Jeb Bush criticizes Donald Trump’s plan to build a great big wall with a beautiful door as something that will cost hundreds of billions of dollars. He’s on the campaign trail saying that doing so is ridiculously unaffordable and hopelessly unrealistic.
Well, he’s only off by hundreds of billions of dollars. Not only that, but when you consider the cost of an illegal alien to the United States, it would reach a break-even point after 8,500 illegals are prevented from crossing.
The 245-mile security fence in Israel cost $450 million, averaging $1.8 million per mile. Assuming the completion of our security fence would cost the same amount, the total tab would come in at just under $2 billion. Even if we use higher estimates of 9 million per mile, as estimated by DHS for the cost of the San Diego fence, that would amount to roughly $6 billion for the project.
Af far cry from hundreds of billions of dollars Jeb. The more Jeb speaks, the more he demagogues, the more he sounds like Obama. Bush is not the one for The White House because like Obama, he does not have America’s, and American’s, best interest in mind.
There’s one guy just tickled to death that Donald Trump is dominating the news on the subject of immigration. President Barack Obama. Anything to draw attention from participating in nuclear proliferation and providing funding to a terrorist-supporting country. And from trying to cripple the energy industry, coal specifically, and drive up the cost of electricity. But I digress . . .
Were it not for Donald Trump, what would the candidates be talking about?
Trump held a press conference yesterday. It was broadcast on two cable news channels. (Are any other candidates talking to the media? Or, is any media talking to other candidates?) At the start, Jorge Ramos from Univision, failed at imitating a BlackLivesMatter antagonist and got the spanking he deserved. Not because Univision and Trump are involved in a lawsuit, but because Ramos was acting like a spoiled child. After Ramos returned, Trump gave him more time than any other candidate would at answering and taking questions from a single reporter. Trump came out the winner in that exchange.
Later on FNC’s The Kelly File, Megyn Kelly asked Ted Cruz if he would deport an American citizen if his parents were illegals? She was speaking of an anchor baby. Instead of answering that question, Cruz gave his own answer which included words to the effect of “I’m not playing that game.”
I’ll answer your question Megyn Kelly. The answer is YES. That’s because, obviously, the family should be kept together. And if the parents would refuse to take their child with them, abandoning the child, then the kid should be taken from them as unfit parents, put in foster care, and the parents sent back to wherever they came from. And the anchor baby problem will cure itself.
Also yesterday, speaking in McAllen, Texas, Jeb Bush said, in Spanish, “I, as President, I would go to congress and change the law to give them not a residency but citizenship.” It is Bush’s belief that illegals (he and Obama call them Dreamers) deserve it. Like so many other candidates, Jeb is on that “the immigration system is broken” bandwagon.
It’s that whole “deserve” thing that troubles me. The other thing that troubles me is when people/politicians say the immigration system is broken. The only way to determine that is to enforce the immigration laws. They are pretty clear. We need a leader to demand that the laws, all of them, be enforced. No sanctuary cities, no anchor babies, no anything for illegals, except a ride back to the border.
Aside from Trump pretty much owning the media, the media is doing a great disservice to the folks by ignoring all but a select few of the other candidates. One such candidate has filed a complaint to the FEC over the media’s totally biased reporting on the field of candidates. And, he’s the only candidate so far who can show you his plan in writing. That would be Kerry Bowers.
So how’s the 2016 Clinton campaign going? Not very well. The fact that people do not trust her was brought on by her own actions.
From the start of her position as Secretary of State, we now learn that she was allowed to have her own private mail server to conduct official business, instead of the required secure government servers.
True to form, for Hillary Clinton, her mission was to keep her activities out of public view and out of the reach of any Congressional oversight. Can you say Benghazi?
So why is it that the most obvious questions about Sec. Clinton’s mail server activity still has not been asked of her boss, President Obama?
Like these two . . .
Mr. President, the Cabinet officials work under you and for you. Confidential and Top Secret emails are normal business for our Embassies around the world. Not only between our Ambassadors and the Sec. of State, but between the Sec. of State and yourself. How is it possible that you never noticed that email communications to and from your Cabinet Secretary were not going through a government-secured mail server? Will you agree to an investigation to verify that you also do not, and did not, have a private server and private email account of your own, that was not part of a government-controlled secure environment, for official business?
Got a letter from Tom Fitton, President of Judicial Watch, the nation’s government watchdog that took over when the media watchdog died. Since Hillary Clinton is making a second go at her husband’s last job, there are some things Tom reminds us voters of. Things that speak to the character of Hillary Clinton, the person who is asking expecting Americans to vote for her.
Here’s Hillary Clinton’s resume and, what you could expect of her in the future. She acts as if the laws that apply to other Americans like you and me do not apply to her.
Whether it was . . .
Obstructing the release of records about the Whitewater land deal when her husband was running for president in 1992 (her Rose Law Firm billing records were mysteriously lost for two years and then turned up in the White House residence); or
Keeping her “Health Care Task Force” proceedings secret when she was First Lady in 1993 (her task force wouldn’t even give the names of all the consultants it brought in for advice); or
Refusing to tell the truth about the deadly Benghazi terrorist attack that took place on her watch as Secretary of State in 2012; or
Violating and avoiding accountability by using secret email accounts as Secretary of State; or
Abusing her public office to funnel money to her personal accounts — with corporate money, foreign money, foreign government money . , , gobs of money, much of which is now sloshing around her vanity “charity” that could be renamed “The Clinton Corruption Family Foundation.”
All throughout her political career, Hillary Clinton has shown chronic contempt for the law and for the American people’s “right to know.”
From the start of Secretary Clinton’s term, her email activities were contrary to government requirements and in violation of espionage laws. And from the start, her boss (that would be President Obama) is ultimately responsible for the activities of those under him.
Ask yourself, had this been any other federal employee carrying on official business, much of which is confidential, secret, and top secret, on a non-secured government mail server, how many days (or hours) would pass before the FBI would be in their house, taking their computers, cell phones, and computers and cell phones of their family?
Over six months have passed since it was publicly known that Obama and Clinton have broken the law. The fact that it is also Obama’s Justice Department stonewalling what would otherwise be an automatic investigation, should also be obvious to everyone by now.
It’s long past time for a Grand Jury to be impaneled if not a Special Prosecutor to begin looking into the special email server, why it was allowed, who authorized it, the deleting of evidence (the emails and server) while under subpoena, and most importantly, all the communications between Secretary Clinton before, during, and after the attack on the Consulate in Benghazi. None of which have, so far, been provided.
It’s not like special prosecutors are not called for and used in cases of national security, and much less. Especially if the subject had an R after their name.
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.
The louder liberals talk about some ancient constitutional right, the surer you should be that it was invented in the last few decades.
In fact, this alleged right derives only from a footnote slyly slipped into a Supreme Court opinion by Justice Brennan in 1982. You might say it snuck in when no one was looking, and now we have to let it stay.
The 14th Amendment was added after the Civil War in order to overrule the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision, which had held that black slaves were not citizens of the United States. The precise purpose of the amendment was to stop sleazy Southern states from denying citizenship rights to newly freed slaves — many of whom had roots in this country longer than a lot of white people.
The amendment guaranteed that freed slaves would have all the privileges of citizenship by providing: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
The drafters of the 14th amendment had no intention of conferring citizenship on the children of aliens who happened to be born in the U.S. (For my younger readers, back in those days, people cleaned their own houses and raised their own kids.)
Inasmuch as America was not the massive welfare state operating as a magnet for malingerers, frauds and cheats that it is today, it’s amazing the drafters even considered the amendment’s effect on the children of aliens.
But they did.
The very author of the citizenship clause, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, expressly said: “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers.”
In the 1884 case Elk v. Wilkins, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not even confer citizenship on Indians — because they were subject to tribal jurisdiction, not U.S. jurisdiction.
For a hundred years, that was how it stood, with only one case adding the caveat that children born to legal permanent residents of the U.S., gainfully employed, and who were not employed by a foreign government would also be deemed citizens under the 14th Amendment. (United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 1898.)
And then, out of the blue in 1982, Justice Brennan slipped a footnote into his 5-4 opinion in Plyler v. Doe, asserting that “no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment ‘jurisdiction’ can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful.” (Other than the part about one being lawful and the other not.)
Brennan’s authority for this lunatic statement was that it appeared in a 1912 book written by Clement L. Bouve. (Yes, the Clement L. Bouve — the one you’ve heard so much about over the years.) Bouve was not a senator, not an elected official, certainly not a judge — just some guy who wrote a book.
So on one hand we have the history, the objective, the author’s intent and 100 years of history of the 14th Amendment, which says that the 14th Amendment does not confer citizenship on children born to illegal immigrants.
On the other hand, we have a random outburst by some guy named Clement — who, I’m guessing, was too cheap to hire an American housekeeper.
Any half-wit, including Clement L. Bouve, could conjure up a raft of such “plausible distinction(s)” before breakfast. Among them: Legal immigrants have been checked for subversive ties, contagious diseases, and have some qualification to be here other than “lives within walking distance.”
But most important, Americans have a right to decide, as the people of other countries do, who becomes a citizen.
Combine Justice Brennan’s footnote with America’s ludicrously generous welfare policies, and you end up with a bankrupt country.
Consider the story of one family of illegal immigrants described in the Spring 2005 Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons:
“Cristobal Silverio came illegally from Oxtotilan, Mexico, in 1997 and brought his wife Felipa, plus three children aged 19, 12 and 8. Felipa … gave birth to a new daughter, her anchor baby, named Flor. Flor was premature, spent three months in the neonatal incubator, and cost San Joaquin Hospital more than $300,000. Meanwhile, (Felipa’s 19-year-old daughter) Lourdes plus her illegal alien husband produced their own anchor baby, Esmeralda. Grandma Felipa created a second anchor baby, Cristian. … The two Silverio anchor babies generate $1,000 per month in public welfare funding. Flor gets $600 per month for asthma. Healthy Cristian gets $400. Cristobal and Felipa last year earned $18,000 picking fruit. Flor and Cristian were paid $12,000 for being anchor babies.”
In the Silverios’ munificent new hometown of Stockton, Calif., 70 percent of the 2,300 babies born in 2003 in the San Joaquin General Hospital were anchor babies. As of this month, Stockton is $23 million in the hole.
It’s bad enough to be governed by 5-4 decisions written by liberal judicial activists. In the case of “anchor babies,” America is being governed by Brennan’s 1982 footnote.
The above graciously lifted from Ann Coulter. Because I bet you didn’t know.
Time was when America’s leaders stood up for it, and the Constitution. No more. Now, thanks to errant and complicit Republicans, behaving like a dictator becomes an “accomplishment.”
A congressional vote of disapproval would not prevent Obama from acting on his own to start putting the accord in place. While he probably would take some heavy criticism, this course would let him add the foreign policy breakthrough to his second-term list of accomplishments.
Remember Marco Rubio’s one-liner at the first Republican “debate?”
God has blessed us. He’s blessed the Republican Party with some very good candidates. The Democrats can’t even find one.
At a time when most Americans believe they are seeing the country in decline, in so many ways, and the only candidates to replace Obama who are resonating with Americans are the ones from outside the political class, the DNC and RNC have a daunting challenge.
The RNC finds itself, once again, spending resources fighting their own candidates, preferring the traditional political class, Jeb Bush. Ted Cruz calls them part of the Washington Cartel. The republican field has ample candidates, not part of the Washington Cartel, who want to turn this ship around and they are vocal about it.
What do Democrats have? Hillary Clinton, part of the Washington Cartel who would be Obama’s third term. More of what most Americans don’t like. And that’s only if she isn’t wearing an orange jump suit in prison for violating the espionage act. Then there’s Al Gore. Al, don’t you want to run again? Or Joe Biden. Joe don’t you want to run? You son wanted you to run.
What’s missing here? Their desire to run. It’s not in their gut to run, to ‘turn this ship around’ or to run on an Obama third term. The DNC doesn’t have a true, organic candidate with a mission. (Credit President Obama for that. He is the only imperial ruler in his party.) The only person attracting democrats is not a democrat. It’s Independent Bernie Sanders, an avowed socialist.
It’s too early to tell how this will sort out by 2016, but a republican landslide isn’t out of the question. It’s the RNC’s election to lose.
When I hear the phony ‘war on women’ meme from those who use it to tar a certain political party, I just have to laugh at their righteous indignation.
You should see what a real war on women looks like. Brought to you by the Islamic goons currently running Iran. With the blessing of the nuclear proliferation co-conspirators, President Obama and Sec. of State John Kerry. (Bet you didn’t know that the Iranian negotiator, Kerry’s Iranian counterpart, is the father of the best man in Kerry’s daughter’s wedding.)
Here’s an account, by someone who used to live there, of what is going on in Iran, and the type of people Obama is dealing with. This was posted on the ‘American Policy on the Middle East and Iran’ FB group.
By Farid A. Khavari
Under the former Shah’s regime, women had equal rights with men. Under the Shia-Mullah regime women’s rights have been eliminated completely, although they get some special treatment under the laws.
Boys of 15 years and girls of 9 are legally adults and subject to execution for crimes.
Out of over 120,000 political executions (mostly young people) since 1979, about one third were females. Since it is illegal to execute a female virgin, she must be deflowered before being hanged or stoned.
The Shia Mullahs legalize the rape of the woman to assure compliance with their version of holy law. These practices do not exist among the Sunnis.
Why is it, that despite all the mud thrown at him by a media hell-bent on discrediting him, even if they have to make stuff up, he continues to rise in the polls?
It’s not just that he strikes a nerve on what most Americans feel is important, because there are other candidates who are saying similar things. What’s different is that Donald Trump doesn’t do PC , doesn’t bow to critics, and is always on offense. That ‘always on offense’ is what’s different. And, what people tired of seeing this country go down the drain are longing for.
It’s what Democrats have perfected. They never lose, even when they lose. They persist. They persist to the point of electing a community organizer as president. Twice! And the other side, being habitually polite, make a science out of caving and face-saving. Which brings us to the point where the Republican leadership, despite what they were elected to do, is going along with Obama’s agenda when every opportunity to stop it comes up.
Trump turns that whole dynamic on its head. And the folks are cheering.