Feds tell court they can decide what you eat
By Bob Unruh
Attorneys for the federal government have argued in a lawsuit pending in federal court in Iowa that individuals have no "fundamental right" to obtain what food they choose.
The brief was filed April 26 in support of a motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund over the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's ban on the interstate sale of raw milk.
"There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds," states the document signed by U.S. Attorney Stephanie Rose, assistant Martha Fagg and Roger Gural, trial attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice.
"Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish," the government has argued.
WND has reported several times on fed crackdowns on producers of raw milk for friends and neighbors, including the recent case when agents arrived to inspect a private property belonging to Dan Allgyer in Pennsylvania at 5 a.m.
The incident was followed by a report a few days later that documented a proposal pending in Congress that critics say would do for the nation's food supply what the new health-care reform law has done for health-care resources.
"S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the U.S.," critiqued Steve Green on the Food Freedom blog. "It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money."
The plan is sponsored by U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., who explains the legislation "is a critical step toward equipping the FDA with the authorities and funding it needs to regulate what is now a global marketplace for food, drugs, devices and cosmetics."
Now it's statism on our plate! Mark Levin's manifesto – 'Liberty and Tyranny' – provides the antidote to its growing stranglehold
His website explains, "The legislation requires foreign and domestic food facilities to have safety plans in place to prevent food hazards before they occur, increases the frequency of inspections. Additionally, it provides strong, flexible enforcement tools, including mandatory recall. Most importantly, this bill generates the resources to support FDA food-safety activities."
The proposal cleared the U.S. House last year but has been languishing in the Senate because of a full calendar of projects. It creates a long list of new requirements for food-producing entities to meet the demands of the secretary of agriculture. It is expected to be the subject of discussion in coming days.
The Iowa case alleges the federal restrictions on raw milk are a violation of the U.S. Constitution, according to a report at Natural News.
The federal attorneys want the case dismissed.
"The interest claimed by plaintiffs could be framed more narrowly as a right to 'provide themselves and their families with the foods of their own choice,'" the government document states. But the attorneys say that right doesn't exist.
"The FDA essentially believes that nobody has the right to choose what to eat or drink," said the Natural News site, which explains it covers topics that allow individuals to make positive changes in their health, environmental sensitivity and consumer choices.
"You are only 'allowed' to eat or drink what the FDA gives you permission to. There is no inherent right or God-given right to consume any foods from nature without the FDA's consent."
The Natural News report continued, "The state, in other words, may override your food decisions and deny you free access to the foods and beverages you wish to consume. And the state may do this for completely unscientific reasons – even just political reasons – all at their whim."
The report cited an increasing level of frustration on the part of the federal government because of tactics including buying "cow shares" in which a consumer drinks milk from a cow he partly owns, or "buying clubs."
"This arrangement drives the FDA absolutely batty because it bypasses their authority and allows free people to engage in the free sales of raw dairy products produced on small family farms," Natural News said.
The report blames the aggressive campaign against raw milk on large commercial dairy interests, "because it threatens the commercial milk business."
The reason cannot be safety, the report said, since a report from the Weston A. Price Foundation revealed that from 1980 to 2005 there were 10 times more illnesses from pasteurized milk than from raw milk.
The federal government attorneys say the FDA's goal is to prevent disease, and that's why the "ban on the interstate sale of unpasteurized milk" was adopted.
The attorneys conceded that states ordinarily are expected to regulate intrastate activity but noted, "it is within HHS's authority … to institute an intrastate ban as well."
Natural News reported the ban could be seen as violating the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which leaves to states all powers not specifically designated in the Constitution for the federal body.
In fact, according to the Wisconsin State Journal, lawmakers there have adopted a bill, with the governor's support, that would allow farmers to sell raw milk directly to consumers.
The move puts Wisconsin in position to be the 20th state to allow direct sales of raw milk. Another handful of states allow retail sales.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Slimeball Waxman Hides Bill
HENRY WAXMAN’S SNEAK ATTACK ON DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS
Last week and over the weekend, the Internet was buzzing about a heretofore undetected provision Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., had slipped into the Wall Street financial reform bill that the House passed in December – a provision critics warned could devastate the nutritional supplement industry with excessive regulations, driving up the costs of supplements or removing them from the market altogether.
“The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173) …includes language going far beyond finance,” the Alliance for Natural Health-USA, a D.C.-based health freedom advocacy group, stated in an April 27 report, with the warning: “This language could be used for an end run around the Dietary Supplement Health and Safety Act (DSHEA), the legislation that governs dietary supplement regulation by the FDA.”
DSHEA was passed by Congress in 1994 in response to public outrage over a series of FDA armed raids on health food stores and alternative medicine clinics; it’s the landmark law designed to protect access to dietary supplements and to information about these products.
The Waxman provision does not affect DSHEA. It has nothing to do with lending institutions or financial matters, nor does it refer to the Food and Drug Administration, the agency tasked with regulating dietary supplements. Instead, it deals with the Federal Trade Commission, an agency set up in 1914 to protect the public from allegedly deceptive advertising and “anti-competition” business practices.
“A direct attack on supplements would take the form of an amendment to DSHEA, since that legislation governs FDA regulation of supplements,” ANH-USA explains. “In this case, Waxman has left DSHEA alone, and has instead inserted language in the Wall St. ‘reform’ bill that gives the Federal Trade Commission important new powers that could be used to circumvent key supplement protections in DSHEA.”
Last week and over the weekend, the Internet was buzzing about a heretofore undetected provision Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., had slipped into the Wall Street financial reform bill that the House passed in December – a provision critics warned could devastate the nutritional supplement industry with excessive regulations, driving up the costs of supplements or removing them from the market altogether.
“The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173) …includes language going far beyond finance,” the Alliance for Natural Health-USA, a D.C.-based health freedom advocacy group, stated in an April 27 report, with the warning: “This language could be used for an end run around the Dietary Supplement Health and Safety Act (DSHEA), the legislation that governs dietary supplement regulation by the FDA.”
DSHEA was passed by Congress in 1994 in response to public outrage over a series of FDA armed raids on health food stores and alternative medicine clinics; it’s the landmark law designed to protect access to dietary supplements and to information about these products.
The Waxman provision does not affect DSHEA. It has nothing to do with lending institutions or financial matters, nor does it refer to the Food and Drug Administration, the agency tasked with regulating dietary supplements. Instead, it deals with the Federal Trade Commission, an agency set up in 1914 to protect the public from allegedly deceptive advertising and “anti-competition” business practices.
“A direct attack on supplements would take the form of an amendment to DSHEA, since that legislation governs FDA regulation of supplements,” ANH-USA explains. “In this case, Waxman has left DSHEA alone, and has instead inserted language in the Wall St. ‘reform’ bill that gives the Federal Trade Commission important new powers that could be used to circumvent key supplement protections in DSHEA.”
Repeal Obamacare NOW!
The Road to Repeal is Well Under Way
"We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it," Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told us just weeks before Congress passed President Barack Obama's health care plan. Well, the nation's post-passage Obamacare education continued yesterday when the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) confirmed that the federal government will have to spend an additional $115 billion implementing the law, bringing the total estimated cost to over $1 trillion. The estimate had been requested before passage of the bill by Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA), but the CBO was too overwhelmed with the Democrats' other constant revisions to the law to get back to Lewis before the final vote.
This is by far not the only nasty little surprise that has come back to bite Obamacare after passage. Shortly after it became law, U.S. employers began reporting hundreds of millions if dollars in losses thanks to tax changes in the bill. AT&T and Verizon alone pegged their Obamacare tax losses at around $1 billion each. At first, Democrats in Congress were outraged by the announcements and threatened to hold hearings persecuting these companies. But then the Democrats not only found out the companies were obligated by law to report their Obamacare related losses, but that the losses were a signal these companies might have to dump their employees' and retirees' health care coverage all together.
Then the Obama administration's own Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released its final cost projections for Obamacare, finding that, contrary to White House claims, the legislation will increase national health care spending by $311 billion over the next decade. The CMS report also revealed that: 1) 18 million Americans will pay $33 billion in penalties for failing to comply with Obamacare’s individual mandate and still receive no health care; 2) U.S. employers will pay $87 billion in employer mandate penalties; 3) 14 million Americans will lose their current employer-based health coverage; 4) 7.4 million seniors will lose their current Medicare Advantage benefits; 5) 15% of all Medicare providers will be made unprofitable, thus “jeopardizing access to care for beneficiaries.”
Facing this onslaught of reality, the Obama administration has swooped into full spin mode, devoting the Weekly Presidential Address to explaining the "real benefits" Obamacare is "already delivering" to Americans. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius then sent letters to House and Senate leaders touting her "progress" in implementing the law. And then last night White House aides Nancy-Ann DeParle and Stephanie Cutter briefed the House Democratic Caucus on the "tangible benefits" of the law. The sales pitch for all three events were the same: 1) "adults" age 26 and younger can be added to their parents' plan (never mind that this drives up their parents' health care costs); 2) new high-risk pools for Americans with pre-existing conditions (never mind that 19 states have rejected working with HHS since Obamacare massively underfunded the pools); 3) supplementing insurance for early retirees (never mind that the Medicare Advantage cuts and tax changes mentioned above are a big reason why seniors will need supplemental coverage).
Democrats know that Americans simply are not buying what they are selling. Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) tells Politico: "It's just like trying to explain the Encyclopedia Britannica." And John Spratt (D-SC) adds: "You need to know what you're talking about and this is extremely complex. It's really difficult to remember, 'was this in this bill, or was this in the bill Senate side.'" Maybe Spratt should have figured out what was and wasn't in the bill before he voted for it.
Since the left can't even figure out what is in the bill they are trying to defend, the latest Rasmussen Reports shows that 63% of likely voters now believe it will increase the federal deficit, and 56% now favor repeal. Not waiting for this November's elections to change the leadership in Congress, states are leading the way on the road to repeal. According to The Washington Post 33 states have mounted legal and legislative challenges to the new law. Clint Bolick, litigation director of the Goldwater Institute, tells the Post: "This is going to be a long, protracted war of attrition and we haven't even seen the first wave of regulations yet. ... The initial challenges to McCain-Feingold were rejected. But since then, litigators found the vulnerabilities. Likewise, here I think you're going to see a thousand flowers bloom in terms of lawsuits. I'm hoping that this will die a death of a thousand cuts."
"We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it," Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told us just weeks before Congress passed President Barack Obama's health care plan. Well, the nation's post-passage Obamacare education continued yesterday when the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) confirmed that the federal government will have to spend an additional $115 billion implementing the law, bringing the total estimated cost to over $1 trillion. The estimate had been requested before passage of the bill by Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA), but the CBO was too overwhelmed with the Democrats' other constant revisions to the law to get back to Lewis before the final vote.
This is by far not the only nasty little surprise that has come back to bite Obamacare after passage. Shortly after it became law, U.S. employers began reporting hundreds of millions if dollars in losses thanks to tax changes in the bill. AT&T and Verizon alone pegged their Obamacare tax losses at around $1 billion each. At first, Democrats in Congress were outraged by the announcements and threatened to hold hearings persecuting these companies. But then the Democrats not only found out the companies were obligated by law to report their Obamacare related losses, but that the losses were a signal these companies might have to dump their employees' and retirees' health care coverage all together.
Then the Obama administration's own Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released its final cost projections for Obamacare, finding that, contrary to White House claims, the legislation will increase national health care spending by $311 billion over the next decade. The CMS report also revealed that: 1) 18 million Americans will pay $33 billion in penalties for failing to comply with Obamacare’s individual mandate and still receive no health care; 2) U.S. employers will pay $87 billion in employer mandate penalties; 3) 14 million Americans will lose their current employer-based health coverage; 4) 7.4 million seniors will lose their current Medicare Advantage benefits; 5) 15% of all Medicare providers will be made unprofitable, thus “jeopardizing access to care for beneficiaries.”
Facing this onslaught of reality, the Obama administration has swooped into full spin mode, devoting the Weekly Presidential Address to explaining the "real benefits" Obamacare is "already delivering" to Americans. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius then sent letters to House and Senate leaders touting her "progress" in implementing the law. And then last night White House aides Nancy-Ann DeParle and Stephanie Cutter briefed the House Democratic Caucus on the "tangible benefits" of the law. The sales pitch for all three events were the same: 1) "adults" age 26 and younger can be added to their parents' plan (never mind that this drives up their parents' health care costs); 2) new high-risk pools for Americans with pre-existing conditions (never mind that 19 states have rejected working with HHS since Obamacare massively underfunded the pools); 3) supplementing insurance for early retirees (never mind that the Medicare Advantage cuts and tax changes mentioned above are a big reason why seniors will need supplemental coverage).
Democrats know that Americans simply are not buying what they are selling. Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) tells Politico: "It's just like trying to explain the Encyclopedia Britannica." And John Spratt (D-SC) adds: "You need to know what you're talking about and this is extremely complex. It's really difficult to remember, 'was this in this bill, or was this in the bill Senate side.'" Maybe Spratt should have figured out what was and wasn't in the bill before he voted for it.
Since the left can't even figure out what is in the bill they are trying to defend, the latest Rasmussen Reports shows that 63% of likely voters now believe it will increase the federal deficit, and 56% now favor repeal. Not waiting for this November's elections to change the leadership in Congress, states are leading the way on the road to repeal. According to The Washington Post 33 states have mounted legal and legislative challenges to the new law. Clint Bolick, litigation director of the Goldwater Institute, tells the Post: "This is going to be a long, protracted war of attrition and we haven't even seen the first wave of regulations yet. ... The initial challenges to McCain-Feingold were rejected. But since then, litigators found the vulnerabilities. Likewise, here I think you're going to see a thousand flowers bloom in terms of lawsuits. I'm hoping that this will die a death of a thousand cuts."
Michelle Obama's Self-Righteous Lies
Michelle Obama: Food Profiteer Turned Food Cop
By Michelle Malkin
May 12, 2010
Let me summarize first lady Michelle Obama's anti-obesity agenda: Shed as I say, not as I gain. While she crusades for organic foods and puts government pressure on corporations to stop marketing fast food and junk food to children, Mrs. Obama herself profited from the very same processed food industry she now demonizes.
In June 2005, a few months after her husband was elected to the U.S. Senate, Mrs. Obama hustled a seat on the corporate Board of Directors of TreeHouse Foods, Inc. Despite zero experience, the food-processing company put her on its audit and nominating and corporate governance committees. For her on-the-job training and the privilege of putting her name and face on their literature, the company forked over $45,000 in 2005 and $51,200 in 2006 to Mrs. Obama -- as well as 7,500 TreeHouse stock options worth more than $72,000 for each year.
The chairman of the TreeHouse Foods board, Sam K. Reed, was a top executive at Kellogg's and Keebler Foods, home of that great menace to children, the Keebler Elf. Before that, he headed up Mother's Cake and Cookie Company. The conglomerate sells cheese sauces, Cremora non-dairy creamer, instant soup, puddings and powdered soft drink mixes. Hardly the stuff of Mrs. Obama's new vision of nutritional paradise. TreeHouse is also a leading supplier of pickles used in the burgers of evil fast food chain McDonald's -- exactly the kind of corporate restaurants Mrs. Obama is now targeting in her war on urban "food deserts."
The corporation-bashing Mrs. Obama would have continued raking in her TreeHouse cash if it hadn't been for her husband's pesky pledge to pander to Big Labor and swear off Wal-Mart. The retail giant, you see, happened to be TreeHouse's biggest customer. And Wal-Mart is to Big Labor as sunshine is to Dracula.
In May 2007, Obama told AFL-CIO workers in Trenton, N.J., that Wal-Mart was dead to him. "I won't shop there," he pledged, with an eye toward embarrassing then-chief rival Hillary Clinton, who had served on Wal-Mart's board from 1986-1992. The AFL-CIO has waged relentless attacks on Wal-Mart, dubbing it the "Poster Store for Greed." That, by extension, would make Mrs. Obama -- all-too-happy recipient of a Wal-Mart dependent compensation package worth more than $100,000 in 2008, according to Securities and Exchange Commission records -- a Poster Child for Ancillary Avarice.
Candidate Obama shrugged off his wife's conflict of interest. "Michelle and I have to live in the world and pay taxes and pay for our kids and save for retirement," Obama explained to Crain's Chicago Business magazine before his White House bid. Political expediency, alas, required that the candidate's wife step down when the issue reared its head after Obama's Wal-Mart bashing during the presidential campaign cycle. True to form, Mrs. Obama turned the decision into an ostentatious display of self-sacrifice:
"As my campaign commitments continue to ramp up, it is becoming more difficult for me to provide the type of focus I would like on my professional responsibilities," said Chicago's Joan of Arc in a resignation statement eight days after her husband declared his boycott of the stores stocked with food items processed and distributed by her TreeHouse colleagues. "My priorities, particularly at this important time, are ensuring that our young daughters feel a sense of comfort and normalcy in this process, and that I can support my husband in his presidential campaign to bring much needed change to this country."
She saw no conflict then. And she sees no conflict now in wielding her East Wing clout to restrict the advertising free speech of the food industry that lined her pocketbook with big, fat paychecks. The Obama White House is on an insatiable control binge. No private space has been left behind -- not your grocery aisles, not your children's TV shows, not even your refrigerator.
Give the first lady this: She has an uncanny knack for wrapping her self-interests in the mantle of self-sacrifice and public service. It's the Obama way.
By Michelle Malkin
May 12, 2010
Let me summarize first lady Michelle Obama's anti-obesity agenda: Shed as I say, not as I gain. While she crusades for organic foods and puts government pressure on corporations to stop marketing fast food and junk food to children, Mrs. Obama herself profited from the very same processed food industry she now demonizes.
In June 2005, a few months after her husband was elected to the U.S. Senate, Mrs. Obama hustled a seat on the corporate Board of Directors of TreeHouse Foods, Inc. Despite zero experience, the food-processing company put her on its audit and nominating and corporate governance committees. For her on-the-job training and the privilege of putting her name and face on their literature, the company forked over $45,000 in 2005 and $51,200 in 2006 to Mrs. Obama -- as well as 7,500 TreeHouse stock options worth more than $72,000 for each year.
The chairman of the TreeHouse Foods board, Sam K. Reed, was a top executive at Kellogg's and Keebler Foods, home of that great menace to children, the Keebler Elf. Before that, he headed up Mother's Cake and Cookie Company. The conglomerate sells cheese sauces, Cremora non-dairy creamer, instant soup, puddings and powdered soft drink mixes. Hardly the stuff of Mrs. Obama's new vision of nutritional paradise. TreeHouse is also a leading supplier of pickles used in the burgers of evil fast food chain McDonald's -- exactly the kind of corporate restaurants Mrs. Obama is now targeting in her war on urban "food deserts."
The corporation-bashing Mrs. Obama would have continued raking in her TreeHouse cash if it hadn't been for her husband's pesky pledge to pander to Big Labor and swear off Wal-Mart. The retail giant, you see, happened to be TreeHouse's biggest customer. And Wal-Mart is to Big Labor as sunshine is to Dracula.
In May 2007, Obama told AFL-CIO workers in Trenton, N.J., that Wal-Mart was dead to him. "I won't shop there," he pledged, with an eye toward embarrassing then-chief rival Hillary Clinton, who had served on Wal-Mart's board from 1986-1992. The AFL-CIO has waged relentless attacks on Wal-Mart, dubbing it the "Poster Store for Greed." That, by extension, would make Mrs. Obama -- all-too-happy recipient of a Wal-Mart dependent compensation package worth more than $100,000 in 2008, according to Securities and Exchange Commission records -- a Poster Child for Ancillary Avarice.
Candidate Obama shrugged off his wife's conflict of interest. "Michelle and I have to live in the world and pay taxes and pay for our kids and save for retirement," Obama explained to Crain's Chicago Business magazine before his White House bid. Political expediency, alas, required that the candidate's wife step down when the issue reared its head after Obama's Wal-Mart bashing during the presidential campaign cycle. True to form, Mrs. Obama turned the decision into an ostentatious display of self-sacrifice:
"As my campaign commitments continue to ramp up, it is becoming more difficult for me to provide the type of focus I would like on my professional responsibilities," said Chicago's Joan of Arc in a resignation statement eight days after her husband declared his boycott of the stores stocked with food items processed and distributed by her TreeHouse colleagues. "My priorities, particularly at this important time, are ensuring that our young daughters feel a sense of comfort and normalcy in this process, and that I can support my husband in his presidential campaign to bring much needed change to this country."
She saw no conflict then. And she sees no conflict now in wielding her East Wing clout to restrict the advertising free speech of the food industry that lined her pocketbook with big, fat paychecks. The Obama White House is on an insatiable control binge. No private space has been left behind -- not your grocery aisles, not your children's TV shows, not even your refrigerator.
Give the first lady this: She has an uncanny knack for wrapping her self-interests in the mantle of self-sacrifice and public service. It's the Obama way.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
A Call To Arms
A Call To Arms
The Obama administration, inspired by Saul Alinsky and the president’s friends and advisors, former underground Weatherman bombers and assassins Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, is intent upon revolutionary extension of socialist statism. They must be stopped if the United States is to survive.
Read More...
Summoning Our Inner Hero
By Jeff Lukens
Rarely does the concern of the middle-class reach a point where they start protesting the government en masse. The passage of ObamaCare and the impending financial ruin of our country is now one of those times.
Despite immense opposition, Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress forced through a health care bill, not to improve people’s health care but to expand the power of the state over them. It is the height of arrogance. As ObamaCare moves closer to reality, we know the resulting intrusion of government in our lives will not allow us to continue to live as we have before.
We know the government can’t keep running huge deficits and think there will be no consequences. We know the federal and many state budgets are already broke, and that hard times are coming. We know that Obama is deliberately trying to drive the country off a cliff with debt our grandchildren can never repay. And we know that when we speak out against this madness, they will malign us and likely smear us as racists.
Until recently, many have avoided speaking publicly about politics, and we now know that must change too. We could never live with ourselves if we sat by and did nothing while liberals dismantle the country. We need heroic action, and we know we are the ones who must be the heroes. Each of us need to reach deep and summon what may not come naturally, and bring out the hero that resides inside.
A hero is someone motivated to act beyond his or her own self-interest. It’s that person faced with an overwhelming challenge or moral dilemma who acts for the greater good. He or she acts in the interest of duty, honor, and country.
Think of the iconic hero Rick Blaine (played by Humphrey Bogart) in the movie “Casablanca.” In it, he is a world-weary American in a lawless town. As lost love and horrendous world events spiral beyond his control, he is faced with the uncomfortable necessity of standing up for good. At first Rick shrugs, “I’m not interested in the politics. The problems of the world are not in my department. I’m a saloon keeper.” His response is typical of many of us today.
Rick eventually comes to the realization that he can no longer run away from himself in drink and self-pity. He knows the only way to move forward is bravely to act on the side of good. His inner hero emerges. At great risk, and some sorrow, Rick puts the courageous underground Nazi resistance leader and his wife on the plane to Lisbon so they can continue their movement.
With the daily assault by progressives on our values, we know that all we hold dear about this county they oppose. Like Rick, we know we too must get off the bench and strive for what is right. And we know we must do it soon.
We know we must fight back now before ObamaCare takes effect, not years from now when the benefits become embedded. We know the massive expansion of the federal government into personal health care will drive health insurance providers out of business and force employers to dump their workers on to the government plan.
Obama thinks he can initially hide the negative effects, hooking us on new benefits until they become entrenched, and putting off the reduced care, the cost overruns, and the tax hikes that are sure to come so we will not make the connection between this horrible legislation and the resulting economic carnage. Like so much about this man, this deception is nefarious and dishonest.
But his plan may be backfiring. Suddenly, the steady encroachment of socialism these many decades is very noticeable by tens of millions of ordinary people who care deeply about their county, and they are taking to the streets.
We must start now at working to repeal this health care debacle and remove Obama and his cronies from office. And we must get out of our comfort zone and do what we may have never done before. We must be sure to vote. And we must peacefully do the tasks of manning picket lines at rallies, encouraging our family and friends to get involved, working the phones lines and canvassing precincts to elect conservatives, and more. In short, we must become heroes for the republic.
The cancer of progressivism didn’t start with Barack Obama and his corrupt Congress, but we can see to it that it ends with them. We must never forget the outrage we felt that Sunday in March when these people forced this legislative monstrosity upon us. Let that outrage spur your inner hero on.
The Obama administration, inspired by Saul Alinsky and the president’s friends and advisors, former underground Weatherman bombers and assassins Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, is intent upon revolutionary extension of socialist statism. They must be stopped if the United States is to survive.
Read More...
Summoning Our Inner Hero
By Jeff Lukens
Rarely does the concern of the middle-class reach a point where they start protesting the government en masse. The passage of ObamaCare and the impending financial ruin of our country is now one of those times.
Despite immense opposition, Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress forced through a health care bill, not to improve people’s health care but to expand the power of the state over them. It is the height of arrogance. As ObamaCare moves closer to reality, we know the resulting intrusion of government in our lives will not allow us to continue to live as we have before.
We know the government can’t keep running huge deficits and think there will be no consequences. We know the federal and many state budgets are already broke, and that hard times are coming. We know that Obama is deliberately trying to drive the country off a cliff with debt our grandchildren can never repay. And we know that when we speak out against this madness, they will malign us and likely smear us as racists.
Until recently, many have avoided speaking publicly about politics, and we now know that must change too. We could never live with ourselves if we sat by and did nothing while liberals dismantle the country. We need heroic action, and we know we are the ones who must be the heroes. Each of us need to reach deep and summon what may not come naturally, and bring out the hero that resides inside.
A hero is someone motivated to act beyond his or her own self-interest. It’s that person faced with an overwhelming challenge or moral dilemma who acts for the greater good. He or she acts in the interest of duty, honor, and country.
Think of the iconic hero Rick Blaine (played by Humphrey Bogart) in the movie “Casablanca.” In it, he is a world-weary American in a lawless town. As lost love and horrendous world events spiral beyond his control, he is faced with the uncomfortable necessity of standing up for good. At first Rick shrugs, “I’m not interested in the politics. The problems of the world are not in my department. I’m a saloon keeper.” His response is typical of many of us today.
Rick eventually comes to the realization that he can no longer run away from himself in drink and self-pity. He knows the only way to move forward is bravely to act on the side of good. His inner hero emerges. At great risk, and some sorrow, Rick puts the courageous underground Nazi resistance leader and his wife on the plane to Lisbon so they can continue their movement.
With the daily assault by progressives on our values, we know that all we hold dear about this county they oppose. Like Rick, we know we too must get off the bench and strive for what is right. And we know we must do it soon.
We know we must fight back now before ObamaCare takes effect, not years from now when the benefits become embedded. We know the massive expansion of the federal government into personal health care will drive health insurance providers out of business and force employers to dump their workers on to the government plan.
Obama thinks he can initially hide the negative effects, hooking us on new benefits until they become entrenched, and putting off the reduced care, the cost overruns, and the tax hikes that are sure to come so we will not make the connection between this horrible legislation and the resulting economic carnage. Like so much about this man, this deception is nefarious and dishonest.
But his plan may be backfiring. Suddenly, the steady encroachment of socialism these many decades is very noticeable by tens of millions of ordinary people who care deeply about their county, and they are taking to the streets.
We must start now at working to repeal this health care debacle and remove Obama and his cronies from office. And we must get out of our comfort zone and do what we may have never done before. We must be sure to vote. And we must peacefully do the tasks of manning picket lines at rallies, encouraging our family and friends to get involved, working the phones lines and canvassing precincts to elect conservatives, and more. In short, we must become heroes for the republic.
The cancer of progressivism didn’t start with Barack Obama and his corrupt Congress, but we can see to it that it ends with them. We must never forget the outrage we felt that Sunday in March when these people forced this legislative monstrosity upon us. Let that outrage spur your inner hero on.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Immigration Lies Exposed
FIVE MYTHS ABOUT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION FROM US GOVERNMENT
By Frosty Wooldridge
In a whopping “Pinocchio’s nose grows longer than a football field” essay, the Washington Post published a piece by former INS commissioner Doris Meissner, currently a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute. She wrote: “5 myths about immigration” 5/9/2010. Also published by the Denver Post.
Once again, ‘experts’ of the U.S. Government fail, and fail miserably, to engage the American public with integrity, honesty and service to American citizens.
“Despite the fact that we are a nation of immigrants,” said Meissner, “immigration continues to be one of America’s most contentious topics. The new law in Arizona authorizing police to arrest individuals who cannot show documents proving that they are in the country legally has set off a fresh bout of acrimony. But as in the past, much of the debate is founded on mythology.”
Reality check: Americans do not question LEGAL immigration although it proves more methodical at 1.5 million annually and more disastrous as it drives this nation toward adding 100 million people within 25 years. Americans resent ILLEGAL immigration. Meissner stands “up and away” from reality by making such an egregious statement.
THE FIVE MYTHS BY MEISSNER THAT AVOID REALITY
1. “Immigrants take jobs away from Americans”—“Although legal immigrants account for 12.5 percent of the U.S. Population, they make up 15 percent of the work-force,” said Meissner. “As a result of this growth, economists estimate that wages for the vast majority of American workers are slightly higher than they would be without immigration.”
Reality check: Over 20 million Americans suffer unemployment with 35 million Americans subsisting on food stamps. Millions of Americans suffer home foreclosures because they cannot secure jobs. That means those Americans must be supported by working Americans through taxes.
The fact remains: immigrants DO take jobs from Americans. Ten to twelve million fully employed illegal alien migrants displace Americans from jobs and they undercut wages as they work off the books. Over 20 million Americans remain unemployed. But, as Katie Couric announced, the U.S. adds only 95,000 jobs monthly. However, the U.S. Congress adds 150,000 to 180,000 legal immigrants every 30 days. Therefore, those immigrants take jobs away from Americans and we cannot possibly catch up to hire Americans to create full employment. Ms. Meissner needs to go back to sixth grade math to understand the numbers.
2. “Immigration is at an all time high, and most new immigrants came illegally”—“Today, two-thirds of immigrants are here legally,” said Meissner.
Reality check: In 2004, Time Magazine’s Pulitzer Prize winning writers Donald Barlett and Jim Steele, wrote, “What happened?” September 20, 2004. They investigated illegal immigration in that year to equal a whopping: “Three million illegal migrants crossed U.S. borders. It’s fair to estimate, based on a Time investigation, that the number of illegal aliens flooding into the U.S. this year will total 3 million—enough to fill 22,000 Boeing 737-700 airliners, or 60 flights every day for a year.”
Those numbers, because of the economic downturn, dropped to 1.0 million in 2009. An enormous 40 percent of illegal aliens arrive with legal green cards and visas, but overstay and melt into their racial enclaves to remain illegal for as long as they like. In order to remain, the women birth ‘anchor babies’ at a cost along with other services of $346 billion annually to U.S. taxpayers. (Source: Edwin Rubenstein Report, www.thesocialcontract.com)
3. “Today’s immigrants are not integrating into American life like past waves did”—“Today, as before, immigrant integration takes a generation or two,” said Meissner.
Reality check: Most Americans must press ‘1’ for Spanish and ‘2’ for English across the country, which shows that not only are immigrants not assimilating, their numbers accelerate so fast, they refuse to speak English and work within our society as integral aspects. They remain outside of American life by their linguistic recalcitrant choices.
4. “Cracking down on illegal border crossings will make us safer”—“Since 9/11, we have dramatically strengthened our borders,” said Meissner.
Reality check: In four of the past five years, I personally inspected the borders from Brownsville, Texas to San Diego, California. We have done NOTHING of any significance to secure the borders. Let me repeat that: NOTHING! Over $75 to $100 billion in drugs crosses the southern border annually and 700,000 plus illegal aliens continue to cross our border from Mexico annually. It’s astounding this lady enjoyed publication in major newspapers of her ‘myths’ by perpetrating outright lies about those myths.
5. “Immigration reform cannot happen in an election year”—“Ruling out immigration reform, whether because Congress has other priorities or because it’s an election year would be a mistake,” said Meissner.
Reality check: To give her the benefit of the doubt, she may be correct. However, the anger and acrimony in Washington, DC today over the health care bill being passed—certainly provides an excoriating environment for immigration reform.
First of all, the past four presidents and Congresses failed to enforce the 1986 immigration amnesty. We do not entertain any chance that this current president or Congress would enforce our borders after yet another amnesty. For anyone that might appreciate HOW deep our predicament, please join Roy Beck at www.numbersusa.com for a look at what we face by downloading “Immigration by the Numbers”. His 14 minute video will show you the futility and insanity of continued mass immigration whether legal or illegal from a line that grows by 77 million annually of poverty stricken people searching for a ‘better life’ in America. You won’t find any media talking about it or addressing it. They run from, avoid, evade and ignore it at all costs.
But if we ignore it as a civilization, immigration will inject 70 million third world people and their cultures of poverty into this country by 2035—a scant 25 years from now. We cannot sustain that number and we most certainly will not survive it with any hope for the continuation of the American Dream for our children.
Listen to Frosty Wooldridge on Wednesdays as he interviews top national leaders on his radio show "Connecting the Dots" at www.themicroeffect.com at 6:00 PM Mountain Time. Adjust tuning in to your time zone.
By Frosty Wooldridge
In a whopping “Pinocchio’s nose grows longer than a football field” essay, the Washington Post published a piece by former INS commissioner Doris Meissner, currently a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute. She wrote: “5 myths about immigration” 5/9/2010. Also published by the Denver Post.
Once again, ‘experts’ of the U.S. Government fail, and fail miserably, to engage the American public with integrity, honesty and service to American citizens.
“Despite the fact that we are a nation of immigrants,” said Meissner, “immigration continues to be one of America’s most contentious topics. The new law in Arizona authorizing police to arrest individuals who cannot show documents proving that they are in the country legally has set off a fresh bout of acrimony. But as in the past, much of the debate is founded on mythology.”
Reality check: Americans do not question LEGAL immigration although it proves more methodical at 1.5 million annually and more disastrous as it drives this nation toward adding 100 million people within 25 years. Americans resent ILLEGAL immigration. Meissner stands “up and away” from reality by making such an egregious statement.
THE FIVE MYTHS BY MEISSNER THAT AVOID REALITY
1. “Immigrants take jobs away from Americans”—“Although legal immigrants account for 12.5 percent of the U.S. Population, they make up 15 percent of the work-force,” said Meissner. “As a result of this growth, economists estimate that wages for the vast majority of American workers are slightly higher than they would be without immigration.”
Reality check: Over 20 million Americans suffer unemployment with 35 million Americans subsisting on food stamps. Millions of Americans suffer home foreclosures because they cannot secure jobs. That means those Americans must be supported by working Americans through taxes.
The fact remains: immigrants DO take jobs from Americans. Ten to twelve million fully employed illegal alien migrants displace Americans from jobs and they undercut wages as they work off the books. Over 20 million Americans remain unemployed. But, as Katie Couric announced, the U.S. adds only 95,000 jobs monthly. However, the U.S. Congress adds 150,000 to 180,000 legal immigrants every 30 days. Therefore, those immigrants take jobs away from Americans and we cannot possibly catch up to hire Americans to create full employment. Ms. Meissner needs to go back to sixth grade math to understand the numbers.
2. “Immigration is at an all time high, and most new immigrants came illegally”—“Today, two-thirds of immigrants are here legally,” said Meissner.
Reality check: In 2004, Time Magazine’s Pulitzer Prize winning writers Donald Barlett and Jim Steele, wrote, “What happened?” September 20, 2004. They investigated illegal immigration in that year to equal a whopping: “Three million illegal migrants crossed U.S. borders. It’s fair to estimate, based on a Time investigation, that the number of illegal aliens flooding into the U.S. this year will total 3 million—enough to fill 22,000 Boeing 737-700 airliners, or 60 flights every day for a year.”
Those numbers, because of the economic downturn, dropped to 1.0 million in 2009. An enormous 40 percent of illegal aliens arrive with legal green cards and visas, but overstay and melt into their racial enclaves to remain illegal for as long as they like. In order to remain, the women birth ‘anchor babies’ at a cost along with other services of $346 billion annually to U.S. taxpayers. (Source: Edwin Rubenstein Report, www.thesocialcontract.com)
3. “Today’s immigrants are not integrating into American life like past waves did”—“Today, as before, immigrant integration takes a generation or two,” said Meissner.
Reality check: Most Americans must press ‘1’ for Spanish and ‘2’ for English across the country, which shows that not only are immigrants not assimilating, their numbers accelerate so fast, they refuse to speak English and work within our society as integral aspects. They remain outside of American life by their linguistic recalcitrant choices.
4. “Cracking down on illegal border crossings will make us safer”—“Since 9/11, we have dramatically strengthened our borders,” said Meissner.
Reality check: In four of the past five years, I personally inspected the borders from Brownsville, Texas to San Diego, California. We have done NOTHING of any significance to secure the borders. Let me repeat that: NOTHING! Over $75 to $100 billion in drugs crosses the southern border annually and 700,000 plus illegal aliens continue to cross our border from Mexico annually. It’s astounding this lady enjoyed publication in major newspapers of her ‘myths’ by perpetrating outright lies about those myths.
5. “Immigration reform cannot happen in an election year”—“Ruling out immigration reform, whether because Congress has other priorities or because it’s an election year would be a mistake,” said Meissner.
Reality check: To give her the benefit of the doubt, she may be correct. However, the anger and acrimony in Washington, DC today over the health care bill being passed—certainly provides an excoriating environment for immigration reform.
First of all, the past four presidents and Congresses failed to enforce the 1986 immigration amnesty. We do not entertain any chance that this current president or Congress would enforce our borders after yet another amnesty. For anyone that might appreciate HOW deep our predicament, please join Roy Beck at www.numbersusa.com for a look at what we face by downloading “Immigration by the Numbers”. His 14 minute video will show you the futility and insanity of continued mass immigration whether legal or illegal from a line that grows by 77 million annually of poverty stricken people searching for a ‘better life’ in America. You won’t find any media talking about it or addressing it. They run from, avoid, evade and ignore it at all costs.
But if we ignore it as a civilization, immigration will inject 70 million third world people and their cultures of poverty into this country by 2035—a scant 25 years from now. We cannot sustain that number and we most certainly will not survive it with any hope for the continuation of the American Dream for our children.
Listen to Frosty Wooldridge on Wednesdays as he interviews top national leaders on his radio show "Connecting the Dots" at www.themicroeffect.com at 6:00 PM Mountain Time. Adjust tuning in to your time zone.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
The Truth About SB 1070
Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen. I want to explain SB 1070
I'm Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen. I want to explain SB 1070 which I voted for and was just signed by Governor Jan Brewer.
Rancher Rob Krantz was murdered by the drug cartel on his ranch a month ago. I participated in a senate hearing two weeks ago on the border violence, here is just some of the highlights from those who testified.
The people who live within 60 to 80 miles of the Arizona/Mexico Border have for years been terrorized and have pleaded for help to stop the daily invasion of humans who cross their property . One Rancher testified that 300 to 1200 people a DAY come across his ranch vandalizing his property, stealing his vehicles and property, cutting down his fences, and leaving trash. In the last two years he has found 17 dead bodies and two Koran bibles.
Another rancher testified that daily drugs are brought across his ranch in a military operation. A point man with a machine gun goes in front, 1/2 mile behind are the guards fully armed, 1/2 mile behind them are the drugs, behind the drugs 1/2 mile are more guards. These people are violent and they will kill anyone who gets in the way. This was not the only rancher we heard that day that talked about the drug trains.
One man told of two illegal's who came upon his property one shot in the back and the other in the arm by the drug runners who had forced them to carry the drugs and then shot them. Daily they listen to gun fire during the night it is not safe to leave his family alone on the ranch and they can't leave the ranch for fear of nothing being left when they come back.
The border patrol is not on the border. They have set up 60 miles away with check points that do nothing to stop the invasion. They are not allowed to use force in stopping anyone who is entering. They run around chasing them, if they get their hands on them then they can take them back across the border.
Federal prisons have over 35% illegal's and 20% of Arizona prisons are filled with illegal's. In the last few years 80% of our law enforcement that have been killed or wounded have been by an illegal.
The majority of people coming now are people we need to be worried about. The ranchers told us that they have seen a change in the people coming they are not just those who are looking for work and a better life.
The Federal Government has refused for years to do anything to help the border states . We have been over run and once they are here we have the burden of funding state services that they use. Education cost have been over a billion dollars. The healthcare cost billions of dollars. Our State is broke, $3.5 billion deficit and we have many serious decisions to make. One is that we do not have the money to care for any who are not here legally. It has to stop.
The border can be secured. We have the technology we have the ability to stop this invasion. We must know who is coming and they must come in an organized manner legally so that we can assimilate them into our population and protect the sovereignty of our country. We are a nation of laws. We have a responsibility to protect our citizens and to protect the integrity of our country and the government which we live under.
I would give amnesty today to many, but here is the problem, we dare not do this until the Border is secure. It will do no good to forgive them because thousands will come behind them and we will be over run to the point that there will no longer be the United States of America but a North American Union of open borders. I ask you what form of government will we live under? How long will it be before we will be just like Mexico , Canada or any of the other Central American or South American countries? We have already lost our language, everything must be printed in Spanish also. We have already lost our history it is no longer taught in our schools. And we have lost our borders.
The leftist media has distorted what SB 1070 will do. It is not going to set up a Nazi Germany . Are you kidding. The ACLU and the leftist courts will do everything to protect those who are here illegally, but it was an effort to try and stop illegal's from setting up businesses, and employment, and receiving state services and give the ability to local law enforcement when there is probable cause like a traffic stop to determine if they are here legally. Federal law is very clear if you are here on a visa you must have your papers on you at all times. That is the law. In Arizona all you need to show you are a legal citizen is a driver license, MVD identification card, Native American Card, or a Military ID. This is what you need to vote, get a hunting license, etc.. So nothing new has been added to this law. No one is going to be stopped walking down the street etc... The Socialist who are in power in DC are angry because we dare try and do something and that something the Socialist wants us to do is just let them come. They want the "Transformation" to continue.
Maybe it is too late to save America . Maybe we are not worthy of freedom anymore. But as an elected official I must try to do what I can to protect our Constitutional Republic . Living in America is not a right just because you can walk across the border. Being an American is a responsibility and it comes by respecting and upholding the Constitution the law of our land which says what you must do to be a citizen of this country. Freedom is not free.
I'm Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen. I want to explain SB 1070 which I voted for and was just signed by Governor Jan Brewer.
Rancher Rob Krantz was murdered by the drug cartel on his ranch a month ago. I participated in a senate hearing two weeks ago on the border violence, here is just some of the highlights from those who testified.
The people who live within 60 to 80 miles of the Arizona/Mexico Border have for years been terrorized and have pleaded for help to stop the daily invasion of humans who cross their property . One Rancher testified that 300 to 1200 people a DAY come across his ranch vandalizing his property, stealing his vehicles and property, cutting down his fences, and leaving trash. In the last two years he has found 17 dead bodies and two Koran bibles.
Another rancher testified that daily drugs are brought across his ranch in a military operation. A point man with a machine gun goes in front, 1/2 mile behind are the guards fully armed, 1/2 mile behind them are the drugs, behind the drugs 1/2 mile are more guards. These people are violent and they will kill anyone who gets in the way. This was not the only rancher we heard that day that talked about the drug trains.
One man told of two illegal's who came upon his property one shot in the back and the other in the arm by the drug runners who had forced them to carry the drugs and then shot them. Daily they listen to gun fire during the night it is not safe to leave his family alone on the ranch and they can't leave the ranch for fear of nothing being left when they come back.
The border patrol is not on the border. They have set up 60 miles away with check points that do nothing to stop the invasion. They are not allowed to use force in stopping anyone who is entering. They run around chasing them, if they get their hands on them then they can take them back across the border.
Federal prisons have over 35% illegal's and 20% of Arizona prisons are filled with illegal's. In the last few years 80% of our law enforcement that have been killed or wounded have been by an illegal.
The majority of people coming now are people we need to be worried about. The ranchers told us that they have seen a change in the people coming they are not just those who are looking for work and a better life.
The Federal Government has refused for years to do anything to help the border states . We have been over run and once they are here we have the burden of funding state services that they use. Education cost have been over a billion dollars. The healthcare cost billions of dollars. Our State is broke, $3.5 billion deficit and we have many serious decisions to make. One is that we do not have the money to care for any who are not here legally. It has to stop.
The border can be secured. We have the technology we have the ability to stop this invasion. We must know who is coming and they must come in an organized manner legally so that we can assimilate them into our population and protect the sovereignty of our country. We are a nation of laws. We have a responsibility to protect our citizens and to protect the integrity of our country and the government which we live under.
I would give amnesty today to many, but here is the problem, we dare not do this until the Border is secure. It will do no good to forgive them because thousands will come behind them and we will be over run to the point that there will no longer be the United States of America but a North American Union of open borders. I ask you what form of government will we live under? How long will it be before we will be just like Mexico , Canada or any of the other Central American or South American countries? We have already lost our language, everything must be printed in Spanish also. We have already lost our history it is no longer taught in our schools. And we have lost our borders.
The leftist media has distorted what SB 1070 will do. It is not going to set up a Nazi Germany . Are you kidding. The ACLU and the leftist courts will do everything to protect those who are here illegally, but it was an effort to try and stop illegal's from setting up businesses, and employment, and receiving state services and give the ability to local law enforcement when there is probable cause like a traffic stop to determine if they are here legally. Federal law is very clear if you are here on a visa you must have your papers on you at all times. That is the law. In Arizona all you need to show you are a legal citizen is a driver license, MVD identification card, Native American Card, or a Military ID. This is what you need to vote, get a hunting license, etc.. So nothing new has been added to this law. No one is going to be stopped walking down the street etc... The Socialist who are in power in DC are angry because we dare try and do something and that something the Socialist wants us to do is just let them come. They want the "Transformation" to continue.
Maybe it is too late to save America . Maybe we are not worthy of freedom anymore. But as an elected official I must try to do what I can to protect our Constitutional Republic . Living in America is not a right just because you can walk across the border. Being an American is a responsibility and it comes by respecting and upholding the Constitution the law of our land which says what you must do to be a citizen of this country. Freedom is not free.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)