Archive for the ‘odd’ Category
OBAMA
“On one end of the spectrum, weve heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that its based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, weve heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.
I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as Im sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.”
Now after everyone has either read or heard this speech, this writer has drawn a conclusion.
On March 18, 2008 Mr. Obama said the following to Major Garrett on FNC:
Garrett: I want to ask you a set of basic, sort of threshold questions about your faith experience at Trinity United Church of Christ because I think they will help Americans understand the story. So, the first question: How long have you been a member in good standing of that church?
Obama: You know, I’ve been a member since 1991 or ’92, and… but I’d known Trinity even before then when I was a community organizer on the south side helping steelworkers find jobs, and we were organizing with churches and trying to recruit folks to get involved in that process. Trinity was one of the churches that we tried to get involved in some of these community projects.
Garrett: As a member in good standing, were you a regular attendee of Sunday services?
Obama: I won’t say that I was a perfect attendee. I was regular in spurts because there were times where… For example, our child had just been born, our first child, and so we didn’t go as regularly then.
Garrett: When you attended, sir, when you attended did you donate frequently?
Obama: Yes.
Garrett: OK. Were you and Michelle married there and did Rev. Wright preside?
Obama: Yes.
Garrett: Were your two daughters baptized there and did Rev. Wright preside over the baptisms?
Obama: That is correct, Major.
Garrett establishes that Obama has a long, close connection with Wright and his church.
Wright and that church is an integral part of the lives of Obama and his family.
Obama gave money to support Wright and Trinity United Church of Christ.
Garrett: Very good. I wanted to talk to you about your statement released this afternoon because earlier today when I contacted your campaign and I asked them if there was any way the campaign felt the need to add further context, add further distance between yourself and the statements of Rev. Wright, the one word answer I received was ‘No.’
Then late this afternoon, you have a statement that says, ‘I vehemently disagree,’ ‘strongly condemn.’ I’m trying to understand the evolution between this morning and this afternoon. I’d like to know specifically, Senator, what you vehemently disagree with and what you strongly condemn.
Obama: Well, Major, I gotta confess that as you know I was voting in the Senate all day yesterday, so I wasn’t following this story as carefully as I could have been and then I flew back to Chicago. When I saw these statments, many of which I had heard for the first time, then I thought it was important to make a very clear and unequivocal statement.
None of these statements were ones that I had heard myself personally in the pews. One of them I had heard about after I had started running for president and I put out a statement at that time condemning them.
The other statements were ones that I just heard about while we were… when they started being run on FOX and some of the other stations. And so they weren’t things that I was familiar with. Once I saw them I had to be very clear about the fact that these are not statements that I am comfortable with. I reject them completely. They are not ones that reflect my values or my ideals, or Michelle’s; and that had I heard them, had I been sitting in the church at the time that they were spoken, I would have been absolutely clear to Rev. Wright that I didn’t find those acceptable.
The excuses are priceless.
Obama saying that he was voting all day on Thursday so he didn’t know about this is an absolute joke.
It’s impossible to believe that he didn’t know there was a controversy. It’s inconceivable.
It is conceivable that Obama is lying and doing a bad job of it.
I think it’s interesting that Obama says Wright’s statements don’t reflect his values and they don’t reflect Michelle’s values. Obama went out of his way to do damage control for Michelle. That was no accident.
Wright and Michelle sound like they’re on the exact same page, divisive and angry and down on America.
Garrett: Sir, would you have quit the church had you heard them personally?
Obama: You know, I guess, keep in mind that just to provide more context, this is somebody who I’d known for 20 years. Pastor Wright had been a pastor for 30 years. He’s an ex-Marine. He is somebody who is a Biblical scholar, has spoken at theological seminaries all across the country from the University of Chicago to Hampton. And so he is a well-regarded preacher, and somebody who is known for talking about the social gospel.
But most of the time when I’m in church, he’s talking about Jesus, God, faith, values, caring for the poor, family. Those were the messages that I was hearing. And so, you know, I think that the statements that have been strung together are compiled out of hundreds of sermons that he delivered over the course his lifetime. But, obviously, they are ones that are, from my perspective, completely unacceptable and inexcusable.
And if I had thought that was the tenor or tone on an ongoing basis of his sermons, then yes, I don’t think that it would’ve been reflective of my values or my faith experience.
Obama says, “Most of the time when I’m in church, he’s talking about Jesus, God, faith….”
“Most of the time”? What about the rest of the time? What has Obama heard Wright say?
Obama points out that Wright is an ex-Marine. How lame!
That doesn’t matter. Wright spews hate. He’s divisive and racist and says outrageous things about America.
Who cares that he’s an ex-Marine? That doesn’t give him a pass to preach such ugliness. Given Wright’s remarks, it’s hard to imagine that he was a Marine and served our country.
Obama notes that Wright is a Biblical scholar. Really? He must be a bad one. The things Wright says don’t sound very Christian. He sounds like he’s trying to incite a riot.
On what planet is the hateful Wright a “well-regarded preacher”?
He talks about Jesus and the poor. Fine. He also talks about God “damning” America.
Garrett: So quick yes or no, if you had heard them in person you would have quit.
Obama: If I had heard them repeated, I would’ve quit. I mean obviously, understand that, understand that, this is somebody who is like an uncle, if you have…, to me. He’s somebody who helped me find Christ. And somebody who always talked to me in very powerful ways about relationship to God and our obligations to the poor. If somebody makes a mistake, then obviously, you recognize I make mistakes. We all make mistakes. If I thought that that was the repeated tenor of the church then I wouldn’t feel comfortable there, but frankly that has not been my experience at Trinity United Church of Christ.
The old uncle stuff again — good grief.
We know the tenor of the Trinity United Church of Christ.
We also know that Obama has felt comfortable there for 20 years.
Garrett: In the time we have remaining, you said that in your statement today, ‘When I first heard these I was beginning my campaign,’ yet you did not begin your campaign on December 4, 2007, when in a press release your campaign announced that Rev. Wright was a part of a, quote unquote, African-American religious leadership committee. I’d like you to try to help me understand the inconsistency there, because obviously if you knew about them at the beginning of your campaign and you put him on this committee later you would have been aware.
Obama: No, no. Wait, wait, Major. I didn’t know about all these statements. I knew about one or two statements that had been made and as a consequence, as I said, if it was just a function of one or two statements, then that’s not something that would lead me to distance myself from either my church or my pastor. And if I was gonna have a committee talking about faith issues, which we’ve been very active in doing all across the country, reaching out to evangelicals and talking to the church communities all across the country, it would not make sense if my own pastor wasn’t on that committee.
——– Now I will keep to this statement:
“None of these statements were ones that I had heard myself personally in the pews. One of them I had heard about after I had started running for president and I put out a statement at that time condemning them.” Says Obama
This writer’s conclusion is that Obama is a liar throughout his statement.
And that we should only vote for him because he is black. Thereby stopping or putting to an end the racism he sees in America.
David A. Paterson
Did you know:
Is legally blind,
The first non-white legislative leader in New York’s history,
New York’s first African-American lieutenant governor.
Paterson is a proponent of embryonic stem cell research.
In February 2008, a U.S. District Judge denied a motion to dismiss a $1.5 million racial discrimination lawsuit naming Paterson. A former staff photographer claims that in 2005 Paterson’s office replaced him with an African American because he is white. According to the New York Post, Paterson’s chief of staff “denied the claim… Paterson, in his deposition, countered that the decision… was simple politics – [the photographer] was a holdover from former Minority Leader Marty Connor, who was ousted by Paterson in 2003
What a world!
Steve King, Republican Congressman: Al-Qaida Will Be “Dancing In The Streets” If “Hussein” Obama Wins – Politics on The Huffington Post#postComment
Coincidence – House Democrats Get Letters With Picture Of Recruiting Station Before New York Bombing : Homeland Security National Terror Alert – Homeland Security News
Radio host Michael Savage’s suit against Islamic group in court
Breitbart.tv » ‘Why Are You So Angry?’: McCain Gets Testy Over NYT Reporter’s Inquiry
Breitbart.tv » ‘Why Are You So Angry?’: McCain Gets Testy Over NYT Reporter’s Inquiry
Not angry but right!
Local girl makes unexpected appearance in Hillary ad | Top Stories | KING5.com | News for Seattle, Washington
Hugo Chavez?
|
Would you believe it if we told you that the U.S. House of Representatives voted to raise the price you pay for gasoline at the pump and — at the same time — give a huge tax break to that America-hating dictator Hugo Chavez?
In common parlance, we call that a “twofer” and as unbelievable as it may sound, Pelosi and company have yet again proved that they have never met a socialist tyrannical despot that they did not like! Here’s what happened.
Investor’s Business Daily put it this way in an editorial on Friday titled, “Tax Cut for Hugo:” “It goes to show that Congress is more willing to empower dictators than to get serious about America’s energy supply.” You remember Hugo Chavez. He’s the mouth-foaming dictator of Venezuela who came to New York City not too long ago and called the President of the United States “El Diablo” (Translation: “The Devil”). Here’s exactly what he said when speaking at the United Nations: “And the devil came here yesterday. Yesterday the devil came here. Right here. [performs the sign of the cross] And it smells of sulfur still today.” “Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the President of the United States, the gentleman to whom I refer as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the world. Truly. As the owner of the world. “I think we could call a psychiatrist to analyze yesterday’s statement made by the President of the United States. As the spokesman of imperialism, he came to share his nostrums, to try to preserve the current pattern of domination, exploitation and pillage of the peoples of the world .” [Emphasis Mine] And Pelosi and company have basically bestowed favor upon this anti-American dictator and they’re bestowing this favor on the backs of American businesses and average American taxpayers like you and me. We must act quickly… and act together… to stop this ridiculous legislation before Pelosi’s liberal colleagues try to sneak it through the Senate. Use the hyperlink below to send your urgent and personalized 50 Blast Fax messages to President George W. Bush and the 49 Republican Members of the United States Senate. Tell them in no uncertain terms that the American people do NOT want tax breaks to go into the greasy pockets of that tyrannical America-hating despot Hugo Chavez. Time is of the essence because Pelosi’s liberal allies and fellow travelers in the Senate may try to fast-track this bill to avoid a filibuster. http://www.cfiflistmanager.org/hugotaxbreakbe.html AOL Members Use This Hyperlink If the above hyperlink does not appear to function you can copy and paste it into the address bar of your browser.
There Is Not A Moment To Lose! Monisha Bansal of CNS News tells us: “Senate Democratic leaders have indicated they would fast-track the bill to try to avoid a Republican filibuster.” That’s why there’s not a moment to lose!
Here’s a short biography of Hugo Chavez:
Once in office, he began the systematic repression of any and all opposition.
Most recently Chavez launched a referendum that would have allowed him to remain Dictator for life. Chavez is also wildly anti-Semitic and frequently unleashes hysterical diatribes against Israel and the Jewish people. He even disturbs the New York Times, which once hailed Fidel Castro’s ascension as a triumph of democracy and agrarian reform.
And perhaps for something even much more chilling… Read on.
Use the hyperlink below to send your urgent and personalized 50 Blast Fax messages to President George W. Bush and the 49 Republican Members of the United States Senate. Tell them in no uncertain terms that the American people do NOT want tax breaks to go into the greasy pockets of that tyrannical America-hating despot Hugo Chavez. Time is of the essence because Pelosi’s liberal allies and fellow travelers in the Senate may try to fast-track this bill to avoid a filibuster. http://www.cfiflistmanager.org/hugotaxbreakbe.html AOL Members Use This Hyperlink
If the above hyperlink does not appear to function you can copy and paste it into the address bar of your browser. But That’s Not The Worst Part… If liberals in Congress were living under the idiotic delusion that Chavez was a benign figure when they passed this legislation, they could hardly maintain that delusion after Monday’s news.
For more than 40 years, Colombia’s legitimate government has been fighting a group calling itself the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) — the military arm of the Colombian Communist Party.
On Saturday, Colombian military forces pursued FARC’s second in command, Raul Reyes, into Ecuador and killed him and at least 16 of his men — the biggest defeat in FARC’s history.
He strutted and postured before the press, sounding just like what he is — a banana-Republic dictator — a character out of a Hollywood farce. On Sunday, during his weekly radio address he bellowed: “Mr. Defense Minister, move 10 battalions to the border with Colombia for me, immediately — tank battalions. Deploy the air force. We don’t want war, but we aren’t going to permit the U.S. empire, which is the master [of Colombia] … to come divide us.” [Emphasis Mine] Addressing the president of Columbia he said: “This could be the start of a war in South America. If it occurs to you to do this in Venezuela, President Uribe, I’ll send some Sukhois.” [warplanes the Russians recently sold to Chavez] Now you might be tempted to laugh at this posturing, but there’s more to this story.
By Monday evening, TV networks were carrying a more disturbing story: Columbian’s had captured documents revealing that Hugo Chavez had given FARC $300 million. Question: Where would the dictator of a starving country get that kind of money? Answer: Oil revenues. Now you see why Pelosi and company’s H.R. 5351 is a betrayal of our country and why it has to be stopped! You have the power to stop this bill in the Senate RIGHT NOW!
Use the hyperlink below to send your urgent and personalized 50 Blast Fax messages to President George W. Bush and the 49 Republican Members of the United States Senate. Tell them in no uncertain terms that the American people do NOT want tax breaks to go into the greasy pockets of that tyrannical America-hating despot Hugo Chavez. Time is of the essence because Pelosi’s liberal allies and fellow travelers in the Senate may try to fast-track this bill to avoid a filibuster. http://www.cfiflistmanager.org/hugotaxbreakbe.html AOL Members Use This Hyperlink If the above hyperlink does not appear to function you can copy and paste it into the address bar of your browser. Some Leaders Are Disgusted. At least some Republican leaders are disgusted by Pelosi and company’s willingness to pass a law guaranteed to feed both inflation at the pump and Hugo Chavez’s appetite for power. House Minority Leader John Boehner said: “Middle-class families and small businesses are feeling the squeeze from rising costs for gasoline, food, and other costs of living…” “[H.R. 5351] actually carves out tax breaks for Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez — courtesy of American taxpayers. This is unacceptable, and the Democratic leadership is irresponsible for bringing the bill to the House floor. “I am disappointed that the Majority voted down a Republican proposal to eliminate the tax relief for Hugo Chavez and give it to those who need it most: middle-class American families.” This bill is a giant step in the wrong direction; and as an extra twist of the knife, Pelosi and Company are deliberately trying to give Chavez a big edge and are making hard-working U.S. taxpayers foot the bill. If we don’t kill this bill, it may cost us more than the tax revenues Pelosi and her colleagues will spend on boondoggles and pork before the lightning bugs show up this summer. The Senate may take up this bill at any time. You and I can beat this obscene legislation — if we act immediately. Use the hyperlink below to send your urgent and personalized 50 Blast Fax messages to President George W. Bush and the 49 Republican Members of the United States Senate. Tell them in no uncertain terms that the American people do NOT want tax breaks to go into the greasy pockets of that tyrannical America-hating despot Hugo Chavez. Time is of the essence because Pelosi’s liberal allies and fellow travelers in the Senate may try to fast-track this bill to avoid a filibuster. http://www.cfiflistmanager.org/hugotaxbreakbe.html AOL Members Use This Hyperlink If the above hyperlink does not appear to function you can copy and paste it into the address bar of your browser.
Yours In Freedom,
Jeff Mazzella P.S. Please help us reach as many concerned Americans as possible by forwarding this e-mail to at least 10 of your friends and family members. The CFIF Action Alert is a service to the conservative community. If you would like to subscribe please go to www.cfif.org/signup. Center for Individual Freedom CFIF is a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit constitutional advocacy organization with Contributions to CFIF are Powered by GrassTopsUSA Please read: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h5351/show Revises tax rules relating to foreign oil and gas extraction income and foreign produced fuel used or sold outside the United States.
|
Obama And Rezko
Election 2008: For an ambitious and savvy politician, Barack Obama has not picked his friends wisely. They include an assortment of influence-peddlers, terrorists and Iraqi billionaires. If you thought the Clinton White House was interesting, just wait.
My reasoning that Obama is doing so well is because of the social disease of political correctness & white guilt.
I agree that Obama will bring a change—a change we don’t want.
Did Clinton Darken Obama’s Skin?
Some Obama backers cry “racism.”
Obama supporters on the Internet are agitated over the apparent darkening of Obama’s image in a Clinton attack ad.
Our conclusions:
• The Obama frames from the ad do appear darker than other video of Obama from the same event.
• However, the YouTube copy of the ad, on which the bloggers base their conclusions, is darker overall than other copies of the ad. We obtained a digital recording of the ad as it actually appeared on a Texas TV station, and it is lighter.
• Furthermore, our analysis of the Obama frames, using Photoshop, shows a fairly uniform darkening of the entire image including the backdrop. It is not just Obama’s skin color that’s affected.
• Also, nearly all the images in the ad are dark, including those of Hillary Clinton. And dark images are a common technique used in attack ads.
Others will speculate about the Clinton campaign’s intentions and motives..
Very Interesting Coincidences
Very Interesting Coincidences
I recently came across some information regarding American-Israeli relations that I thought was worth sharing. I am not exactly sure what it all means, but I have learned enough in my life to know that there is no such thing as coincidences.
For those of you who know me,
I am just trying to keep it “Is-Rael”
The following is just a sampling with the real kicker at the end.
October 30, 1991:
President Bush (1st one) opened the Madrid Conference, the intended purpose of which was to strip Israel of its land in exchange for peace with the Palestinian Arabs. ON THAT VERY DAY, an extremely rare storm formed on the coast of Nova Scotia , a storm later named ‘The Perfect Storm’ (which the book and movie were about), and record-setting waves pounded the New England coast causing heavy damage to the President’s home in Kennebunkport, Maine .
August 23, 1992:
The Madrid Conference moved to Washington, D.C. With the same agenda of attempting to wrest land from a sovereign country. That, of course, would create a state of homelessness for thousands of Jews. ON THAT VERY DAY, Hurricane Andrews produced an estimated $30 billion in damage, leaving 180,000 Floridians homeless. It was the worst natural disaster to ever hit America, at least up to that time.
January 16, 1994:
President Clinton meets with the Syrian President in order to develop a strategy that would force Israel to give up the Golan Heights. LESS THAN 24 HOURS LATER. A powerful 6.9 earthquake rocks southern California. Which left countless Americans homeless.
March 1, 1997:
Arafat begins a one-month tour of America and President Clinton publicly rebukes Israel for not surrendering land for peace. ON THE VERY DAY that Arafat lands in America, powerful tornadoes devastate huge sections of the country while ripping across Texas , Arkansas , Mississippi , Kentucky , and Tennessee . Days later, as Arafat is still touring, storms hit the Dakotas, causing the worst flooding of the century. Weeks of storms rage throughout the Midwest until Arafat completes his tour. The day he leaves the U.S., the storms suddenly begin to settle down, and end within a few days.
January 21, 1998:
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu meets with Clinton and is coldly received as President Clinton and Secretary of State Madeline Albright refuse to lunch with him. ON THAT VERY DAY , just hours later, the Monica Lewinski scandal erupts and will consume the major portion of Clinton’s time for the remainder of his tenure.
Others include:
The World Trade Center Bombing of 1993, on the day that Secretary Albright leaves on a trip to visit 8 Arab/Muslim countries to develop a strategy against Israel .
The Northridge Earthquake in 1994, on the day that President Clinton and Syrian President Assad demand that Israel turn the Golan Heights over to Syria.
Ravaging tornadoes hit the Mid-West on the day in 2002 that Bush negotiates Arafat’s release from Israeli capture.
In 2002 that Bush refuses to move the American Embassy to Jerusalem and refuses to recognize Jerusalem as the Capital. Hurricane Lili hits the United States at the same time
But here, ladies and gents, is the kicker.
August of 2005 was the month when Sharon expelled the Jews of Gaza from their homes. Just about 10,000 Jews were made homeless, in accordance with the demands of the American President and his Secretary of State. The operation was being concluded on August 29. THAT VERY DAY, America was hit by THE WORST natural disaster to have ever occurred in America. Hurricane Katrina hit the New Orleans area and just about 500,000 people were made homeless.
10,000 Jews out of a population of 6 million is a percentage of .00167.
500,000 Americans out of a population of 300 million is a percentage of .00167.
Whites to be minority
Whites to be minority in US by 2050: study
Immigration will drive the population of the United States sharply upward between now and 2050, and will push whites into a minority, projections by the Pew Research Center showed Monday.
“If current trends continue, the population of the United States will rise to 438 million in 2050, from 296 million in 2005,” an increase of nearly 50 percent, the study by the Washington-based think-tank said.
More than 80 percent of the increase will be due to immigrants arriving in the country and their US-born children, who will make up nearly one in five Americans by 2050 compared with one in eight in 2005, it said.
Whites, who currently make up around two-thirds of the US population, will become a minority (47 percent) by 2050, the report said.
The Hispanic population, currently the largest minority group, will triple in size and double in percentage terms from 14 percent in 2005 to 29 percent in 2050, the report said.
The Asian population will roughly double in percentage terms, from five percent to nine percent, while the black population will remain static at around 13 percent.
The projections are based on trends over the past 50 years, during which legal and illegal immigration have played an increasing role in US population growth, the report said.
From 1960 to 2005, new immigrants and their US-born descendants accounted for 51 percent of population increase, and for 58 percent from 1980 to 2005, the report said.
But, the report warned, “possible future changes in immigration policy” could impact the projections.
Illegal immigration has become a top issue in the race for the US presidency, especially among Republican candidates, most of whom favor of a crackdown.
Copyright © 2008 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AFP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of Agence France Presse.
var ADFadids = “-1,1030392″; function ADFlaunch() {var w; var l=”http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=14s51n3ts/M=224039.1983420.3465435.1919853/D=news/S=95972313:FOOT/_ylt=AtHBCND.d0VX3TwAsUkCVijZa7gF/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1202878575/L=iAT3vdG_Rt2MkCMxR50GkAQzQrB7XkeyXE8ADKxT/B=Uv.nBUSOxIU-/J=1202871375876039/A=1030392/R=0/id=adfeedback/SIG=12g1ilon3/*http://surveys.yahoo.com/user_ad_feedback?source=95972313:FOOT&.q28=news&.q26=”+ADFadids; w=window.open(l,”AdFeedbackWin”,”toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable,location=no,height=400,width=640″); }
| Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Questions or Comments Privacy Policy -Terms of Service – Copyright/IP Policy – Ad Feedback |
if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['Wf.nBUSOxIU-']=’&U=129jnvaar%2fN%3dWf.nBUSOxIU-%2fC%3d-1%2fD%3dFSRVY%2fB%3d-1′; if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['Uv.nBUSOxIU-']=’&U=139vfkoqm%2fN%3dUv.nBUSOxIU-%2fC%3d224039.1983420.3465435.1919853%2fD%3dFOOT%2fB%3d1030392′;
if(window.yzq_p==null)document.write(“”); if(window.yzq_p)yzq_p(‘P=iAT3vdG_Rt2MkCMxR50GkAQzQrB7XkeyXE8ADKxT&T=19so5ovqa%2fX%3d1202871375%2fE%3d95972313%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d1.1%2fW%3dJ%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d3395749709%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJXYXNoaW5ndG9uO2NoaWxkcmVuO2l0O1JlcHVibGljYW47cmVmdXJsX25ld3NfeWFob29fY29tIiByZWZ1cmw9InJlZnVybF9uZXdzX3lhaG9vX2NvbSIgdG9waWNzPSJyZWZ1cmxfbmV3c195YWhvb19jb20i%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d7A46BFD1′); if(window.yzq_s)yzq_s();
Off Beat
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Summary: The Fiscal Cost of Low-Skill Immigrants to the U.S. Taxpayer
Executive Summary: The Fiscal Cost of Low-Skill Immigrants to the U.S. Taxpayer
by Robert E. Rector and Christine Kim
Special Report #14
|
Each year, families and individuals pay taxes to the government and receive back a wide variety of services and benefits. When the benefits and services received by one group exceed the taxes paid, a distributional deficit occurs, and other groups must pay for the services and benefits of the group in deficit. Each year, government is involved in a large-scale transfer of resources between different social groups. This paper provides a fiscal distribution analysis of households headed by immigrants without a high school diploma. The report refers to these households as “low-skill immigrant households.” In fiscal year (FY) 2004 there were around 4.5 million low-skill immigrant households in the United States, containing 15.9 million persons, roughly 5 percent of the U.S. population. About 60 percent of these low-skill immigrant households were headed by legal immigrants and 40 percent by illegal immigrants The analysis measures the total benefits and services received by these “low-skill immigrant households” compared to the total taxes paid. The difference between benefits received and taxes paid represents the total resources transferred by government on behalf of this group from the rest of society. In FY 2004, federal, state, and local expenditures combined amounted to $3.75 trillion. Government expenditures can be divided into six categories: Direct benefits, which include Social Security, Medicare, and a few smaller transfer programs; Means-tested benefits, including cash, food, housing, social services, and medical care for poor and near-poor individuals; Public educational services, which include the governmental cost of primary, secondary, vocational, and post-secondary education; Population-based services, which are government services made available to a general community, including police and fire protection, highways, sewers, food safety inspection, and parks. These first four categories can be termed “immediate benefits and services.” Entry of legal or illegal immigrants into the U.S. will generally cause expenditures in these categories to rise. Two additional spending categories are: Interest and other financial obligations resulting from prior government activity, including interest payments on government debt and other expenditures relating to the cost of government services provided in earlier years; and Pure public goods, which include national defense, international affairs and scientific research, and some environmental expenditures. Entry of immigrants into the U.S. will generally not cause expenditures in these last two categories to increase, at least in the short term. Therefore, these categories are not included in the calculations on the fiscal burden imposed by low-skill immigrant households presented in this paper. In FY 2004, low-skill immigrant households received $30,160 per household in immediate benefits and services (direct benefits, means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services). In general, low-skill immigrant households received about $10,000 more in government benefits than did the average U.S. household, largely because of the higher level of means-tested welfare benefits received by low-skill immigrant households. In contrast, low-skill immigrant households pay less in taxes than do other households. On average, low-skill immigrant households paid only $10,573 in taxes in FY 2004. Thus, low-skill immigrant households received nearly three dollars in immediate benefits and services for each dollar in taxes paid. A household’s net fiscal deficit equals the cost of benefits and services received minus taxes paid. When the costs of direct and means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services are counted, the average low-skill household had a fiscal deficit of $19,588 (expenditures of $30,160 minus $10,573 in taxes). At $19,588, the average annual fiscal deficit for low-skill immigrant households was nearly twice the amount of taxes paid. In order for the average low-skill household to be fiscally solvent (taxes paid equaling immediate benefits received), it would be necessary to eliminate Social Security and Medicare, all means-tested welfare, and to cut expenditures on public education roughly in half. American families often are net tax payers during working age and net tax takers (benefits exceeding taxes) during retirement. This is not the case for low-skill immigrant households; in these households benefits substantially exceed taxes at every age level. Consequently, low-skill immigrant households impose substantial long-term costs on the U.S. taxpayer. Assuming an average adult life span of 60 years for each head of household, the average lifetime costs to the taxpayer will be nearly $1.2 million for each low-skill household for immediate benefits received minus all taxes paid. As noted, in 2004, there were 4.5 million low-skill immigrant households. With an average net fiscal deficit of $19,588 per household, the total annual fiscal deficit for all of these households together equaled $89.1 billion (the deficit of $19,588 per household times 4.54 million low-skill immigrant households). Over the next ten years, the net cost (benefits minus taxes) to the taxpayer of low-skill immigrant households will approach $1 trillion. Current immigrants (both legal and illegal) have very low education levels relative to the non-immigrant U.S. population. At least 50 percent and perhaps 60 percent of illegal immigrant adults lack a high school degree.[1] Among legal immigrants the situation is better, but a quarter still lack a high school diploma. Overall, a third of immigrant households are headed by individuals without a high school degree. By contrast, only 9 percent of non-immigrant adults lack a high school degree. The current immigrant population thus contains a disproportionate share of poorly educated individuals. These individuals will tend to have low wages, pay little in taxes, and receive above average levels of government benefits and services. Recent waves of immigrants are disproportionately low skilled because of two factors. For years, the U.S. has had a permissive policy concerning illegal immigration: the 2,000-mile border with Mexico has remained porous and the law prohibiting the hiring of illegal immigrants has not been enforced. This encourages a disproportionate inflow of low-skill immigrants because few college-educated workers are likely to be willing to undertake the risks and hardships associated with crossing the southwest U.S. deserts illegally. Second, the legal immigration system gives priority to “family reunification” and kinship ties rather than skills; this focus also significantly contributes to the inflow of low-skill immigrants into the U.S. Understanding of the fiscal consequences of low-skill immigration is impeded by a lack of understanding of the scope of government financial redistribution within U.S. society. It is a common misperception that the only individuals who are fiscally dependent (receiving more in benefits than they pay in taxes) are welfare recipients who perform little or no work, and that as long as an individual works regularly he must be a net tax producer (paying more in taxes than his family receives in benefits). In reality, the present welfare system is designed primarily to provide financial support to low-income working families. Moreover, welfare is only a modest part of the overall system of financial redistribution operated by the government. Current government policies provide extensive free or heavily subsidized aid to low-skill families (both immigrant and non-immigrant) through welfare, Social Security, Medicare, public education, and many other services. At the same time, government requires these families to pay little in taxes. This very expensive assistance to the least advantaged American families has become accepted as our mutual responsibility for one another, but it is fiscally unsustainable to apply this system of lavish income redistribution to an inflow of millions of poorly educated immigrants. Finally, it is sometimes argued that since higher-skill immigrants are a net fiscal plus for the U.S. taxpayers, while low-skill immigrants are a net loss, the two cancel each other out and therefore no problem exists. This is like a stockbroker advising a client to buy two stocks, one that will make money and another that will lose money. Obviously, it would be better to purchase only the stock that will be profitable and avoid the money-losing stock entirely. Similarly, low-skill immigrants increase poverty in the U.S. and impose a burden on taxpayers that should be avoided. U.S.immigration policy should encourage high-skill immigration and strictly limit low-skill immigration. In general, government policy should limit immigration to those who will be net fiscal contributors, avoiding those who will increase poverty and impose new costs on overburdened U.S. taxpayers. Recent proposed legislation in the Senate will do exactly the opposite.[2] By granting amnesty to illegal immigrants (who are overwhelmingly low skilled) and creating massive new “guest worker” programs that would bring millions of additional low-skill families into the nation, such legislation, if enacted, would impose massive costs on the U.S. taxpayer. Robert Rector is Senior Research Fellow in Domestic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation. [1] Jeffrey S. Passel, The Size and Characteristics of the Unauthorized Migrant Population in the U.S.: Estimates Based on the March 2005 Current Population Survey, Pew Hispanic Center, March 7, 2006. See also Jeffrey S. Passel, Unauthorized Migrants: Numbers and Characteristics, Pew Hispanic Center, June 14, 2005. Steven S. Camarota, The High Cost of Cheap Labor: The Impact of Illegal Immigration on the Federal Budget, Center for Immigration Studies, August 2004.
[2] The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act (S.2611), introduced May 2006. |
OPPOSE any guest-worker/amnesty or “comprehensive” bills!
To pass the US Senate, bills must also pass a cloture vote to close debate and force a vote: 60 Senators must vote to end the discussion and debate, calling for all 100 Senators to vote on passage. Without 60 YES votes for “cloture,” the debate continues with the possibility of death by filibuster.
That’s exactly what we want! If the full Senate never votes on illegal alien amnesty, it won’t pass.
Listen to All Reports at the Website:
Click on the following link to hear ALL Senate reports:
http://www.minutemanhq.com/hq/cloture_update.php
Carmen Visits Senator Lugar from Indiana:
05/21/07 5:02 PM EST
Click on the following link to hear her report:
IN_Lugar.mp3
Carmen Visits Senator Pryor from Arkansas:
05/21/07 5:01 PM EST
Click on the following link to hear her report:
AR_Pryor.mp3
Carmen Visits Senator Martinez from Florida:
05/21/07 3:48 PM EST
Click on the following link to hear her report:
FL_Martinez.mp3
Carmen Visits Senator McConnell from Kentucky:
05/21/07 2:51 PM EST
Click on the following link to hear her report:
KY_McConnell.mp3
Carmen Visits Senator Salazar from Colorado:
05/21/07 2:07 PM EST
Click on the following link to hear her report:
CO_Salazar.mp3
Carmen Visits Senator Stevens from Alaska:
05/21/07 2:05 PM EST
Click on the following link to hear her report:
AK_Stevens.mp3
Odd News
Serial Socks Snatcher in Trouble Again / BELLEVILLE, Ill. — James Dowdy has admitted his hankering for women’s hosiery has been his undoing, earning him three stints in prison and repeated scoldings from judges over the years. So police say
Man Gets Wallet Back From 1946 Hudson / TWIN FALLS, Idaho — Glenn Goodlove said he was likely smooching with a girl in the expansive back seat of a 1946 Hudson when his wallet slipped from his pants pocket more than five decades ago. The year
