To answer that question requires navigating a minefield of political considerations. But it shouldn’t have to be that way. As any country proud of its founding and its heritage should be, the answer is simple. Any immigration should be to the benefit of the country. Not to a particular political party or to any identified “class.”
Democrats act as if the right to run across the border when you’re 8 1/2 months pregnant, give birth in a U.S. hospital and then immediately start collecting welfare was exactly what our forebears had in mind, a sacred constitutional right, as old as the 14th Amendment itself. This is the ‘anchor baby’ effect. That’s not the case. But needs to be addressed, eliminated, in any immigration reform legislation.
There is, or was, an effort to attract and keep highly skilled immigrants in the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math. It was called the STEM Jobs Act.
STEM Jobs Act summary . . .
Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to make up to 55,000 visas available in FY2014 and subsequent fiscal years to qualified immigrants who:
(1) have a doctorate degree in a field of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM degree) from a U.S. doctoral institution of higher education; and
(2) have taken all doctoral courses in a STEM field, including all courses taken by correspondence or by distance education, while physically present in the United States.
It passed the House with bi-partisan support. But died in the Democrat-controlled Senate. What could be controversial about that? It appears that smart and self-sufficient immigrants, those likely to be job creators themselves, not dependent on government welfare programs are not the kind of immigrants Democrats prefer. They prefer immigrants that are both bad for society and good for their political party.
Want more government money for your union buds? Come up with a great name for a bill, then ask taxpayers to fund it. For example, Senate bill S 708: Success in the Middle Act of 2013.
A bill to provide grants to States to ensure that all students in the middle grades are taught an academically rigorous curriculum with effective supports so that students complete the middle grades prepared for success in secondary school and postsecondary endeavors, to improve State and district policies and programs relating to the academic achievement of students in the middle grades, to develop and implement effective middle grades models for struggling students, and for other purposes.
Isn’t that their job? If they can’t do it, replace them. Make them compete, charter schools. Give parents a choice, school vouchers. And of course, you gotta love that “and for other purposes” line.
Speaking of gun control hysteria, GE Capital stopped offering financing to retailers whose main business is selling guns. They say it affects less than one percent of gun dealers and, as big as GE Capital is, dropping that market segment from their model is immaterial to them from a business standpoint. The spokesperson said that the decision was made in response to the “industry changes, new legislation and tragic events.” Tragic events like the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre I suppose, committed by GE Capital Vice President, Peter Lanza’s son.
This is purely a political statement, from the company that paid no taxes for 2010 on their $14 Billion in profits. Whose head of the company was on President Obama’s Jobs Council. You remember, that shovel-ready joke, har har, we spent billions and didn’t create any?
This isn’t the first move against firearm dealers and, by extension, citizens that support and believe in the Constitution. A couple of months ago Intuit Payment Solutions, a credit card processor and Lefty organization, dropped gun dealers from their client list too!
Neither will do much to negatively affect the industry. Their competitors will gladly get their business. It’s only important that you know who they are.
Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, in an effort to legislate some brotherly love, signed a bill that bans firearms from public parks and recreation areas. Placing restrictions, and limiting the ability of law-abiding citizens to protect themselves is his idea of public safety.
Denying reality, bill sponsor Councilwoman Cindy Bass (D) said “There’s no reason to have a firearm at a public playground.” Oh really? Here’s one! According to police records, there have been more than 50 shootings at rec centers and playgrounds in Philadelphia since 2010.
What is so difficult for these Democrats to understand that it is the criminal, not the politicians, who decide whether there is a reason to have a firearm, as well as the capacity of your magazines?
Councilman David Oh (R), one of two (out of seventeen) council members who voted against the bill argued that the ban hurts legal handgun owners since all the shootings at city parks have involved illegal guns.
Mayor Nutter and the City Council are forcing law-abiding citizens to make a choice when it comes to using these city facilities. To use them and put your family in danger. Use them but break the law by carrying your otherwise lawful weapon in order to provide protection as may be necessary. Or, not use them and turn them over to the criminals.
According to former Congressman Joe Scarborough (R-FL1), those House members (R’s and D’s) who voted against the gun control bill last week are “against background checks for criminals and terrorists” and “occupy the most extreme corner of American politics.”
I don’t know anyone who is against background checks for purchasing firearms, including the NRA. Background checks have been law for decades now. But that’s not the case from wherever Joe sits.
Only in the mind of the far Left is the 2nd Amendment in the “extreme corner of American politics.” Basically, it has nothing to do with politics. It is part of the Constitution that lawmakers are charged with protecting and defending. Second Amendment be dammed, Joe has made using 20 dead school children his cause for infringing upon the 2nd Amendment. Tugging on ones heartstrings is what Liberals do, and that’s what Joe is doing in this article. Creating his straw man argument for more gun control laws.
Could it be that Joe (Morning Joe) Scarborough isn’t aware that criminals and terrorists are already not permitted to buy or posses firearms?
Could it possibly be that Joe isn’t aware that the provisions in the bill that was defeated last week would have done nothing to stop the kind of violence that has brought “gun control” to the front page again, including the Sandy Hook Elementary school massacre and including the Boston terrorist bombers?
And could it be that Joe, like the President, wants an issue to use for political advantage (presumably for Democrats) than to insist on enforcing current laws before infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens by calling for more laws that criminals and terrorists won’t obey anyway?
Jeri MacDonald on Joe’s facebook page said “Joe, i wish you’d come over to the left side!” Judging from his article in Politico, that is a redundant statement.
According to Reuters, the two brothers suspected in the Boston Marathon bombings, who police say engaged in a gun battle with officers early Friday after a frenzied manhunt, were not licensed to own guns in the towns where they lived, authorities said on Sunday.
Must be a little disheartening for the gun-grabbing lobby to learn that common criminals aren’t the only people who don’t obey gun laws. Islamic terrorists don’t obey them either.
Anyone still believe that making more restrictive laws on law-abiding citizens will take guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists?
Like Jan Morgan said, “It seems the only people who adhere to the laws were those poor law abiding citizens who were forced to walk around defenseless while these murderous Islamic thugs were on the loose in their area looking for their next victims.”
This is rich. One can only hope that William Ayers’ rose is beginning to wilt. Not just because he is a bomb-throwing terrorist, but because of his Revolutionary (with a capital R) ideas about educational institutions being used more for engineering a “social justice” movement than anything else.
Minnesota State University Moorhead President Edna Szymanski said . . .
The university has lost a “significant amount” of donor money since William Ayers was there for a Feb. 26 speech and three days of meetings with faculty and students on how to incorporate social justice issues into curricula.
The House, in a bi-partisan fashion, passed H.R. 624, the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act. H.R. 624 seeks to establish voluntary information-sharing links between the private sector and the government. Rather than seeking to intrude on the private sector by mandating the sharing of information, this bill encourages companies to share cyber threat information by limiting the government’s use of the information and protecting the companies from liability.
The bill includes safeguards to our personal liberty which Democrats who voted against the bill (98 NO, 92 YES) thought we don’t need or deserve. Specifically, that the federal government may not make use of any records with personal identifiable information—such as firearms sales records, tax return records, and medical records—shared under the legislation. And, nothing in the bill authorizes the Department of Defense, National Security Agency or other Intelligence Community element to target an American citizen for surveillance. And that nothing in the bill authorizes companies receiving cyber threat information to sell the personal information of a consumer for marketing purposes.
Contrary to the Big Brother mentality that pervades Washington, the bill is constrained to limiting and combating cyber security threats only. Next step is for the Senate to do something with it. Or not.
Pensacolans missed a chance to show a little respect. I’m afraid our public servants and first responders may have felt a little like Rodney Dangerfield. Billed as “Respect for Law Day” by the Optimist Club, an event held by Optimist Clubs everywhere, Pensacola missed a chance to get tips on public safety, check out a fire engine, and see some beautiful horses. And they missed a chance to show some respect to our first responders. They are respected and appreciated here at The Lunch Counter.
I hope the rest of the event was better attended than it was when it began at 10AM. I took a few pictures and found this video. There was no mention in the News Journal about the 4-hour event. At the start there was no one there but willing and helpful volunteers and club members anticipating some folks. Hot dogs and refreshments were there. Everything was there except the public.
The Pensacola Police department, Fire department, and Sheriffs department’s Posse were all represented. Gulf Power had a representative and a display showing hazards and giving safety tips for electrical emergencies that occur during storms.
The Obama administration’s first attempt at incrementally limiting the 2nd Amendment went down in bi-partisan defeat in the Senate. Walter and Joe Biden are visibly upset.
To prey on the emotions of victims is standard operating procedure for bleeding-heart liberals. That goes without saying. But what’s interesting to me about this performance yesterday is the audacity and arrogance he displays, and whining, over losing his first attempt at putting limits on the second amendment.
But instead of supporting this compromise, the gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill. They claimed that it would create some sort of “big brother” gun registry, even though the bill did the opposite. This legislation, in fact, outlawed any registry. Plain and simple, right there in the text. But that didn’t matter. And unfortunately, this pattern of spreading untruths about this legislation served a purpose, because those lies upset an intense minority of gun owners, and that in turn intimidated a lot of senators.
Making the gun lobby the bogeyman is expected. It is the American people who know, and have seen, what can be accomplished by incrementalism when it comes to legislation. This was but the first step. For him to accuse anyone of lying to the American people is the pot calling the kettle black when he says “this pattern of spreading untruths about this legislation served a purpose.” He should know, beginning with the so-called Affordable Health Care Act when he told the American people “I will not sign a bill that adds one dime to the deficit.” On Obama’s part, he knew he was lying. He knew that if it was repeated enough, with the support of the media, that the American people would believe his lies. They bought it. But since the Congress didn’t, states had to be bribed and the bill had to be forced through without a proper vote to get it enacted. Who’s to say he won’t try the same shenanigans with ‘gun’ control?
The only difference here is, gun rights folks know what Obama’s end-game is. It didn’t have to be spelled out in the legislation. Democrats have openly said they want to effectively disarm law-abiding citizens, since they can’t disarm criminals.
Below is the whiner and liar-in-chief from The Rose Garden.