Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
RESORT MOGUL STEVE WYNN SLAMS OBAMA’S ANTI-BUSINESS FEAR MONGERING
Publicly-traded companies hold quarterly conference calls where investors are given updates on the state of the company and often hear about positive plans for the future.
Just yesterday, Wynn Resorts (WYNN) CEO Steve Wynn was speaking on a company conference call when he unleashed on President Obama, ranting about what Wynn sees as anti-business, socialist policies that are frightening companies as well as customers:
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Resident holds burglary suspect at gunpoint, calls 911
http://www.wfie.com/story/15077558/evansville-resident-holds-burlgary-suspect-at-gunpoint
EVANSVILLE, IN (WFIE) -
An Evansville homeowner caught a burglar red-handed, held him at gunpoint until police arrived, and a 911 tape recorded it all.
911 tape - Joseph Vallar says, "I just caught somebody breaking into my house, I have my gun drawn on him right now. Get down!"
The 911 tape reveals the intense situation.
911 tape - Vallar says, "I've got my gun on him and I got him on the ground. (Talking to suspect) You ain't using the bathroom, you ain't using nothing, you're just going to lay there!"
Joseph Vallar says he found a suspect inside his home on east Riverside Drive on Wednesday morning, after a neighbor called him at work telling him his home was being burglarized.
Vallar says armed with a handgun, he entered his home, found the suspect, and held him at gunpoint while dialing 911.
911 tape - Joseph Vallar says, "(talking to the dispatcher) You want officers to come into the front door? Come into the front door. I'm sitting here by the front door, with my gun drawn at the guy."
When police arrived, they arrested 19-year-old Joshua Wilson. Authorities say they found pills, cologne, a pocket knife, and army metals on Wilson. He is charged with burglary.
Police say this situation turned out perfect, but it could have gone the other way just as quickly.
EPD PIO Karen Kajmowicz says, "It was great that it turned out the way it did, but there were so many potential problems, it's scary to think how it could have turned out."
Police say for everyone's safety, home break-ins should be left for officers, who can respond quicker, are trained in the situations, and have bulletproof vests.
Vallar acknowledges that fact, but says he'd do it all again.
"I feel good. I feel like justice has been served, it feels good to know I have my belongings back, and he's going to get what he deserves."
Police say Vallar did not violate any laws, or did anything wrong. However, authorities say deadly force cases come with many gray areas.
Click here to read the state statute regarding a home owner's right to protect his or her property. It's section number 35-41-3-2.
Copyright 2011 WFIE. All rights reserved.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Defending the English Defense League
http://frontpagemag.com/2011/01/19/defending-the-english-defense-league-2/2/
The EDL, or English Defense League, which vigorously opposes the advance of Islam into the cultural nexus of Western democracies, finds itself on the receiving end of the customary hysteria that greets every such attempt to defend a way of life we have too long taken for granted. Originating in the city of Luton in England, where a substantial, radicalized Muslim population has been linked to various terror plots and fomented demonstrations against British troops returning from Iraq, the EDL has taken its premonitory message to Europe and North America. A rally was held on January 11, 2011 in Toronto, hosted by the Jewish Defense League (JDL). Predictably, it was met by “pacifist” protesters, associated with several anti-Zionist and ostensibly anti-racist groups, chanting such peaceable slogans as “EDL—go to Hell” and “Smash, Smash, Smash EDL”—and, yes, initiating pockets of violence requiring police intervention. So it goes.
Although defamed as a “neo-fascist organization” responsible for targeting “all Muslim people simply for being who they are,” nothing could be further from the case. The EDL warns of a dark and troubling future in which Shari’a courts become part of Western legal systems, no-go zones spread through our cities, and Islamic violence increasingly becomes a norm of daily life. In effect, the EDL sees Luton as the potential face of 21rst century Europe and a harbinger of the destabilization of Canada and the United States. This is a message that does not sit well with militant left-wing organizations, such as Unite Against Fascism in the U.K., so-called Human Rights groups such as the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty and the ridiculously named Queers Against Israeli Apartheid in Canada, and even the TSA in the U.S
Defending the English Defense League
Posted by David Solway Bio ↓ on Jan 19th, 2011
Print This Post A A A
The EDL, or English Defense League, which vigorously opposes the advance of Islam into the cultural nexus of Western democracies, finds itself on the receiving end of the customary hysteria that greets every such attempt to defend a way of life we have too long taken for granted. Originating in the city of Luton in England, where a substantial, radicalized Muslim population has been linked to various terror plots and fomented demonstrations against British troops returning from Iraq, the EDL has taken its premonitory message to Europe and North America. A rally was held on January 11, 2011 in Toronto, hosted by the Jewish Defense League (JDL). Predictably, it was met by “pacifist” protesters, associated with several anti-Zionist and ostensibly anti-racist groups, chanting such peaceable slogans as “EDL—go to Hell” and “Smash, Smash, Smash EDL”—and, yes, initiating pockets of violence requiring police intervention. So it goes.
Although defamed as a “neo-fascist organization” responsible for targeting “all Muslim people simply for being who they are,” nothing could be further from the case. The EDL warns of a dark and troubling future in which Shari’a courts become part of Western legal systems, no-go zones spread through our cities, and Islamic violence increasingly becomes a norm of daily life. In effect, the EDL sees Luton as the potential face of 21rst century Europe and a harbinger of the destabilization of Canada and the United States. This is a message that does not sit well with militant left-wing organizations, such as Unite Against Fascism in the U.K., so-called Human Rights groups such as the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty and the ridiculously named Queers Against Israeli Apartheid in Canada, and even the TSA in the U.S.
In defiance of the luridly obvious, no reference is made to the pro-Islamic slant of the campaign to discredit the EDL’s judicious sounding of the alarm. The EDL, as we have seen, has been castigated as “part of an alarming rise in fascist, racist and neo-Nazi organizing in Europe” which targets Muslims and immigrants. It is denounced for street rumbles, for sponsoring hate fests against Muslims and for lighting the fires of social unrest. The evidence to the contrary is considered inadmissible.
For the truth is very much the antithesis of the largely unsubstantiated claims and accusations being hurled against the League. The truth, as Rochelle Michaels points out in a recent article on the subject, is that “corrupt EU governments and politicians” have become advocates for Islam, that “Marxists in the mainstream press…continually whitewash the truth about Islamic Fascism,” as do academics in our universities, and that “roving gangs of Islamic thugs are wreaking havoc…in every EU country.” And indeed, the street clashes laid at the door of the EDL, as Michaels indicates, are generally ignited by leftists and Islamists attacking EDL demonstrators, often with the complicity of the police who “turn a blind eye” to what is actually taking place—a frequent occurrence in Britain. There can be little doubt that the agencies of political correctness have given these disruptive elements a free pass.
Defending the English Defense League
Posted by David Solway Bio ↓ on Jan 19th, 2011
Print This Post A A A
As the EDL’s leader Tommy Robinson told the BBC on November 19, 2010, “the root cause of the problem is the Koran, it’s Islam…We’re not creating these divisions and this extremism. It’s already there…If there was no militant Islam there would be no EDL.” To dismiss Robinson as merely uninformed or as nothing but a professional rabble-rouser is an act of pure ignorance or cowardly disingenuousness. His argument is borne out by many of our most reputable and erudite students of Islam and jihad, such as Ibn Warraq, Bruce Bawer, Andrew Bostom, Robert Spencer, Christopher Caldwell, Walter Laqueur, Melanie Phillips, Phyllis Chesler, Bat Ye’or, Roger Scruton, Claire Berlinski, Mary Habek, Jamie Glazov, Oriana Fallaci, Howard Rotberg, Wafa Sultan, Lee Harris, Rachel Ehrenfeld, Salim Mansur, Andrew McCarthy, Ayann Hirsi Ali, Steven Emerson, Brigitte Gabriel, whose books form part of a growing bibliography. Tommy Robinson is in good company. His detractors are not.
Curiously, Jewish organizations tend to present an anomalous state of ideological affairs. The Jewish Defense League, as noted, has partnered with the EDL, an act of solidarity that testifies to its acumen and courage. For that it is to be commended. Canada’s largest Jewish organization, The Canadian Jewish Congress, however, has once again revealed its depressing lack of foresight and its unwillingness to see the world for what it is, a classic Jewish syndrome that has cost the Jewish people dearly. Fighting Islamic fundamentalism “with generalized hatred against Muslims, as does the EDL, is only a recipe for fuelling more conflict,” pontificates the Congress’ CEO Bernie Farber, who then proceeds to condemn “the intolerance and violence the EDL represents.”
We can expect no better from such mainstream organizations which can be counted on to bowdlerize the facts, side with the wrong people and expose their own constituents to imminent peril, in an effort to ingratiate themselves with the liberal status quo and pass themselves off as eminently reasonable participants in a cultural debate. But one must keep in mind that these are the species of communicants whom I’ve dubbed the “good Jews” and Ezra Levant, author of Shakedown, has typed as “official Jews”—namely, those who lack the courage to take a strong and principled stand against factions that would do them harm.
These are Jews who profess to work quietly, to lobby behind the scenes, to practice an invisible advocacy by viewing themselves as noble supporters of “diversity” and freedom for all—bromides so nebulous as to have no significant impact—or promoting legislation against neo-Nazis while agitating on behalf of Islamists. This is either brain cramp or first-degree cognitive dissonance. And so they continue to maintain an obsolescent world-view in which a smattering of neo-Nazis who have no popular or effective base are regarded as a more serious threat than the thousands of Islamists and Islamic sympathizers who are zealously plotting their ruination. They are thus boosters of demagogic organizations like our soi-disant Human Rights Commissions, which are anything but.
Farber, for example, in an an interview with the Toronto Star’s dubious Haroon Siddiqui , essentially puts anti-Semitism, along with undeniably valid complaints against Muslims abusing our tribunal system in order to suppress dissent, on the same level. But the fact is, to quote Ezra Levant, “Farber is shilling for a fascist organization that routinely indulges in anti-Semitic propaganda.” Similarly, freelance writer David Menzies , guesting on the Michael Coren Show, says of Farber: “This is the guy who has embraced Human Rights Commissions to shut down skinhead loser Nazis in Saskatchewan, meanwhile giving a platform to the Islamist community.” As I have written before, Farber and his multitudinous ilk are the Jews who whisper “don’t rock the boat” when the boat is riddled with leaks and sinking fast. Just ask the Jewish population in England, France and Holland, many of whom are now making aliyah to Israel or emigrating to America and Australia.
One would hope that the “good Jews,” the “official Jews,” would one day show up for work, but they are so detached from reality as to give new meaning to the term “schizophrenia.” Muddling about in the asylums of their social and political infatuations, they turn against the JDL and the EDL, which have put their comfort and security on the line to defend a besieged culture, while merrily hobnobbing with interfaith dialogue groups and organizations like the Canadian Islamic Congress, whose function is to disarm awareness. They like to think of themselves as the voices of moderation. Regrettably, they are only mewling supplicators dressed up as ambassadors for the common weal.
Where, one can’t help wondering, do these people come from? What is their experience of real violence and the techniques of furtive subversion practiced against them? From where do they derive their putative competence, for it is clear that their skill set is no match for the adversary’s kill set? How do they rationally justify their silent acquiescence in the face of anti-Zionist cadres, so-called “anti-apartheid” brigades, BDS hooligans, left-wing trade unionists and aggressive Islamic contingents?
And what will they say should Luton eventually come to Canada and the U.S.?
The EDL, or English Defense League, which vigorously opposes the advance of Islam into the cultural nexus of Western democracies, finds itself on the receiving end of the customary hysteria that greets every such attempt to defend a way of life we have too long taken for granted. Originating in the city of Luton in England, where a substantial, radicalized Muslim population has been linked to various terror plots and fomented demonstrations against British troops returning from Iraq, the EDL has taken its premonitory message to Europe and North America. A rally was held on January 11, 2011 in Toronto, hosted by the Jewish Defense League (JDL). Predictably, it was met by “pacifist” protesters, associated with several anti-Zionist and ostensibly anti-racist groups, chanting such peaceable slogans as “EDL—go to Hell” and “Smash, Smash, Smash EDL”—and, yes, initiating pockets of violence requiring police intervention. So it goes.
Although defamed as a “neo-fascist organization” responsible for targeting “all Muslim people simply for being who they are,” nothing could be further from the case. The EDL warns of a dark and troubling future in which Shari’a courts become part of Western legal systems, no-go zones spread through our cities, and Islamic violence increasingly becomes a norm of daily life. In effect, the EDL sees Luton as the potential face of 21rst century Europe and a harbinger of the destabilization of Canada and the United States. This is a message that does not sit well with militant left-wing organizations, such as Unite Against Fascism in the U.K., so-called Human Rights groups such as the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty and the ridiculously named Queers Against Israeli Apartheid in Canada, and even the TSA in the U.S
Defending the English Defense League
Posted by David Solway Bio ↓ on Jan 19th, 2011
Print This Post A A A
The EDL, or English Defense League, which vigorously opposes the advance of Islam into the cultural nexus of Western democracies, finds itself on the receiving end of the customary hysteria that greets every such attempt to defend a way of life we have too long taken for granted. Originating in the city of Luton in England, where a substantial, radicalized Muslim population has been linked to various terror plots and fomented demonstrations against British troops returning from Iraq, the EDL has taken its premonitory message to Europe and North America. A rally was held on January 11, 2011 in Toronto, hosted by the Jewish Defense League (JDL). Predictably, it was met by “pacifist” protesters, associated with several anti-Zionist and ostensibly anti-racist groups, chanting such peaceable slogans as “EDL—go to Hell” and “Smash, Smash, Smash EDL”—and, yes, initiating pockets of violence requiring police intervention. So it goes.
Although defamed as a “neo-fascist organization” responsible for targeting “all Muslim people simply for being who they are,” nothing could be further from the case. The EDL warns of a dark and troubling future in which Shari’a courts become part of Western legal systems, no-go zones spread through our cities, and Islamic violence increasingly becomes a norm of daily life. In effect, the EDL sees Luton as the potential face of 21rst century Europe and a harbinger of the destabilization of Canada and the United States. This is a message that does not sit well with militant left-wing organizations, such as Unite Against Fascism in the U.K., so-called Human Rights groups such as the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty and the ridiculously named Queers Against Israeli Apartheid in Canada, and even the TSA in the U.S.
In defiance of the luridly obvious, no reference is made to the pro-Islamic slant of the campaign to discredit the EDL’s judicious sounding of the alarm. The EDL, as we have seen, has been castigated as “part of an alarming rise in fascist, racist and neo-Nazi organizing in Europe” which targets Muslims and immigrants. It is denounced for street rumbles, for sponsoring hate fests against Muslims and for lighting the fires of social unrest. The evidence to the contrary is considered inadmissible.
For the truth is very much the antithesis of the largely unsubstantiated claims and accusations being hurled against the League. The truth, as Rochelle Michaels points out in a recent article on the subject, is that “corrupt EU governments and politicians” have become advocates for Islam, that “Marxists in the mainstream press…continually whitewash the truth about Islamic Fascism,” as do academics in our universities, and that “roving gangs of Islamic thugs are wreaking havoc…in every EU country.” And indeed, the street clashes laid at the door of the EDL, as Michaels indicates, are generally ignited by leftists and Islamists attacking EDL demonstrators, often with the complicity of the police who “turn a blind eye” to what is actually taking place—a frequent occurrence in Britain. There can be little doubt that the agencies of political correctness have given these disruptive elements a free pass.
Defending the English Defense League
Posted by David Solway Bio ↓ on Jan 19th, 2011
Print This Post A A A
As the EDL’s leader Tommy Robinson told the BBC on November 19, 2010, “the root cause of the problem is the Koran, it’s Islam…We’re not creating these divisions and this extremism. It’s already there…If there was no militant Islam there would be no EDL.” To dismiss Robinson as merely uninformed or as nothing but a professional rabble-rouser is an act of pure ignorance or cowardly disingenuousness. His argument is borne out by many of our most reputable and erudite students of Islam and jihad, such as Ibn Warraq, Bruce Bawer, Andrew Bostom, Robert Spencer, Christopher Caldwell, Walter Laqueur, Melanie Phillips, Phyllis Chesler, Bat Ye’or, Roger Scruton, Claire Berlinski, Mary Habek, Jamie Glazov, Oriana Fallaci, Howard Rotberg, Wafa Sultan, Lee Harris, Rachel Ehrenfeld, Salim Mansur, Andrew McCarthy, Ayann Hirsi Ali, Steven Emerson, Brigitte Gabriel, whose books form part of a growing bibliography. Tommy Robinson is in good company. His detractors are not.
Curiously, Jewish organizations tend to present an anomalous state of ideological affairs. The Jewish Defense League, as noted, has partnered with the EDL, an act of solidarity that testifies to its acumen and courage. For that it is to be commended. Canada’s largest Jewish organization, The Canadian Jewish Congress, however, has once again revealed its depressing lack of foresight and its unwillingness to see the world for what it is, a classic Jewish syndrome that has cost the Jewish people dearly. Fighting Islamic fundamentalism “with generalized hatred against Muslims, as does the EDL, is only a recipe for fuelling more conflict,” pontificates the Congress’ CEO Bernie Farber, who then proceeds to condemn “the intolerance and violence the EDL represents.”
We can expect no better from such mainstream organizations which can be counted on to bowdlerize the facts, side with the wrong people and expose their own constituents to imminent peril, in an effort to ingratiate themselves with the liberal status quo and pass themselves off as eminently reasonable participants in a cultural debate. But one must keep in mind that these are the species of communicants whom I’ve dubbed the “good Jews” and Ezra Levant, author of Shakedown, has typed as “official Jews”—namely, those who lack the courage to take a strong and principled stand against factions that would do them harm.
These are Jews who profess to work quietly, to lobby behind the scenes, to practice an invisible advocacy by viewing themselves as noble supporters of “diversity” and freedom for all—bromides so nebulous as to have no significant impact—or promoting legislation against neo-Nazis while agitating on behalf of Islamists. This is either brain cramp or first-degree cognitive dissonance. And so they continue to maintain an obsolescent world-view in which a smattering of neo-Nazis who have no popular or effective base are regarded as a more serious threat than the thousands of Islamists and Islamic sympathizers who are zealously plotting their ruination. They are thus boosters of demagogic organizations like our soi-disant Human Rights Commissions, which are anything but.
Farber, for example, in an an interview with the Toronto Star’s dubious Haroon Siddiqui , essentially puts anti-Semitism, along with undeniably valid complaints against Muslims abusing our tribunal system in order to suppress dissent, on the same level. But the fact is, to quote Ezra Levant, “Farber is shilling for a fascist organization that routinely indulges in anti-Semitic propaganda.” Similarly, freelance writer David Menzies , guesting on the Michael Coren Show, says of Farber: “This is the guy who has embraced Human Rights Commissions to shut down skinhead loser Nazis in Saskatchewan, meanwhile giving a platform to the Islamist community.” As I have written before, Farber and his multitudinous ilk are the Jews who whisper “don’t rock the boat” when the boat is riddled with leaks and sinking fast. Just ask the Jewish population in England, France and Holland, many of whom are now making aliyah to Israel or emigrating to America and Australia.
One would hope that the “good Jews,” the “official Jews,” would one day show up for work, but they are so detached from reality as to give new meaning to the term “schizophrenia.” Muddling about in the asylums of their social and political infatuations, they turn against the JDL and the EDL, which have put their comfort and security on the line to defend a besieged culture, while merrily hobnobbing with interfaith dialogue groups and organizations like the Canadian Islamic Congress, whose function is to disarm awareness. They like to think of themselves as the voices of moderation. Regrettably, they are only mewling supplicators dressed up as ambassadors for the common weal.
Where, one can’t help wondering, do these people come from? What is their experience of real violence and the techniques of furtive subversion practiced against them? From where do they derive their putative competence, for it is clear that their skill set is no match for the adversary’s kill set? How do they rationally justify their silent acquiescence in the face of anti-Zionist cadres, so-called “anti-apartheid” brigades, BDS hooligans, left-wing trade unionists and aggressive Islamic contingents?
And what will they say should Luton eventually come to Canada and the U.S.?
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Hillsdale College: A Citizen's Guide to the Federal Debt Limit Debate
From: hillsdalecollege | Jul 13, 2011 Veronique de Rugy - A Citizen's Guide to the Federal Debt Limit Debate
Speech delivered at the Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies & Citizenship in Washington, D.C. on July 8, 2011
Hillsdale College 2011
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Caset Anthony--It is over--and why
First, I was a law enforcement officer for over 30 years, and secondly I attended law school for two years.
Secondly, I was involved in around 500 trials, ranging from minor misdemeanors to long term felony prison sentences.
A trail is parts:
A. The Jury- In the early days, I had to sit through Jury selection. What I found was that if you are intelligent and know things, you are excused
If you are a Nurse, doctor, cop, attorney, or know any cops, you are excused.
B. The Judge- Judges are attorneys in robes. The two opposing attorneys and the judge are in the same fraternity. Favoritism is involved as well as political view.
C. The Attorneys. Basically, a trail is the effort of attorneys to "Put on a show". The prosecutor tries to put on his/her show, and the Defense attorney tries to block the prosecutor.
Several rules are in place "To make it fair". You can not talk about a defendent's (Perpetrator) previous criminal history.
You can not show "inflammatory photos" of the blood and gore the Defendent caused,
The Defense attorney tries to put on his/her show, and the prosecutor tries to block it.
The Defense can call "Expert Witnesses", (Or as we called them, "Liars for Hire")to blur the picture or contradict what witnesses have testified to.
In this case, the defense killed the case with excess trivia, and put out a lot of "Coulda-Woulda-Shoulda".
Monday, July 4, 2011
Wrong people discarded
First, we had this story from San Jose:
http://www.mercurynews.com/san-jose-police/ci_18384442
Amid a homicide surge in what once was dubbed "America's Safest Big City," 66 young San Jose cops turned in their badges Thursday as a $115 million budget shortfall led to the city's first-ever police layoffs.
The somber embraces of laid-off cops with fellow officers come as tensions simmer between cops and city leaders over pay and benefit cuts needed to save jobs as more deficits loom. While the toll was much less than had been feared weeks ago because dozens of the 122 who were given layoff notices found jobs in other police departments, the cuts will take a historic toll on San Jose's police force.
In addition to the cops let go, the city cut nearly 100 police positions left vacant by recent retirements and departures,
Then, Blogger Rajipuut's research shows:
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/rajjpuuts-folly-illegals-cost
Obama was Dead Wrong,
Illegals Cost California Solvency
A recently revealed lowball study of the state’s budget problems shows that withdrawing services from California’s 2.5 million illegal aliens in the state would save the state roughly $4.5 Billion annually. The breakdown of the savings was: $2.5 Billion from the cost of education; $1 Billion from prison budgets; almost $780 Million from medical expenses; and other cost savings amounting to roughly $300 Million yearly. In short, paying for the illegal aliens who have been welcomed into California (the state has more “Sanctuary Cities” than the rest of the country combined) over a typical period of five years would account for the total California shortfall at its 2009 cited $21 Billion maximum. Later in this blog, you’ll discover why Rajjpuut used the term “lowball” to describe this recent study.
How surprising can this statistic be? A mid-2008 study by FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform) showed that 60% of the nation’s illegal aliens were concentrated in six states mostly in the Southwest. California’s almost 3.5 million illegals in that study easily topped the list. That figure you’ll notice is a full one million fewer illegals than found in the more recent lowball study mentioned earlier. Poor methodology? Deliberate undercounting? Probably neither. Every year that the state’s abysmal Sanctuary City situation has existed, it’s become much harder to accurately count the illegals, never an easy proposition in the best of scenarios.
Two years later when FAIR updated and expanded its study in 2010 it found that nationally illegals cost America $113 Billion yearly. The study then was called “extremist” and compared to a study that said that rather than costing us, illegals raise the nation’s GDP by $245 Billion. Certainly if that were true, the answer to our budget woes would be to throw open the borders to everyone. This infamous Perryman Report, rumored to have been funded by “Open Society Initiative” founder George Soros, has been cited by all those seeking further amnesty and even citizenship to all illegals. The Perryman Report is suspected of flawed, perhaps even deliberately flawed, methodology because “it fails to fully account for the cost to individual counties, cities and towns” which absorb a huge percentage of the cost of accommodation for illegal aliens.
Are illegals really such a big problem? Ex-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger once said that it would be a “big mistake” to blame California’s huge illegal immigration population for the state’s long-enduring budget crisis. Any sane review of the figures seems to cough up only one conclusion: the Guv’s been in deep denial. The average yearly budget deficit in California is slightly less than the average cost of illegal immigration to the state over 365 days according to the recent figures.
California, with the other five big alien states, together face a cost of $36 Billion annually for K-12 education, criminal incarceration and health care costs. Some studies show that the cost to California is NOT the $4.5 Billion recently touted, but rather, almost $12 Billion yearly to accommodate illegal aliens, roughly $3,400 per each man, woman or child LEGLLY residing in the state. Other studies call even this figure into doubt and indicate the cost could be much, much higher. Besides the monetary price, there is also the matter of sociological cost . . . .
A recent Supreme Court decision is forcing the state to release “up to 46,000 inmates” before their prison terms are concluded. California is only expected to release roughly 30,000 “low-risk inmates” from prisons, the biggest release of lawbreakers in American history, as a measure to combat the state’s deficit. Among ALL the California convicts an estimated 20,000 are illegal aliens about one-seventh of the entire prison population. The state has deliberately given no indication how many of the projected “parolees” will be illegal aliens. Nor has the state answered questions about how many illegals might be turned over to immigration officials for deportation or if any will just be allowed to walk freely back into California society.
Schwarzenegger, of course, has infamously guaranteed there was NO connection between the state’s large illegal alien population and its budgetary woes. The ex-governator, it seems, has been in denial for eight long years.
His predecessor, Pete Wilson commissioned two separate studies which each reached the same conclusions: illegals were bankrupting California. The 1994 Philip J. Romero study showed that illegal immigrants and their American-born children received $3.6 Billion more in state services than they paid in state taxes. The vast majority of those taxes are sales taxes, not income taxes which few illegals pay. In 1997 the Jordan Commission’s study conducted under the National Research Council put that figure at a $3.463 Billion cost to California. But Schwarzenegger even willfully ignored far more up-to-date information: Romero’s 2007 update of his earlier study. Because of the state’s Sanctuary City situation, Romero found it far more difficult to pin down the full extent of the problem. His shocking results: illegal aliens were now costing California between $9.6 and $ $38.2 billion more in state services than they generate in state taxes.
Everything about the illegal alien question is debatable. Recent estimates of their population have used the numbers 12-18 million illegals with 13 Million the most commonly cited figures. President Obama has used the numbers 11 million and even 10 million in describing them and suggested, in line with the Perryman Report that they constitute a huge NET POSITIVE to the nation’s economy.
Regardless of which figures are used, the logical conclusion is obvious. California, Texas and other border states are being negatively affected by huge illegal alien populations. California itself has been bankrupted by several huge policy boondoggles. The Sanctuary City program in that state is definitely the most costly in the nation and the state’s welcoming of illegals has contributed mightily to California’s ongoing financial meltdown.
Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut
My view is that California should get rid of Illegals, not lay off cops
http://www.mercurynews.com/san-jose-police/ci_18384442
Amid a homicide surge in what once was dubbed "America's Safest Big City," 66 young San Jose cops turned in their badges Thursday as a $115 million budget shortfall led to the city's first-ever police layoffs.
The somber embraces of laid-off cops with fellow officers come as tensions simmer between cops and city leaders over pay and benefit cuts needed to save jobs as more deficits loom. While the toll was much less than had been feared weeks ago because dozens of the 122 who were given layoff notices found jobs in other police departments, the cuts will take a historic toll on San Jose's police force.
In addition to the cops let go, the city cut nearly 100 police positions left vacant by recent retirements and departures,
Then, Blogger Rajipuut's research shows:
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/rajjpuuts-folly-illegals-cost
Obama was Dead Wrong,
Illegals Cost California Solvency
A recently revealed lowball study of the state’s budget problems shows that withdrawing services from California’s 2.5 million illegal aliens in the state would save the state roughly $4.5 Billion annually. The breakdown of the savings was: $2.5 Billion from the cost of education; $1 Billion from prison budgets; almost $780 Million from medical expenses; and other cost savings amounting to roughly $300 Million yearly. In short, paying for the illegal aliens who have been welcomed into California (the state has more “Sanctuary Cities” than the rest of the country combined) over a typical period of five years would account for the total California shortfall at its 2009 cited $21 Billion maximum. Later in this blog, you’ll discover why Rajjpuut used the term “lowball” to describe this recent study.
How surprising can this statistic be? A mid-2008 study by FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform) showed that 60% of the nation’s illegal aliens were concentrated in six states mostly in the Southwest. California’s almost 3.5 million illegals in that study easily topped the list. That figure you’ll notice is a full one million fewer illegals than found in the more recent lowball study mentioned earlier. Poor methodology? Deliberate undercounting? Probably neither. Every year that the state’s abysmal Sanctuary City situation has existed, it’s become much harder to accurately count the illegals, never an easy proposition in the best of scenarios.
Two years later when FAIR updated and expanded its study in 2010 it found that nationally illegals cost America $113 Billion yearly. The study then was called “extremist” and compared to a study that said that rather than costing us, illegals raise the nation’s GDP by $245 Billion. Certainly if that were true, the answer to our budget woes would be to throw open the borders to everyone. This infamous Perryman Report, rumored to have been funded by “Open Society Initiative” founder George Soros, has been cited by all those seeking further amnesty and even citizenship to all illegals. The Perryman Report is suspected of flawed, perhaps even deliberately flawed, methodology because “it fails to fully account for the cost to individual counties, cities and towns” which absorb a huge percentage of the cost of accommodation for illegal aliens.
Are illegals really such a big problem? Ex-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger once said that it would be a “big mistake” to blame California’s huge illegal immigration population for the state’s long-enduring budget crisis. Any sane review of the figures seems to cough up only one conclusion: the Guv’s been in deep denial. The average yearly budget deficit in California is slightly less than the average cost of illegal immigration to the state over 365 days according to the recent figures.
California, with the other five big alien states, together face a cost of $36 Billion annually for K-12 education, criminal incarceration and health care costs. Some studies show that the cost to California is NOT the $4.5 Billion recently touted, but rather, almost $12 Billion yearly to accommodate illegal aliens, roughly $3,400 per each man, woman or child LEGLLY residing in the state. Other studies call even this figure into doubt and indicate the cost could be much, much higher. Besides the monetary price, there is also the matter of sociological cost . . . .
A recent Supreme Court decision is forcing the state to release “up to 46,000 inmates” before their prison terms are concluded. California is only expected to release roughly 30,000 “low-risk inmates” from prisons, the biggest release of lawbreakers in American history, as a measure to combat the state’s deficit. Among ALL the California convicts an estimated 20,000 are illegal aliens about one-seventh of the entire prison population. The state has deliberately given no indication how many of the projected “parolees” will be illegal aliens. Nor has the state answered questions about how many illegals might be turned over to immigration officials for deportation or if any will just be allowed to walk freely back into California society.
Schwarzenegger, of course, has infamously guaranteed there was NO connection between the state’s large illegal alien population and its budgetary woes. The ex-governator, it seems, has been in denial for eight long years.
His predecessor, Pete Wilson commissioned two separate studies which each reached the same conclusions: illegals were bankrupting California. The 1994 Philip J. Romero study showed that illegal immigrants and their American-born children received $3.6 Billion more in state services than they paid in state taxes. The vast majority of those taxes are sales taxes, not income taxes which few illegals pay. In 1997 the Jordan Commission’s study conducted under the National Research Council put that figure at a $3.463 Billion cost to California. But Schwarzenegger even willfully ignored far more up-to-date information: Romero’s 2007 update of his earlier study. Because of the state’s Sanctuary City situation, Romero found it far more difficult to pin down the full extent of the problem. His shocking results: illegal aliens were now costing California between $9.6 and $ $38.2 billion more in state services than they generate in state taxes.
Everything about the illegal alien question is debatable. Recent estimates of their population have used the numbers 12-18 million illegals with 13 Million the most commonly cited figures. President Obama has used the numbers 11 million and even 10 million in describing them and suggested, in line with the Perryman Report that they constitute a huge NET POSITIVE to the nation’s economy.
Regardless of which figures are used, the logical conclusion is obvious. California, Texas and other border states are being negatively affected by huge illegal alien populations. California itself has been bankrupted by several huge policy boondoggles. The Sanctuary City program in that state is definitely the most costly in the nation and the state’s welcoming of illegals has contributed mightily to California’s ongoing financial meltdown.
Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut
My view is that California should get rid of Illegals, not lay off cops
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Another great writing by Ann Barnhardt
ON THE DECLARATION & OUR DUTY TO RESIST TYRANNY 2
POSTED BY ANN BARNHARDT - JULY 2, AD 2011 9:12 PM MST
http://barnhardt.biz/
I have a current personal anecdote related directly to this question. The homeowners’ association of the neighborhood I live in sent me a letter last week demanding that I remove the chalk Epiphany Blessing from the frame of my front door. Apparently they didn’t notice the same blessing above both my garage door and my deck door, which kinda blows their whole argument that it is an egregious eyesore. Snorf. And apparently they have NO CLUE who they’re dealing with. Double snorf. I pick fights with 1400 year old satanic political systems as a means of passing time on lazy Sunday afternoons. HOA’s don’t exactly intimidate me. Triple snorf.
For those of you who don’t know, it is an ancient Catholic sacramental tradition for the head of every household to make an inscription above every outside door at Epiphany. This inscription is small and subtle, and marking the door frame harkens back to the Passover in Egypt wherein Israel marked their doors with the blood of the Passover lamb. You would have to consciously look at the top of the door frame to see it. It is all but invisible to anyone walking by. Here is the text of the instructions and prayer that I received and used in January:
“The blessed chalk is taken home and then the father or senior member of the family says the following prayer once at the main entrance of the house, and that door is marked as follows. Then the family members should accompany the father as he goes from outside entrance to outside entrance and marks this over each door:
Hear us, O Holy Lord, Father Almighty, Eternal God, and send Thy Holy Angel from heaven to watch over, cherish, protect, be with, and defend all who live in my house. I call upon Thy Saints Gaspar, Melchior, and Balthazar to protect my family and my home from every harm and danger, and I place the marks of their holy names over the doors of my home to remain there as a constant reminder to us and to all who enter here that my house is truly a house of the Lord. O God, make the door of my house the gateway to Thy Eternal Kingdom. I ask these things in the Name of Jesus Christ Thy Son. Amen. 20 + G + M + B + 11”
Given the fact that I have baited 1.5 billion worshippers of allah/satan and thus satan himself to come and kill me, the Epiphany Blessing of my home ain’t going anywhere. But I wouldn’t remove it regardless, because to do so is a violation of my fundamental human right to practice my religion. If the HOA comes and removes it or paints over it, I’ll put it right back up. If they want to litigate, we’ll litigate. The bottom line is this: the only way it goes is if I go, and that will require the HOA to physically seize my home and then enjoin a SWAT Team to physically remove me. And I’m not kidding. Enough is enough. I will not be dehumanized, nor will I encourage or perpetuate the dehumanization of other people by allowing this precedent to be set on me. A failure to stand in defiance of tyranny would be a sin in and of itself. I. WILL. NOT. ROLL. OVER. And neither should you.
Finally, here is a wonderful piece by Fr. Robert Barron explaining why the recent pattern of removing “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance is so utterly critical and evil. Catholic, Protestant, Jew, Atheist – all need to watch this because the concept of how government relates to the people is universal and transcendent. The concept ties directly back to the Declaration itself
Friday, July 1, 2011
Fast and Furious weapons turn up in Phoenix area crimes
Fast and Furious weapons turn up in Phoenix area crimes
http://www.therightscoop.com/fast-and-furious-weapons-turn-up-in-phoenix-area-crimes/
Posted by KenInMontana on Jul 1, 2011 in Politics | 18 Comments
As if no one could have seen this coming, Phoenix area law enforcement has turned up several “walked” firearms in their investigations of local crimes. Local ABC affiliate ABC15 is all over this and to their credit has worked hard to connect the dots, this by reporter Lori Jane Gliha.
ABC15 – Phoenix ATF agents recently testified during a Congressional hearing that they knowingly allowed weapons to slip into the hands of straw buyers who would then distribute the weapons to known criminals.
The strategy was designed to lead ATF officials to key drug players in Mexico, but some agents admitted they never fully tracked the weapons after suspicious buyers purchased them.
“It made no sense to us either, it was just what we were ordered to do, and every time we questioned that order there was punitive action,” Phoenix Special Agent John Dodson testified.
According to the testimony of three Phoenix ATF agents, including Dodson, hundreds of weapons are now on the streets in the United States and Mexico, possibly in the hands of criminals.
Dodson estimated the number could be as many as 1,800 weapons.
Reporters found several “smoking guns” (pun fully intended) in their investigation. In both Glendale and Phoenix.
The ABC15 Investigators uncovered documents showing guns connected to at least two Glendale criminal cases and at least two Phoenix criminal cases also appear in the ATF’s Suspect Gun Database, a sort-of watch list for suspicious gun sales.
All four cases involve drug-related offenses. In one Glendale police report dated July 2010, police investigators working with DEA agents served search warrants at homes near 75th and Glendale avenues in Glendale, and 43rd and Glendale avenues in Phoenix as part of a “large scale marijuana trafficking” investigation.
Police investigators reported they “obtained information that members of the (trafficking) organization were using the homes…as stash houses used to store large amounts of marijuana temporarily.”
They reported finding hundreds of pounds of marijuana, more than $63,000 in U.S. currency and three guns inside the homes. One of the recovered weapons, a Romarm/Cugir WASR-10 rifle, appeared in an official ATF Suspect Gun Summary document in November 2009, proving agents knowingly allowed the suspicious gun sale, months before the weapon turned up at the crime scene.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is on this as well, as his office is following this story while pressing the BATFE for answers, even though the BATFE is stonewalling the local reporter’s requests for information.
Grassley has been demanding information from ATF leaders, trying to determine who had knowledge of the controversial strategy and when they knew.
His staff also sent public records requests to every sheriff’s department in Arizona and several local Valley departments, requesting information about weapons that have turned up at Valley crime scenes that may have been connected to the Fast and Furious operation.
Meanwhile from ABC15:
ATF representatives denied ABC15’s open records request for documents showing other weapons connected to the Fast and Furious case that may have been involved in other crimes in the United States.
The BATFE has (surprise,surprise) declined requests for an interview by the local station. My own feeling on this “clusterf@#k” of an operation is that DOJ higher (Holder) ups saw this as a step towards Obama’s endrun around the 2nd Amendment, but that’s just me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)