Intended Consequences Of Immigration Executive Order
Feb 14, 2015 Immigration, Political
There is a thing called unintended consequences where something is done and the consequences of the action are not thought through (and they can be good or bad). When they happen people never saw them coming. For example, Congress passes a bill that only affects employers with more than 50 workers. Small businesses reduce their workforce so they are not affected by the law (Obamacare is a prime example). Time and again this happens but they keep passing bills that harm people. The consequences were unintended but they happened.
The illegal actions Barack Obama has taken regarding immigration is a different monster. In this case the consequences were anticipated and intended. Obama wants to bring people who are here illegally into the spotlight and give them a legal status. He is operating way outside his authority but no one seems to want to stop him (and I mean to really put the brakes on his plans). Many talk a good game but do little to actually stop what is happening.
Illegals will be able to file income taxes and claim credits from years past. They will get taxpayer dollars even though they NEVER paid into the system. They are being rewarded with OUR money for breaking the law.
Illegals who fall under the Obama Executive Order will also be able to register to vote and vote in elections. It is illegal for them to do so but that will not stop them. The states do not have the manpower to weed out applications to see who is registered legally and who is not. This is all by design because Democrats want more voters.
Some Democrat lawmakers comically assert that they doubt anyone who falls under this umbrella would risk deportation by voting in an election. Really? So the same people who broke the law to get here and who risk deportation each day they are here would NEVER break the law and risk deportation by voting particularly when there is little risk of getting caught. Right. These people are either idiots or they think we are.
Barack Obama and his minions do not want restrictions. They do not want to go after illegals and they do not want to deport anyone because the overwhelming majority of these people support Democrats. This is all a backdoor amnesty designed to increase the number of Democrat voters.
In addition, these people will drain our resources even more than they already are by receiving tax refunds (if you can call it a refund when you paid nothing in), welfare and Obamacare.
This needs to stop and we need to put every member of Congress who supports this as well as Obama on trial for violating their oath to this nation. They are taking us down from within and they need to be stopped.
We tried the soapbox and the ballot box so we are running out of options.
[UPDATE] This article claims the illegals paid into the system for years but were unable to get benefits. Perhaps BUT, they were not supposed to be here and if they paid in were doing so under false pretenses. And really, does anyone believe they were not receiving benefits because they were not allowed to?…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: backdoor amnesty, Democrats, elections, illegal immigrants, lies, voting
There Is Responsibility Involved In Voting
Jul 8, 2011 Political
Bill Clinton is upset by proposed laws in Florida and New Hampshire. Those laws would not allow people from other states, who happen to be attending college in these two states, to register to vote in the states. The law would require them to vote in their home states.
Clinton likens this to Jim Crow laws. This is nothing more than rhetoric designed to inflame the issue, which really should be a non-issue.
The members of our military who are stationed in a state other than their state of residence are not allowed to register to vote in the states in which they are stationed. They use a little thing called an absentee ballot. They request one, fill it out, and send it in. Then Democrats work really hard to have them discounted.
College kids from all states should be required to do the same thing. This IS the reason we have an absentee ballot process.
What Clinton fails to understand (as do many Democrats) is that voting requires a bit of personal responsibility. Now I know Democrats are not big on personal responsibility (and one only needs to look at Clinton to see that) but it is required nonetheless.
If college students can’t request an absentee ballot, fill it out, and mail it in then they do not need to vote. This is not an undue burden and it certainly does not rise to the level of Jim Crow.
What is it with Democrats and voting? Why do they claim ID requirements will disenfranchise people when the very people they claim will be disenfranchised need IDs to collect from the many government programs from which they benefit?
Why is it some kind of burden for people to fill out an absentee ballot if they will not be home on election day?
This all requires people to be responsible for their vote. If they can’t do that then they do not need to vote.
Hell, will we have to spoon feed them next to ensure they eat properly?
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: bill clinton, college students, jim crow, laws, Military, personal responsibility, voting
Voting Is For Citizens Only
Oct 25, 2010 Political
The dilution of American culture and its rules continues as some states are considering letting noncitizens vote. They are doing this in spite of the fact that the Constitution does not allow noncitizens to vote.
Let me be clear, this is not about illegal aliens who have no rights and should be removed. This is about those who are here legally and, in some cases, paying taxes. They do not have the right to vote and they think it is not fair. After all, they are here legally and (in many cases) pay taxes, so they should be allowed to vote. The big argument comes from folks who pay taxes and think they should be allowed to vote. Nice concept so how about we deny the vote to anyone who does not pay taxes?
The Constitution is pretty clear about this. Voting is not even the right of the people in the original Constitution. Elections call for electors selected from the states or by the state’s legislatures. The closet thing is the election of House members who are elected “…by the people of the several states.” Then electors and qualifications are discussed so it is not clear as to whom is allowed to acutally vote. One thing is certain, all other elections are done by the states and not by the people.
Several amendments to the Constitution changed these procedures and electors are now selected based upon the vote of the state. When people vote for a president they are actually voting for an elector to cast a vote for that person in Congress (the electoral college). Senators are now selected by popular vote in the state and no one may be denied the “right” to vote.
All this is well and good and there have been plenty of changes but one thing is abundantly clear. In all instances where voting is mentioned in any amendment that discusses the issue the word citizen is used in conjunction with the “right” to vote. The 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments all qualify who may vote with the word CITIZEN.
Therefore, noncitizens are NOT allowed to vote.
People who come here and want to vote should have an allegiance to this country and they can demonstrate that by becoming a citizen.
If that is not good enough then they can always go back whence they came.
Source:
FOX News
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: citizens, constitution, non citizens, voting
Rules Regarding Our Rights
Dec 27, 2008 Political, Second Amendment
The last presidential election demonstrated that we need some controls on who we allow to vote. I had suggested that people should have to pass a test in order to vote or that people should receive more votes based on how much money they pay in taxes. This is not my idea and has been explored by others. The idea is like those who own stock in a company. Those who own more get more votes and in the case of elections, those who pay more in taxes would have more votes because they are providing more of the capital to run the country.
I remember when I made these suggestions I had a few folks who said that what I wanted amounted to racism and discrimination because I would require people to qualify to exercise a basic right. I see nothing wrong with giving a person a basic civics test and making him pass before he is registered to vote but for some reason this gets the panties of some in a wad. The videos in the bottom right siderbar clearly demonstrate why some folks should not be allowed to vote but even the stupidity displayed is not enough reason for the crowd that believes people should have unfettered access to the polling places (unless a Black Panther is intimidating people).
It is interesting to me that people would oppose an idea that would impose qualifications on a so called right. Keeping in mind that the Constitution does not give anyone a right to vote we will assume that it does for the sake of argument. That and that states have set up voting as the method to select people for office. Why would people feel offended that we would impose a qualification to exercise a right?
The very same liberals who get bent out of shape at some sort of litmus test to exercise the right to vote have no problem setting up barriers for those who want to exercise their rights under the Second Amendment. You see, the right to keep and bear arms is absolute. The Founders used wording that acknowledged the right existed prior to the founding of this nation. The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
But it is infringed each and every day. Many states impose restrictions on who may and who may not own a gun and they are very strict on allowing people to carry them. In Maryland, assuming one meets all the checks for criminal record and mental health, one must demonstrate that he is in danger or has been the victim of threats. In some states people must register the gun, submit to a background check, attend safety classes and then, if the state feels generous, the person might get issued a carry permit. These permits and the background checks all come with fees that the gun owner must pay.
Imagine if there were a fee to register to vote. Suppose a person who wanted to vote had to fill out a form, pay a fee and then get a background check and pass a test before being allowed to vote? The ACLU and many other alleged civil rights organizations would be lined up to file the lawsuits crying about the denial of a right. They seem pretty comfortable with these restrictions on a right that is clearly enumerated in the Constitution.
Suppose that Congress made a law that people who wanted to go to church had to pay a fee and have a background check before they could attend services or be affiliated with a religion. Suppose people had to pay fees and pay to get speech training before they could exercise free speech. All of this would not sit well with the very liberals who attacked me for my suggestion that there be a voting test and yet they remain silent when it comes to the rights of the citizens to own and carry firearms.
Well, they are not exactly silent. They are usually speaking out in favor of gun control and against the rights acknowledged in the Constitution. These are the folks who will vote for candidates who want to exercise extreme gun control and who want to ban certain types of weapons (so called assault weapons). They seem to be able to rationalize that it is OK to infringe on one right if they disagree with the right but not on any right they hold sacred.
The “right” to an abortion is not spelled out in the Constitution. The word abortion does not appear in the document and yet the Supreme Court found that right in Roe vs. Wade. This decision overturned all the laws states had regarding abortion and now the left is so wrapped up in this murderous practice that anything sensible is an assault. Require minors to tell their parents, a violation of the “right.” No abortions after the third trimester, a violation so let’s go on and have partial birth abortions to ensure that babies are murdered any time the woman wants to exercise her “right.” God forbid any lawmaker tries to write some kind of law that places any restriction whatsoever on abortion because then the left gets up in arms and sees it as an affront to a basic “right.”
Not so much for gun ownership. The left wants to impose extremely restrictive rules on the law abiding citizens who want to exercise a right that, unlike abortion, is clearly spelled out.
As we move into the anti gun administration and as people like anti gun Caroline Kennedy look to be put into office we will see more restrictions put forth in bills at the federal level. States will try to impose even tighter control. As they do, ask how you would react if these impositions were directed at the other rights that are held as sacrosanct.
Barack Obama said that he felt the government could impose common sense restrictions on rights (he was speaking about the right to keep and bear arms). If this is the case then my common sense restrictions can be placed on voters. I am all in favor of a criminal records check to buy a firearm so that criminals do not buy guns. I am also in favor of a common sense approach to voting. I wonder if Obama will feel that voting should have some common sense restrictions placed on it…
Without the Second Amendment there would be no First and if the liberals get their way it too will be in jeopardy.
If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader.
Tags: abortion, free speech, gun control, Second Amendment, voting