Wednesday, July 23, 2014

A Few More facebook Post

Is Anything Obama's Fault?

President Obama blamed the recent influx of unaccompanied children crossing our southern border on violence in Central America. I expected the usual media suspects to support Obama’s narrative, as well as the ever-popular Blame-Bush excuse. I did not expect the usually more rational Wall Street Journal, and specifically Mary Anastasia O’Grady (whom I had admired), to support them.
“Well, I think, Paul, what you have is a combination of factors, both push-and-pull factors. So from Central America, you have lots of crime and violence… the effect of the war on drugs in Central America has created chaos and a breakdown of institutions in Central America… And the pull factors, I think, are, first of all, most important, is an asylum opportunity that children have because of a law passed in 2008 during the Bush administration --”
There they go again: violence in Central America and, of course, Bush. It’s everyone’s fault except Obama’s. (By the way, the 2008 Wilberforce bill was sponsored by a California Democrat and passed in the Senate with “unanimous consent” when Barack Obama was a Senator. Bush signed it after Obama had won the election in November.)
Let’s go to the tape (which I first touched on last week). The US Border Patrolprovides the numbers of unaccompanied children apprehended at the border for fiscal years 2009 through June of 2014. The graph below shows the numbers for El Salvador and Guatemala.
It is obvious that there has been an explosion in these border-crossing numbers, and only after 2011. The numbers for Honduras, the third country most contributing to this explosion, would present a similar graph. (Note that the numbers for 2014 are only through June, or through 9 of the 12 months of the fiscal year.)
Now look at the evidence on Central American violence and the drug war. First, the Drug War has been around for over 40 years. It would not contribute to a sudden jump in 2012 unless some drug war policy changed since about 2011.
The homicide rates for El Salvador and Guatemala, as provided by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (most recent data is for 2012), indicate no recent upswing in violence in those countries. First, the murder rate in those countries has been significantly higher than that of the US for many years -- 5 to 10 times higher.
But for both countries, the murder rate has been declining since 2005 (linear regression), and declining more rapidly since 2009.
(It is true that the murder rate in Honduras has been increasing since 2006. But if the trend in child apprehensions from Honduras is similar to those of El Salvador and Guatemala, but the murder rate trends are opposite, wouldn’t that indicate that violence is not the cause of the recent border crossings by unattended children?)
The War On Drugs has been with us since 1970. The Wilberforce Act became law in 2008. The murder rates in El Salvador and Guatemala were declining from 2005 through 2012. Yet the number of children crossing the border was fairly low and steady through 2011 -- a full three years after the 2008 law.
My “keen grasp of the obvious” criterion says we should be looking for things that changed in late 2011 or early 2012 for the most likely causes of the explosion in child border crossings.
Did anything change around then? Yes, two things, maybe three, all authored by President Obama.
  • In August 2011, Obama directed ICE to use “prosecutorial discretion” to keep its hands off children here illegally (under the guise of prioritizing criminal aliens).
  • In June 2012, Obama made that policy more formal with his DREAM executive order. Children would not be deported.
  • If there were any recent changes in our drug policies or drug war execution in Central America, they happened comfortably into Obama’s term in office.
This seems simple to me. In 2011 Obama let it be known that the US will not deport children, and in 2012 the number of children crossing the border exploded.
Did the people of El Salvador just find out about a 2008 US law in 2012? Did a decline in murder rates accompany an increase in other violence and corruption in Central America? Did Drug War polices in place prior to 2009 cause Central America’s murder rates to decline from 2005 through 2012, yet also cause children to leave there unattended 2012-14?
The standard explanations do not compute. The logic of O’Grady is, at best, pure post hoc ergo propter hoc. But her explanations don’t even pass a first-order smell test of critical thinking.
Obama has been President for 5½ years. He might just be responsible for something by now.
(By the way, I was never a fan of the Drug War in the first place. I had never heard of the Wilberforce Act until recently. I don’t defend either one; eliminate them both if you like. But to blame the recent influx of children across our border on them is, well, stupid.)

IRS experts: Lois Lerner's hard drive only 'scratched' and data mostly recoverable

The behavior of the IRS is looking more and more like a cover-up. Byron York reports in The Examiner:
Top IRS officials told congressional investigators that Lois Lerner's hard drive -- the one containing emails that could shed light on the IRS targeting scandal -- was irreparably damaged before it was destroyed completely in 2011. But now, investigators have had a chance to talk to the technical experts inside the IRS who actually examined Lerner's computer, and the experts say the hard drive in question was actually just "scratched," and that most of the data on it was recoverable.
The IRS computer experts also told the committee that they had recommended seeking outside help in recovering the data from Lerner's computer — something IRS management declined to do.
It gets worse:
In addition, the committee says it has come across evidence that, at least for some period of time, Lerner's computer was listed as "recovered" in an internal IRS IT tracking document. The committee says IRS experts were not able to say whether "recovered" meant that the hard drive had actually been saved or whether it had met some other fate.  In any event, committee aides say they have consulted with "former federal law enforcement and Department of Defense forensic experts" about the matter, and their conclusion is that the majority of information on the drive could have been saved.
At what point does this become criminal? Perhaps the past tense is more appropriate.

Allen West Nukes The Fundraiser-In-Chief ➡ “An Act of Narcissism by Obama”


Mark Levin ANNIHILATES Jon Stewart On Hannity ➡ Epic Video

This is such a simple Matter. Israel wants to be left alone. Hamas a terrorist organization is bombarding Israel with rockets. Israel Protects it borders, Period! why does the left wing Hacks have a problem with this?


Tuesday, July 22, 2014

Illegal Immigration, destroying one school district at a time

Illegal immigration is destroying not just the fabric of our nation, it’s destroying the very foundation of our nation.  Public schools, and we’re not friends of public education, are at the point of the spear when it comes to the destructive impact of allowing illegals to flood into the US.
Illegals aliens bring their children, so-called DREAMERs, into the country, and thanks to Democrats, we require that schools accept every child in their district without regard to the immigration status of the child or the family.  Like their parents, these illegal alien children can’t speak English, and are uneducated in their home language.  That means that tremendous resources must be used to “mainstream” these kids into the classroom.  That does two things.
First, it takes resources away from kids who are, and whose families are, US citizens.  For the most part, these families pay the taxes to run the schools and their kids are getting robbed of any chance of a decent education by the flood of illegals taking up classroom resources.  Second, it slows down the learning process for the entire class, because these kids can’t be just put into a special needs classroom until they’re able to keep up, because that might “scar them.”  Rather than call attention to the fact that they have no business in a regular classroom, educators mainstream them and slow down the whole class.
What’s the impact on your city or town?  We would guess it’s a lot like the impact on Lynn, Massachusetts, or it will be shortly since the Obama administration is busily relocating the flood to random towns in red states.
Lynn, MA Mayor Judith Kennedy (R) said that she received “no notice” before over 200 illegal immigrant children were sent to her town in a phone conversation on Fox News Channel’s “Your World with Neil Cavuto” on Wednesday.  “I have had to increase my school department budget 9.3 percent and have had to cut all of my other city budgets between 2 percent and 5 percent to make up for the influx of the unaccompanied children.” Kennedy stated.

Remember this story, it’s coming to your neighborhood.  President Obama’s Department of Homeland Security is moving these illegal aliens into your neighborhood with no notice.  You can expect your schools to be overrun, if you offer any kind of public assistance to low income families, you can expect your welfare budget to skyrocket as well.
We would urge you to contact your Senator and Representative today.  Tell them to seal the border and to stop relocating illegal aliens to the interior of the nation where they’ll soon be forgotten and it’s likely they’ll end up on President Obama’s AmnestyWishlist.

BREAKING! Court Just Issued Obamacare a CRUSHING Blow

In what many view as a crushing blow to Obamacare, the federal appeals court for the D.C. Circuit announced their highly anticipated opinion in the Halbig v. Burwell case Tuesday morning. 
In a 2-1 decision, the court struck down federal government subsidies for healthcare policies purchased through the federal government’s Obamacare exchange, the troubled HealthCare.gov. 

The way the law was originally written, federal government subsidies can only be paid to those who purchase policies through a state-established  healthcare exchange. 

“Section 36B [of Obamacare] plainly makes subsidies available in the Exchanges established by states,” wrote Senior Circuit Judge Raymond Randolph in his majority opinion. 

Judge Griffith had the same conclusion, writing, “the ACA [Obamacare] unambiguously restricts the section 36B subsidy to insurance purchased on Exchanges ‘established by the State.’”

Taxpayer-funded subsidies are a major component of Obamacare, and if the decision is not overturned, it will basically defang the overreaching monstrosity. Healthcare.gov offers policies to the 36 states that chose not to create their own Obamacare health insurance exchange. 

The lone dissenting vote was cast by Judge Harry Edwards, who disregarded the way the law was written and made a politically charged statement, calling the case “a not-so-veiled attempt to gut” Obamacare. 

The Obama regime has already indicated that it will challenge the decision, as CNBC reports:

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the ruling—for now—”does not have any practical impact” on premium subsidies issued to HealthCare.gov enrollees now. “
“We are confident” that the ruling will be overturned, Earnest said. “We are confident in the legal position we have . . . the Department of Justice will litigate these claims through the federal court system.”
Earnest said “it was obvious” that Congress intended subsidies, or tax credits, to be issued to Obamacare enrollees regardless of what kind of exchange they used to buy insurance.