	National News

Welcome to National News & Commentary

Just click on INDEX to take you to a complete listing of all articles appearing on this page

Obama Hauls Arizona before the UN Human Rights Council (August 30, 2010)

By Ben Johnson, Floyd Reports

Apparently Barack Obama is not content to make a federal case out of his immigration feud with Arizona; he just made it an international one.

The president’s first-ever report on U.S. human rights to the UN Human Rights Council contains a rich vein of offensive material. So far, one aspect has not been reported: our petty president used the situation to bash Arizona’s immigration law — and possibly transfer jurisdiction over the law from Arizona to the UN. Throughout the report, which sounds like an Obama campaign speech, the president discusses “the original flaw” of the U.S. Constitution, America’s tolerance for slavery, and his version of our long and despicable history of discriminating against and oppressing minorities, women, h***sexuals, and the handicapped.

After each complaint, he addresses how he is delivering us from ourselves, patting himself on the back for such initiatives as ending “torture,” promoting Affirmative Action, and passing health care legislation.

In his section on “Values and Immigration,” he praised the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to provide better medical care for detainees and increase “Alternatives To Detention” (e.g., letting them go). Then he turned to the one state that has had the temerity to stand in his way of fundamentally transforming the American electorate:

A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world. The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined.

On Obama’s command, Attorney General Eric Holder has sued the State of Arizona for passing a law that he criticized without reading, and which merely upholds federal law. (He gave sanctuary cities a pass.) He now threatens an additional lawsuit against Sheriff Joe Arpaio for “racial profiling” when arresting illegal immigrants near the Mexican border. Obama’s turns his skirmish with Jan Brewer from a states rights dispute into an international human rights cause. It also places Arizona’s law in the hands of the United Nations.

The national report is but the first step of the international government’s review process. On November 5, the United States will be examined by a troika of UN bureaucrats from France, Japan, and Cameroon (an oppressive nation which is a member of the Organization of Islamic Conference).

This trio will consider three items: Obama’s self-flagellating report, reports written about America by UN tribunals or international governing bodies, and testimony from NGOs with a pronounced anti-American bias. It will also consider “voluntary pledges and commitments made by the State,” such as suspending an Arizona state law. Then the French, Japanese, and Cameroon diplomats will draw up a plan of action for the United States to implement.

Nations are re-examined every four years. The Human Rights Council looks for voluntary compliance. However, its website asserts, “The Human Rights Council will decide on the measures it would need to take in case of persistent non-cooperation by a State with the” World Body.

When the Left cannot win at the ballot box (virtually every time), it overrules the people in the courts. Now that Obama is not sure he can prevail in the courts, he has overruled the American people by hauling Arizona and the two-thirds of Americans who support its law before the United Nations.

Unforgivable (August 30, 2010)

By Ayad Rahim*

It is unforgivable that we, as a nation:

· Considered, for president of the United States, somebody, with no discernible affection for, pride in, or allegiance to the country.

· Considered, for president of the United States -– and “Leader of the Free World” -– a “red-diaper baby” (with a Third World twist, and a side of Islam), marinated in Marxism for three generations (on both sides of the family).

· Considered a candidate, who -- based on his life story, family pedigree, the lives and views of immediate and extended family members, and his own past and current political teammates, friends, mentors and heroes -- is, at best, not sympathetic to the country’s traditions, core values, founding principles, free-enterprise system, military and police.

· Considered, for high political office, someone who might not be able to obtain a security clearance to enter the White House.

· Considered, for president, somebody with an Arabic name, with whom Arabs identify, while we are at war with Arab fascism (and not even asking whether the first name comes from Baraka (meaning blessing) or Buraq (the name of the horse that Islam’s prophet, Muhammad, rode to heaven)).

· Considered, for high political office, somebody with Third Worldist sentiments, allegiances and ideologies.

· Considered for president, someone with no appreciation or regard for what made the country great.

It is unforgivable, that we:

· Have gone the way of Third World dictatorships (including that with which I am most familiar, my native Iraq), by succ**bing to what Arabs call “empty talk” – the hollow slogans and fantastical rhetoric upon which Arabs have feasted and been deluded for generations.

· Demonized our last (and last patriotic) president and many patriotic Americans (as well as patriotic Iraqis), thus paving the way for demagoguery.

· Have gone the way of the Arab world, with scapegoating and demagoguery, messianism, tribalism and identity politics, political idolatry, cult of personality, mass hysteria and delusion, the pathology of perpetual crises and emergency rule, a political culture of angels and devils, criminalizing politics, and seeking redemption and salvation through politics.

· Have gone the way of the Third World, where each incoming ruler seeks to remake the nation anew.

· Cared so little about this great country, as to entrust its leadership to the most untested, inexperienced, unaccomplished, unexamined, un-vetted and unknown presidential candidate in memory, and, probably, in the country’s history.

It is unforgivable that our media:

· Have become defense counsel and propagandists for a particular party, forcing Americans -– as Iraqis did, in the days of Saddam -– to turn to foreign sources to find out what’s happening inside their own country (in our case, Izvestia, students in Communist China and the British press).

· Did not demand a presidential candidate’s personal, school, financial, medical and psychological records.

· Did not closely examine a candidate’s -– let alone a presidential candidate’s upbringing, family background, personal history, psychological makeup, political history and teammates, financial patrons, ideology, worldview, and attitude towards business, to enable citizens to discern how those might affect that candidate’s motivations and views on American traditions and values, the middle class, the “American Dream,” the role of government in people’s lives, and the need to be taken care of.

· Did not attempt to discover who a candidate’s friends have been, and who, his enemies.

· Did not scrutinize how a presidential candidate climbed the academic and political ladders, to enable us to judge his qualities and qualifications.

· Has not looked into the lives and politics of a candidate’s sister, brothers and other family members.

· Has not examined that candidate’s father -- his life, ethnicity, politics, personal behavior, alcoholism, work history, and parental role, and their effects on the son.

· Has not examined that candidate’s mother -- her politics, behavior, and parental role, and their effects on the son.

· Did not look at Kenyans’ animus toward England (an animus surpassed only by the Irish), and a certain politician’s feelings towards his Kenyan grandfather’s alleged treatment by the British (under Winston Churchill).

· Did not examine a candidate’s views of American power and historic role in the world, and what those views might mean for the world, our allies and our adversaries.

· Have abdicated their proper role as watchdogs, and, in the manner of dictatorships, become not only lap dogs for the state (or a particular party), but attack dogs, scrutinizing, investigating and attacking any private citizen or public official who dares to question the anointed leader.

· Cover up news and scandals, rather than uncovering them.

· Have made our fate, in some ways, worse than in a dictatorship, where people know their media are not free and independent, and thus disbelieve everything they say.

· Divulge operational secrets of the war effort -- and get away with it

· Reported in bad faith on Iraq and the military effort as a wh***.

· Painted the toppling of the world’s greatest terrorist and biggest sponsor of terrorism, as not only wrong and having nothing to do with 9/11 and terrorism, but illegal, immoral, and “the original sin.”

· Made “Iraq” a dirty word.

· Mock, smear and impugn the motives of American citizens, peacefully exercising their right to protest their government, by insulting them with such slurs as racists, bigots, Nazis, skinheads, klansmen, “angry white men,” haters, a mob, terrorists, violent, lunatic fringe, wackos, and tea-baggers – and get away with it.

· Do not criticize or ask difficult questions of a politician, for fear of being called racist.

· Did not examine what a candidate meant by “change” and “transformation” of the country.

Unforgivable

· The “loyal opposition” cynically switching its position on Iraq, for no reason but to gain power.

· Maligning and demoralizing the troops, undermining the war effort, and stabbing in the back the commander-in-chief and the military, in wartime

· Knee-jerk America-blaming and fault-finding.

· An arrogant class’s bigotry against Southerners, conservatives, Christians, white men, patriots, traditionalists, morally upright citizens, people from small towns, people not of the right schools, people who don’t speak with the approved accents, people who work their way through school, people who go into the military, people with large families, people who don’t kill their babies in the womb (especially if the baby is “defective”) -– or, as one presidential candidate famously said, “people who aren’t like them.”

· Crying wolf, as a nation -- about loss of liberties, invasion of privacy, lying, lack of science, suppression of dissent, shredding the Constitution, a lawless and rogue regime, illegitimate rule, a power grab, crony capitalism, arrogance, egomania, narcissism, “father issues,” dictatorship, fascism, Hitler, Nazi, disastrous economy, abuse of power, scaremongering and hatemongering, “culture of corruption,” a compliant press, impending, catastrophic natural disasters, and an apocalypse around every corner.

· Our tremendously wide fifth column, that has now conquered the country.

· An arrogant class’s scurrilous and malicious treatment of a high-ranking and courageous politician, with a string of accomplishments, a remarkable life story, and one of the highest approval ratings in the country -- and, on top of that, the vile treatment of that politician’s children.

· Immigrants -- and others -- who use the country and benefit from it, while constantly disparaging it and complaining about its people and culture.

· Sacrificing America at the altar of…I-know-not-what -- “white guilt”? assuaging our narcissism by making us feel good about ourselves? affirmative action? encouraging people’s self-esteem? wishful thinking about “race relations” or “world peace”? utopian visions? political correctness? the god of multicultural diversity?

· Making our professional clowns and mimics into opinion leaders and experts on everything under the sun -– including the sun itself.

Unforgivable, this president’s:

· Unleashing and feeding resentments, class warfare, hatreds and racial hostilities -- destructive forces, that, once unleashed, are well-nigh impossible to contain.

· Targeting, attacking and vilifying professions, businesses and industries.

· Pitting segments of society against each other, and sicking them on each other.

· Engaging in racial and identity politics -– and the backlash that has created.

· Sitting in the pews of an America-hating bigot’s church -– and subjecting his children to that abusive venom.

· Trillion-dollar budget deficits.

· Making trillion an everyday number.

· Firing a private-company executive.

· Gross interference in the economy and takeover of sections of the private sector.

· Centralizing control of the economy.

· Rewarding bad behavior and punishing good.

· Taking us down “the road to serfdom,” by undermining and destroying enterprise and the spirit of self-reliance.

· Putting a stake through the heart of the country -– its very spirit, drive and energy.

· Playing the blame game -- the stock-in-trade of the Arab world.

· De-emphasizing the 9/11 attack and war, reducing it to a crime and a “tragedy,” to be “remembered” by “service.”

· International spitting-on-America tour.

· Un-presidential behavior, language and comportment.

· Mocking and snearing at political opponents.

· Showing disrespect to the citizens of the country he putatively leads.

· Showing more sympathy towards terrorists and this country’s enemies, than towards its friends.

· Friendliness to dictators and communist regimes.

· Disdain and betrayal of democracies and democratic movements.

· Lack of fondness and affinity for the U.S. Constitution.

It is unforgivable that we

· Fell for media propaganda -– that propped up a naked emperor and smeared good and decent patriots.

· Bought something, without knowing what we were getting.

· Fell for the biggest scam and con-job in America’s history.

· Thought so little of the United States as to roll the dice with the country, risking its future and very essence.

· Are so cavalier with the country, as to turn it into a laboratory for social engineering.

· Were so gullible as to fall for the fraudulent hoax of global warming.

· Have been so conceited and narcissistic as to think we are greater than the sun, the seasons, and the natural world; that we know what the right temperature should be; and believing we can do something about the weather.

· Are trading individual liberty, for the potential of (Third World-like) government-promised security.

· Accept more and more government subsidies (in Iraq, Saddam “bought” people, with subsidized homes, land, jobs, food, fuel, healthcare and education).

· Grow increasingly dependent on government.

· Are turning ourselves from free and independent citizens, to subjects of the state, beholden and indebted to the beneficent leader -- the source of all things -- our welfare, our property, and our very lives.

· Have forgotten Thomas Jefferson’s maxim that “the government that governs least, governs best.”

· Do not understand -– or care -– that the bigger the government, the less freedom we, as individuals, have.

· Have mainstreamed radicalism.

· Have become ahistorical and apolitical.

· Have become ignorant of the true nature and reality of Marxism, socialism and demagoguery, and not recognizing them when they hit us in the face.

· Equate the country with the leader, as is done in the Third World.

· Look increasingly to the state to create work and jobs, rather than to ourselves.

· Have eroded and weakened our democracy, with an uninformed and ill-educated populace.

· “Talked down” the economy and the country, thus undermining Americans’ faith and confidence.

· Have “trashed” America for a couple generations, thus turning Americans against their country and churning out, as in the Arab world, a couple generations of America-haters.

· Have become economically illiterate, ignorant of the most basic laws of economics, how goods and services are produced, how wealth is created.

· Abandoned skepticism of politicians and the ways of politics.

· Did not act in the tried-and-true American way, by kicking the tires, taking the car around for a spin, and checking under the hood.

· Did not demand some accomplishments from a candidate.

· Considered a candidate (for any office) who, as a legislator, voted against providing medical care to babies surviving abortions who are left to die (what can, at best, be called “passive infanticide”) -– and who did so more than once.

· Lacked the basic common sense and patriotism to see through the propaganda, BS and the “con.”

· Handed over our government -– and country -– to a bunch of neo-Comms.

· Set aside patriotism and basic love of country, as requirements, for any public office.

· Gave our country its first Third Worldist president.

· Gave our country its first Marxist president.

· Gave our country its first anti-American president.

· Put a demagogue in the White House, maybe for the first time.

· Introduced the cult of personality to the country.

· Introduced our country to a “true believer,” a revolutionary, and the politics of mass movements.

· Were so ignorant, gullible and unpatriotic, as to have given such a person a hearing.

· Vote, based on identity, or for racial, ethnic or tribal reasons.

· Make everything about race, to the exclusion and detriment of everything else, including the country, and “race relations” themselves.

· Jettisoned human history’s most successful experiment in individual liberty.

· Took America for granted.

*Ayad Rahim is a Cleveland-based bookseller and former journalist.

Muslims are Exempt from Obamacare Tax (August 30, 2010)

Dhimmitude is the Muslim system of controlling non-Muslim populations (that's us folks!) conquered through jihad. Specifically, it is the TAXING of non-Muslims in exchange for tolerating their presence AND as a coercive means of converting conquered remnants to Islam.

The ObamaCare bill is the establishment of Dhimmitude and Sharia Muslim diktat in the United States. Muslims are specifically exempted from the government mandate to purchase insurance, and also from the penalty tax for being uninsured. Islam considers insurance to be "gambling", "risk-taking" and "usury" and is thus banned. Muslims are specifically granted exemption based on this.

How convenient. So I, Ann Barnhardt, a Christian, will have crippling IRS liens placed against all of my assets, including real estate, cattle, and even accounts receivables, and will face hard prison time because I refuse to buy insurance or pay the penalty tax.

Meanwhile, Louis Farrakhan will have no such penalty and will have 100% of his health needs paid for by the de facto government insurance.

Non-muslims will be paying a tax to subsidize Muslims. Period. This is Dhimmitude. Dhimmitude serves two purposes: it enriches the Muslim masters AND serves to drive conversions to Islam. In this case, the incentive to convert to Islam will be taken up by those in the inner-cities as well as the godless Generation X, Y and Z types who have no moral anchor. If you don't believe in Christ to begin with, it is no problem whatsoever to sell Him for 30 pieces of silver. "Sure, I'll be a Muslim if it means free health insurance and no taxes. Where do I sign, bro?"

Amish are also excluded. I think I could become Amish a whole lot easier than Muslim!!

Advantages and Responsibilities of an American Citizen (August 16, 2010)

An 1896 political science textbook used at the university level titled "Issues of the Day" describes the "Advantages and Responsibilities of an American Citizen" to include:

"Our nation is what we as citizens make it … safe citizenship demands a careful study of our country and its people, our government and all the questions of vital interest constantly pressing to the front. He who will not inform himself upon the living issues of the day and interest himself in these subjects so essential to national life, does not deserve the name of citizen, and by is very ignorance and selfishness become in fact, if not intention, an enemy of his own nation."

Following the compelling assertion that ignorance and inaction are equivalent to being an enemy of the state, the textbook describes, "Duties of an American Citizen":

1. Political Rights – "… In order to sustain a good government every man should exercise his political rights to the best of his knowledge … every man should be able to vote intelligently."

2. Your Duty – "It is your right to expose the folly or injustice of a law, to demand its repeal, and to try to get a majority to repeal it. But while it remains a law, you are to obey it."

3. Voting at the Polls – "It is the duty of every American citizen to exercise his right to vote at all the primaries and all the elections to which he is eligible. The American people are too indifferent in nominating and supporting men for office."

4. Prompt Execution of the Laws – "It is your duty to insist upon the prompt execution of the laws."

5. Act Generally with Some Political Party – "It is your duty to act generally with some political party and to exert your influence upon its leaders to induce the nomination of capable and honest men for office."

6. Watch the Conduct of Public Officers – "It is your duty to watch the conduct of public officers, to see that they perform their duties and observe their constitutional limitations …"

There is so much more in this textbook that is profoundly relevant for today but I will just reference one more clause under "Political Training for the Citizen" that I think you will find of interest due to its obvious application:

Making Citizens of Foreigners – How safe we should be from the pernicious effect of much ignorance and vicious anarchism which now trouble us if committees of good citizens had attended at our courts of naturalization and had forced upon … all officers … that this wise law be obeyed. But in practice … the process is "mechanical, because it is usually conducted in the interest of one or the other of the party "machines".

George Santayana’s observation is as applicable today as when first spoken: “Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Birthright or Birthwrong? (August 16, 2010)

By Virgil Goode

In his address to the country on immigration, President Obama said that “being an American is not a matter of blood or birth.” Our current government policy of giving automatic US citizenship to the children illegal aliens who are born on American soil makes being American solely a matter of birth.

Americans are quickly waking up to the disaster that is the arbitrary government policy of guaranteed automatic citizenship to the children of illegal aliens. A Rasmussen Poll found that 58% of Americans opposed granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens, while only 33% supported it.

Birthright citizenship creates a massive fiscal burden on the American taxpayer.

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 specifically states illegal aliens and even many legal immigrants are “not eligible for any Federal public benefit” with a few exceptions such as disaster relief.

According to the Pew Hispanic Center, there are four million children of illegal aliens who received US citizenship by the sole virtue of being in the United States. Over one-third of these children live at or below the poverty line and are eligible for a host of welfare programs that they would not receive were it not for birthright citizenship.

Additionally, Obama’s health care legislation created a huge loophole that allows illegal aliens to use birthright citizenship to receive government subsidized health care. While there are verification loopholes, the legislation makes illegal aliens ineligible for taxpayer funded “Affordability Credits.”

However, the bill intentionally does not address what would happen if an illegal immigrant family had a US citizen child. According to Pew, 8.8 million people live in such mixed families.

The Congressional Research Service noted that under Obama’s legislation, “it appears that the Health Choices Commissioner would be responsible for determining how the credits would be administered in the case of mixed-status families.”

In other words: Obama’s Health Czar will decide whether or not to give free healthcare to the families of illegal aliens. I wonder what side they will rule on!

Birthright citizenship makes it much more difficult to enforce our immigration laws.

When an illegal immigrant is detained, they can use the fact that they have citizen children as extenuating circumstances that make them a “hardship case” when appealing deportation orders.

This is why I have used the term “anchor baby” to describe them. The critics of this term are the same people who are trying to make the anchor drop even deeper. During his speech last week, President Obama stated we cannot deport illegal aliens because “it would tear at the very fabric of this nation—because immigrants who are here illegally are now intricately woven into that fabric. Many have children who are American citizens.”

The costly policy of granting birthright citizenship is based upon a misinterpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment. It states, “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.”

This was clearly designed to guarantee for the purpose of ensuring that the children of freed slaves could not be denied citizenship. Granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens is a completely arbitrary interpretation that has never been ruled on by the Courts or passed by statute.

When I served in Congress, I co-sponsored 10 bills to end birthright citizenship either by statute or Constitutional Amendment. Rep. Nathan Deal’s Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009 (H.R.1868) currently has 92 co-sponsors. This is a start, but unless the debate changes, it is unlikely that the Republican leadership, much less the Democratic majority in Congress, will address the issue.

With the federal government far behind on upholding its constitutional duties on immigration, the States are once again stepping in.

State Rep. Leo Berman of Texas introduced a bill to deny benefits to children of illegal aliens, and State Rep Randy Terrill of Oklahoma and State Sen. Russell Pearce of Arizona–who wrote SB 1070–are planning on introducing similar legislation.

Mark Twain wrote, “Citizenship is what makes a republic.” Our policy of giving the children of illegal aliens citizenship cheapens one of the most basic building blocks of our Republic.

Virgil Goode Represented Virginia’s 5th Congressional District from 1997 until 2009.

Amnesty for Millions without Any Vote in Congress (August 9, 2010)

The U.S. Senators who have been demanding answers from the Administration about a rumored administrative amnesty have now revealed shocking memos from top Obama officials.

They show Obama Administration officials offering a detailed plan that would offer actual or de facto amnesty to millions of illegal aliens without Congress ever taking a vote.

In this way, the Administration would be able to reap the thanks of all the cheap-labor, outlaw industries relying on illegal labor, as well as the entire pro-illegal voter base.

But no Member of Congress would have a vote for amnesty on his/her record while facing elections.

A day after a federal judge ruled that the people of Arizona can't enforce immigration laws against illegal aliens, this memo shows a grand plan for the Obama Administration to ensure that most illegal aliens get work permits, keep their jobs and prevent unemployed Americans from getting the jobs instead.

Reported in NumbersUSA.com. Update to come later.

Mexico's Brutality Towards Illegal Aliens Ignored by Obama, US Media (August 9, 2010)

By Jim Kouri

"Besides the news media's overall silence on illegal immigrants being terrorized, robbed and killed by Mexican authorities, the Obama Administration and US lawmakers are equally silent."

If the news media were truly unbiased in their reportage of Mexican illegal immigration and told the whole story, Americans would be shocked at the degree of President Felipe Calderon's hypocrisy.

For instance, Calderon's government is filing a lawsuit against Arizona over their new immigration enforcement law. Calderon himself during a visit to Washington, DC scolded the state of Arizona and its citizens and received a standing ovation from Democrat members of Congress.

However, Calderon and his government appear to be unwilling to acknowledge their own hypocrisy in dealing with illegal immigrants who enter Mexico from Central American countries. Considered felons by the Mexican government, these immigrants fear detention, rape and robbery. Police and soldiers hunt them down at railroads, bus stations and fleabag hotels. Sometimes they are deported; more often officers beat them and simply take their money and possessions.

Anyone who doesn't believe the above treatment of illegal aliens by Mexican authorities should peruse reports by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.

"This 128-page report examines the commission's work on more than 40 human rights cases, including recent abuses by soldiers involved in law enforcement operations, police crackdowns against demonstrators in Guadalajara and San Salvador de Atenco, and the killings of women in Ciudad Juárez over the past decade, among others. The report also examines the commission’s role in addressing abusive laws, including restrictions on freedom of expression, and responding to important reforms..." states the Human Rights Commission report's preface.

Besides the news media's overall silence on illegal immigrants being terrorized, robbed and killed by Mexican authorities, the Obama Administration and US lawmakers are equally silent.

"They allow Calderon and his flunkies to denigrate and scold Americans who call for tougher border security and a sane immigration policy while the blood of Central Americans who've entered or attempted to enter Mexico across its southern border stains their own hands," says former military intelligence officer, and NYPD detective, Sid Franes.

While illegal immigrants in the United States have held huge rallies in the U.S., without any consequences, the thousands and thousands of undocumented Central Americans in Mexico endure their inhumane treatment in silent fear. In fact, Mexico's constitution prohibits non-citizens from participating in protests or other public demonstrations against the Mexican government.

And while President Calderon demands humane treatment for his countrymen who break US immigration laws to enter and remain in the US, Mexico provides few -- if any -- protections for its own illegal immigrant population.

The level of police brutality Central American illegal immigrants endure in Mexico was apparent, when a police raid near a rail yard outside Mexico City ended in the death of an innocent man. Mexican cops shot and killed a local man, because the poor soul's appearance made officers think he was a immigrant.

Undocumented Central Americans complain much more about how they are treated by Mexican officials than about authorities on the US side of the border, where aliens may resent being caught but often praise the professionalism of the agents scouring the desert for their trail, according to this writer's sources within the intelligence community.

If an immigrant is carrying any money, Mexican police officers or soldiers take it from the hapless illegal immigrant. And it's not just local cops: Federal (Federales) and state police officers are equally corrupt and brutal. There is no such thing as a sanctuary city in Mexico. And the illegal immigrants are lucky if the are confronted by police officers; the soldiers are far worse in their treatment of these foreigners.

While most countries including the United States have some police corruption, the level of corruption in Mexico is shocking. To many, the only difference between Mexican organized crime gangs and the police is that the cops wear uniforms and badges.

While the Obama Administration praises Mexican cooperation with fighting a war on drugs, most law enforcement commanders know better. The Mexican government has been bought and sold by the drug gangs. The only time there is a crackdown on a drug gang is when a rival drug gang "requests" police action in order to eliminate their competition.

Mexico's President Felipe Calderon has called US residents', who live along the US-Mexico border, plans to build a fence along their properties "shameful." What's shameful, Mr. President, is your hypocrisy, lies and corruption.

Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he's a columnist for The Examiner (examiner.com) and New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he's a blogger for the Cheyenne, Wyoming Fox News Radio affiliate KGAB (www.kgab.com). Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.

He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He's a news writer and columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he's syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. Kouri appears regularly as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Fox News Channel, Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, etc.

Obama's Growing Racist Government (August 2, 2010)

Barbara Simpson

For a president and an administration with the media in its pocket, it's amazing they haven't convinced the American public that it's OK to protect lawbreakers by racial profiling.

I know, I know – if you believe the left's rant, only conservatives are racist bigots. But the truth is, the liberals lead on that one, and they're proud of it.

When they demand special rights for a certain class of "brown" people, they're racially profiling and are bigots.

They should be ashamed. Not only have they opened racial divisions in this country that were virtually closed decades ago, but they cater to it and are moving this country to the breaking point.

The issue is illegal aliens: foreigners who cross our borders illegally, stay in this country illegally, take jobs using fake identification – both of which are illegal – and feed at the trough of American generosity for food, housing, medical care, education and whatever else they can get.

On top of that, too many get involved in criminal activities from petty crimes to felonies. The costs to the criminal justice system and the numbers of incarcerated illegals prove the point.

Arizona hit the breaking point: bankrupt hospital emergency rooms, overcrowded schools, enormous social costs on every level, escalating crimes, record-setting kidnapping rates and violence against private citizens as well as police officers and Border Patrol, including murder.

It's a basic responsibility of the federal government to protect the borders and the citizens living within them. There are laws on the books to accomplish that.

But for political and philosophical reasons, politicians for decades have chosen not to enforce the law. They've chosen not to think first of the welfare and safety of the country and all Americans. They do what they please, hoping it will buy them votes and change the face and culture of this country permanently to their advantage. Their attitude is: The country be damned.

Their hubris is astonishing, and it's getting worse. The federal government, from the president on down, is doing as little as possible to strengthen the border, has encouraged the demonization of any entity – read that Arizona – and anyone who disagree.

To liberals, Arizona is the ultimate "racist" – all because Arizonans have had enough of what illegals are doing to them because the feds virtually ignore the problem.

The legislature passed S.B.1070, which allows law enforcement to question a suspect's immigration status, if, during a stop for another criminal issue, the officer has reason to suspect an immigration violation.

Gov. Jan Brewer signed the bill. She's clearly one of the most politically courageous politicians in decades.

Barely had the ink dried, then the long swords were drawn with everyone from politicians, immigration activists, education hacks, the media, ignorant citizens and religious hierarchy, most especially clerics of the Roman Catholic Church, piling on.

Liberals say 1070 mandates racial profiling and is racist – but in truth, liberals are the racists since they seem to think only "brown" people are illegals. Facts prove otherwise, but facts confuse them.

Under the guise of "human rights" and a "religious halo," they advocate criminal lawbreaking, and the government isn't letting up. In addition to demonizing the state and its residents, the feds plan to sue and had Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announce it during a press conference in Ecuador.

Gov. Brewer was furious at the insult of the foreign announcement, but is hanging tough and touts her record of winning such court cases.

After a long delay, Obama did briefly meet with Brewer, promising a border security plan in two weeks. She's heard nothing.

When Sen. John Kyl, Ariz., told a public meeting that the president told him privately he would only secure the border after "comprehensive immigration reform" – leftist political shorthand for "amnesty."

The audience was appalled. The White House, furious, called Kyl a liar. It became a political p---ing contest; another unflattering reflection of the president.

Unflattering but accurate – as accurate as the rumors now circulating that Obama plans to get immigration "reform" by a presidential executive order. There's enough concern that eight GOP senators wrote to Obama warning him against it.

They said such a move "would further erode the American public's confidence in the federal government."

Confidence? Hah! More than 80 percent of Arizona citizens support the new law. Upward of 70 percent of the country supports the Arizona law.

Fremont, Neb., last week passed a referendum making it illegal to rent to or hire illegal aliens. Kris Kobach, the attorney who help draft that ordinance, also helped craft the Arizona law and has won court battles defending similar laws in Arizona, Missouri and Nebraska.

Americans are furious that Obama sided with Mexican President Felipe Calderon in criticizing Arizona and even more furious now that Mexico has petitioned American judges to void the Arizona law.

And the bad news continues – with reports of increasing numbers of illegals from Muslim countries crossing the Mexican border, with increasing drug trafficking and weapon smuggling, with the discovery of another tunnel under the border, with confirmation that the "teen boy" shot and killed by the Border Patrol after rock throwing attacks, had a long, border criminal record including deportations.

Despite this, the Border Patrol has to pay for environmental damage resulting from its patrols and also has to contend with wildlife protection.

Yet, despite widespread calls to boycott Arizona, the AP reports at least 20 other states plan similar legislation.

If Obama tries to shove amnesty through despite public opinion, his head will spin at the reaction he'll get. It won't be pretty.

Arizonans wanted protection. Who knew it would provide the flashpoint to protect the country? Good for them!

Racism Runs Rampart in the Obama Administration (August 2, 2010)

It appears that the Department of Justice has implemented a ban on prosecuting defendants who are black based on actions taken by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. The Commission is requesting further information from the Department of Justice based on credible allegations that the DOJ is afflicted by a "culture of hostility" toward prosecuting black perpetrators of voting-rights violations against white victims.

J. Christian Adams, a recent top trial attorney in the voting section of the DOJ, testified before the Commission that former DOJ attorney, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandez, an Obama appointee at the top of the department, announced at a policy meeting that "the voting section will not bring any other cases against blacks and other minorities.”

Adams pointed out that over the past 45 years, the department has brought hundreds of cases against whites violating the rights of ethnic-minority voters, but only two cases against blacks violating the rights of whites.

Adams resigned from the department after he was ordered by his superiors to drop a case prosecutors already had won – the notorious New Black Panther Party intimidation of voters in a majority-black precinct in urban Philadelphia on Election Day in 2008.

Amateur videographers had caught New Black Panther Party activists on video wielding a baton, intimidating the elderly black man serving as the Republican poll watcher and calling for the murder of white babies in their cribs. Klee’s Kaleidoscope previously posted the video on its website. See below.

One of the four New Black Panther Party members charged in the case is also an elected Democrat holding a local office.

When they were ordered to drop the case, Adams and the team of DOJ lawyers had already won the case by default because the New Black Panthers declined to defend themselves in court. At that point in the proceedings, the DOJ team was simply waiting for the judge to assign penalties against the New Black Panthers.

Adams claimed that the decision to drop the case was made by Obama political appointees, and that the decision to drop a case that was already won was "unprecedented."

The full story is reported in World Net daily at http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=175729

YouTube Video: "Security" patrols stationed at polling places in Philly"

Five Ways the Obama Administration Has Made the Gulf Oil Crisis Worse (August 2, 2010)

By John Hawkins

The oil spill in the Gulf AKA Obamatrina has been a disaster for everyone involved. Millions of ordinary people who did nothing wrong are taking a huge economic hit, it's a genuine environmental disaster, BP may end up going bankrupt over the whole disaster, and Obama's incompetence has been so galling that even Democratic apparatchik's like James Carville and Chris Matthews are criticizing him publicly.

The political beating Obama has taken over the spill has been entirely appropriate. After all, this is a far left-wing President who believes in inserting the Federal Government into EVERYTHING because he thinks there's nothing they can't do better than the private sector. Run the banks? Run the auto-companies? Student loans? Health care? You name it and Barack Obama wants the government to control it.

Of course, the government can't handle any of those industries any better than they can this oil spill, but there's the rub: This time, there's no waiting. People are getting to see the failure of government in the Gulf in real time. Here's a test of the government's preparation and competence that can be judged by a simple standard: How long will it take them to "plug the damn hole" and get the mess cleaned up? Answer: Apparently, a long, long, long, long time.

Yet, what is Obama primarily being criticized for? His inability to even pretend that he cares more about the Gulf than his golf game. His creepy autocratic demand that BP give him 20 billion dollars to use... instead of staying within the law of the land. His disengagement. His flat emotionless response to this disaster. His inability to make any significant progress, even though he has admitted that his Administration, not BP, is calling all the shots.

While these are all valid grounds for criticism, there's another area where Obama has actually been getting much more of a pass than he deserves: His administration has greatly hindered the clean-up efforts in the Gulf. In other words, there are businesses that have been ruined, people's livelihoods lost, and beaches that have oil on them today as a direct result of the Obama Administration's incompetence. It's a real world example of Ronald Reagan's famous quotation, The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, "I'm fr... Here's some of the "help" the Obama administration has provided to the Gulf states in the aftermath of this crisis:

Why Won't Obama Waive the Jones Act? Waiving the Jones Act would make it easier for "foreign vessels to move in U.S. waters and between ports." This is quite significant, since the "State Department acknowledges it has had 21 aid offers from 17 countries." Getting that help could have been the difference between skimming off the oil at sea and seeing that same oil wash up on American beaches. George Bush waived the Jones Act during Katrina, so why hasn't Barack Obama followed his lead? Whatever his reasoning may be, the consequences of his inaction have been rather severe.

Sen. George LeMieux (R-Fla.) pressed the president on the Jones Act during a recent face-to-face meeting. LeMieux said the action would signal America's allies that their help is wanted. Given the dire situation in the Gulf, what's the harm? Two other members from Florida, Reps. Corrine Brown (D) and John Mica (R), said their state is suffering while skimmers sit idle. At a hearing on Thursday, Brown held up photos of vessels in Mexico and Norway, asking, "What is the process for the state to take advantage of skimmers from other countries?"

Mica trained his criticism on Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano for failing to mobilize the entire American fleet. "U.S.-flag vessels have the capacity to bolster the current oil skimming and removal taking place in the Gulf of Mexico," he said. "Over the last couple of weeks, we have seen oil products wash up on the shores of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida while vessels, which could have been pressed into service, sit idle. This is unacceptable."

Perhaps the real problem Obama has with waiving the Jones Act is that it would be an acknowledgement of the obvious truth: That government regulations often slow the private sector down and get the way. When you're a liberal who has never seen a regulation that you don't like, that can be a hard admission to make.

The Louisiana Sand Berms: Louisiana has been trying to build sand berms to keep oil away from their coastal marshes, where it would obviously cause a lot of environmental damage. Rather bizarrely, after dragging their feet about approving the sand berms, The Obama Administration has told Louisiana to stop building the sand berms because they might cause environmental damage. In other words, their logic is that Louisiana needs to allow oil to permeate their coastal marshes in order to prevent possible environmental damage. No wonder Bobby Jindal is pleading for, "the federal government to get out of the way."

16 Crude Sucking Barges Taken Out Of Action By The Feds: Believe it or not, the Coast Guard actually stopped 16 crude-Sucking Barges from siphoning up oil in order to make sure "there were fire extinguishers and life vests" on the ships. Had Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal not pitched a fit to the media and called the White House, those barges might still be sitting around today, waiting for some Coast Guard bureaucrat to allow them to get back to work.

Government Delays Hamstring Alabama: Alabama Governor Bobby Riley's biggest hurdle in dealing with the oil spill has apparently been the Coast Guard,

As an example, (Riley) said a Coast Guard plan for protecting the Alabama shoreline has been held up for 45 days because another member of the committee is reviewing it. "You can't continue to do that. We're going to have to have one person who makes the call on what we do and where," he said.

Imagine desperately needing to swing into to action to help safeguard your state and having some bureaucrat strangling you in red tape for 45 days. But wait, it gets worse.

Riley, who has quietly lobbied for weeks for more oil-blocking barriers called booms, said the Coast Guard wrongly decided to remove miles of boom from Alabama and Mississippi last week and take it to Louisiana after large amounts of oil began hitting that state. Speaking in an interview with The Associated Press during a three-state conference on hurricane planning, Riley said the decision meant wetlands, estuaries and beaches on the northern Gulf Coast are more at risk from the oil that began hitting their coasts in reddish-brown globs on Tuesday.

The Coast Guard wrongly believed floating booms could be returned to their original positions and used along with oil-removing boats called skimmers to keep oil off the coasts, Riley said, and the agency has held up approving the use of hundreds of private boats to remove oil.

If you think this is bad, just wait until the American people get to experience this sort of bureaucracy in action as the government takes over America's health care.

Deploying Only A Tiny Percentage Of Skimmers: As of a week ago, only 1/100th of the skimmers in the United States were deployed to help clean up the Gulf oil spill. Here's what Florida GOP Sen. George LeMieux had to say about this from the floor of the Senate:

“61 days ago is when the tragedy started. We are here 61 days later, we still have this tremendous pouring of oil from the bottom of the sea floor into the Gulf of Mexico. In fact, the amount of oil that is coming into the gulf now equals the size of the Exxon Valdez oil spill every 2 1/2 days.

“ ...Last week -- a week ago tomorrow, I met with the President of the United States and Admiral Allen in Pensacola.

“At that time, I raised the issue of skimmers. Why are there so few skimmers in the Gulf of Mexico? Why were there only at that time 32 skimmers off the coast of Florida?

“...And I'll come to the floor tomorrow to talk about that in more detail. But the state of affairs is that there are only now 20 skimmers off the coast of Florida for.

“When there were 32 last week, there are now just 20.

"While there are 2,000 skimmers available in the United States alone. That number comes from Admiral Allen.

“I spoke to Admiral Allen last week, along with my colleague from Alabama, senator Sessions, and we said, where are the skimmers?

“I showed him information like I have here today which is the Deepwater Horizon response report from the incident command in the state of Florida.

“Then it showed 20 skimmers.

“Today it still shows 20 skimmers.

“And I asked him to reconcile this for me. If we're asking for all these skimmers, if we're calling for all of them to come here, where are they?

“The response is anemic, at best.

“So, Mr. President, today I've sent a letter to Admiral Allen asking for an inventory of the 2,000 skimmers that he has said are available in the United States of America.

“Now, when I talked to the President and Admiral Allen about this last week, they said, look, some of these skimmers are not available because we may need them for an oil spill. Well, we have an oil spill.”

It wasn't so long ago that Obama said, the Gulf Oil Spill "echoes 9/11."

Yet, the Obama administration is holding back all those skimmers in case there's a real emergency? I guess we're lucky Obama wasn't President when 9/11 happened or he'd probably still be trying to figure out who to bow to and where Afghanistan is on a map between games of golf.

A Victory for All Americans (July 26, 2010)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Calling it ‘a victory for all Americans’, U.S. Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) and Jon Tester (D-Mont.) praised the recent landmark U.S. Supreme Court McDonald v. City of Chicago decision.

The ruling finds it unconstitutional for state and local governments to restrict individual gun rights of law-abiding Americans.

Hutchison and Tester led a bipartisan effort in Congress urging the U.S. Supreme Court to side in favor of individual gun rights and to strike down local restrictions.

Hutchison and Tester are Congress’ leading gun rights advocates. They said today’s decision gives all law-abiding American gun owners reason to celebrate.

“Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a major victory for the rights of all Americans to protect themselves and their families,” said Hutchison. “The Supreme Court once again sent a clear message to local, state, and federal governments: the individual right to keep and bear arms applies to all law abiding Americans, regardless where they live.”

“Today, we ensured that law-abiding folks have the same Second Amendment rights no matter where in America they live,” said Tester, co-chairman of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus. “This decision is a major victory for America’s gun owners and I’ll keep fighting hard to protect our gun rights.”

Hutchison and Tester wrote and delivered a 59-page friend-of-the-court brief to the Court last October for McDonald v. City of Chicago. The document, which argued for inherent individual gun rights under the Second Amendment, included signatures from 309 senators and representatives from both parties—more members of Congress than any friend-of-the-court brief in U.S. history.

Hutchison and Tester also led a successful effort in Congress to support gun rights in the landmark Supreme Court case Heller v. District of Columbia. That case overturned Washington, D.C.’s longstanding ban on firearms 5-to-4.

The 5-4 decision is scary in that one more liberal on the Court would have changed the result. Keep an eye on how the Senate votes on Kagan’s nomination and vote out of office anyone who votes in favor of her nomination.

Congressional Reform Act of 2010 (July 26, 2010)

I’d like to see Obama and the Democrats push this one through Congress.

1. Term Limits: 12 years only, one of the possible options below.

A. Two Six year Senate terms

B. Six Two year House terms

C. One Six year Senate term and three Two Year House terms