Wednesday, January 9, 2019

SIRC's PDD Set. Progressive Radicals Full of Ideas But Lack Way To Pay For Them. More Piling on? Is Iran Driving Saudis and Israelis Together? Bibi?


Skidaway Island Republican Club Presents


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++







+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Illegal Immigration It's About Power - YouTube

And:

BDS bill debate is about anti-Semitism, not speech - Jonathan Tobin
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0119/tobin010919.php3#tEllA7Zx7zuSwT97.03 (see 1 below.)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There was a period when brilliant minds were capable of equally brilliant insults.  Now, it seems, female idiots are leading the parade and they also happen to be Democrat House members. (See 2 and 2a below.)

Like all progressive radicals, they are full of heartfelt ideas but have no idea how to pay for them. (See 2b below.)

While I am on the subject of insults, let's take a shot at California whose new governor is prepared to spend whatever it takes to wreck the state causing more residents to flee. (See 3 below.)
++++++++++++++
This from a dear New Englander friend and fellow memo reader whose family have been in this country for centuries and one of his close relatives served in FDR's Cabinet. (See 4 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Investigating Trump and his family becomes a Democrat priority.  More piling on by petulant Demwits. (See 5 below.)

And:

Just the first day. (See 5a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
While I was waiting for a new computer I had some random musings on several subjects. (See 6 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Is there a real opportunity to bring Israel and The Saudis together because of the threat from Iran? (See 7 below.)

And:

Will Bibi win?  My friend and fellow memo reader  gives us his thinking. (See 7a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++
As Democrats swing to the radical left and the Governor of California and Mayor of New York promise to give away the store, my hope is they will drive away voters who remain rational and concerned about the political appetite for open ended spending.

I further hope Republicans will hang tough on immigration and become a barrier against the hypocrisy of Pelosi and Schumer. Pelosi and Schumer voted, two years ago, to spend billions of dollars for those "immoral" walls but the minute Trump was elected they decided they could not allow Trump to meet another campaign commitment.

What I find interesting is why existing walls are allowed to stand if they are so immoral? Does this mean walls built by Democrats are moral and those by Republicans are immoral?

If Radical Democrats have their way you can kiss goodbye the America most conservatives believe is
still worth saving. The Founding Fathers did not intend for America to become a sanctuary nation  for illegals, for  American citizens to become dependent upon a bloated government run by non-elected bureaucrats and those elected to office who enrich themselves and place their selfish interests above those of the nation.

More and more voters are concluding the two parties are irrelevant and the unaffiliated ranks are increasing. Time will tell where this all leads.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Catching up on some postings after old computer crashed. (See 8 and 8a below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Finally, comment from a dear friend and fellow memo reader:

"Dick,
Op Ed in 1/10/19 Savannah Morning News RIGHT ON - as is your usual keen observation of all events! Thanks for writing this one. I'm at wits end with this border situation. Got interested in history of United States immigration. Read excellent book "American Passage  - The History of Ellis Island," by Vincent J. Cannato. Period covered is 1800 - forward.

My key learnings from the book: 

1800- 1855 80% of all immigrants arrived at Port of NY - they just off loaded the ships and filtered into society (granted at great risk to many innocent immigrants who fell prey to gangs and hooligans pretending to represent their ethnicity, religion, or country of origin).

1855 - 1892 Castle Rock located in Battery of Manhattan became the designated immigrant landing port - NY City government was somewhat involved, but there was no viable governmental immigration policy or administration to speak of. 
1892 Ellis Island opened - strict measures taken to screen immigrants - elites (Sen. H. C. Lodge Mass for one) convinced best immigrant was English or N. European WASP - little interest in any others - turns out 80% of those who reached Ellis Island (1892-1954) succeeded in gaining authority to enter. 

ELLIS ISLAND FACTS (1.) families were often separated; (2.) children were denied entry - family had to decide all go back, or child denied entry be returned to family o/seas; (3.) Newly admitted immigrant had to prove ability to support self/family; (4.) Immigrant was monitored for 3 Years - many were deported during that period to avoid prospect of "BECOMING A PUBLIC CHARGE"; (5.) ELLIS ISLAND WAS DECLARED NEUTRAL ZONE - NOT U.S. SOIL - "No Anchor babies" - but children were born to Ellis Island occupants during processing. SCOTUS Oliver W. Holmes Court (1905) decision upheld "Neutral Zone" policy; (5.) Various immigration laws were passed - many ineffective; (6.) 1920's U. S. set Annual Immigrant Totals by Nation.

We now have devolved to Chain Migration, Foreign Nation Lottery selection of immigrants, VISA over-stays, and "storming"/ "invasion" of our southern border aggravated by the inchoate policy of "catch and release." SO THE U. S. IS RIGHT BACK TO WHERE IT WAS 1800 - 1892 - immigrants can just fly & overstay Visa, or swim, walk, or climb in.

My next bit of research is to look into how we handled Cuban and Haitian immigrants arriving by boat in Post WW II era. My recollection is we turned most of them back. I need to verify that recollection, and under what law or policy we turned them back. Seems we are on a path to a 2019 repeat Simpson - Mazzoli (1986) - that is; grant amnesty to another group of millions, promise action on border security, but do nothing about it. 

Your friend, T--"

And

" Another from a dear friend, fellow memo reader and tennis partner: "Good letter in this morning's SMN.  You can't make a convincing argument that physical barriers don't work unless your target audience is ignorant, naive, or are mindless ideologues.  Queen Nancy may possibly realize that.  That's why we have the "wall is immoral" argument.  If the concept defies common sense, Democrats invoke the "morally superior" position.  Of course, none of us could argue with that.  We all know they have the high ground in that department. T----"

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) The ironies of illegal immigration
By Victor Davis Hanson

 Estimates suggest that there are 11 million to 13 million Mexican citizens currently living in the United States illegally. Millions more emigrated previously and are now U.S. citizens.
A recent poll revealed that one-third of Mexicans (34 percent) would like to emigrate to the United States. With Mexico having a population of about 130 million, that amounts to some 44 million would-be immigrants.

Such massive potential emigration into the United States makes no sense.

First, Mexico is a naturally rich country. It ranks 19th in the world in proven oil reserves and is currently the 12th-largest oil producer. Mexico certainly has significantly more natural advantages than do far wealthier per capita Singapore, Taiwan or Chile.
Mexico also is one of the world's most popular tourist destinations and earns billions in foreign exchange from visitors. It enjoys a temperate climate, is rich in minerals, and has millions of acres of fertile farmland and a long coastline.

In addition to being strategically located as a bridge between North America and South America, Mexico has ports on both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
It is not an overcrowded country: Mexico ranks in the lower half of the world in population density. Too many people and too little land are certainly not the reasons why millions of Mexicans either emigrate or wish to emigrate to the United States.

Second, popular progressive narratives in both Mexico and the United States cite America for all sorts of pathologies, past and present. The United States is often damned for prior colonialism and imperialism, as well as current racism and xenophobia.
Why, then, would millions of people south of the border leave their own homeland and potentially risk their lives to encounter a strange culture and language, to live in such a purportedly inhospitable place, and to adopt to an antithetical system based on supposedly toxic European and Protestant traditions?
The answers to these two paradoxes are as obvious as they are politically incorrect and therefore seldom voiced. Life in Mexico is relatively poor, dangerous and often unfree. In contrast, the United States is rich, generous and secure.

Mexico -- unlike, say, Japan or Switzerland, which are far less naturally endowed and yet far wealthier -- has never fully adopted Western paradigms of free-market economics, constitutionally protected free speech, due process, gender equity, private property rights, an autonomous press, government transparency, an independent judiciary, and religious diversity and tolerance.

To the degree that Mexico can make strides toward these goals, its population will stabilize and become more affluent -- and also become less likely to emigrate.

More importantly, millions of Mexican citizens recognize (at least privately) that the United States is not the bogeyman of mostly elite critiques. Instead, it is one of the world's rare multiracial, equal-opportunity societies. It is generous with its entitlements even to those who cross its border illegally, and far more meritocratic than most of the world's highly tribal societies.

Maybe that is why millions of impoverished people from Mexico have left their homes in expectation that they will be treated far better as foreign, non-English speakers in a strange land than they will at home by their own government

Indeed, if the U.S. treated immigrants in the fashion that Mexico does, then Mexican citizens would probably never emigrate to the U.S.
In sum, illegal immigration is both logical and nonsensical.

After all, the Mexican government is quick to fault the U.S., but it is rarely introspective. It does not explain publicly why its own citizens wish to flee the country where they were born -- or why they are eager to enter a country that is so often ridiculed by the Mexican press and government.

Mexico apparently does not take care of its own citizens. But once they arrive inside the U.S., Mexico suddenly becomes an advocate for their welfare. No wonder: Mexican expatriates send back an estimated $30 billion a year in remittances.

Real and would-be emigrants themselves also act ironically.

On both sides of the border, they often fault the U.S. and demand that U.S. immigration law be suspended -- but only in their case.
Emigrating Mexican citizens wave Mexican flags at the border as they try to enter America, while their counterparts inside the U.S. do the same when they protest being sent back home.

Apparently, no one in Mexico or in the U.S. ever wishes to admit that Mexican citizens really like the United States -- apparently far more than they do their own homeland.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2) A member of Parliament to Disraeli: "Sir, you will either die on the gallows or of some unspeakable disease.”

"That depends, Sir, " said Disraeli, "whether I embrace your policies or your mistress"

He had delusions of adequacy ."

-Walter Kerr



"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire."

- Winston Churchill

"He has no enemies, but is intensely disliked by his friends."

-Oscar Wilde

"I've just learned about his illness. Let's hope it's nothing trivial."

-Irvin S. Cobb

"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination."


-Andrew Lang (1844-1912)

2a) 

 MELTDOWN: Ocasio-Cortez Explodes After Fact-Check, Doesn't Want To Be Held To Same Standards As Trump

 Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) exploded on Monday after multiple left-wing publications fact-checked her and criticized her defense of the numerous falsehoods she has told.

 By RYAN SAAVEDRA
The former bartender claimed on CBS News' "60 Minutes" on Sunday that people were too focused on being "factually" accurate, and not focused enough on being morally right, which drew widespread criticism.
That criticism carried over into news reports today from left-leaning publications, including The Washington Post and CNN, which published reports titled, "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s very bad defense of her falsehoods" and "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's very slippery slope on facts," respectively.
Even leftist Whoopi Goldberg slammed Ocasio-Cortez, advising her to "sit still for a minute and learn the job .. .before you start pooping on people and what they’ve done, you got to do something ... "
Ocasio-Cortez then suggested that it was not fair that she was, in her own mind, being held to the same standards as President Donald Trump.

2b)

WATCH: Ocasio-Cortez Gets Asked How She'll Pay For Her Programs. It Was A Disaster.

"No one asked how we're going to pay for the Space Force."

By Alex Saavedra

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) was again unable to explain how she intends to pay for $40 trillion in far-left big government programs during a Sunday interview on CBS News' "60 Minutes" with host Anderson Cooper.
This marks the second time that Ocasio-Cortez was unable to explain how she would pay for the programs that she wants the government to pay for, with the other instance occurring during an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper.
"How are you going to pay for all of this?" Cooper asked.
Ocasio-Cortez got defensive, responding: "No one asks how we're gonna pay for this Space Force. No one asked how we paid for a $2 trillion tax cut."
"We only ask how we pay for it on issues of housing, health care and education," Ocasio-Cortez said. "How do we pay for it? With the same exact mechanisms that we pay for military increases for this Space Force. For all of these-- ambitious policies."
"There are Democrats, obviously, who are worried about your affect on the party," Cooper responded. "Democratic Senator Chris Coons said about left-leaning Democrats, "If the next two years is just a race to offer increasingly unrealistic proposals, it'll be difficult for us to make a credible case we should be allowed to govern again."
"What makes it unrealistic?" Ocasio-Cortez asked.
"How to pay for it," Cooper responded.
"We pay more per capita in health care and education for lower outcomes than many other nations," Ocasio-Cortez answered, as she still could not provide an answer about how to pay for her programs. "And so for me, what's unrealistic is-- is what we're living in right now."+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)



Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)