumented alien (ITIN) filers were able to claim higher tax refunds that totaled $4.2 billion. They represent an increase from $924 million in 2005.

It is clear that unauthorized aliens are filing ITIN tax returns with fraudulent data. The Treasury report found that "One common type of fraudulent refund involves taxpayers fabricating a Wage and Tax Statement (Form W-2) that shows excess withholding and results in a tax refund."

Street-smart illegal immigrants are wise to the federal government's incompetence.

Making matters worse, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Accounts Management Taxpayers Assurance Program (AMTAP) has failed to take steps to notify U.S. taxpayers when it is obvious that their SSNs and names have been compromised.

The Treasury Report found "sufficient evidence" that the IRS took no steps to notify legitimate taxpayers that their SSNs, and sometimes their names, were used by undocumented aliens filing tax returns on regular or ITIN tax returns.

The Child Tax Credit (CTC) benefit also is being fraudulently used by illegal aliens.

The Treasury Report indicates that the IRS will discuss amending the Tax Code to limit eligibility for the CTC and ACTC. Meanwhile, in reply to suggestions of misfeasance, the IRS answers that the agency does not have the legal authority to verify and disallow CTC and/or ACTC applicants as to their qualifications including their residency claim.

Meanwhile, over at the White House, President Barack Obama's two years and nine months in office have seen a rapid decline in his approval ratings with regard to proposed programs and job performance. At the top of the list is widespread disappointment at his promised immigration reform and border control that have yet to come to pass.

The failure of the federal government to control the borders not only means lost jobs, escalating healthcare costs, escalating criminal justice costs including victim costs, educational costs, welfare costs, and now fraudulent tax refund costs.

Immigrant advocates promulgate the myth that illegal aliens are simple souls in need of government assistance. In actuality, illegal aliens, despite their level of education, have become experts at taking the U.S. government for all its worth.

President Obama's immigration gyrations range from providing undocumented aliens with billions in tax refunds to promising U.S. citizens an emphasis on deportations.

In place of immigration reform, the president has chosen a re-election gimmick that authorizes by bureaucratic fiat "prosecutorial discretion" to be exercised by government immigration lawyers in halting the deportation of illegal aliens in deportation/removal proceedings.

A bewildered citizenry is witnessing a White House form of bureaucratic amnesty!

Yet the nation grows uneasy with Obama campaign promises that fail to materialize. Citizens and non-citizens alike have yet to know precisely where the president stands or what he means when he orates, leaving many to conclude that "Obama speaks with forked tongue."

New York Times Distorts Facts on Alabama Immigration Law
Tuesday, 06 Sep 2011


While the New York Times masthead reads: "All the News That's Fit to Print," the newspaper picks and chooses facts that support its liberal stance.

On Aug. 28, 2011, for instance, an NYT editorial entitled "The Nation's Cruelest Immigration Law" maligned immigration legislation that was signed into law on June 9, 2011, by the governor of Alabama.

The legislation (HB 56), known as the Beason-Hammon Alabama Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act, was scheduled to take effect on Sept. 1, 2011.

Instead, lawsuits filed by plaintiffs, including religious groups, civil rights groups, and 16 foreign countries, have resulted in a temporary hold on its enforcement.

The NYT editorial alleges that several clerics considered the Alabama law to be inhumane and thus filed suit. The editorial declares that the law is an attempt to terrorize undocumented immigrants and make criminals of those who live with them or show them any kindness.

In addition to U.S. clerics, Mexico and 15 other foreign countries have filed papers against the Alabama law. U.S. citizens might ask if these same countries would allow the United States to file legal papers to nullify a law passed by one of their states.

A U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) press release dated Aug. 1, 2011, stated that the Alabama law conflicts with federal immigration law and undermines the federal government's "careful balance" of immigration priorities and objectives. The Obama administration again seeks nullification of a state's effort to protect its citizens, while the federal government fails to enforce existing U.S. immigration laws.

The NYT editors allege that undocumented immigrants will be criminalized for working, renting, and failing to comply with federal registration laws that they say are "largely obsolete."

The editors criticize the Alabama law for requiring police to check the papers of people suspected of being in the state illegally, for suspending the licenses of businesses that employ illegal immigrants, and for requiring school officials to determine the immigration status of students and report the same to the state.

Here is what the Alabama law actually does. Section 13 (a) provides that anyone knowingly concealing, harboring, or shielding an illegal alien could be charged with a crime. This wording tracks existing federal immigration law (8 USC section 1324) and is similar to state immigration laws passed by Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, and Utah.

The existing federal law reads in part that violations include bringing in an alien without inspection; transporting or moving an alien; concealing, harboring, or shielding an alien or attempting to do so; or inducing an alien to enter or reside in the United States. This is the current U.S. immigration law of the land.

In April, a United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Virginia sentenced two persons to prison and fined them $2 million for harboring illegal immigrants and inducing the aliens to reside in this country. For more than two decades, similar convictions have occurred in U.S. District Courts throughout the nation.

U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, including the liberal Ninth Circuit Court, have ruled that section 1324 is Constitutional and have upheld these convictions. The United States Supreme Court also has affirmed the constitutionality of "harboring" and other portions of section 1324. Thus the U.S. law against concealing, harboring, or shielding an illegal alien is far from "obsolete".

The Obama administration has made a point of promoting E-Verify, an immigrant identification program passed by Congress (8 USC section 1373 [c]) to assist businesses in insuring that they are hiring legal workers. The program is operated and promulgated by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Section 15 of the Alabama law, in compliance with the federal law, requires use of the federal E-Verify program in determining whether a person detained by state law enforcement officials is in the country legally. By using the E-Verify program to check on new hires, employers comply with both federal and Alabama law and will not lose their business licenses.

Requiring school officials to determine the immigration status of students and report the findings to the state (Section 28 of the Alabama law) is meant to determine the actual number of legal and illegal students. Currently the federal government has no accurate count of how many illegal aliens are in the United States — only guesstimates.

The actual count of illegal alien children would help determine federal and state money allocations and determine the actual costs of illegal aliens to local and state governments. Nothing in the Alabama law prohibits the education of illegal alien children.

The Alabama law prohibits consideration by law enforcement officials of the race, color, or national origin of a detained person in determining reasonable suspicion or probable cause in questioning the person.

No Alabama official or agency may adopt a policy or practice that limits or restricts the enforcement of federal immigration laws.

State immigration control and protection laws ultimately will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. The NYT editorial's rush to judgment on the Alabama law is based on the folly of ideological hubris rather than on an objective reading of the law.

Perhaps the NYT editors pulled a Pelosi and wrote the editorial without reading the law.

Obama Opens the Door to Amnesty
Friday, 26 Aug 2011


The Obama re-election campaign jumped into full operational mode with an announcement by Janet Napolitano, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary, that illegal aliens in deportation proceedings — whether border-crossers or visa overstays — who have yet to commit an additional crime, will be allowed to remain in the United States and obtain work permits.

In an Aug. 18, 2011, letter to Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., regarding his proposed DREAM Act (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors), Napolitano announced a review and reprioritizing of all cases in deportation/removal proceedings.

Low-priority cases, which she believes waste enforcement resources, will be dismissed in defiance of existing U.S. immigration laws passed by Congress and signed into law by previous presidents.

Under the Obama administration, only high-priority cases, such as those involving violent criminals and national security risks, will be pursued. She added that "prosecutorial discretion" cases will not alleviate the need for passage of the DREAM Act or for larger reforms to the immigration law.

Cecilia Munoz, White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, blogged that "the president has the responsibility of enforcing existing laws in a smart and effective manner." Munoz, who is a former official of the radical Hispanic organization, La Raza (The Race), repeated the Obama party line that the executive branch of the government no longer will focus resources on low-priority cases in deportation.

She agreed with Secretary Napolitano's letter to Durbin that endorsed a memorandum by John Morton, DHS Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Issued on June 17, 2011, the Morton memo was entitled, "Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with the Civil Immigration Enforcement Priorities of the Agency for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Aliens." In it, Morton permitted DHS attorneys and officers to use "prosecutorial discretion" when dealing with removal cases.

The Morton memo followed earlier attempts in 2010 to effectuate amnesty for illegal aliens through a bypass of the legislative process. It set forth categories that DHS officers, agents, and attorneys are to consider in determining whether or not to cancel deportation/removal proceedings or efforts — regardless of where in the system an alien may be.

Meanwhile, President Barack Obama continued to speak out of both sides of his mouth. In his July 2011 speech to La Raza, he rejected the idea of imposing immigration reform without legislation passed by Congress, which is designated by the Constitution as the nation's lawmaking body.

Obama stated, "Now I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own . . . the idea of doing on my own is very tempting. But that's not how the system works. That's not how democracy functions." Yet Obama condones a bureaucratic obfuscation of content, meaning, and responsibility for deciding which immigration laws to enforce.

This Democratic motif works to bypass Congress and its obligations to enact laws. It muddles the understanding and application of existing immigration laws as well as DHS regulations and operating instructions, thus confusing an already befuddled bureaucracy.

Obama amnesty is to be achieved by administrative and bureaucratic fiat. As with other Obama administrative fiats, such as those in EPA, Agriculture, Interior, National Labor Relations Board, Health and Human Services, and OSHA, the Obama re-election juggernaut decided to merely bypass the Constitutional process.

Congress be damned is the insider motto at the White House, where it is assumed that no news organization will dare criticize the president's actions, even if unconstitutional.

Many in the illegal alien community believe that the Napolitano letter has opened the door for amnesty. Along with the Morton memo, it authorizes ICE field personnel to effectuate amnesty by creating a bureaucratic nightmare of piecemeal decisions.

Immigrant advocates consider this a plus, for bureaucratic anarchy leads to favorable outcomes for illegal aliens. In a sub-rosa manner, Obama political appointees are requiring career federal employees to broaden the interpretation of the Morton memo and Napolitano letter to apply to all illegal aliens.

In the process, the president's re-election team is attempting to bag the idea of separate but equal branches of government. An end run of Congress and the legislative process is deemed necessary by the Obama administration to pacify the Hispanic population and show that the president cares for illegal aliens, especially those who vote in U.S. elections.

Pressure by immigration advocates forced Obama to take action to appease the Hispanic population, the largest minority in the country.

Statements by Hispanic journalists and activists that Obama had broken his promise of immigration reform were numbing his re-election fervor. Such criticisms were paralyzing the White House, which has now found a remedy in "prosecutorial discretion."

While it is campaign season, and the Obama administration is pulling out all the stops, where is a rebuttal of the Morton memo and the Napolitano letter by the Republican congressional leadership?

Illegal Aliens Drive Up National Debt
Friday, 22 Jul 2011


Back in September 2010, the Pew Hispanic Center placed the total number of undocumented foreign nationals residing in the United States at 11.1 million.

The actual count today could be three times this estimate. Pew also referenced an estimate of unemployed illegal aliens at 10 percent, likely the result of recession-caused layoffs mainly in construction and factory work.

The illegal aliens in the United States at any given time and their costs to U.S. taxpayers remain ghost numbers. Look around, illegal aliens are here, but their exact numbers are hidden. The costs to U.S. taxpayers for the education, healthcare, incarceration, and welfare benefits for illegal aliens, employed and unemployed, can only be estimated. For years now, a segment of immigrant advocates downplay illegal migration, its causes, and the cost to U.S. taxpayers.

Douglas S. Massey, demographer at Princeton University and co-director of the Mexican Migration project, believes that Americans have a skewered view of Mexico; that it is underdeveloped with a population desperately seeking to come to the United States.

He states, "That's just not true at all." In 2006, Massey opined that Mexican migrants were not fleeing poverty but instead were seeking social mobility. He noted that their decreasing interest in migrating to the United States was the result of Mexican families having fewer children, border crime linked to growing drug cartel violence frightening many from attempting a crossing, educational and economic opportunities in Mexico, and a business slow-down in the United States.

These positions, advanced by Massey and accepted as gospel-truth by many illegal alien advocates, create assumptions that are passed off as etched in stone. It is true that the Mexican life-style is improving, except for the drug cartel massacres. If, however, the fertility rate among women in Mexico is decreasing, why is the fertility rate of Mexican women in the United States exceeding that of U.S. citizens?

Demographers agree that the Hispanic population rise in the United States is caused by immigration and the births of anchor babies. A more recent Pew Hispanic Center study (July 14, 2011) found that Mexican births in the United States have surpassed immigration as the main driver of Hispanic population growth.

Numbers on illegal aliens in the United States remain estimates and will continue to be so, until an accurate method for counting illegal border crossers and visa overstays is established. The best numbers on illegal immigration come from U.S. Border Patrol apprehensions. U.S. Census numbers remain notoriously inaccurate with regard to illegal alien counts, largely because members of the ghost population choose not to be counted.

Meanwhile, back on the border, apprehensions of illegal border-crossers are down for the years 2008 through 2010. According to U.S. Border patrol official figures, a total of 447,731 apprehensions of illegal border-crossers were made in 2010, down from the 540,865 apprehensions made in 2009. In comparison, between 2000 and 2006, the average apprehensions per year were 1.1 million, with 95 percent of them occurring along the Mexico-U.S. border.

U.S. Border Patrol estimates are that for every apprehension of an illegal border-crosser, three persons evade apprehension. Some Border Patrol agents estimate that five to seven persons enter illegally for each person apprehended. If the number of apprehensions in 2010 is down to half that in earlier peak years, still at least 1.2 million aliens are entering the country illegally each year.

For decades, "Other Than Mexicans" (OTM) has been a category for border-crossing apprehensions. In the past two years, the number of Central American illegal border-crossers has risen, as have those from "special interest countries" that sponsor terrorism against Western nations, including the United States.

The National Public Radio (NPR) recently quoted an illegal border crosser from Guatemala, who said that no matter how many times he is caught by the Border Patrol, he will continue to attempt a crossing, because it is difficult to find opportunities in his country.

An El Salvadoran Non-Government Organization (NGO) official states that Salvadorans migrate to the United States because of the lack of jobs and opportunities in their homeland. He failed to mention that El Salvadorans in the United States have founded one of the world's largest criminal gangs, MS-13.

Rather than consider remedies, such as a modernized "Bracero" program to document Mexican farm workers, President Barack Obama prefers the pabulum of comprehensive immigration reform with its pathway to citizenship for all comers.

The president refuses to acknowledge that the United States is faltering under the weight of an escalating national debt of $40 trillion within a decade. He refuses to acknowledge that the national debt is increasing partly because of the escalating numbers of undocumented aliens — a ghost population that threatens the financial solvency of the United States.

Illegal Aliens Strain Education Budgets
Tuesday, 12 Jul 2011


As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama vowed to champion education and lift schools out of the Bush doldrums. As president, Obama has failed.

His administration and his news media support team place the blame on former President George W. Bush. The remedy, they say, is fast cash for public education of the nation's children, including those who enter the country illegally.

Public education has cost U.S. taxpayers an estimated $2 trillion since 1980 when President Jimmy Carter rewarded his supporters in the National Education Association (NEA), the teachers union, by creating the U.S. Department of Education.

In the intervening years, federal control over local school districts has lowered performance levels of public-school students. A recent study found that 47 percent of adults in Detroit, many of them high school graduates, are functional illiterates.

Detroit is spending $15, 945 for each public school student, yet 77 percent of 8th graders perform below skill levels. Nationwide, student performance in engineering, mathematics, and science has fallen to Third-World levels.

Part of the problem is illegal border crossers, whose families drain education resources. Legal immigrants are not the problem. Increasingly U.S. businesses look to legal immigrants to perform the 21st century work that many U.S. public school graduates are unprepared to do.

The Washington Post on June 25, 2011, reported the resignation of a young public school principal, who found the D.C. school system dysfunctional.

The Post followed with a report on June 28, 2011, that the Maryland version of the DREAM Act which awards college tuition benefits to illegal aliens was in peril of repeal due to the frustration of Marylanders with illegal immigration.

Major support for repeal is coming from Baltimore and Prince George's counties, the bluest parts of a very blue (Democratic) state. As of July 6, 2011, required signatures to place repeal on the ballot had been surpassed.

According to The Philadelphia Inquirer on Sept. 20, 2010, black and Hispanic high school dropout rates track the national averages, 46 and 44 percent, respectively.

Liberals blame a too-strict discipline policy. Meanwhile the Chicago Urban League reported at its 2011 Summit meeting that "well-known deficiencies in the public education system play a role in the blocking of African-American access to the higher wage, fast growth job lane." The League noted that black children are performing below basic skill levels. The same can be said of Hispanic students.

The Boston Globe reported on July 5, 2011, that Boston public schools are in turmoil, with the superintendent playing musical chairs in moving under-performing teachers and principals to better performing schools and vice versa. One under-performing teacher complained that much of her time was spent helping students to speak English.

In Georgia, where the illegal alien population is among the highest in the nation, a state investigation found rampant cheating on test scores in Atlanta's "long troubled schools." The cheating was not by students but by teachers and principals.

In California, low graduation rates and school dropouts occur among students who speak little or no English. To address the problem, the politically correct town of Ukiah in Mendocino County has a number of subjects, including math, taught only in Spanish. California has the largest number of failing schools in the nation.

Meanwhile Illinois is dropping writing from the high school core curriculum, and Indiana no longer requires the teaching of cursive penmanship.

Although the 2011 budget for President Obama's Race to the Top (RTTT) education program is $4.35 billion, one state official notes that RTTT provides little or no real services.

It merely gives billions to school administrators who are able to employ good grant writers. The Chronicle of Higher Education, May 25, 2010, reported that an Obama Department of Education official observed that some high schools are "dropout factories," and many who graduate have to take remedial courses in college.

A 2011 poll indicates that people are losing faith in the public education system. As Andrew Coulson of the Cato Institute observed, "People will see the president's budget as a definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over that has failed, and $2 trillion of federal spending has failed America's children."

The reason could be that the influx of undocumented foreign nationals is integral to the re-distribution of wealth by means of class warfare permeating the Obama re-election rhetoric.