Monday, January 14, 2013


 

Marco Rubio’s Real Immigration Reform Obstacle
Sen. Marco Rubio (Shark Tank Media)
By Javier Manjarres / The Shark Tank


As last year’s presidential campaign began to come into focus, Senator Marco Rubio was busy immersing himself in the controversial debate over illegal immigration by laying out some specific ideas that compromised his own “Dream Act”- a move that was partly intentioned to give the Republican party an immigration plan to talk about during the campaign season.

During the sit down talk that Rubio had with the Shark Tank last May 5th, Rubio outlined some of the same details of his immigration proposal that he just disclosed to the Wall Street Journal last week.  During that same interview, Rubio also disclosed some additional details that he requested remain off the record until he was more fully prepared to make these public.  Rubio however did offer us a sneak peek as to what his specific policy proposal would consist of- listen to Rubio’s abbreviated interview with the Shark Tank here.
“The goal is to give American agriculture a reliable work force and to give undocumented they’re vulnerable to being exploited.”
Initially, the illegal protection to these workers as well,” Mr. Rubio says. “When someone is [migrants now in the U.S. would mostly "avail themselves" of the guest-worker system, says Mr. Rubio. "Just the process to come here to legally work in agriculture is very difficult and very expensive. It doesn't work well. So that alone encourages illegal immigration."- Wall Street Journal
Since then, Rubio has spent considerable time calling attention to the human trafficking epidemic and is directly related to sex trafficking that affects untold numbers of illegal immigrants who are brought to this country to find work and are subsequently forced into human slavery and prostitution. Rubio even called out a media outlet for openly promoting and profiting of the sexual exploitation of women. (Source- Human Trafficking)
 Actively, you can go on there and buy a human being for two hours, and you can do that on advertising going on in newspapers being printed in this very town by Village Voice Media.  It is an outrage. - Senator Marco Rubio
But now Rubio's message on immigration has softened somewhat from the once hard-line position he took during his 2010 Senatorial campaign, having previously discounted the immigration issue until he more realized that it was the new "third rail" of American politics. Rubio's more 'moderated' ideas on immigration reform will likely result in substantial backlash from those pro-legal immigration supporters that once backed his tougher position.  Rubio is attempting to bring a workable solution to the fore about the issue of illegal immigration, hoping to finally resolve the issue not only Republicans but for the country with specifics that will earn credibility with immigration hawks and forge common ground with Democrats.  

While the some of the language that Rubio uses is likely to be perceived as advocating amnesty, the fact is that any idea that is anything proposal short of "deport them all" will likely be considered amnesty.
Here's what Rubio to the WSJ-
"Here's how I envision it," he says. "They would have to come forward. They would have to undergo a background check." Anyone who committed a serious crime would be deported.
"They would be fingerprinted," he continues. "They would have to pay a fine, pay back taxes, maybe even do community service. They would have to prove they've been here for an extended period of time. They understand some English and are assimilated. Then most of them would get legal status and be allowed to stay in this country."
These are very practical points that many pro-legal immigration proponents will probably be able to stomach, as in this statement he is not advocating granting citizenship, only giving them legal status to be able to work and pay taxes.

Given Democrats' success with Hispanics in the 2012 general election, some Republicans decided to immediately pander to Hispanics on the immigration issue by supporting blanket amnesty. Rubio's competing ideas may resonate well with Hispanics- his own conservative alternative "Dream Act" proposal that President Obama subsequently co-opted was beginning to attract favorable attention last year.

However, Rubio's own 'Dream Act' did not fully consider the pandora's box of possible legal implications that the military component that he was considering, as he and his adviser did not think through its potential shortcomings. Back in February 2012, we outlined some basic questions regarding the "honorable discharge=citizenship" provision that Rubio and others were in favor of-
Another question to consider is the following- how long does an illegal immigrant have to serve before he or she is ‘Honorably Discharged’ and receives their citizenship- is it 2 years, 4 years, 6 years, or more? And what if the soldier decides to make the military a career, what then? Do ‘what if’?’ provisions need to be added to the agreement regarding extended military service?
Another question- once these illegal immigrants become citizens by virtue of their military service, will they be allowed to immediately request the rest of their families? -(Source-Rubio Walking Amnesty Tightrope)
Moving ahead to May of last year, after being informed about a few of these implications, Rubio came to the realization that he needed to further think through the military option,  and asked to be put in touch with then retired Army Lieutenant Colonel and Congressman Allen West for guidance on the issue.

According to sources in both offices, Rubio never reached out to West, probably because the point was moot after Obama took all of the immigration glory away from Rubio.

Rubio is on the right track as he outlines practical ideas and principles that will modernize our immigration system. With President Obama stating that he is putting immigration reform at the top of his wish-list, we can probably expect to see Rubio roll out a few immigration proposal that will tackle some of these thornier issues head on. 

It will be interesting to see if Rubio can win broad support from Hispanics who may be adverse to accepting the ideas and solutions that come from an "American-Cuban."  While it's not widely reported, the truth is that most Hispanic immigrants believe that Cuban-Americans have had a 'free pass' to come to this country and are somewhat out of touch with the plight of the majority of other Hispanics who have come here from other countries.

History Suggests That Entitlement Era Is Winding Down

By: Michael Barone / Townhall Columnist
History Suggests That Entitlement Era Is Winding Down
It's often good fun and sometimes revealing to divide American history into distinct periods of uniform length. In working on my forthcoming book on American migrations, internal and immigrant, it occurred to me that you could do this using the American-sounding interval of 76 years, just a few years more than the Biblical lifespan of three score and 10. 

It was 76 years from Washington's First Inaugural in 1789 to Lincoln's Second Inaugural in 1865. It was 76 years from the surrender at Appomattox Courthouse in 1865 to the attack at Pearl Harbor in 1941.

Going backward, it was 76 years from the First Inaugural in 1789 to the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713, which settled one of the British-French colonial wars. And going 76 years back from Utrecht takes you to 1637, when the Virginia and Massachusetts Bay colonies were just getting organized.

As for our times, we are now 71 years away from Pearl Harbor. The current 76-year interval ends in December 2017.

Each of these 76-year periods can be depicted as a distinct unit. In the colonial years up to 1713, very small numbers of colonists established separate cultures that have persisted to our times.

The story is brilliantly told in David Hackett Fischer's "Albion's Seed." For a more downbeat version, read the recent "The Barbarous Years" by the nonagenarian Bernard Bailyn.

From 1713 to 1789, the colonies were peopled by much larger numbers of motley and often involuntary settlers -- slaves, indentured servants, the unruly Scots-Irish on the Appalachian frontier.

For how this society became dissatisfied with the colonial status quo, read Bailyn's "Ideological Origins of the American Revolution."

From 1789 to 1865, Americans sought their manifest destiny by expanding across the continent. They made great technological advances but were faced with the irreconcilable issue of slavery in the territories.

For dueling accounts of the period, read the pro-Andrew Jackson Democrat Sean Wilentz's "The Rise of American Democracy" and the pro-Henry Clay Whig Daniel Walker Howe's "What Hath God Wrought."

Both are sparklingly written and full of offbeat insights and brilliant apercus.

The 1865-1941 period saw a vast efflorescence of market capitalism, European immigration and rising standards of living. For descriptions of how economic change reshaped the nation and its government, read Morton Keller's "Affairs of State and Regulating a New Society."

The 70-plus years since 1941 have seen a vast increase in the welfare safety net and governance by cooperation between big units -- big government, big business, big labor -- that began in the New Deal and gained steam in and after World War II. I immodestly offer my own "Our Country: The Shaping of America From Roosevelt to Reagan."

The original arrangements in each 76-year period became unworkable and unraveled toward its end. Eighteenth-century Americans rejected the colonial status quo and launched a revolution and established a constitutional republic.

Nineteenth-century Americans went to war over expansion of slavery. Early 20th-century Americans grappled with the collapse of the private sector economy in the Depression of the 1930s.

We are seeing something like this again today. The welfare state arrangements that once seemed solid are on the path to unsustainability.

Entitlement programs -- Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid -- are threatening to gobble up the whole government and much of the private sector, as well.

Lifetime employment by one big company represented by one big union is a thing of the past. People who counted on corporate or public sector pensions are seeing them default.

Looking back, we are as far away in time today from victory in World War II in 1945 as Americans were at the time of the Dred Scott decision from the First Inaugural.

We are as far away in time today from passage of the Social Security in 1935 as Americans then were from the launching of post-Civil War Reconstruction.

Nevertheless our current president and most politicians of his party seem determined to continue the current welfare state arrangements -- historian Walter Russell Mead calls this the blue state model -- into the indefinite future.

Some leaders of the other party are advancing ideas for adapting a system that worked reasonably well in an industrial age dominated by seemingly eternal big units into something that can prove workable in an information age experiencing continual change and upheaval wrought by innovations in the market economy.

The current 76-year period is nearing its end. What will come next?

Obama interested in 'Allah-is-God' curriculum

Source says federal officials pursuing program used in Texas 

obama-pointingby John Griffing / WND Education

CSCOPE, the controversial online curriculum that taught “Allah is God” and currently is used in 80 percent of Texas school districts, has caught the attention of the Obama administration’s Department of Education.

A source in the Texas education system has told WND that Common Core operatives in the U.S. Department of Education are actively pursuing CSCOPE as a way around the Texas legislative process.

Texas is one of the few states still resisting implementation of Common Core, Obama’s national standards initiative, which many feel is a transparent attempt to nationalize education and progressively control classroom content with minimal parental oversight.

Implementation of Common Core is known to have been made a condition of school systems’ receipt of federal dollars under Obama’s “Race to the Top” program.

CSCOPE recently has come under fire for evidence of what sources claim to be radical content and secrecy. Now new information of such a radical agenda has surfaced showing CSCOPE connections to Obama mentor and self-acknowledged terror group member Bill Ayers.

WND has documented a strong link between Ayers and CSCOPE heavyweight and Common Core advocate Linda Darling-Hammond. An unrepentant terror group member (and known Obama supporter, financier, and ghost-writer), William “Bill” Ayers was part of the notorious Weather Underground which attempted to bomb the Pentagon in the seventies. After 9/11, Ayers was interviewed by the New York Times, and was quoted as saying he had “no regrets.”

Ayers gave Darling-Hammond an enthusiastic endorsement for education secretary when Obama was first elected. Ayers has worked extensively with Darling-Hammond on many of the same projects, even editing her work. Both are part of what some education experts have termed the “small schools movement,” which allegedly emphasizes “emotional” responses and output over factual mastery.

Darling-Hammond is mentioned throughout CSCOPE literature, has given innumerable lectures on behalf of CSCOPE, and was part of Obama’s educational transition team. She is a primary advocate and proponent of Common Core in Texas, and observers see the acquisition of CSCOPE by the U.S. Department of Education as a logical next step.

This scenario has alarmed those concerned about classroom content accountability. Previously, WND reported how CSCOPE lessons promote Islam, teaching conversion methods and presenting verses from the Quran that denigrate other faiths. In CSCOPE curriculum, the Boston Tea Party is likened to an act of terrorism on par with 9/11. In the wake of the Newtown massacre, the Second Amendment is portrayed as a “collective,” not an individual right, despite the Supreme Court’s recent rulings to the contrary.

The CSCOPE website has posted a response to concerns about certain lesson plans, including an extensive discussion of the Boston Tea Party. But critics say that such lessons should never have appeared in the first place.

Sources within the Texas education system recently informed WND that Wicca, thought by many to be akin to witchcraft, was being taught in CSCOPE curriculum alongside Christianity, but was removed before the news media could access it, a fact which represents one of the biggest concerns for followers of CSCOPE.

CSCOPE apparently immediately deletes controversial content once leaked, making it impossible at any one time to know exactly what students are learning and in what order. Defenders of this process say that this responsiveness to public scrutiny is a form of self-auditing. Others have said that it simply leaves parents, teachers and those in charge of curriculum oversight powerless to stop agenda-driven lesson plans and the damage the ideas therein might do to students.

WND has documented numerous instances of lessons being deleted after their use in classrooms.
When it was discovered that Islam was being given preferential status as a part of a study on the world’s major religions, CSCOPE administrators deleted the lesson plan and associated PowerPoint in the presence of two sources, leaving no trace online.

However, through available technology, documentation of this lesson plan and other such controversial content has been retained and reviewed by Texas educators and WND.

See the lesson.

In CSCOPE World History/Social Studies, Lesson 2, Unit 3 under the heading, “Classical Rome,” students are told that Christianity is a “cult,” and given a link to a BBC article saying the early Christians were “cannibals,” i.e. the Eucharist, which students are then led to conclude is the reason for Roman persecution.

See the lesson.

This lesson has since been removed, but documentation in WND’s possession confirms that the lesson existed. Critics contend that this ability to change content on a whim to evade scrutiny or accountability is a persistent risk with a system like CSCOPE. An organic curriculum – if regulated – might be advantageous, but without transparency, these types of occurrences will likely be more frequent, critics say.

Speaking with WND, Texas Sen. Dan Patrick, new chairman of the education committee, communicated his intent to hold high-profile hearings and investigate CSCOPE.

Sen. Patrick noted, “Any system where the chairman of the state board can’t get a password to explore their site in detail for six months, requires teachers to sign an agreement that could subject them to criminal penalties, and is not easily transparent to parents, needs to be closely examined by the legislature.”

When asked if he would support placing CSCOPE under state oversight and/or local school board oversight, Sen. Patrick answered carefully, explaining,

“We will make that decision after our hearings. However, I have concerns of any curriculum program that is in the majority of our school districts without some level of oversight by either the SBOE, TEA, or the legislature.”

Patrick, along with many other Republicans, supported the 2011 legislation that took power over Internet curriculum review away from the SBOE, though this provision was admittedly ill-understood in its implications and was originally intended to reduce the cost-burden to school districts in obtaining and distributing the curriculum. While reducing costs, this move also created the basis of the current controversy.

Opponents of CSCOPE, on the other hand, desire a lawsuit. They do not want to wait for hearings. As they contend, CSCOPE is already violating Texas public statutes, which require all “instructional materials” to be available to parents. CSCOPE places all primary content – apart from summaries – behind a pay wall.

Texas Education Service Center Curriculum Collaborative (TESCCC) Governing Board minutes, obtained only by Texas Public Information Act request, reveal that even the governing board in charge of CSCOPE may not be fully aware of CSCOPE content issues.

Minutes for the meetings covered show that governing board members were told by CSCOPE Executive Director Wade Labay that they will only be involved in content-related issues if “politically sensitive,” what Labay calls “’911′ type messages or those deemed critical.” In other words, in addition to the absence of state oversight, corporate oversight within CSCOPE might be lacking.

The fears of some that CSCOPE is replacing textbooks, a claim denied by Texas SBOE member Thomas Ratliff, would appear justified if governing board minutes are considered.

In addition to outlining when and under what circumstances CSCOPE would communicate with the TESCCC governing board, pending textbook alignments with Pearson, McGraw Hill, et al., were discussed and delayed with the support of governing board members. Some attendees lamented even having to align CSCOPE content with textbooks, since “the mission of CSCOPE is to change instruction in the classroom.”

TESCCC has now asked the Texas Attorney General to make its minutes exempt from public information requirements.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/obama-interested-in-allah-is-god-curriculum/#Kxq2DUsYlffdhRaI.99
Rubio Outlines Bold Plan Giving 12 Million Illegals Legal Status

Image: Rubio Outlines Bold Plan Giving 12 Million Illegals Legal Status
By Sandy Fitzgerald / Newsmax

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio is developing a wide-ranging immigration reform plan — including steps to give more than 12 million illegals currently in the U.S. legal status — in an effort to seize the initiative on a contentious issue that polls show is hurting the Republican Party with the nation’s rapidly growing Hispanic population.

Rubio laid out the broad outline of his plan in an interview with the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal, at the same time President Obama announced he would push a comprehensive immigration plan of his own this March.

Surprisingly, both hold similar goals – creating a process in which undocumented workers in the U.S. can gain status and at the same time create a potential path to citizenship at some point in the future.

New York’s Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer predicted immigration will soon take center stage in Washington, sweeping other issues to the side.

“This is so important now to both parties that neither the fiscal cliff nor guns will get in the way,” Schumer, who heads up bipartisan Congressional efforts on immigration, told The New York Times.

Republican lawmakers have told Newsmax that Rubio’s plan could pass muster, even with immigration hardliners, if the plan included a significant restitution for illegals to pay and began taxing them for their work here.

Critically, Republicans want to ensure newly documented workers don’t get citizenship too soon, with many advocating a minimum 10-year window before newly legal residents could acquire citizenship.

But the Republicans have to walk a political tightrope. After President Obama handily won re-election, garnering the support of 71 percent of Hispanic voters, the GOP has been anxious to woo this key swing ethnic group.

At the same time, Republicans fear that the nation’s delicate political balance would move in favor of the Democratic Party if election rolls swelled too quickly with new immigrant voters.

Rubio, in his interview, made clear that his Republican plan differs from the president’s in its phased approach. He argues it should create a series of legislative bills on immigration reform rather than one omnibus bill envisioned by the president.

The Florida Republican, one of the nation’s best-known Hispanic leaders and an oft-mentioned candidate for president in 2016, is preparing the first such bill, one that will provide legal status specifically for young illegal immigrants, known as Dreamers, who came to the United States as children.

Rubio’s plan also will include penalties for those already in the country, but notably doesn’t call for tougher border enforcement because he believes the sweeping reforms will deter future waves of illegals from landing on America’s shores.

Rubio, the son of Cuban-American exiles, is making immigration one of his primary issues in 2013, the Times reported Sunday.

Rubio says his piecemeal approach will be more successful, since lawmakers will get better results if the politically and practically tangled problems of the immigration system are handled separately.

Rubio, however, told reporters last week that the piecemeal approach was “not a line in the sand” for him.

He does, however, demand that any legalization measure should not be unfair to immigrants who played by the rules and applied to become residents through legal channels.

Specifically, Rubio’s proposals would allow illegal immigrants to gain temporary status so they could remain in the country and work, according to the Times. Then they would be sent to the back of the line in the existing system to apply to become permanent residents, and eventually citizenship.

Republicans “are going to have a struggle speaking to a whole segment of the population about our principles of limited government and free enterprise if they think we don’t want them here,” Rubio told the Times.

The Wall Street Journal revealed other key parts of Rubio's plan:
  • Some 12 million illegals residing in the U.S. could begin the process of becoming legal by identifying themselves to federal authorities and being fingerprinted. If they have not committed any crime, demonstrate that they have been in the U.S. for a while, and then pay a fine and taxes, they could enter a “limbo status,” Rubio said. “Assuming they haven’t violated any of the conditions of that status,” newly documented workers can apply for permanent residency and potentially citizenship, he added.
  • A rise in the cap for people who bring investment or other skills into the country. Rubio noted the United States doesn't produce enough science, math or engineering graduates to fill high-tech posts. The number of those people allowed in could be adjusted according to demand, Rubio noted, saying, “I don't think there's a lot of concern in this country that we'll somehow get overrun by Ph. D.s and entrepreneurs."
  • A weakening of the family reunification aspects of current immigration law. "I'm a big believer in family-based immigration," he says. "But I don't think that in the 21st Century we can continue to have an immigration system where only 6.5 percent of people who come here, come here based on labor and skill. We have to move toward merit and skill-based immigration."
  • A guest-worker program to help meet the needs of American growers. Most of the 1.6 million agricultural laborers in the United States are illegal immigrants, and Rubio noted American produce could not be picked without them. He wants the country to have a number of visas that are provided through a guest-worker program that is sufficient to address growers' needs for pickers. “The goal is to give American agriculture a reliable work force and to give protection to these workers as well," Rubio told the Journal. "When someone is [undocumented] they're vulnerable to being exploited."
“Every country in the world has immigration laws and expects to enforce them, and we should be no different,” Rubio told the Journal.

Rubio said he wants the reform to come through in a comprehensive package of bills, possibly four or five instead of one omnibus, that would move through Congress concurrently because he knows how bad policy easily sneaks into big bills.

This isn't Rubio's first proposal on immigration matters. He is a co-sponsor for the E-Verify law, which if passed will require employers to check workers' legal statuses against a federal database. Critics have complained the database is faulty and the law turns employers into immigration agents and pushes illegal workers into hiding.

Rubio, though, said workplace enforcement is essential for reform, especially if his plans for expanding guest-worker and high-tech visas come through.

“You want to protect those folks that are coming here,” he said. “You're not protecting them if you allow their wages and their status to be undermined by further illegal immigration in the future."

Rubio said he believes people who come here unlawfully with their parents should be accommodated quickly to gain a way to become naturalized citizens.

Rubio tried last year to get support for his immigration reform ideas, but his fellow Republicans didn't like how certain provisions would allow some illegals to obtain citizenship.

But his efforts caught President Obama's eye, and the president ended up offering two-year reprieves from deportation, helping him win the Hispanic vote.

But Rubio says Obama's action may have set back the reform cause some. Still, he is ready to take on further immigration reform, even though comprehensive efforts failed twice already under George W. Bush's administration, and Obama failed to act on reform in his first term.

Rubio told the Journal that Obama has “not done a thing” on reform and may want to keep it alive as a Democratic platform, but at the same time, “maybe he's interested in his legacy” and will be willing to make a deal.

But immigration reform won't be all the GOP needs to attract the Hispanic vote, Rubio said.

“The immigration issue is a gateway issue for Hispanics, no doubt about it,” he said. “No matter what your stance is on a number of other issues, if people somehow come to believe that you don't like them or want them here, it's difficult to get them to listen to anything else."

Editor's Note: Read More About Marco Rubio's Plans to Change America. Click Here!
Op-ed:
Barack HUSSEIN Obama...a firearm dealer's dream come true
By: Diane Sori

Hey...you gotta love Obama for one thing...he's helped put more firearms in the hands of 'We the People' like nothing ever has before.

Obama's misguided and nefarious ulterior motives for initiating even more gun control than we already have has set off a gun-buying frenzy all across the country and rightly so, as more and more people are finally waking up to the fact that our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is all that's left between us and 'them'.

And you all know who 'them' is, but if you don't know by now then your head is too buried in the sand to reach you at this late date, for know it or NOT...we are already at war with an administration run amok...and the Second Amendment is our battle flag.

As Thomas Jefferson said in the Thomas Jefferson Papers, "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.  The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." 

And if there ever was a government that is the epitome of tyranny, this administration is as it chips away at our constitutionally given rights like NO administration has ever done before. 

Now with people all across America fearing that Obama will soon limit the purchase of ALL firearms, gun and ammo sales are reaching record highs.  And while we know that Obama wants to ban and severely tighten regulations on so-called 'assault weapons' (which by the way are nothing more than 'ugly' supposedly scary looking 12 gauge shotguns), the fear is that this is just the beginning of the road leading up to the confiscation of ALL citizen-owned firearms as the final goal. 
 
We know that dismantling the Second Amendment has always been an Obama objective, but in the wake of the Newtown massacre this has now come front and center...pushed to the forefront by a media controlled by this administration.  Never mind that a madman alone did the unspeakable, the gun-control freaks, egged on by the media frenzy, see all we gun owners ('embittered clingers' as we're called) as the cause of this massacre, as well as the Colorado movie theater massacre, and any and all previous ones too.

But because of this, and because Obama's anti-gun stance has been well known since he was first elected ('stole' is a bit more accurate), about 67 million firearms have been sold across the country...more than were sold in the seven years preceding his first election.  And in 2012 alone, more than 19 million background checks were conducted on folks buying firearms from licensed dealers, with 2.2 million of those done just this past December, an increase of 58.6% over the same period in 2011.

Also, add into this that since the Newtown shooting, the NRA is registering an average of 8,000+ new members a day, and hopes to increase its current membership of 4.2 million to 5 million before the debate over gun control is finished.  Remember, the powerful NRA lobby is really all that stands between us and Obama, the man who wants to take the guns away from us ordinary, peaceful, freedom loving Americans, and placing them solely in the hands of his administration's controlled thugs and miscreants.

So between all the new firearm sales, the pre-Obama owned firearms, and the ever-increasing NRA membership roster, that's a lot of firepower in the hands of 'We the People'.  In other words, Obama might try to disarm the American citizenry either through gun bans or confiscation, but he will have one hell of a hard time doing it.

As the saying goes...'from our cold dead hands.'