The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of President Barack Obama has plunged into the nightmare of oppression pioneered by Lyndon Johnson and perfected by Richard Nixon of an unparalleled inquisition into the affairs of everyone in the country that must file returns for themselves or their organizations. That is enough to frighten all Americans but in addition it wants to insert itself into the lives of every low-income person as well.

The IRS admission that it assaulted any group with the name “Tea Party” or “Patriot” by political inquisition parallels what Lyndon Johnson did 50 years ago and Richard Nixon refined with his “enemies list” in the early 70s. While President Obama says “If” the IRS did this it will be held accountable,” the “transparent” IRS has already admitted to the crime.

Worse still, the IRS is hiring of 16,000 MORE agents to police Obamacare’s individual mandate. They are doing this despite no experience and a history of mistakes in providing information or even in reviewing tax forms prepared by experts. One in five (20%) of IRS answers to questions is wrong according to audits. And now it wants to expand to prepare tax returns for trusting Americans, for “free.”

This is bad news for everyone, yes, but for Hispanic Americans these IRS actions and new hiring are a forthcoming disaster. Why, because the IRS is on a mission to offer “Free” tax preparation for low-income people which, of course includes many Hispanic Americans and importantly those that are currently the target of legalization efforts in the Congress of the United States.

We must recall that despite private software companies offering up to 16 different software packages to anyone that wants to prepare their individual tax forms and send them to the IRS FOR FREE, if the IRS gets its way, it will enter the private space of everyone it can possibly reach for “Free.”

Nothing, however, is for free. Since when is it not a conflict of interest for the tax collector to prepare tax returns?

We already know that the IRS’ California pilot program of free tax preparation cost over $200,000 for the preparation of 11,000 tax forms. That is $200,000 of our taxpayer money. Assuming that the IRS would reach out to millions, just how many billions of taxpayer dollars will be spent preparing tax forms that are free today from private industry sources?

On top of those potentially wasted billions, what about the local “notarios” (notaries) who prepare tax forms for low-income people today? Low income Hispanics have traditionally received tax preparation in neighborhood offices of people they know whom they trust. Certainly these “notarios” charge small fees but they have the trust of the client who generally is their neighbor. Will the low-income worker be able to trust free tax preparation by his “friendly” tax collector. As “collateral damage” how many people will lose their jobs or small businesses by this expansion of the IRS?

The question is: Who can or will trust an agency that practices illegal inquisitions and investigations of legal entities practicing free speech, free association and petitioning of the government? Which individual can possibly trust this agency to honestly prepare tax forms for little people like you and me? If the agency deliberately violates the legal rights of organizations that disagree with the agency and the President, just where are we going?

Congress must step in and launch massive investigations targeting the IRS’ illegal activities revealed in the past few days, as to who authorized these activities and just exactly where the responsibility lies. Congress must stop or at least hold in abeyance the hiring of more IRS agents, stop its development of Obamacare oversight and stop any expansion of “free tax preparation” for low income people including millions of Hispanic American workers who want to be on the right side of legalization requirements being constructed in Congress at this very moment.

We cannot trust the IRS any longer. Spying on groups and individuals for political reasons by the IRS cannot be countenanced. Nor can the IRS be allowed to expand its activities such as oversight over health care mandates or “free” tax preparation” until Congress discovers who and what is responsible for these egregious crimes.

Let there be no doubt, the IRS has run rampant committing crimes, again. Many thought that this criminal activity belonged to the Lyndon Johnson/Richard Nixon dark years (1963-1974) but they are wrong. The IRS dark years are here again in the year 2013, and have been at least since 2011.

It must stop now before millions of innocent Hispanic Americans and those waiting to apply for legalization are sucked into the IRS Black Hole of criminality.

Editor’s Note: reposted from Cafe Con Leche Republicans with author’s permission – original link.

####

Raoul Contreras Lowery

Raoul Lowery Contreras (1941) was born in Mexico, raised in the USA. Former U.S. Marine, athlete, Dean’s List at San Diego State. Professional political consultant and California Republican Party official (1963-65)…Television news commentator, radio talk show host…published Op-Ed writer (1988 to present)…author of 12 books (as of 1-05-12). His books are available on Amazon.com.

Freer Labor: A Biblical Concept for Immigrant Labor[1]

The Holy Bible

At first glance when reading through the Bible, one would think that the Bible does not directly address the concept of free labor – the concept that immigrants should legally be allowed to travel and be employed without any overly encumbering restrictions. However, if one takes a closer look, one will notice several key biblical principles that can support the idea behind a biblical policy for immigrant labor. Moreover, economic data also reveals that there is also a net benefit that is achieved from immigrant labor. In Romans 13, Paul is clear that God gave the sword to the government to punish those who do evil and God expects the government to reward good behavior. The United States government does much good and it gets many things right. Yet, one of its grave shortcomings has to do with the issue of immigration. The current immigration system in the US can even be considered unjust due to three inherent flaws: (1) its regulations infringe on the Christian individual/business owners’ rights to be able to carry out God’s command to be hospitable towards immigrants, (2) its regulations are unrealistic towards immigrant laborers and employers, (3) and its regulations go against God’s command to do good for the nation’s people.

First, the scripture makes it clear that God expected His people to be hospitable towards immigrants. The Hebrew word used to refer to resident aliens or immigrants in the Old Testament is gēr. This term is used to refer to both Israel and any other people group residing in a foreign land (Ex 23:21). In a sense gēr is referring to an individual’s status or position in the foreign nation.[2]  The scriptures also makes mention of the verb gur, which means to “reside [as an alien].”[3] According to Rousas Rushdoony, the biblical laws dealing with hospitality towards aliens both “permanent and temporary” are dealing with those who resided in the land and not those foreigners who were just passing through.[4] This concept of hospitality was a personal, individual, or familial decision to take care of the immigrant.[5]

God called his chosen people to treat the resident immigrant justly. In fact, the Old Testament is very specific in requiring the people of God to treat the immigrant as a protected class (Ex 20:10, 23:12; Lev 16:29). This is most clearly shown in Exodus 22:21 which states, “You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt,” and Deuteronomy 27:19, “‘Cursed is he who distorts the justice due an alien, orphan, and widow.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’” (NASB) In the book of Exodus, God reminds the nation of Israel that they were once resident aliens in Egypt. One can therefore infer that the reason God willed for them to remember this, was so they would make it a point to treat the immigrants in their land as they would have wished to be treated in Egypt.

God also had expectations of how the nation of Israel was to treat foreign laborers, in matters such as being given the right to glean for food and to be employed as residents if taken in by a family to work on their residence. Daniel Carrol states,

Without land and kin, many sojourners would be dependent on Israelites for work, provisions and protection. They could be day laborers (Deut. 24:14), and the Old Testament mentions that they were conscripted to do the labor in building the temple (1 Chron. 22:2; 2 Chron. 2:17-18). [6]

In other words, God expected his people to treat the immigrant labor justly. Bernhard Asen even further bolsters this point by stating that Israel was not just to treat the ger as a protected class, but the people of Israel were to also incorporate or include them into their society. Asen States, “in addition to protection, inclusion of the gēr into the community to share privileges also is seen as important.”[7]  This incorporation according to Christopher Wright included the “feast of weeks and booths,” and a resident alien who happened to be a hired laborer could also be included at Passover.[8] Write argues the eligibility was based on the fact that they would have been included within an Israelite family with whom they were residing.[9] Therefore, the people of God in the Old Testament were to be hospitable toward the resident alien and include and protect them as a class, just as they would have wanted to have been treated when they were in slaves in the land of Egypt.

This concept is even more important if one looks at the teaching of Jesus. As he stated in Luke 6:31, “Treat others the same way you want them to treat you.”  Thus, just as Christians would want people from other nations to give them help and employment, so that they could take care of their families, so then should Christians help out those immigrants who wish to labor for their families. However, this has proven problematic in the United States since there are unrealistic worker visa programs that make it almost impossible for Christian business owners to be able to be hospitable and have the opportunity to hire immigrant laborers who are in need. The current federal caps on immigrant labor incentivize many immigrants to come here illegally and risk being caught. Many of these people, if they could, would have obtained a work visa or a legal means to come to the United States.

This becomes a problem, biblically, for Christians because as the chosen people of God they too should be hospitable towards aliens and any other class of people who should be protected. This is why the current immigration policy restrictions pose a dilemma for Christians, because while they are to be submissive and respectful to the government God has placed over them, they also have an obligation to protect and seek justice for those who are in classes that need to be protected, like the resident alien. Christian individuals/business owners should respect their government, while at the same time seek for a more biblical policy that will lead to a more realistic policy towards aliens seeking work, and continue to work to incorporate the alien into the community. This is all founded on the basic biblical concept of loving one’s neighbors and treating them, as the believer would want to be treated if he or she were in a similar situation.

The second problem with the immigration system is that it has unrealistic regulations on immigrant labor. As previously mentioned, the scriptures do not ban migrant or immigrant labor. Rather, it takes for granted that foreigners would be around and would need protection. Just as prohibition failed because it was an unrealistic regulation on human action; so too the current immigrant labor quota system is failing because it is unrealistically regulating labor. There is not a biblical mandate on the total number of immigrants a nation should allow to enter its borders; rather, the Scriptures simply presuppose that resident aliens will be around.  The guest worker program in the United States is broken down into three major sections H-1b[10](skilled labor) which is capped at 65,000 persons and the  H-2a(agricultural) and H-2b[11] (non agricultural) visas – both capped at 66,000. These all do not even come close to meeting the demand for labor that many American industries need.

In addition to these quotas, the Federal government, under the current administration, has made it harder on farmers to legally higher immigrant labor. According to an Immigration Works policy brief, the Obama administration’s new regulations eliminated “the streamline application process for employers” implemented by the Bush administration and instead in required employers to “submit to a lengthy DOL(Department of Labor) review,” to apply for immigrant laborers.[12] The Obama administration also has raised the federal minimum wage on foreign workers to $9.48, and increased fines to $1,500 per employee for farmers who are missing even one piece of paper work.[13] This is on top of that fact that it costs farmers thousands of dollars to hire lawyers to help them file all the legal paper work with the department of labor. Another added cost for farmers created by new regulations is the increased risk for being sued. David Bier explains,

Labor Department requirements mandate U.S. employees be treated similarly to migrants, but Obama officials created a new definition of ‘corresponding’ treatment that could be interpreted by courts to include the housing, transportation, and in some instances, meals that H-2A regulations require employers to supply to migrants. Disgruntled employees who are citizens or permanent residents could sue under the ambiguous definition and potentially collect damages.[14]

The current administration has also passed new regulations on highly skilled laborers with H-1b visas that are adding cost to businesses that would keep their business here in America if it were not for these added costs. One such regulation dictated that no company who had employees with H-1b visas could be eligible to partake in federal bailouts through the Trouble Asset Relief program known as TARP.[15] There has also been an increase in the processing fees of business with more than 50 employees who wish to higher immigrants with H-1b visas “from $325 to as much as $2,300.”[16] These are all added cost that do harm to business and ultimately the nation’s economy.

All of these added costs and legal liabilities incentivize farmers to hire illegal immigrants. The caps on legal immigration also incentivize immigrant workers to come work in the United States illegally, even with increased federal enforcement.  The fact is, “if the extra cost of such enforcement[along with these new regulations] is larger than the net fiscal cost of illegal immigration, then driving illegal immigration to zero would fail a cost benefit test.”[17] Current federal enforcement for hiring legal immigrants may cost more than to take a risk to higher immigrants who are not authorized to be here. A perfect example of this risk taking by business owners can be found in Arizona, since it passed the Legal Arizona Workers Act (LAWA). LAWA required Arizona employers to use E-verify to ensure the legal status of their employees. In response to this law, employers and immigrants responded differently. First, there was an increase in self employment by 73%, of which, “about 25,000 Arizona Hispanic noncitizens dropped out of the formal wage market and became self-employed.”[18] Moreover, employers responded with only a “72 percent” participation rate in 2010, and a “67 percent in 2011.”[19]  The reality is that this is a Genesis 3 world; unrealistic laws like prohibition and immigration labor regulations are unjust because they do not coincide with basic human nature. The government should seek to do good for its citizens (Rom 13:4), and placing unrealistic labor restrictions that incentivize individuals to sin by breaking laws is not good. This is why Christians should seek to reform immigrant labor laws to be more free and open by removing these unrealistic restrictions.

Thirdly, the current immigration policies inhibit economic growth and reduce national productivity. This is counter to the idea that, “one of the primary responsibilities of government is to act as God’s servant to ‘do good’ for the citizens of a nation (see Rom. 13:4).”[20]  The reality is that immigration will increase the nation’s ability to produce and therefore increase economic growth. Yet, there are some detractors who disagree with this position like Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS), and possibly the most academic detractor when it comes to low skilled immigrant labor is Economist George Borjas.

For example CAPS runs sensational TV ads, insinuating that Americans are unemployed, because immigrants are “taking American jobs.”[21] This is clearly Malthusian’s thinking that there are only a set number of jobs. There are not a set number of jobs. Jobs are created and lost every day; there is no set labor force. Since the 1950s, there has been an increase of about 90 million new workers in the labor force including women, and baby boomers.[22] This has not resulted in any “long term increase” in unemployment rates.[23]  Many activists who support immigration and immigrant labor argue that immigrants do the jobs that Americans won’t do,  at least for the wages being offered, but if the wages were increased then Americans would apply for those jobs. In some cases this may be true, but it does not ring true in all situations. The problem is that higher wages would mean that many of those jobs would no longer be there.[24]  Benjamin Powell explains,

Approximately one third of all garment workers in the United States are immigrants. If wages needed to be higher to get Americans to take the jobs, many of these jobs would have gone overseas. .. In Arizona, for example, only 30 percent of the 2004 lettuce crop was harvested; the rest was left in the ground to rot. Losses were nearly $1 billion. Farmers certainly could have paid higher wages to get the crop harvested, but losses would presumably have been even greater.[25]

In the end, an increase in wages could result in a loss of productivity and economic growth.

Another proponent of the idea that immigrants are taking “American jobs” is Harvard Economist George Borjas.  In 2010 he coauthored an article arguing that African American incarceration rates were on the rise because low skilled immigrants were taking their jobs.[26] Diana Furchotgott-Roth explains the flaws in Borjas’s study. First, African American men started to “withdraw from the labor force in the 1960s,” when immigrants made up “less than 1 percent” of the labor force.[27]Moreover,  “The percentage of black men between ages 16 and 24 who were not in school, not working, and not looking for work rose to 18 percent in 1982 from 9 percent in 1964. It then reached 23 percent in 1997 and remained at that level as of 2011.”[28] Finally, Borjas does not even mention in his study the changes in laws and policies, nor does he consider how both have been enforced. Therefore, immigration is not the reason for the rise in African American unemployment or the direct reason for the increase in their incarceration rates.

Another problem with this argument that immigrants take American jobs is the fact that, many more families are moving towards both parents working outside of the household. Hanson found that this, “often requires hiring outside labor to care for children, clean the home, launder clothes, and tend to the yard.”[29] He also found that the in cities where immigrant labor was prevalent that these services were more affordable.[30]

Borjas in several of his studies showed that cheap immigrant labor harms the high school dropouts by reducing their wages. In 2003 he claimed wages dropped by 9%, in 2004 by 7%, and in 2006 by 5%.[31] There are two other studies worth noting.  One is by David Card which showed that low skilled immigrant labor reduced low skilled workers wages by 3 percent in cities where the population of immigrants was higher. The second study was done by Giovanni Peri, who found that immigrants only cause 0.7 percent decrease in low skilled workers’ wages.[32] In other words, even though wages are depressed for high school drop outs, there is not enough decisive evidence to point out how much wages are lowered, nor is there enough negative evidence to call for a reduction in low skilled immigrant labor compared to its benefits.

There any many benefits to having affordable labor. As previously mentioned, in cities that boast a high percentage of low skilled immigrant labor, goods and services are provided at a more affordable rate. This translates into cost savings for the population as a whole.  It is imperative to understand that the total national income is not lost from these savings; rather it is redistributed by creating employer gains and savings for consumers.[33]  The savings for the consumer will allow them to later choose where they would like to spend the extra cash, which would in turn help another business, consequently, helping the employees of that business. In the end, the wealth is not lost.  In addition, high skilled laborers who are paid less than native born employees actually add to economic growth and job creation. Economist Peri explains that “firms pay immigrants less than their marginal productivity, increasing the firms’ profits. Such cost savings on immigrants act as an increase in productivity for firms…[T]his allows firms to expand production and employ more people in complementary task many of which are supplied by natives.”[34] Therefore, immigrant labor helps to creates more affordable goods and services by increasing profits to businesses and helps them to employ more Americans, which are net benefits, instead of a net loss.

In conclusion, a biblical policy towards immigrant labor would be to allow for a freer more open system, because it fulfils God’s command that the government do good to the people, and it allows Christian individuals/business owners to legally carry out God’s command to be hospitable towards immigrant laborers. This should include the removal of federal caps on labor and a shift towards a system where the free market decides the number of laborers that are needed.  There should also be a removal of unrealistic federal mandates and regulations that make it harder for business owners to legally hire immigrant labor. A policy based off the free market would not just benefit the United States, but it would also benefit the immigrant who comes to the United States to make several times more than he or she could have earned in their home nation. In many cases, this move would also improve the immigrant’s standard of living. Some may argue that these immigrants harm low skilled native born workers; but the reality is that these people already have protections which come in the form of unemployment insurance, welfare, food stamps and so on. Ultimately, the government’s job should not be one of creating jobs, but one of being just. A just society creates the ideal framework for economic growth and prosperity – for both the citizen and the immigrant.

[1] The term freer labor is used instead of Free Labor because, the author does not believe in open boarders, but does believe that the free flow should be allowed by the Government who should screen and have limited regulations, but not cap allowing people to freely and legally come to work in the United States.

[2] Baker, D. L. Tight Fists or Open Hands?: Wealth and Poverty in Old Testament Law. Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans Pub, 2009.178.

[3] Baker, Tight Fist Open Hands, 178.  This verb “gur” (1481a.גּוּר)has been translated by the NASB several ways which many can convey the idea of residing, or dwelling: “abide*(1), alien(1), aliens(1), assemble(1), colonize(1), dwell(3), dwells(1), habitation(1), live(4), live as aliens(2), lives(1), reside(13), resided(1), resides(3), sojourn(11), sojourned(9), sojourning(1), sojourns(13), stay(6), staying(4), stays(1), strangers(3).” Robert L. Thomas, ‘1481aגּוּר   gur.” New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries : Updated Edition (Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc., 1998).

[4] Rushdoony, Rousas John. The Institutes of Biblical Law 2, Law and Society. (Nutley, N.J.]: Craig Pr, 1982.):199.

[5] M.  Daniel Carrol R., Christians at the Boarder: Immigration, the Church, and the Bible. (Grand Rapids: Baker Pub. Group, 2008): 95.

[6] Carrol, Christians at the Boarder, 103.

[7] Bernhard Asen, “From Acceptance to Inclusion: The Stranger (גֵּר /gēr) in Old Testament Tradition, in Christianity and the stranger: historical essays. (ed. Nichols, Francis W. Atlanta, Ga: Scholars Press, 1995): 16-35.

[8] Christopher J. H. Wright, God’s People in God’s Land: Family, Land, and Property in the Old Testament. (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1990.): 101.

[9] Wright, God’s People in God’s Land, 101-102.

[10] United States citizen and immigration services, “Cap Count for H-2B Nonimmigrants,” 17 April 2013, (21 April 21, 2013).

[11] Andorra Bruno, “Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues,” Congressional Research services. (2012): 9.

[12] Immigration Works USA, “Reduced Access: New Regulations Aimed at Temporary Worker Visas.” (2009):1.

[13] David Beir, “Obama’s Secret Anti-Immigrant Campaign.” Real Clear Politics.com, 9 July 2012,  (16 April  2013).

[14]Beir, Obama’s Secret, 2012.

[15] Beir, Obama’s Secret, 2012; & Immigration Works USA, “Reduced Access,” 2009, 3.

[16] Beir, Obama’s Secret, 2012

[17]Gordon H. Harrison, Immigration and Economic Growth, CATO Journal. 32, 1 (2012): 31.

[18] Alex Nowrasteh, The Economic Case against Arizona’s Immigration Laws, Cato Policy Analysis No. 709. (2012).9.

[19] Nowrasteh, The Economic Case, 9.

[20] Wayne Grudem, Politics According to the Bible: A Comprehensive Resource for understanding Modern Political Issues in the Light of Scripture, (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 2010), 269.

[21] Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS), “Press Release: Memorial Day TV Ad Ask why President Obama is admitting millions of Immigrant Workers when 1 in 3 Young Veterans are Jobless.” 22 May 2012.

[22] Benjamin Powell, An economic Case for Immigration, 7 June 2010.

[23] Powell, Case for Immigration, 2010.

[24] Powell, Case for Immigration, 2010.

[25] Powell, Case for Immigration, 2010.

[26] Borjas, George J., Jeffrey Grogger, and Gordon H. Hanson. 2010. “Immigration and the Economic Status of African-American Men.” Economica 77, no. 306: 255-282.

[27] Diana Furchotgott-Roth, “The Path Forward for Immigration”. Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. 12 December 2012.8.

[28] Furchotgott-Roth, The Path Forward, 2012, 12.

[29] Harrison, Immigration and Economic Growth, 2012, 28.

[30] Harrison, Immigration and Economic Growth, 2012, 28.

[31] Furchotgott-Roth, The Path Forward, 2012, 9.

[32] Furchotgott-Roth, The Path Forward, 2012, 9.

[33] Harrison, Immigration and Economic Growth, 2012, 28.

[34] Peri, Giovanni. “IMMIGRATION, LABOR MARKETS, AND PRODUCTIVITY.” CATO Journal 32, no. 1 (Winter2012 2012): 35-53.44.

Bibliography

Asen, Bernhard, “From Acceptance to Inclusion: The Stranger (גֵּר /gēr) in Old Testament Tradition, in Christianity and the stranger: historical essays. ed. Nichols, Francis W. Atlanta, Ga: Scholars Press, 1995.

Baker, D. L. Tight Fists or Open Hands?: Wealth and Poverty in Old Testament Law. Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans Pub, 2009.178.

Beir, David, “Obama’s Secret Anti-Immigrant Campaign.” Real Clear Politics.com, 9 July 2012, (16 April  2013).

Borjas, George J., Jeffrey Grogger, and Gordon H. Hanson. 2010. “Immigration and the Economic Status of African-American Men.” Economica 77, no. 306: 255-282.

Bruno, Andorra, “Immigration of Temporary Lower-Skilled Workers: Current Policy and Related Issues,” Congressional Research services.2012.

Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS), “Press Release: Memorial Day TV Ad Ask why President Obama is admitting millions of Immigrant Workers when 1 in 3 Young Veterans are Jobless.” 22 May 2012.

Carroll R., M. Daniel. Christians at the Border Immigration, the Church, and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Pub. Group, 2008.

Furchotgott-Roth, Diana ,“The Path Forward for Immigration”. Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. 12 December 2012.8.

Grudem, Wayne, Politics According to the Bible: A Comprehensive Resource for understanding Modern Political Issues in the Light of Scripture, Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 2010.

Harrison, Gordon H.,  Immigration and Economic Growth, CATO Journal. 32, 1 (2012): 31.

Immigration Works USA, “Reduced Access: New Regulations Aimed at Temporary Worker Visas.” (2009):1.

Nowrasteh, Alex, The Economic Case against Arizona’s Immigration Laws, Cato Policy Analysis No. 709. (2012).1-20.

Peri, Giovanni. “IMMIGRATION, LABOR MARKETS, AND PRODUCTIVITY.” CATO Journal 32, no. 1 (Winter2012 2012): 35-53.44.

Powell, Benjamin , An economic Case for Immigration, 7 June 2010.

Rushdoony, Rousas John. The Institutes of Biblical Law 2, Law and Society. [Nutley, N.J.]: Craig Pr, 1982.

Thomas, Robert L.  ‘1481aגּוּר   gur.” New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries : Updated Edition,Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc., 1998.

United States citizen and immigration services, “Cap Count for H-2B Nonimmigrants,” 17 April 2013, (21 April 21, 2013).

Wright, Christopher J. H. God’s People in God’s Land: Family, Land, and Property in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1990.

This was originally published on Thomas’s personal Blog Arizona Seminarian, and the Cafe Con Leche Republicans Blog 

####

Editors note: as with all blog postings that appear with a by-line, the opinions presented are the author’s and not necessarily the positions of Cafe Con Leche Republicans.

Thomas Martin Salazar

Thomas Martin Salazar is an Arizona leader of the Café con Leche Republicans. Thomas was born and     raised in Arizona. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in History from Grand Canyon University and is currently working on obtaining a MDiv in Biblical Communication from Phoenix Seminary. Thomas has also served as the Grand Canyon University College Republicans Vice President and interim President (February 2007-April 2008) and as a Maricopa County Republican Precinct committeeman (August 2009 – August 2012).

Former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee made the stunning prediction that Obama will not finish his second term. Huckabee, widely respected and not known for partisanship, may be right!

The Political Demise of Richard Nixon

Many older Americans remember the Nixon years. Richard Nixon was reelected in a landslide, but the groundwork for Nixon’s demise was laid during his first term. The Nixon administration engaged in dirty tricks to aggressively undermine his opposition.

The White House “plumbers” were hired to repair “leaks” of sensitive information that embarrassed Nixon. With no accountability or oversight, the “plumbers” were soon out of control. One night they broke into Democratic National Headquarters (DNC) at the Watergate Hotel, and were arrested.

Nixon didn’t know in advance about the burglary, and was furious. Like most presidents, Nixon’s king-sized ego that would not allow apology, and instead he covered-up, which led to Nixon’s downfall.

Nixon, like John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson before him, unleashed the IRS to go after his enemies, which also came to light during the furor over Watergate.

Nixon was able to cover-up scandals during his first term, but during his second term a steady drip-drip-drip of revelations about Nixon’s abuses of power appeared in the news media, and eventually Congress began impeachment proceedings, and when impeachment became apparent he resigned.

Obama’s Abuse of the IRS

Like Nixon, Johnson, and Kennedy, the Obama administration used the IRS to intimidate enemies. The latest revelations are truly shocking. Any organization whose name included “tea party” or “patriot” received intense scrutiny from the IRS, which demanded answers to questions about donors, volunteers, Facebook posts, even which legislators they had talked to.

Now Jewish groups who had opposed Obama’s Mideast policies have revealed they were abused by the IRS too, and the Koch brothers revealed in 2010 the White House had information about them which could only have come from the IRS.

If Obama abused the IRS to intimidate and harass his political enemies, that may well lead to an Obama impeachment, just as it did with Nixon.

‘Fast and Furious’ may also lead to Obama impeachment

During Obama’s first term, the Obama administration sold over 2,000 high powered assault weapons to Mexican narco-traffickers, supposedly to track these weapons, but nobody put tracking devices in the guns or tracked them. Border patrol agent Brian Terry was killed with one of these guns, which initiated the scandal.

Basically the guns were allowed to ‘walk.’ The Mexican government was not told and dozens of innocent Mexicans were killed by drug traffickers with these weapons.

When Congress investigated, the Obama DOJ dragged its feet for months, withholding requested information. The eventual subpoena led to a showdown with Obama. With Holder about to be held in contempt of Congress, Obama threw an overreaching blanket of executive privilege over everything related to ‘fast and furious.’ Congress held Eric Holder in contempt, and not surprisingly the DA refused to prosecute his boss. Any day now we can expect a court to order compliance with the subpoena, court appeals, but in the end Obama will lose and the truth about ‘fast and furious’ will be public.

Will the Benghazi cover-up lead to Obama impeachment?

The full story of the tragic loss of four American heroes in Benghazi begs to be told. Benghazi was unmistakably a terror attack from the beginning, but Obama lied for weeks to assure his reelection.

There was nothing criminal about Obama’s actions leading up to Benghazi, but the incompetence will sink Hillary’s career and tarnish Obama’s leadership. Terror attacks on American diplomatic outposts are nothing new. Two U.S. embassies in Africa were destroyed by car bombs during the Clinton years with massive loss of life. Hillary Clinton was first lady, and Susan Rice the Associate Secretary of State for Africa at the time. Amazingly, Hillary Clinton ignored numerous urgent requests for beefed up security.

Obama failed to authorize military support when told about Benghazi, and at least two who died could have been saved with military support in the region. The Obama administration sought to cover up this gross incompetence to get past the election just two months later, and Susan Rice and Obama clearly lied to the American people about a third-rate video and “spontaneous” demonstration, to divert attention from the fact Al Qaeda is as dangerous as ever.

It remains to be seen whether witnesses in Congress were induced to lie and obstruct. There are already serious allegations a recent witness was the victim of retaliation. One thing is already apparent. The “talking points” from the intelligence community, which Jay Kearney said received one minor insignificant edit before release, were edited 12 times and scrubbed of any terror references. The Review Board that reviewed Benghazi didn’t interview key witnesses, who now are testifying in Congress. Apparently, the review board was a whitewash from the start!

Will Congress consider an Obama impeachment?

If an impeachment vote were held today, it would undoubtedly fail. Congress generally won’t impeach a popular president.

Bill Clinton committed impeachable offenses and was impeached, but the Senate balked at removing Clinton from office because he was still popular.

However, as these scandals grow and the wheels fall off of Obamacare next year, Obama’s approval ratings can be expected to sink to rock bottom levels, and we may well see an effort to impeach Obama. The Obama recovery is worse than the Bush recession, and the public is tired of a jobless economy. Bush has been out of office for four years now, and Obama owns the economic morass though he still blames Bush.

In my opinion, Obama is the worst president in modern history, and the only reason he was reelected is that Mitt Romney wasn’t the best candidate, and didn’t run a good campaign against Obama.

####

Bob Quasius is the founder and president of Cafe Con Leche Republicans.

Liberals on the Supreme Court and in Congress refused to heed warnings as they brazenly imposed President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) on the American people. Example:

“Our doctors have told us to be prepared for the worst because right now we can hardly find a doctor.”

Under a cloud of controversy, Obamacare has now entered its third year.

In its 2012 decision on Obamacare, the U.S. Supreme Court based its ruling on a convoluted interpretation of law. In a 5-4 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts voted alongside liberal justices to clear the way for the implementation of Obamacare. Roberts’ overriding concern was if the individual mandate to force Americans to buy medical insurance should be labeled a tax or a fine. Human loss and suffering were inconsequential. The human toll could not be factored in based on legal constricts placed on the court. Decisions are to be based on law and not emotion. Regardless and predictably, the leftist jurists’ ideology of applying social justice, a primary tenet of socialism, infused their decisions. Conservatives on the bench voted against the individual mandate, which would force Americans to purchase medical insurance under coercion whether by a tax or fine, as unconstitutional.

Chief Justice Roberts and President Obama

Soon after its passage, Obamacare began claiming casualties. Front-line victims became early warnings of the pain and suffering — the desperation — to come. Few in seats of power took heed. Obama and Congress had, after all, exempted themselves from the medical nightmare they created along with a swath of their political cronies and supporters. Supreme Court justices remain exempt as well. Question: Why exempt themselves? What is it that they are afraid of?

Mid-2010, Americans were beginning to experience the creeping effects of socialized medicine. During a radio interview, a caller who identified himself as a life-long Democrat told me of the particular form of hell that he and his young paraplegic wife were going through due to Obamacare. The caller wanted to warn fellow Americans. His wife was already being abandoned by her doctors who feared cuts in reimbursements. Doctors pointed to mandated cuts in Medicare monies being shifted to fund Obamacare. What follows in a limited transcript of my on-air interview with the caller about his wife’s ordeal.

Husband/Caller:

Our doctors have told us to be prepared for the worst because right now we can hardly find a doctor. We’re not in a small town, and when we go to find a new doctor for a new problem, a podiatrist or specialty doctor of any kind, we go through many, many, many, many names before one finally decides to take us. They tell us upfront that you are going to probably end-up being billed the 20% because we [the doctors] know that we don’t get reimbursed for that and they’ve changed their paperwork. You used to be able to pick up the phone and call any doctor and they say come on in, we take Medicare, we take QMB – now I spend two and three days trying to find one doctor with other doctors helping me to find a doctor that would accept the program. Through the Bush time, we thought GW was the worst thing that had ever happened to America. But, we were able to keep everything we had. Nothing was affected, our health plan was not affected, the doctors were not affected, nothing happened to us badly. Well, now since Obama has taken over we can no longer . . . (Voice cracks.)

The caller explained further, that in desperation, he took his wife to a clinic. Clinic doctors informed him that they were not qualified to treat his wife, nor could they admit patients to a hospital. Frantic, he recruited the help of others in his continued search to find a qualified doctor who would accept their Medicare/Qualified Medicare Beneficiary program. Eventually, he said, a 74-year-old doctor, in semi-retirement, finally agreed to treat his wife.

As a result of that call, I have investigated first-hand accounts and concerns of those who provide medical care to our mentally and physically disabled and to our seniors. Medical care providers expect the human toll, from warehousing patients to loss of life, to be extensive. Obamacare results in fewer doctors available to middle and lower income patients. Corruption is embedded in Obama’s Affordable Care Act as it fosters breeding grounds for less skilled and less ethical doctors and clinics to run Obamacare mills based on quantity of patients and not quality of care.

A recent interview I did with an emergency room doctor disclosed traumatizing choices that doctors are already being forced to make. An experienced emergency room doctor found himself trapped between admitting two critically ill patients or adhering to newly applied government regulations. His hospital’s funding was under new government-imposed financial guidelines. Costs were to be lowered by turning away short-term, repeat Medicare patients. The doctor explains that he is now caught in a regulatory vice:

As more and more are added to the Obamacare rolls, there will be less and less access. People will get sicker and yes, people will die because of it. I had a sick and sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach today after both of these incidents.

Facing the prospects of turning away dying patients or facing a hospital reprimand for admitting them, this doctor chose patient care over job security. The doctor expects to retire in a few years.

Former top aide to Obama, Jeffrey Crowley, helped design how Obamacare is being implemented. Crowley openly admits that there are serious flaws saying, “We know it’s going to be messy.” “Messy?” Is that what President Obama, liberal Democrats and socialists on the Supreme Court call the heartache, suffering and sorrow that is already being faced by Americans and their families? Chief Justice Roberts and his liberal jurists on the high court have torpedoed the American economy along with the American health care system making the pain not just medical, but financial? Workers nationwide complain that their paychecks have been hit with the first-round of Obamacare taxes resulting in less take-home pay. It is just the beginning.

The latest Rasmussen Reports survey reveals that a 54% majority of Americans expect the U.S. healthcare system to get worse over the next four years. Benjamin Domenech of Health Care News reports that the latest Kaiser/Harvard survey found, “Obamacare’s Unpopularity Grows in New Poll.” The survey reports that the disapproval of Obamacare “was mostly driven by an increase in opposition from the politically significant independent voters — the survey found 57% of independents opposed the law, up from 41 percent last month.” The House of Representatives currently has the authority to defund the administrative arm of the Affordable Care Act and effectively nullify Obamacare. Having been given that authority by the American people, the latest polls indicate that they should use it – and then expand sales of personal medical insurance into the free-market to be sold at competitive rates across state lines.

Further analysis by Sharon Sebastian on YouTube: Click here.

Sharon Sebastian (www.DarwinsRacists.com) is a columnist, commentator, author, and contributor to various forms of media including cultural and political broadcasts, print, and online websites. In addition to the heated global debate on creation vs. evolution, her second book, “Darwin’s Racists: Yesterday, Today & Tomorrow,” highlights the impact of Social Darwinism’s Marxist/Socialist underpinnings on the culture, the faith and current policy out of Washington. Critics are calling Darwin’s Racists, “Incredibly Timely” and “A Book for our Times.” Sebastian is a featured guest on broadcasts nationwide on topics ranging from politics, the economy, healthcare, culture, religion and evolution to Agenda 21′s global green movement. Sebastian’s political and cultural analyses on a wide range of national and global events are published nationally and internationally. Website: www.DarwinsRacists.com. “Darwin’s Racists – Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow” may be purchased at: www.DarwinsRacists.com, www.Amazon.com, www.BarnesandNoble.com and at bookstores online and worldwide. Listen to Sharon Sebastian’s analysis on YouTube: Click here.

Reposted from Cafe Con Leche Republicans with permission – original link.

Few realize that the “green movement” is about building large personal fortunes (green money) for an elite few. As with all robber barons, it is about the money. It is why President Barack Obama laid out his threat to again bypass Congress and ignore the American people during his 2013 State of the Union address. Mr. Obama will attempt to force his ill-conceived green energy plans into existence with the stroke of his pen via Executive Orders:

“I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.” – President Barack Obama, February 12, 2013

Obama is determined to resurrect his green energy schemes by drying up America’s access to oil and gas no matter the pain inflicted on American families and businesses. Having put the coal industry on life-supports, his next target — restricting power plants that generate electricity to homes and businesses.

Al Gore

What the President hides behind the curtain and does not reveal is his alliance with international green elites, White House and Wall Street cronies and energy regulatory czars who have orchestrated a CO2 carbon-taxing scheme that puts billions of dollars into their own hands. It’s a money scheme. Three years ago, the global-warming money transfer scam surfaced and named not only this president, but a former Democrat president and vice-president as participants planning to accumulate vast personal wealth as a result. One need only ask, why did Al Gore so confidently tout that he was destined to become the “first global-warming billionaire?”

Long in the designing, the elements were close to being in full play. The plans were drawn, the carbon-credit trading exchange registered as the Chicago Climate Exchange was formulated (New York Times – Click here // Trading symbol CCX – Click here.), set to both transfer and stash cash, the green barons’ privately-owned Chicago bank was on the ready and the right president was in office to perpetrate the scam on the American people. That is, until the great global-warming-climate-change fraud stopped the United Nations-supported, elite cadre of well-connected political, banking and Wall Street associates in their tracks. British Freedom quotes The Times of India:

George Soros

“Billionaire globalists like George Soros fund green groups and seek to promote the globalist ‘climate change’ scam as a way to enrich themselves and infiltrate developing nations in order to financially exploit them and their natural resources for profit.”

The June 2009 Bloomberg article, Sandor Got Obama’s Nod for Chicago-Style Climate Law by Jim Efstathiou Jr., reported that a carbon-capping bill set to be imposed on American businesses was the cornerstone of Obama’s environmental agenda. Bloomberg quotes CCX founder Richard Sandor as saying that the bill “began “way, way to the left with provisions to push U.S. utilities into bankruptcy.” The article further reads: “Sandor launched the Chicago Climate Exchange, or CCX, in 2003 after getting two research grants from the Chicago-based Joyce Foundation. Obama was on the foundation that gave us the grant, Sandor said. We know him well.” CCX reportedly now operates under the auspices of Environmental Financial Products.

When “global-warming-climate-change” was exposed as a blatant fraud, the American people and a Republican House refused to play ball. By doing so, they stymied the global clique of politicians and socialist ideologues who remain ready to bring America to its economic knees for their own financial and ideological gains. Even so, Mr. Obama is making another high-stakes play to push through his green agenda to fully activate the global CCX exchange despite the high cost to even the poorest of Americans.

While Obama is gearing up to invest billions of America’s tax dollars into the green abyss, other countries are backing away. Never mind that China and India refuse to put a dime into the scam. European nations have already experienced a severe hit to their economies and negative blow-back from their citizens. In the face of worldwide data to the contrary, Obama claimed during his State of the Union address that: “the fact is, the 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15.” How an American President can make such an erroneous claim to the American people in the face of existing facts reveals him as sorely misstating or misinformed.

A February 27, 2013 news release by the Global Warming Policy Foundation states that it has highlighted the global warming standstill for many years against fervent denial by climate activists. Its Chairman, Nigel Lawson, states: “there has been no further recorded global warming at all for at least the past 15 years.” Backing-up Lawson’s findings are reported reversals by such global-warming heavy-weights as the United Nation’s Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and NASA’s James Hansen who both reportedly now recognize that global temperatures have not risen for more than a decade.

Europe is facing a green backlash.

“The BBC has backed down over Sir David Attenborough’s widely contested claim that parts of the world have warmed by 3.5C over the last two decades. …The comment was removed from Sunday night’s repeat of the show.” – Harley Dixon, The Daily Telegraph, 11 Feb. 2013

“…long-term consequences of the Energy Bill will be horrible. It’s a recipe for deindustrialization.” – Professor Gordon Hughes, Mail on Sunday, 24 February, 2013

“Today energy policy is framed with only one factor in mind: satisfying the green lobby. It is, to be blunt, mad.” – Stephen Pollard, Daily Express, 20 February 2013

“Carbon emissions are no longer the driving factor setting UK energy policy. The new and dominant issue is cost.” – Nick Butler, Financial Times, 21 February, 2013

Scientific facts that Mr. Obama and his cronies prefer you not know come from Edmund Contoski, an environmental consultant for more than 40 countries. In Liberty Unbound, Contoski writes: “The overwhelming majority (97%) of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere comes from nature, not from man.” Based on scientific data, “Not only are worms contributing to the CO2 in the atmosphere,” Contoski further notes that, “volcanoes, swamps, rice paddies, fallen leaves, and even insects and bacteria alone emit ten times more carbon dioxide than all the factories and automobiles in the world. Even natural wetlands emit more greenhouse gases than all human activities combined.” Nature itself foils the environmentalists as The U.S. Department of Energy admits that once emitted that 98% of all the carbon dioxide emissions are again absorbed by nature. Contosky then queries,

“Termites emit ten time more CO2 than humans, should we cap-and-tax them?”

The media neglect the real reason Barack Obama wants your dollars to flow into his green machine that will swallow them up and then divvy them up among an elite group that will reap financial gain as America loses. The scheme is hidden in plain sight. Perhaps a great investigative journalist like Bob Woodward will peel back the layers of this political fraud. After all, he’s already endured one tongue-lashing threat from the White House.

List of reported quotes from Green Globalists compiled by real-world-news, click here.

YouTube: White House and Green Globalists’ Action Plan, click here.

Email a link of this website with the information provided to fellow Americans and to Congress.

Sharon Sebastian (www.DarwinsRacists.com) is a columnist, commentator, author, and contributor to various forms of media including cultural and political broadcasts, print, and online websites. In addition to the heated global debate on creation vs. evolution, her second book, “Darwin’s Racists: Yesterday, Today & Tomorrow,” highlights the impact of Social Darwinism’s Marxist/Socialist underpinnings on the culture, the faith and current policy out of Washington. Critics are calling Darwin’s Racists, “Incredibly Timely” and “A Book for our Times.” Sebastian is a featured guest on broadcasts nationwide on topics ranging from politics, the economy, healthcare, culture, religion and evolution to Agenda 21′s global green movement. Sebastian’s political and cultural analyses on a wide range of national and global events are published nationally and internationally. Website: www.DarwinsRacists.com. “Darwin’s Racists – Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow” may be purchased at: www.DarwinsRacists.com, www.Amazon.com, www.BarnesandNoble.com and at bookstores online and worldwide. Listen to Sharon Sebastian’s analysis on YouTube: Click here.

Reposted from Cafe Con Leche Republicans with permission – original link

National pro-immigration reform group Cafe Con Leche Republicans today reacted to the presidential election debacle. Bob Quasius, president, said

Yesterday’s election results show it is imperative that the Republican Party improve Latino outreach or become permanently uncompetitive in presidential and many other races. Exit and election-eve polls put Mitt Romney’s votes among Latinos at 23%, although over 60% of Latinos are center-right, according to Pew Research.

Polls consistently show a majority of Republicans support immigration reform, including a path to legalization, and a PEW Research poll from May 2011 showed that even among staunch conservatives there is a 49/49% split on immigration reform. However, due to lack of engagement and outreach and shrill rhetoric on this issue from a small minority of Republican politicians, Democrats have been successful in unfairly framing the Republican party as anti-immigrant and anti-Latino, particularly in states where there has been harsh rhetoric on immigration.

This trend started in California. Prior to proposition 187, Republicans were competitive in statewide races, but since Governor Pete Wilson jumped on the proposition 187 bandwagon, many Hispanics left the GOP and since then the GOP has not been competitive in statewide races in California.

Latino outreach improved during the Reagan/Bush years, and President Bush won over 40% of the Latino vote during his reelection campaign, proving that Latinos can be swayed to vote Republican with the right messaging and sensible solutions to issues of interest to Latinos like immigration.

However, since SB1070 and other harsh laws were passed, mass exodus of conservative Hispanics has occurred in Colorado following Tom Tancredo’s candidacy for Governor, in Arizona following SB1070, and in Nevada due to harsh rhetoric from Sharon Angle in the U.S. Senate race.

Cafe Con Leche Republicans initially supported Newt Gingrich, and one of our reasons is that Newt’s campaign recognized the importance of outreach to Latinos and a sensible stance on immigration reform, neither mass amnesty nor mass deportations but a solution that addresses our broken immigration system and seeks to strike a balance between accountability for illegal immigration, and the need to keep families together and avoid damaging our economy. Newt’s campaign reached out to us, and ultimately Cafe Con Leche Republicans provided five members of Newt’s national Hispanic leadership team.

When Newt dropped out of the race and Mitt Romney became the nominee, we decided to support Mitt Romney. Numerous attempts to connect with the Romney campaign’s Hispanic outreach proved fruitless. In our one year of existence, we’ve also had just one conversation with the RNC’s Latino outreach, and were left with the impression the RNC wasn’t interested in working with us due to our pro-immigration focus.

A common complaint among Latino Republican leaders is that RNC Latino outreach is dominated by a small clique of Latino Republicans from Washington DC and Florida, to the exclusion of others, particularly from the Southwest. We share the frustration of Latino Republican leaders from outside the DC/Florida clique that Mitt Romney received bad advice to largely ignore immigration, and some of Mitt’s rhetoric and association with immigration extremist Kris Kobach early in the campaign provided useful fodder for Democrats to frame Mitt Romney as anti-immigrant and anti-Latino, which we don’t believe is the case.

It’s time to root out the small minority of immigration extremists from the GOP. That process is already underway, for example Russell Pearce, the author of SB1070, has now twice been defeated by conservative Republicans who differed mainly by having sensible positions on immigration reform. We’d like to see Kris Kobach leave the party. Kobach is a top lieutenant to John Tanton, a notorious bigot and population control progressive, who once bragged how he manipulates Republicans. In a letter to a supporter, Tanton in 2001 stated:

The goal is to change Republicans’ perception of immigration so that when they encounter the word “immigrant,” their reaction is “Democrat.”

Our plan is to hire a lobbyist who will carry the following message to Republicans on Capitol Hill and to business leaders: Continued massive immigration will soon cost you political control of the White House and Congress, given the current, even division of the electorate, and the massive infusion of voters about to be made to the Democratic side. We are about to replay the Democratic hegemony of 1933-53, fueled back then by the massive immigration of 1890-1924.

It’s time for the GOP to recognize this pattern of manipulation, and fully embrace immigration reform based on free market principles, and not arbitrarily low quotas promoted by population control progressives like Tanton. Harsh rhetoric on immigration coupled with lack of adequate engagement with Latinos and race baiting by Democrats has resulted in very low GOP support among Latinos, and we ignore this at our own political peril.

The 2012 election served up lemons for Republicans, but with sensible changes in strategy and direction we can make lemonade instead. Already we’re hearing that party leaders have woken up and ‘smelled the coffee’ and we’re hopeful this situation can be turned around.

President Obama promised to pursue immigration reform during his second term. Due to President Obama’s history of immigration fakery and failure to put anything on the table during his first term, we have reason to doubt this promise, but he is welcome to surprise us. With the election behind us, we have put our partisan hats and boxing gloves aside, and we stand fully ready to work with President Obama and Democrats on immigration reform, which won’t happen without bipartisan support. We hope that President Obama will ‘hit the reset button’ in his relationship with Republicans in Congress, as the hyper-partisanship that has characterized the last four years has been a major stumbling block to governing our nation.

Original link here.

####

About Us – Cafe Con Leche Republicans is a national organization of Republicans who welcome “New Americans”, defined as immigrants and family of recent immigrants. Our mission is to make America and the GOP, more welcoming to “New Immigrants” through political activism, “in-reach” and education within the Republican Party, and lobbying government to adopt more immigrant friendly policies. We also seek to bring more conservative and moderate “New Americans” to the Republican Party. These efforts will strengthen the GOP, and lead more Republicans to embrace welcoming policies for immigrants and their families. We have members nationwide, with chapters in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and California. Our members and leadership are predominantly Hispanic, though we define ourselves by mission and guiding principles, not ethnicity, and we welcome all who share our goals. Our leadership is 100% Republican.

by Bob Price (reposted with permission of author - original link. Agent Terry was murdered in Arizona, so this blog post should be of particular interest to Tucson Citizen readers.)

Nearly two years after U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered by a gang of Mexican thugs in the desert night of southeastern Arizona, the federal government has finally secured a conviction. Yesterday, Manuel Osorio-Arellanes, plead guilty to the murder but denied being the shooter. He pled guilty in exchange for having the death penalty taken off the table during the sentencing portion of the trial, set for January. Osorio-Arellanes faces life in prison as his maximum punishment. Is this conviction too little, too late from an Obama Administration that appears to be up to their ears in the Fast and Furious program that led to Terry’s murder and its subsequent cover-up?

I spoke with Brian Terry’s brother, Kent Terry, today about this news and his reaction. He indicated he was not aware that the defendant was going to change his plea and said, “I am glad justice was served somewhat.” Terry questioned the timing of this plea bargain and its proximity to the election next week.

As do many Americans, Kent Terry believes that President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder are directly involved in the Fast and Furious program that put two of the guns used in Brian Terry’s murder into the hands of these gangsters. Terry said, “I am ashamed of how Obama handled Fast and Furious and Benghazi.” He feels Obama’s failure to comment on Fast and Furious or pressure his Administration to get to the truth about Fast and Furious and Benghazi are indications of Obama’s direct complicity.

Osorio-Arellanes was part of a gang of Mexican bandits who had come into the United States illegally solely for the purpose of committing crimes. In his plea statement, Osorio-Arellanes admitted he was part of this “rip-off” crew. They sneaked into the U.S. from Mexico about a week prior to Agent Terry’s murder. They had stashed food and weapons (including at least two guns from Fast and Furious) and were searching for Mexican marijuana smugglers to rob when they encountered Agent Terry’s BORTAC team and engaged them in a fire fight. Osorio-Arellanes admitted raising his weapon but said he did not fire on the agents. Osorio-Arellanes was shot during the gunfight and has been in federal custody ever since.

Clearly our borders are not secure. Not only are drug smugglers free to traffic their products into our nation. They also are freely engaging in human smuggling, human trafficking and sex-slavery as they bring their human cargo into America. In addition, rip-off gangs like the one Osorio-Arellanes was a part of, freely come and go across our border preying on their victims and endangering our Border Patrol Agents.

President Obama has failed in his primary duty as Commander-in-Chief – that of protecting our borders from an invasion of an army of smugglers and gangsters who endanger the lives of American citizens every day. Brian Terry’s murder is not the only one attributable to Obama’s failure to secure our borders. Many other Americans have lost their lives to bandits like this.

Our nation deserves to have a president who will take seriously, the dangers associated with our unsecured borders. And we deserve the opportunity to engage in real reform of our broken immigration system that makes it too easy for people to enter our country illegally and much too difficult for many to find a legal way to come here.

While immigration reform and border security have not been talked about very much in this presidential election season, it is an important issue and one where Obama has failed. You can make a statement by getting out and voting for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. Send a message of overwhelming magnitude and unarguable force that we reject the last four years of this Lawless Presidency and tell the Democrat party they must re-tool their issues from the ground up if they want to remain a viable party in our nation’s political system. You can do this by not just winning this election, but by getting every single voter you know to the polls. Vote a straight Republican ticket to send your message all the way down the ballot!

by Linda Vega (re-posted with permission of author and Latinos Ready to Vote)

There is no right to be born in the U.S., according to the current U.S. President.  Children are not given these rights, unless they are considered viable, whatever that that may be.  To date, no one has been able to define the term, from scholars, legal experts, religious advocates, not even mothers. Abortion is a topic that is being avoided as of late from the scandalous funding cutoffs that are plaguing Planned Parenthood and the Komen Foundation.  Even the recent Mandate to Religious schools and hospitals, from the Obama Administration, is to make certain that these employers offer free contraceptives and other health benefits to their employees. However, in untold facts, the President is using federal funding to suppress religious freedom, while at the same time pretending to promote women’s health. And it is all about votes.

The Administration flaunts its defense in the name of women’s health and their importance.  They proclaim the obvious, and that is that women are important to everyone.  They are a large part of our economy.  They are the largest voting bloc. They are the organizers at home.  Moreover, currently women are the ones employed in the higher number within the U.S.  Additionally, women live longer.  They are the most economically organized group of individuals.  Yet, they are quick on emotion to help other women and to protect the less fortunate before looking at all of the details.  They rescue and ask questions later.  This is our nature.

The White House spokespersons mention women in all of their interviews when referring to the decision to call upon religious organizations to provide contraceptives to help women and their choices.  The wording is fabulous because  women will come to the aid of other women when it comes to health and choices.  This power was discovered, by women, only after the passage of the 19^th Amendment and one that has been nurtured and used with great force to elect Presidents since Hoover.  In fact, women have voted for those Presidents who pushed issues regarding women and their health.

As a result, politicians like our current President, have learned to use issues and language affecting women to their advantage.  And, we as women, allow them–him to whisper into our ears that famous language of hope and change.  Our President states, throughout his speeches, what matters is that women have power over their health and their choices.  And he has us believing that he cares about our well being all the while, he has an ulterior motive—-Votes.   He is indeed the master of language, but I don’t think that this is the Change and Hope that unborn children were looking from him.  His language is smoke and mirrors looking for the next 15 minutes of glory from his “new age” language. This does not make him fit to be President, but rather it makes him the King Confabulator.

Republicans leading the charge against this law, including Republican Senator Marco Rubio recently stated that, “From a practical standpoint this will force Catholic organizations to make an unacceptable choice: Ignore a major tenet of their faith, or not provide any insurance to their employees and be punished with a federal fine for violating Obamacare’s mandate on employers.”  This should be an important part of the equation women should consider before closing the door on this mandate, that is the part about religion and faith.

According to the Institute of Medicine, an independent group of doctors and researchers that the Administration relied upon, birth control is medically necessary “to ensure women’s health and well-being.”  In furthering their study, they conclude that this means that women would be less likely to succumb to unwanted pregnancies, which in turn will mean less abortions.  Now we understand the one part of the offering that is hidden in the plan.  The one concept no one wants to overtly talk about.  Abortions.

This mandate will give women more access to abortions.  And in order to avoid this or even get to this topic, the mandate stops with the rational to help women and their health.  It does not speak of the unborn children that will be affected by this law.  In as much as the funding pulled by the Komen Foundation did not explain why it was pulling its funding from Planned Parenthood.  The reasoning was to defund abortions.  The comingling of funds could not be honed in on those mammograms versus abortions that are performed by Planned Parenthood.  It is as though, women are not allowed to look behind the curtain to see the Wizard who dictates the destruction of lives that will not be born.

Sen. Rick Santorum has taken the position that health insurance plans should not be required to cover birth control.  He also favors allowing states to decide whether to ban birth control. Speaker Gingrich wants to withdraw government money from Planned Parenthood because it performs abortions in addition to providing contraceptives, because federal money cannot be used for abortions.  Therefore, just like Gingrich and Santorum, women ought to be outraged that they are going to be used like pawns to get votes to re-elect Obama.  In as much, the Catholic Church  has the right to be angry at the President for suppressing their faith in the name of politics.

In a diabolical but clever manner, the Obama Administration aims at the largest voting bloc of women, 18-29 year old women who care about contraceptives and abortions.  They are 54% of the voters.  Unmarried women are 41% of these votes, Latina women 42%, Black women 41%.  So this outcry for women’s health, is true to some extent.  But let us not forget that underneath that whisper of the importance of hope and change, are the smothered cries of the unborn’s rights.

by Bob Quasius

Sharing this news release, with Arizona context. Much of Arizona’s border is remote, and as border fencing, security, etc. has been beefed up in other states, Arizona, in particular the Tucson Sector, has become a funnel for increased illegal border crossing.

The U.S. currently has seven million unauthorized immigrant workers, with the capacity to remove approximately 400,000 per year. Just 1.7 million guest worker and training visas were issued in 2011. In other words, less than 20% of ‘guest workers’ have a visa! Most guest worker visas are subject to strict quotas. In many cases the quotas are a small fraction of need, and across the board employers and employees encounter considerable red tape, delays, etc., and once a visa is issued, guest workers cannot readily change employers, which allows unscrupulous employers to exploit them.

For example, the U.S. has 1.5 million non-citizen agricultural workers, but only 12% have some type of visa. Many states that have implemented immigration crackdowns quickly experienced farm labor shortages. Even states that did not crack down, such as Washington State, are experiencing farm worker shortages. Some Americans are willing to take these types of jobs, but not in the numbers needed by agriculture. Georgia and Alabama experienced widespread crop losses after implementing SB1070 type laws, as immigrant farm workers fled but few Americans took their place. After SB1070 was passed, over 100,000 immigrants fled Arizona, and yet Yuma’s unemployment rate remains at great depression levels.

Fixing legal immigration and guest worker programs can be expected to reduce illegal border crossings by diverting the flow of migrant workers into legal channels, allowing the border patrol to focus on those who are truly dangerous, such as drug traffickers, gun runners, and terrorists. The grid lock on immigration reform remains in Washington, with Obama blaming Republicans when in truth Republicans are deeply divided on immigration reform, but don’t trust Obama! Read our release below for more perspective…

Marshall, MN – National pro-immigrant group Cafe Con Leche Republicans today slammed President Obama for failing to include immigration reform in his second-term economic plan titled “A Plan for Jobs & Middle-Class Security.” In May 2011 Obama described immigration reform as an “economic imperative” and yet incredibly Obama fails to include immigration reform in his economic and jobs plan!

During both presidential campaigns, Obama often promised to introduce immigration reform during his first year in office. However, Obama failed to put anything on the table during his first two years in office, despite a strong majority in Congress, and a cloture-proof majority in the Senate.

In a recent interview with Univisión, Obama again blamed Republicans for his own lack of leadership on immigration:

“My biggest failure so far is we haven’t gotten comprehensive immigration reform done, but it’s not because for lack of trying or desire, and I’m confident we are going to accomplish that.

What I confess I did not expect, and so I’m happy to take responsibility for being naive here, is that Republicans who had previously supported comprehensive immigration reform, my opponent in 2008 who had been a champion of it and who attended these meetings, suddenly would walk away.”

Obama’s biggest failure has been failure to work with Congress on a range of issues, not just immigration, and the second part of his answer to Univisión highlight his constant blame of others for his own leadership failures. Obama also failed to put immigration reform on the table during his first two years, and yet still blames Republicans for blocking it!

Obama’s actions as a Senator underline a different explanation of Obama’s failure to lead. Obama claimed he supported Bush’s immigration reform bill, then quietly worked with Harry Reid to sabotage Bush’s immigration reform through poison pill amendments and procedure to encourage moderate Republicans to drop their support, and then blaming Republicans for the bill’s failure. In a 2010 Wall Street Journal Op-ed, former Bush administration official William McGurn described Obama’s “immigration fakery”:

Earlier this month President Obama gave us his speech on comprehensive immigration reform.

Since then, observers have commented on its similarity to the Oval Office address given by George W. Bush four years earlier. As someone who had a hand in the Bush speech, let me point out two striking differences.

First, President Bush actually wanted an immigration bill, and indeed many of his conservative critics loathed him for it. Second, because he knew that such a bill required bipartisan support, he did not disparage members of the other party.

Wait a minute. Hasn’t Mr. Obama told us how he “reached across the aisle in the Senate to fight for comprehensive immigration reform”? Well, yes, those are his words. The back story, however, suggests another face to our president. For then-Sen. Obama also favored a series of amendments that were plainly recognized as bill-killers—spurning not only Mr. Bush and Mr. McCain but the Democratic architect of that compromise, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D., Mass.).

One such amendment was Mr. Obama’s own, which aimed to substitute family ties for education and skills when determining who gets green cards. That led to what the Associated Press called a “heated exchange” with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.). Mr. Graham accused Mr. Obama of undercutting Democrats and Republicans working for reform—contrary to his lofty campaign rhetoric about Americans coming together.

So when you are out on the campaign trail, my friend, tell them about why we can’t come together,” said Mr. Graham. “This is why.”

Mr. Obama’s mischief did not stop there. Though his own amendment failed, he supported another poison pill by Sen. Byron Dorgan (D., N.D.). Mr. Dorgan’s target was the guest-worker provision, another key to GOP and business buy-in.

There were 70 “yea” cloture votes to introduce Bush’s immigration reform, including dozens of Republicans. After Obama’s fakery and Harry Reid’s chicanery in not allowing debate on most Republican amendments, immigration reform failed to gain the required “yea” votes in two cloture votes to end debate and take up a final vote. Although the second cloture vote came closer to the required 60 “yea” votes, instead of allowing amendments and debate to continue until 60 votes were secured, Reid pulled the bill.

A constant narrative from Democrats ever since is that Republicans blocked immigration reform, when in fact Reid pulled the bill from the floor as “yea” votes for cloture approached the required 60. Not surprisingly, Republicans in Congress learned not to trust Obama on immigration and other issues, trust that is essential for bipartisanship. In fact, there has been almost no bipartisanship during Obama’s presidency, a problem that began during Obama’s tenure as a Senator, as described Bob Woodward’s book “The Price of Politics.” In our opinion, Mitt Romney demonstrated the ability to work across the aisle as Governor of Massachusetts, where he had to work with a legislature with 85% Democrat majority, and this, combined with Mitt Romney’s economic plan and immigration reform platform led us to endorse Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney can be expected to work with both parties in Congress, find middle ground, and pass immigration reform as promised, while Obama will either ignore the issue or continue to use immigration as a wedge issue as he has done now for years.

Obama campaigned in 2008 on a strong commitment to pass immigration reform during his first year in office, but during his first two years in office Obama failed to put anything on the table despite a strong House majority and cloture-proof majority in the Senate. He failed to even call Democrat senators in support of the DREAM Act, and Reid combined abortion measures and gay marriage with the DREAM Act to ensure that few Republicans would vote for the DREAM Act. Despite failing to put anything on the table, Obama has continued to blame Republicans for his own lack of leadership on immigration reform. Sadly, ‘hope and change’ has become ‘hype and blame’ and we have seen no progress on immigration reform during Obama’s presidency.

During the last year of the Bush administration, the H2A agricultural guest worker program was streamlined to help farmers obtain the guest workers they needed, while also enhancing accountability for hiring unauthorized workers. Upon taking office, Obama promptly canceled Bush’s H2A improvements, and then made the H2A program even more difficult for farmers. About 88% of non-citizen farm workers are unauthorized immigrants as a result. The H2A system remains broken to this day, although there is flexibility to reform this program administratively just as Bush did.

When Marco Rubio sought to find middle ground and introduce a new version of the DREAM Act, DREAM Activists and Democratic congressmen and senators were told not to talk with Rubio by the Obama administration, and soon afterwards came the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, a ‘band aid’ approach to providing relief for deportation for DREAM eligible youth, was rolled out to undermine Senator Rubio’s efforts. DACA angered Republicans in Congress, who rightly felt Obama was circumventing Congress, and ended any hope of bipartisanship solutions during the present Congress. A lawsuit was filed by immigration agents and union leaders, which seems likely to prevail on some points. In the rush to implement DACA, the Obama administration’s failed to follow the rule making process mandated by federal law.
Though jobs and economy remain top issues with New Americans, immigration is important too, with Latinos in particular, since a large majority of Latinos are immigrants themselves, or first or second generation immigrants, and often empathize with unauthorized immigrants. Obama’s continued “fakery”, as evidenced by his omission of immigration reform in his economic plan though he has described immigration reform as an “economic imperative” speaks to Obama’s continued “immigration fakery.”
His opponent, Mitt Romney, supported Bush’s immigration reform bills, and has demonstrated the ability to reach across the aisle as governor of Massachusetts. If Obama is reelected, he’s welcome to surprise us by hitting the “reset” button with Congress, and on this issue we will work with anyone who will work with us, but so far Obama has done little to inspire confidence he can turn around his relationship with Congress. We cannot help but note Mitt Romney’s strong commitment to turning our economy around, and his immigration reform platform promises badly needed reforms in guest worker programs.

####

About Us – Cafe Con Leche Republicans is a national organization of Republicans who welcome “New Americans”, defined as immigrants and family of recent immigrants. Our mission is to make America and the GOP, more welcoming to “New Immigrants” through political activism, “in-reach” and education within the Republican Party, and lobbying government to adopt more immigrant friendly policies. We also seek to bring more conservative and moderate “New Americans” to the Republican Party. These efforts will strengthen the GOP, and lead more Republicans to embrace welcoming policies for immigrants and their families. We have members nationwide, with chapters in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and California. Our members and leadership are predominantly Hispanic, though we define ourselves by mission and guiding principles, not ethnicity, and we welcome all who share our goals. Our leadership is 100% Republican.

By Thomas Martin Salazar, (content originally Published through Cafe con Leche Republicans)

In 2008 President Obama made a promise to many Hispanics and Latinos that said he would make immigration reform priority. He promised that immigration reform was an important issue that should not wait to be addressed down the road, but during his first term.

Here we are four years later and in an interview with Univision, Obama tells the American people that his greatest failure was not passing comprehensive immigration reform.  This would be ironic if it was not such a tragic understatement. In fact, President Obama and his administration are aggressively  enforcing  immigration laws.

In the last four years President Obama rounded up and deported more than 1.5 million illegal immigrants. Moreover, he masqueraded as an immigration reformer – working to seduce the Latino community, by suing Arizona all the way up to the Supreme Court for passing SB 1070 and by opposing Maricopa county Sheriff, Joe Arpaio. Yes Obama and his campaign surrogates boast with pride about how Obama is the immigrant’s champion, but they neglect to tell the truth about Obama’s own immigration policies.

They conveniently ignore the fact that Obama has pioneered the Secure Communities program. According to a Research Report by Aarti Kohli, Peter Markowitz, and Lisa Chavez, President Obama took this pilot program, which was started under President Bush, from 14 jurisdictions to 1,595. This program empowers state and local police all throughout the United States, to do the very exact things for which his administration sued Arizona and Maricopa county Sheriff Joe Arpaio. More revealing statistics from the same research study states,

“Latinos comprise 93% of individuals arrested through Secure Communities though they only comprise 77% of the undocumented population in the United States;”

And

“Only 2% of non-citizens arrested through Secure Communities are granted relief from deportation by an immigration judge as compared to 14% of all immigration court respondents who are granted relief”

This is unequivocally a disproportionate assault on Latinos. But the facts do not stop here.  The President has deported more than 1.5 million illegal immigrants, which averages to just below 400,000 people a year. Furthermore, Obama’s immigration policies have left more than 5,000 American citizens in foster care because their parents were rounded up and deported. His administration in the name of national security continues to deny passports to United States citizens whose birth certificates came from midwife and not through a hospital. This has disproportionately affected Latinos. This new policy of no longer accepting midwife birth certificates as an acceptable form of Identification goes far beyond just impacting Latinos who are seeking to obtain passports; in fact, there are even incidents where Federal immigration officials coerced United States citizens into signing away their citizenship. These are not the actions of a man who cares about immigrants and their families nor is it the actions of an immigration reformer.

Recently Obama has again been making his rounds – reaching out to Latinos with his promise and message of reform. Ironically, Obama and his campaign want Americans to believe that immigration reform will become a reality within the next four years. Indeed, it is such an important issue to our President that he failed to even reference immigration in his new glossy pamphlet. Thus it seems that immigration reform is not as important as the President claims.  Then again, in the first four years immigration reform was supposedly a high priority.

While the President plays the victim, blaming lack of bipartisanship for why he has failed to pass immigration reform, I would ask you to look at his real record on immigration. Look at the millions of people he has rounded up and deported. Moreover, how debased it is that our government would see fit to seize children from their own parents, and place them in the foster care system. What type of nation have we become, when basic parental rights and child rights are neglected? Sadly, under President Obama this is a reality. Obama needs to be held accountable for his deception. In the end, Latinos have a choice of either voting for the deporter-in-chief or they can vote for a new direction.

Editors note: as with all blog postings that appear with a by-line, the opinions presented are the author’s and not necessarily the positions of Cafe Con Leche Republicans.

Thomas Martin Salazar is an Arizona leader of the Café con Leche Republicans. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in History from Grand Canyon University and is currently working on obtaining a MDiv in Biblical Communication from Phoenix Seminary. Thomas has also served as the Grand Canyon University College Republicans Vice President and interim President (February 2007-April 2008) and as a Maricopa County Republican Precinct committeeman (August 2009 – August 2012).