The Sixties Radical- Beware of Obama’s and The Democrat’s Trojan Horse Concerning Immigration Reform

What the hell is going on here? We now have  conservatives that are now falling hook, line and sinker for the liberal bull crap. I am for one tired of this same old story. There is not a dimes worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican Parties. Rubio, McCain, and the rest of statists have sold their souls for votes. This will always come back and bite you in the ass. This is what will happen now.

We are not against Hispanics. We are for the rule of law, freedom, liberty, and doing things the right way. This is not the right way.

I have a good idea let’s enforce the laws that we have on the books. Lets secure the borders. And this is why we are against amnesty.  I did it the right way.

Follow the law. Rubio’s immigration will open the door for people to start coming here illegally. Ronald Reagan fell for the same trick and all this did was increase the numbers of illegals here by ten fold.

The bill was called the Simpson-Mazzoli Act in 1986. Here is the guts of the bill. “Required employers to attest to their employees’ immigration status.

made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit unauthorized immigrants.

legalized certain seasonal agricultural illegal immigrants. Legalized illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt. About three million illegal immigrants were granted legal status.

This was an abject failure.

Mike Scruggs wrote this for the

“According to Ronald Reagan himself, as told to his trusted long-time friend and U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese, the biggest mistake of his presidency was signing the l986 amnesty for what turned out to be more than half the five million illegal immigrants in the country. Reagan was uncomfortable with the amnesty but was persuaded by some of the leaders of his own party (still living) that it would only affect a small number of illegal immigrants and would assure that Congress would follow through with more vigorous enforcement of U.S. immigration laws. The misnamed Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 was touted by its supporters as “comprehensive immigration reform” that would grant amnesty only to a few long-settled immigrants and strengthen border security and internal immigration enforcement against employers who were hiring illegal immigrants.

Internal enforcement was critical to Reagan. He knew that the real key to stopping illegal immigration was to cut off the job magnet at the employment place. He was also honest enough to call what he believed would only be a small amnesty by its real name—amnesty. He did not try to deceive the American people into thinking it was not really an amnesty, a deception much in vogue with many politicians today.

There are various accounts of how many amnesties were expected with passage of the 1986 amnesty. Figures range from 300,000 (Gingrich, who voted for it) to about 2.1 million. Some reasonable estimates center around 1.2 million. The actual result was 2.7 million. Close to one third of the amnesties given were based on document fraud.

Ronald Reagan was not comfortable with amnesty. He was pro-enforcement, and he admitted to Edwin Meese that the biggest mistake of his presidency was to sign the 1986 amnesty. We should learn from the wisdom Reagan gained by bitter experience. Any amnesty is a slippery slope to national economic and social disaster.”

This story appeared on Fox News.

President Obama is suggesting that House Republicans on the issue of gun control appear neither willing to work with him nor inclined to listen to the American public on the issue.

“The House Republican majority is made up mostly of members who are in sharply gerrymandered districts that are very safely Republican and may not feel compelled to pay attention to broad-based public opinion, because what they’re really concerned about is the opinions of their specific Republican constituencies,” the president said in an interview with The New Republic.

Obama also said he can get 50 percent of public support for many of his upcoming initiatives, but “I can’t get enough votes out of the House of Representatives to actually get something passed. … I think there is still shock on the part of some in the party that I won re-election.”

“If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News or by Rush Limbaugh for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you’ll see more of them doing it,” he said. “I think John Boehner genuinely wanted to get a deal done, but it was hard to do in part because his caucus is more conservative probably than most Republican leaders are, and partly because he is vulnerable to attack for compromising Republican principles and working with Obama.”

When all else fails demonize Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and Mark Levin. This is how the game works. Demonize the opposition and this will shut us up. Obama has the state run media in his pocket. Obama has now in effect killed the opposition. The Republican Party is dead.  This is all done by a well thought design and plan of attack.  Marco Rubio is another in along line of  conservatives who have sold their souls for votes and power. I will never believe in another politician again. The only authority I trust is Adonai and Yeshua, and the word of Adonai.

Here are some more stories that should stand your hair on end.

This is from the Drudge Report.

“Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is putting more pressure on gun makers to get behind his push for an assault weapons ban and criminal background checks for gun purchasers.

This time, he wants to go after their bottom line.

Emanuel is pushing two major financial institutions to stop their financial backing of gun makers, unless those companies support “commonsense reforms, including requiring criminal background checks on all gun sales.”

The mayor is urging that banks to stop lines of credit, financing for acquisitions and expansions and financial advising.”

Here is another story from the Drudge Report.

“In the third installment of his 52-week sermon series, Nation of Islam leader, Minister Louis Farrakhan, ridiculed the “volatile” American right to own weapons.

On Sunday, Farrakhan continued “The Time and What Must Be Done” sermon series by stating that Americans are increasingly angry at the government, and are simultaneously preparing themselves for war. Farrakhan went on to say that the Second Amendment has little relevance in modern society, stating that the constitutional right to bear arms is outdated.”

This was taken from

“Karl Marx summed up Communism as “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” This is a good, pithy saying, which, in practice, has succeeded in bringing, upon those under its sway, misery, poverty, rape, torture, slavery, and death.

For the saying implies but does not name the effective agency of its supposed utopia. The agency is called “The State,” and the motto, fleshed out, for the benefit of the easily confused must read “The State will take from each according to his ability: the State will give to each according to his needs.” “Needs and abilities” are, of course, subjective. So the operative statement may be reduced to “the State shall take, the State shall give.”

All of us have had dealings with the State, and have found, to our chagrin, or, indeed, terror, that we were not dealing with well-meaning public servants or even with ideologues but with overworked, harried bureaucrats. These, as all bureaucrats, obtain and hold their jobs by complying with directions and suppressing the desire to employ initiative, compassion, or indeed, common sense. They are paid to follow orders.

Rule by bureaucrats and functionaries is an example of the first part of the Marxist equation: that the Government shall determine the individual’s abilities.

As rules by the Government are one-size-fits-all, any governmental determination of an individual’s abilities must be based on a bureaucratic assessment of the lowest possible denominator. The government, for example, has determined that black people (somehow) have fewer abilities than white people, and, so, must be given certain preferences. Anyone acquainted with both black and white people knows this assessment is not only absurd but monstrous. And yet it is the law.

What Obama is doing is wiping out all opposition to his ideas and policies. Obama thinks he is the King, Messiah, and Yeshua all rolled into one. We need to bow down to him. We are the surfs and servants to our master Obama and the Demo-Republican Party. In their eyes we have too much freedom and liberty.  We are too stupid to live and run our own lives.

This site is worth checking out. Here is the link to it. Please read it.

Mark Levin wrote these very words. Please take these words to heart.

“Where utopianism is advanced through gradualism rather than revolution, albeit steady and persistent as in democratic societies, it can deceive and disarm an unsuspecting population, which is largely content and passive. It is sold as reforming and improving the existing society’s imperfections and weaknesses without imperiling its basic nature. Under these conditions, it is mostly ignored, dismissed, or tolerated by much of the citizenry and celebrated by some. Transformation is deemed innocuous, well-intentioned, and perhaps constructive but not a dangerous trespass on fundamental liberties.”
Mark R. Levin, Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America

“Utopianism also finds a receptive audience among the society’s disenchanted, disaffected, dissatisfied, and maladjusted who are unwilling or unable to assume responsibility for their own real or perceived conditions but instead blame their surroundings, ‘the system,’ and others. They are lured by the false hopes and promises of utopian transformation and the criticisms of the existing society, to which their connection is tentative or nonexistent. Improving the malcontent’s lot becomes linked to the utopian cause. Moreover, disparaging and diminishing the successful and accomplished becomes an essential tactic. No one should be better than anyone else, regardless of the merits or values of his contributions. By exploiting human frailties, frustrations, jealousies, and inequities, a sense of meaning and self-worth is created in the malcontent’s otherwise unhappy and directionless life. Simply put, equality in misery — that is, equality of result or conformity — is advanced as a just, fair, and virtuous undertaking. Liberty, therefore, is inherently immoral, except where it avails equality.”
Mark R. Levin, Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America

Obama has now weighted in on The NFL. This story appeared on The NFL website.

President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, have two daughters. If they had a son, Obama isn’t sure that football would be an option for him.

“I’m a big football fan, but I have to tell you if I had a son, I’d have to think long and hard before I let him play football,” he said in an interview with the New Republic. “And I think that those of us who love the sport are going to have to wrestle with the fact that it will probably change gradually to try to reduce some of the violence.

“In some cases, that may make it a little bit less exciting, but it will be a whole lot better for the players, and those of us who are fans maybe won’t have to examine our consciences quite as much.”

Obama isn’t asked what changes could be made, nor does he indicate if he’ll have a role in making changes happen. He believes a bigger concern for the sport comes from the college level, which acts as the NFL’s feeder system.

“I tend to be more worried about college players than NFL players in the sense that the NFL players have a union, they’re grown men, they can make some of these decisions on their own, and most of them are well-compensated for the violence they do to their bodies,” he said. “You read some of these stories about college players who undergo some of these same problems with concussions and so forth and then have nothing to fall back on. That’s something that I’d like to see the NCAA think about.”

The NFL has taken steps to improve player safety, and Obama touches on the fine line the league must walk on this issue. The NFL has the responsibility of protecting the long-term health of its players while continuing to produce an exciting and profitable product. In a game with inherent violence and injury risk, that’s no easy task.

The NFL will be history and it will be later than you think. Rush Limbaugh warned us about this about six months to a year ago. I did too.

Rush Limbaugh said this on his radio program Monday January 28th.

I’ve had a couple people also e-mail me, friends of mine who said they thought that I was way out on a limb, maybe gone too far when I predicted months ago that the National Football League as we know it is over, it’s only a matter of time.  They said, “Rush, you’re talking about the most popular, the most profitable professional sport in America where television earns its lion’s share of revenue and ratings.  This time, Rush, I think you’ve overshot the mark.”  Now they’re sending me notes saying, “My gosh, I should never, ever doubt you,” because the president’s out there, and in this same interview, let me read what he said to you.

“I think a lot of parents feel like Barack Obama.  ‘I’m a big football fan, but I have to tell you, if I had a son,” like Trayvon “I’d have to think long and hard before I let him play football.'”  The president of the United States weighing in on this.  The president, this is not insignificant.  The president now suggesting this game is too dangerous for America’s children, certainly for his son, Trayvon, if he had one. And he said, “And I think that those of us who love the sport are going to have to wrestle with the fact that it will probably change gradually to try to reduce some of the violence.”

The president said, “And I think that those of us who love the sport are going to have to wrestle with the fact that it will probably change gradually to try to reduce some of the violence. In some cases, that may make it a little bit less exciting, but it will be a whole lot better for the players, and those of us who are fans maybe won’t have to examine our consciences quite as much,” and thereby signaled the line of attack.  It’s the same line of attack that was used for global warming, to guilt you, your guilty conscience, you’re destroying the planet.  That’s why you gotta support bigger government, higher taxes, buy small little battery powered cars and all the rest of it.

So now, they’re gonna start working on this, you watch a football game and you’re gonna have a guilty conscience.  You know why?  Because you’re gonna be sitting there watching football and you’re gonna be loving it.  But what are you loving?  Maiming, injury, concussion, life changing injuries to the point that the players you’re watching today might be committing suicide in a few short years, and it’s all being done for your blood lust, it’s all being done for your bloodthirstiness.

Well, we all know you have a guilty conscious about it, so we’re gonna make this game safer. The president of the United States is saying this. If you doubted me, please don’t ever doubt me. For the president to weigh in on this — exactly as I predicted the left would attack the game — means that it is already a fait accompli. I don’t even know if the NFL is ready for this. I still don’t know if they are aware of what’s headed their way. (interruption) Well, I was gonna say, “I wonder how he’d feel about his son serving in Afghanistan.”

What about his daughters? Would he send his daughters to Afghanistan? Would he feel comfortable with his daughters in Iraq? He wants to send your women and children off to combat. Put this in perspective. Imagine if a coach… Let’s say one of the Harbaughs. Let’s say Jim Harbaugh. Jim Harbaugh is the brawler of these two. Say Jim Harbaugh, at one of his press conferences this week, says that what he wants in the future is women on the 53-man roster. He wants women playing the game. He wants a female offensive line, kicker whatever.

What do you think the reaction would be?

We are now on verge of giving up all of our freedom and liberty.  Obama is our King. We are the slaves of the state.

Obama is now in attack mode on conservatives and people of faith. The next attack will be on the First Amendment. We are considered obsolete. The Torah, the word of Adonai, Yeshua, freedom, and liberty are now deemed out of date. The new lord and saviour is Obama and the state.

Does Karl Marx strike a familiar note.

This story appeared on

U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee and former Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, issued the following statement on the new push for comprehensive immigration reform and amnesty:

“Americans overwhelmingly oppose illegal immigration. They have pleaded with Congress to end the mass illegality for decades to little avail. All the while, millions have been added to the total of those illegally here.

It’s time to fix that broken system. Now we are told that the Obama Administration and members of Congress say they have a plan that they promise will do the job. So, the American people will need to watch closely. And, members of Congress must insist that they have a full and complete opportunity to study and amend such legislation.

Yet, without consulting the law officers who have the duty to enforce the law, another group of senators, meeting in secret—just like the last time comprehensive reform failed—have set forth an outline with no legislative language. We have seen too often before that the promises made by bill sponsors do not match up to the reality when the language is produced. No secret accord with profound consequences for this nation’s future can be rushed through. That means a full committee process and debate and amendments on the floor of the Senate.

Mark Levin has summed it up best we have a lawless President.

The Republicans are going down the same path again and again. Marco Rubio is expecting different results. This is the perfect definition of insanity. What Rubio doesn’t understand is that Obama and Demo-Republican Party want to destroy him. What Obama got from Marco Rubio was a public admission that amnesty is the way. Marco Rubio just admitted that the rule of law is wrong. Our founding was illegitimate. Illegals have the same rights and privileges as citizens.

Underneath Rubio’s immigration reform is the premise that Republicans can win the Hispanic vote. Not in this lifetime.

I have a novel idea. How about enforcing the laws that are on the books. Secure the border and then lets talk about after these things are done.

One final point Marco Rubio doesn’t understand the true nature of who he is dealing with in Obama, Schumer, Harry Reid, and the rest of the Democrat-Republican Party. These people are not looking to work with you on ideas and laws that will fix the problems that we have these folks want to crush you dead. Once you realize this Marco, then you will see the folly of what you are trying to do. Logic and problem solving is not what Obama etal are seeking. These folks want to have power over us all. Obama etal want to be our ruler and once you see this then you fully understand Marco what Obama’s real intention and nature.

This story appeared on Mark Levin’s website. This story proves my point. www.marklevin,com

Undoubtedly, Republican negotiators of reform proposals, like Marco Rubio, are well-intentioned in their desire to solve a serious problem with thoughtful solutions.  However, if they are really committed to advancing conservative solutions and addressing conservative concerns about the immigration system, they must understand the adversity we all face with our Democrat opponents on this issue.  Their proposals must be crafted to work not just in a world full of Marco Rubios and Paul Ryans, but in a political system full of Luis Gutierrezs and a judicial sphere full of ACLU and MALDEF (Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund)  types.  Hence, when proposing immigration bills, to know thy enemy is key.

Democrats like Luis Gutierrezs and Chuck Schumer believe that all 7 billion people in the world are born with a God-given right to immigrate to the United States.  When they speak of “our broken immigration system,” they are not bemoaning our policies that are biased towards low-skilled immigration; they are complaining that our generous acceptance of over 1 million new immigrants every year, predominantly from the third world, is not enough.  As such, they believe that illegal immigration is a natural and justified result of our refusal to let in even more low-skilled immigrants than we have already admitted over the past two decades.  They believe that our unwillingness to immediately grant them amnesty is a violation of their natural rights, and is a reflection of our sinister bigotry towards others.

Perforce, when they speak of “comprehensive immigration reform” they are referring to the following: complete amnesty of all illegals so they can immediately sign up for welfare programs and commence the path towards becoming a permanent Democrat voting bloc; an even larger increase in legal immigration from the third world and from countries that represent a security risk; more welfare recipients now – enforcement later (or never).

This is the brutally honest reality of the liberal immigration policy desideratum.  Any Republican who plunges into this debate while disregarding this reality is willfully ignoring the statements and actions of Democrats over the past several decades.

Marco Rubio is in the process of formulating and negotiating a proposal which he tells conservatives would deal with the aforementioned concerns.  He claims that his proposal to grant work visas to a selected group of illegal immigrants based on paying a fine and learning English (much like the 2006/07 McCain-Kennedy amnesty bills) would not result in them receiving welfare benefits, and would force them to go to the back of the line to embark on the process of obtaining a green card and eventual citizenship (although they would not have to return to their country of origin – the place of the real line).  He also says that he would like to reform our legal immigration system to one that pursues higher-skilled workers.

I rest my case.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s