Monday, April 29, 2013

Should we all buy silver on May 1st? Twelve reasons I say, “dang straight!”

Via Marton

 http://www.tulving.com/bullion/$500FaceValue90Silver.jpg

An effort has recently been launched on the Internet to get those who believe in “real money” to buy (physical) silver on May 1st.

It’s too soon to know if this grassroots’ appeal goes “viral” and makes a statement that influences not only markets, but the mainstream media and perhaps even the world.

At least some early comments about this fledgling initiative fall in the “Why bother?” “This-is-silly” categories.

Balderdash. I love the idea, am definitely going to participate, thank those who thought of it and hope millions of liberty-loving people do as well.

Ron Paul army? You up for another great cause?

What’s the worst that can come of such an effort? I can think of two things.

1. It falls flat, never takes off, makes no real difference. No one seems to even notice.

2. You buy some silver and you have less fiat currency in your possession.

Now, what’s the best that could happen if this effort DOES go viral? Off the top of my head, I’ve come up with 12 possible outcomes and I like all of them.

More @ Silver Seek

Rubio hit hard after inviting comments on immigration bill

Via avordvet

 

Senator Marco Rubio, the leading Republican behind the Gang of Eight comprehensive immigration reform proposal, has often challenged those who criticize the bill to come up with ways to improve it.  And not just his fellow lawmakers; Rubio has opened a new page on his Senate website asking for help from the public.

“Visit our website and submit your ideas to ‘Help Us Improve the Bill,’” says an announcement from Rubio’s office Friday. “Since the immigration legislation was introduced, Rubio has received over 1,100 suggestions for how to improve the bill.  Rubio encourages the public to continue reviewing the bill and sharing their ideas on ways to make the bill better when the time comes to amend the legislation.”

A visit to the “Help Us Improve the Bill” page shows the senator has posted just 147 out of the 1,100 suggestions he has so far received.  Rubio’s staff is reviewing each one — a wise move, given the emotions that the immigration issue can involve and the tendency of some people to say nasty things on the Internet. 

But even after screening for foul language and general content, the suggestions Rubio has so far received are remarkably negative.  Actually, they are overwhelmingly, crushingly negative, criticizing a wide spectrum of issues included in the Gang of Eight bill.  The commenters Rubio has invited to speak really, really, really don’t like what he has done.

“This amnesty bill is awful and you should back away from it as you promised you would,” says the very first suggestion, setting the tone for what is to come.

“Here’s how to improve the bill,” says another. “KILL IT.” “The only way to improve this bill is to chuck it into the garbage can,” says another.  “We cannot believe you are so naive to believe that this bill would work.” “My suggestion is a simple one,” says another.  “Throw out this bill and enforce our current immigration laws.”

“NO, NO, NO,” says yet another.

Other suggestions focus specifically on the enforcement provisions in the bill.  “Secure the border first, this is not debatable,” says one. “As a Cuban-American myself, I can tell that a lot of Cuban-Americans are against this bill if the border is not secured first,” says another.  “I would not be voting for Sen. Rubio again if border security is not first achieved.”  “NO amnesty for those here illegally,” says another.  Yet another: “Enforce the laws that we already have.”  And another: “Please — no agreement unless the borders will be secured, and no rewards for wrongdoing!!”  “The border must be sealed FIRST,” says another.  “Obama lies. He will not enforce border security.”  Then: “Common sense would dictate STRONGER ENFORCEMENT at the border FIRST!!”  “I suggest that until the borders are secure, nothing else should happen,” says another. 

“We have been promised secure borders before and it hasn’t happened. Once secure, we can discuss the rest of your bill.”  Says yet another: “I have no problems with compassionately dealing with the illegals that are already here, but by giving then amnesty (or whatever else you want to call it) before any real enforcement kicks in is the biggest problem. Don’t tell me no one gets legalized until DHS submits and starts a plan to secure the border. That’s not enforcement.”

Tea Party Senators Prep for Immigration Battle

 Another epic filibuster is brewing

One thing is for sure: Republican establishment senators are definitely feeling the heat from their constituents, as Cruz noted in that FreedomWorks speech.

“We’ve had probably five or six lunches with a bunch of Republican senators standing up and looking at Rand and Mike and me and yelling at us at the top of their lungs, I mean really upset, they said, ‘look, why did you do this? As a result of what you did, when I go home, my constituents are yelling at me that I got to stand on principle!’” Cruz told the conservative activists. “I’m really not making that up. I don’t even bother to argue with them. I just sort of let them yell and say, ‘look, you know, vote your conscience.’”

============================== 

Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY), Mike Lee (R-UT) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) now each appear to be positioning themselves in the fight against the push for the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill in much the same way the Senate’s Tea Party triumvirate knocked down the left’s push for new gun control legislation.
The three are joining Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) in questioning every painstaking detail of the bill, and reframing the narrative that those in favor of the legislation have driven including the need for a “path to citizenship” for America’s at least 11 million illegal immigrants and that the bill is tough on securing the border. Together, the group is using every tool at its disposal in the Senate--public pressure, process disputes and aggressive oversight procedures, among others--to fight against the legislation.

They face an uphill battle, even more so than they did when fighting against new gun control legislation. This time around, right off the bat, the four Republicans in the Gang of Eight already back the bill. Also, they have been a little bit slower to coalesce against this bill because they have been so busy fighting gun control, and immigration reform in and of itself and if done differently is not something they oppose. They just oppose this bill because it does not do immigration reform the way they think it should be done.

More @ Breitbart

Mexico opens door for illegal immigrants from Central America to pass through on way to U.S

 

With her leg snapped and folded excruciatingly over her shoulder, Elvira López Hernández lay flat on a railroad bed as the freight train hurtled above her, clinging tightly to two things: the railroad ties beneath her and the memory of the 4-year-old daughter she had left behind in Guatemala.

 “I said: ‘My God, I don’t want to die! My daughter!’ ” 

She slipped off the train in January, one of scores of migrant stowaways heading to the United States. Now she sat at a shelter here, an amputee. But she had no intention of returning to the crime and desperation of Guatemala City; she was still looking north. 

“What can I do?” she said. 

In Washington, the biggest immigration overhaul in decades would tighten border security between Mexico and the United States to stem the flow of illegal crossings. 

But there is another border making the task all the more challenging: Mexico’s porous boundary with Central America, where an increasing number of migrants heading to the United States cross freely into Mexico under the gaze of the Mexican authorities. So many Central Americans are fleeing the violence, crime and economic stagnation of their homes that American officials have encountered a tremendous spike in migrants making their way through Mexico to the United States. 

Americans fear government more than terror


According to a pair of recent polls, for the first time since the 9/11 terrorist hijackings, Americans are more fearful their government will abuse constitutional liberties than fail to keep its citizens safe.

Even in the wake of the April 15 Boston Marathon bombing – in which a pair of Islamic radicals are accused of planting explosives that took the lives of 3 and wounded over 280 – the polls suggest Americans are hesitant to give up any further freedoms in exchange for increased “security.”

A Fox News survey polling a random national sample of 619 registered voters the day after the bombing found despite the tragic event, those interviewed responded very differently than following 9/11.

For the first time since a similar question was asked in May 2001, more Americans answered “no” to the question, “Would you be willing to give up some of your personal freedom in order to reduce the threat of terrorism?”

Of those surveyed on April 16, 2013, 45 percent answered no to the question, compared to 43 percent answering yes.

In May 2001, before 9/11, the balance was similar, with 40 percent answering no to 33 percent answering yes.

More @ WND

Sex-ed cartoons 'too graphic' for N.Y. Times

 130427sexeducationbirthcontrol

While Americans debate how to best keep school children safe from violence, at least one group is asking why the media won’t help pressure the education system into keeping kids safe from another child predator the group dubs “Sex Incorporated” – also known as Planned Parenthood.

The American Life League, or ALL, issued a statement questioning why major news outlets like the New York Times and Washington Post have declined their recent request to run ads highlighting the methods Planned Parenthood uses to target young kids.

ALL claims the content of the ads came straight out of Planned Parenthood publications ALL says are used to “hook kids on sex.”

“This week, both the New York Times and Washington Post rejected a full-page advertisement from American Life League as ‘too graphic’ and ‘shocking’ for their adult readers,” says an ALL report.
Judie Brown, president and co-founder of ALL, agrees that the images are shocking, but says that the images come directly from Planned Parenthood materials funded by American taxpayers and aimed at those taxpayers’ own children.

“Parents tax dollars are being used to turn their own children into Planned Parenthood’s future sex customers,” says Brown. “Their abortion business is based on exploiting young minds and filling those minds with all manner of sex instruction.

More @ WND

Actor Robert Davi on political correctness

Cousin Bill


33 Million More Immigrants in 10 Years: Press 4 for English


Haze photo Hating_Wet_Backs.jpg

Mike Scruggs

     The Drudge Report recently revealed that the so-called Gang-of-Eight Senate Immigration bill, also known as Schumer-Rubio, if passed, would bring another 33 million immigrants, both legal and illegal, to the U.S. within ten years. The present population of the United States is about 308 million. Of these, 40 million or about 13 percent are foreign born, most coming since 1980. The 33 million estimate was originated at NumbersUSA, a prominent, pro-immigrant education and research foundation that believes we need to cut down the number of immigrants we admit each year for the benefit of both immigrants and natives.

      Heritage Foundation and Center for Immigration Studies research papers have also substantiated that the low levels of skills and education brought by most immigrants since the 1965 Immigration Reform Act have resulted in an increasing net fiscal drain on the economy and future Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid liabilities. Furthermore, the wages of American workers are being depressed by $2,800 annually per employed person by the massive influx of cheap-labor competition. Those with a high school education or less are hardest hit. These wage losses for American workers are a $437 billion annual gold mine for cheap-labor special interests.

     The March 2013 unemployment rate indicates excess labor supply’s grim impact on minorities and teens. While the overall (U-3) unemployment rate in March was 7.6 percent, the rate for blacks was 13.3 percent, and for Latinos, 9.7 percent. The overall teen rate for 16-19 year-olds was 22.5 percent. Black teens had a 33.9 percent unemployment rate.

     Schumer-Rubio or S.744 is officially titled “The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act.” Curiously, the underlying theme of its 844 pages is that there is a severe labor shortage! Yet the U-6 unemployment rate, which includes discouraged workers and those forced to part-time by economic conditions is 13.8 percent, numbering among the distressed 21.3 million people who want full time work but cannot find it. Another 2.0 million have dropped out of the workforce since March 2012. Yet S.744 sponsors John McCain and Lindsey Graham are appearing on national TV interviews claiming there is a national labor shortage. Florida’s Republican presidential hopeful Marco Rubio’s statements on Rush and other conservative talk shows indicate he is confused, to put it politely, about the actual language of the bill.

     Schumer-Rubio includes a major amnesty, estimated to be at least 11 million and perhaps as many as 18 million people. The one thing the public must know about amnesty is its MULTIPLIER EFFECT. Because of rampant fraud and poorly enforced criteria, past amnesties have turned out to be much larger than expected. The disastrous 1986 Amnesty was originally supposed to cover about one million illegal immigrants. It turned out to be closer to 2.7 million, followed by six follow-up special amnesties totaling another 3.0 million. In addition, all their relatives began to show up.  Based on the 1986 Amnesty, you can expect two to three additional illegal immigrants over 10-20 years for each amnesty. Amnesty draws more illegal immigrants like bees to honey and begets still more amnesties.

     Besides the massive amnesty, the bill calls for legal immigration to increase from 1.1 million per year to 2.6 million per year. Before the 1986 amnesty, legal immigration was about 300, 000 per year.  One major provision of S.744 is the tremendous expansions of additional guest-worker programs, more than tripling the current 900,000 to nearly 3.0 million.  As the Jordan Commission’s six-year study of immigration released to Congress in 1997 pointed out, guest-worker programs result in the same fiscal costs, suppression of American wages, and displacement of American workers as illegal immigration. In addition, they increase illegal immigration by relatives and widespread visa jumping. They also add to medical and hospitalization costs of birthright citizenship babies.

     According to NumbersUSA, the 33 million new immigrants resulting from the passage of S.744 would be 12 million amnestied illegal immigrants, 17.6 million of their relatives, and another 3.4 million in business sponsored immigration. Given the additional number of guestworkers, I am surprised the number is only 33 million. Keeping it under 33 million would be a huge problem, since Obama has demonstrated a strong disposition against enforcing immigration laws— also a continuing boon to terrorists. 

     Even the liberal-leaning Politico website admits the passage of S.744 will be a tremendous bonanza for Democrats, binging in at least 11 million new Hispanic voters within 10 years. Recalculating the 2012 vote based on the projected numbers of new Hispanic voters in 10 years would have given Obama a 7 point lead over Romney rather than only a 4 percent lead. States like Ohio, Florida, and Colorado would not have been close.

     The Bush strategy of going easy on immigration enforcement and favoring amnesty failed to get more than 40 percent of the Hispanic vote. But an additional 5 million illegal immigrants and about 4 million more legal immigrants than the Jordan Commission considered healthy for the country arrived during his eight years in office. Bush’s lenient immigration strategy, actually gave Obama a boost against McCain, who is essentially Senator Amnesty in the Republican Party. As careful academic research has pointed out, the Hispanic vote was never really in play. The myth of Hispanic social conservatism is largely confined to the Cubans (5 percent of Hispanics), Evangelical Church members (18-19 percent), and wealthier, active Catholic families. Bush’s 40 percent Hispanic vote in 2004 was earned by gains and high turnout of Evangelical Church members. 

     Meanwhile, as many as 8 million white conservative voters did not vote in 2008 and 2012. The Republican National Committee needs to figure out why. Competent research and polling indicate Republicans would make no significant gains with Hispanic voters by backing amnesty or open borders immigration policies but would lose a devastating share of their conservative base.  Enforcement is the necessary strategy for Republicans.

Antiabortion group releases videos of clinic workers discussing live births

Via Horace


 An antiabortion group that mounted a six-month undercover investigation has released videos this week that raise questions about what might happen to a baby as a result of an unsuccessful abortion.

One video features a D.C. doctor, Cesare Santangelo, who said that in the unlikely event that an abortion resulted in a live birth, “we would not help it.” Santangelo was answering repeated questions from an undercover operative about what would happen, hypothetically, if she gave birth after an unsuccessful abortion.

“I mean, technically, you know, legally, we would be obligated to help it, you know, to survive, but . . . it probably wouldn’t,” Santangelo is shown telling the woman, who was 24 weeks pregnant. “It’s all in how vigorously you do things to help a fetus survive at this point.”

Live Action president Lila Rose said the group’s videos expose “truly gruesome, illegal and inhuman practices.” She defended the tactics, saying undercover investigations are a powerful method to expose abuses.

Rep. McCaul: Boston Bombing Suspects Likely Had Training

 

VERBATIM

The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee says he believes the Boston Marathon bombing suspects had some training in carrying out their attack.

Rep. Michael McCaul is citing the type of device used in the attack — shrapnel-packed pressure-cooker bombs — and the weapons' sophistication as signs of training.

Homemade bombs built from pressure cookers have been a frequent weapon of militants in Afghanistan, India and Pakistan. Al-Qaida's branch in Yemen once published an online manual on how to make one.

McCaul also tells "Fox News Sunday" that he thinks the suspects' mother played "a very strong role" in her sons' radicalization process and that if she were to return to the United States from Russia, she'd be held for questioning.