Allen West: I May Challenge Rubio for Senate Seat (+video)

Billboard on I-75 in Ocala, Florida. Click on the image for a larger view

Joe Miller from Restoring Liberty reports:

Former U.S. Rep. Allen West said Wednesday that he hasn’t ruled out a challenge to Florida Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, even as the former congressman acknowledged that it would be a difficult and expensive road to take.

West, a favorite of conservatives who lost his House seat in 2012, said he’d draw on his faith to make a decision on a future political contest.

Read more.

Senator Rubio may be vulnerable due to his role as the “leader” of the Gang of Eight on immigration. He has lost support of conservatives. In Florida a billboard was raised showing the distrust of Rubio by at least some voters.

“When 20 million American citizens and legal workers are unemployed or desperately trying to find full time jobs it is both callous and irresponsible for Florida Senator Marco to sponsor an immigration bill that will flood the labor market with 33 million foreign workers over the next ten years,” said Jack Oliver of Floridians for Immigration Enforcement.

Allen West during an interview on WMAL radio says challenging Senator Marco Rubio in the 2016 Republican Florida primary election would be a daunting task:

Remember that Rubio faced a daunting task running  against former Governor Charlie Crist in 2010. Rubio faced a sitting Governor who at that time had a statewide approval rating of 70%, was flush with campaign cash and had already been endorsed by the Republican Senatorial Election Committee. Rubio won because he had the support of the conservative grass roots in a three way race (Crist became an Independent and ran as an “I”).

Déjà vu all over again?

RELATED COLUMNS:

Breaking News: Florida Patriot Groups feel betrayed by Senator Rubio
Rubio’s bill is more disturbing than his motives
Rubio declines to say whether he supports his own immigration bill
Marco Rubio’s approval ratings up despite immigration issues

Rubio lied, border security died

[youtube]http://youtu.be/yBhoVQZW17s[/youtube]

Tony Lee from Breitbart reports, “On Thursday [June 13th], Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) said one reason illegal immigrants must be legalized as soon as possible is so they can help fund border security measures by paying taxes and fines. ”

Lee notes, “Immigration experts, though, note that some illegal immigrants may be able to apply for fee waivers in order to avoid fines. In addition, the IRS may have difficulty figuring out how much back taxes illegal immigrants owe. And finally, some nonprofit agencies may even receive taxpayer dollars that presumably should be used to fund some border security programs in order to help illegal immigrants pay their fines to get legalized.”

WDW – FL reported:

On the June 12th evening edition of the Bill O’Reilly Show Senator Marco Rubio stated,“It depends on border security, and it depends on ensuring that it doesn’t cost the American taxpayer. I think the bottom line is we can secure the border and ensure that this never happens again, and if we can ensure that it doesn’t cost the American taxpayer by people going on welfare and things like that, then I think it will pass. If it doesn’t do those things, it won’t.”

Earlier on that same day an amendment from Senator Grassley to strengthen border security was stopped from coming to the US Senate floor for an up or down vote by Senator Harry Reid. Surely Senator Rubio knew this because he voted against the amendment.

This is a flip from Rubio’s repeated on the record statements that border security must come first. On June 11th Rubio stated, “We will have immigration reform if we can secure the border“:

Rubio said the same thing during an interview on Univision.

John Hall from Stand with Arizona reported, “In a Spanish-language interview Sunday with the network Univision (video here, translation here) Sen. Rubio made his strongest statement yet that legalization of the nation’s tens of millions of illegal aliens must happen before any new border security or internal enforcement measures are in place, and will in no way be conditional on any security requirements.”

Rubio: “Let’s be clear. Nobody is talking about preventing the legalization. The legalization is going to happen. That means the following will happen: First comes the legalization. Then come the measures to secure the border. And then comes the process of permanent residence. What we’re talking about here is the system of permanent residence. As for the legalization, the enormous majority of my colleagues have accepted that it has to happen and that it has to begin at the same time we begin the measures for [the border]. It is not conditional. The legalization is not conditional.”

Senator Rubio has not offered an amendment to strengthen border security. On June 17th Rubio was interviewed by the Washington Examiner and asked, “Are you going to offer your own border-security amendment?” Rubio replied, “We’re prepared to.”

It appears Senator Rubio lied to the American people and border security died.

RELATED COLUMNS: 

Benefits and borders: A Q&A with Marco Rubio

Jeb Bush: US Economy Needs Illegals’ “Fertility” (+video)

Senate to pass immigration bill with over ’70 votes’…

‘Disaster’…

Republicans in ‘demographic death spiral’…

Rubio Aide: Some American Workers ‘Can’t Cut It’…

REPORT: Obama runs immigration bill from White House, has control over Gang of 8…

Republican US Senate candidate Gabriel Gomez campaigns at Gay Pride Week event

Mass Resistance reports:

Gabriel Gomez is the GOP candidate for the US Senate in the June 25 special election to replace John Kerry. In the primary, he was the big favorite of the national GOP establishment. They said Gomez represents the future of the Party. Gomez’s slogan is that he’s going to be “a new kind of Republican.”

No Republican candidate for US Senate has ever (to our knowledge) campaigned for office by having a booth at a Gay Pride festival.

Republican US Senate Candidate Gabriel Gomez (pictured above third from left) stands outside of his booth at the “Gay Pride” Celebration.  Seated at the booth getting his photo taken by woman is Gomez’s 8-year-old son. [MassResistance photo]

This past weekend’s Gay Pride Parade went through downtown Boston and ended at City Hall Plaza, where, as in past years, a huge “Gay Celebration” was held with numerous booths.

Not many politicians of any party buy a booth at this event. But Gabriel Gomez not only had a booth, but he was there to greet people personally. And he brought his eight-year-old son to help run the booth, along with at least one very pro-GLBT campaign worker.

Diversity? No problem. Not too far away was the booth for the Bisexual Resource Center. [Mass-Resistance photo]

This “Celebration” has a very “diverse” atmosphere. Gomez’s booth was not far from a booth featuring gay sex toys, a sado-masochism booth, and several booths giving out condoms and anal lubricant.

Earlier in the week, Gomez released a statement saying that he if elected he intended to be considered “a pain in the butt” to the Republican Party, and that he “will go to work on them” to “support allowing two people to get married, whether they are gay or straight.

This is not surprising given that Gomez had supported Obama in 2008 and had donated $500 to the Obama campaign, and said he supported Obama’s positions on immigration and gun control. Gomez also gave $1,000 to ultra-liberal U.S. Senate candidate Alan Khazei. (Alan Khazei hired gay activist Kevin Jennings to run his non-profit group.)

On the abortion issue, Gomez claims to be “personally pro-life” but says that Roe v Wade is “settled law” and he would do nothing to take away a woman’s right to an abortion.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on MassResistance.org.

RELATED VIDEO:

Third Graders Introduce Obama at Homosexual Pride Event

Rubio: Gay couple amendment to immigration bill a poison pill

Yahoo News reports:

Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, a co-author and key proponent of the Senate immigration bill, said he will revoke his support if an amendment is added that allows gay Americans to petition for same-sex spouses living abroad to secure a green card.

If this bill has in it something that gives gay couples immigration rights and so forth, it kills the bill. I’m done,” Rubio said Thursday during an interview on the Andrea Tantaros Show. “I’m off it, and I’ve said that repeatedly. I don’t think that’s going to happen and it shouldn’t happen. This is already a difficult enough issue as it is.”

The amendment, introduced by Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy, would grant green cards to foreign partners of gay Americans. Leahy originally introduced the measure during the Senate Judiciary Committee markup of the bill, but he withdrew it under pressure from Republican lawmakers who said it would reduce the chance of the bill passing. [Emphasis added]

Read more.

The Leahy amendment states in part:

Notwithstanding section 7 of title 1, United States 8 Code, an individual shall be considered a ‘spouse’ and a marriage shall be considered a ‘marriage’ for the purposes 10 of this Act if—

(1) the marriage of the individual is valid in the State in which the marriage was entered into; or
(2) in the case of a marriage entered into outside of any State, the marriage is valid in the place in which the marriage was entered into and the marriage could have been entered into in a State..

Are Rubio and Reid playing us for fools on immigration reform?

On the June 12th evening edition of the Bill O’Reilly Show Senator Marco Rubio stated,“It depends on border security, and it depends on ensuring that it doesn’t cost the American taxpayer. I think the bottom line is we can secure the border and ensure that this never happens again, and if we can ensure that it doesn’t cost the American taxpayer by people going on welfare and things like that, then I think it will pass. If it doesn’t do those things, it won’t.”

Earlier on that same day an amendment from Senator Grassley to strengthen border security was stopped from coming to the US Senate floor for an up or down vote by Senator Harry Reid. Surely Senator Rubio knew this because he voted against the amendment.

According to Breitbart.com, “On Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) blocked a vote on the border security amendment to the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill offered by Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA). Grassley was pushing for an up-or-down vote by the Senate on his amendment, which would have required the border to be secured for six full months before any legalization of illegal immigrants in America began. Reid objected to Grassley’s motion, effectively implementing a 60-vote threshold that completely blocked any attempt at a fair vote on the amendment.”

Is Rubio being played by Reid or are Reid and Rubio playing all Americans for fools?

Eric Erickson from RedState.com in his column “No More Games” states, “… Marco Rubio is being played the fool or we are being played the fool by Senator Rubio. He has become the face of support for this legislation and much of the support of the legislation from those on the right has come because of the good will so many of us have for Senator Rubio.”

Erickson, who is a lawyer and has represented illegals, reports:

Contrary to the Americans for Conservative Reform advertisement in which he appears, the law does not prohibit illegals from getting benefits. Sure, some welfare benefits will be excluded as will, though it is debatable, Obamacare, but a sizable portion of entitlement benefits actually flow through tax credits in the tax code that these immigrants would get.

Contrary to the advertisement, the law does not secure the border in any meaningful way, in fact the “border security on steroids” as the ad claims does not begin until after the citizenship push starts, hence the pretend effort of John Cornyn now that this has been exposed.

Are Rubio and Reid a “Gang of Two” pushing a bill that is eerily similar to Obamacare through the US Senate for political gain? Is Rubio talking about border security but not willing to propose amendments himself to strengthen it? Time will tell.

Senator Rubio on the Bill O’Reilly Show:

UPDATE:

Erick Erickson reports:

Marco Rubio told Sean Hannity yesterday that he had wanted border security before amnesty, but now thinks we need amnesty first so, in paying the government for their amnesty, we can use the illegal aliens’ to pay for securing the border. After all, the border will take several years to secure, so we should encourage people to cross the border illegally and forge documents to prove they’ve met the deadline. Then they can pay the feds to secure the border in even higher numbers. Or something like that.

RELATED COLUMNS:

Double Agent: Marco Rubio Caught Making Different Amnesty Claims to Spanish, English Audiences
SENATE FIGHT: REID BLOCKS BORDER FIX…
FAST TRACK: Senators urge Obama to stay on sidelines…
COULTER: IF THE GOP IS THIS STUPID, IT DESERVES TO DIE…
Hispanic vote declined in 2012…

Rubio: ‘I should have been more artful’…
Rand Paul to Illegals: ‘We Will Find a Place for You’…
Nevada a ‘border state’…
Flake on Border Enforcement: This Time Is Different Because ‘They Have to Submit a Plan’…

Rubio on Univision: No immigration law unless border security measures are improved

Note: Excerpts of English and Spanish transcripts as published by Univision are below.

Excerpts of Interview on Univision’s “Al Punto” with Maria Elena Salinas. 

Senator Marco Rubio: “I am 100 percent committed to the immigration issue, immigration reform. Quite the opposite, I will continue to work to make sure that it doesn’t come to that. My point is that if we don’t have those—if we cannot secure the border, if we cannot take the necessary steps to earn our colleagues’ trust, this will never become law. We’re wasting our time. But I don’t think it will come to that. I simply think that if we can arrive at a reasonable measure— of course, it has to be something reasonable—to secure the border and prevent any sort of wave of illegal immigration in the future, that we’re going to have more than enough votes to be able to accomplish it.”

Maria Elena Salinas: “Let’s try to understand how to accomplish that. At this time, the border is more secure than ever. There are 21,000 border agents, a 651-mile wall, more than 300 watchtowers. And the bill that you helped to write has even more funds for border security. So, what are the measures that you consider key for the Senate to approve the reform? What else do the Republicans want?”

Rubio: “Well, the problem—, not just Republicans. There are four, five Democrats who are also asking for it in the Senate. And the point is the following: What they want are details on exactly where those resources are going to be used because, yes, there are sectors of the border that are much more secure, but there are others that aren’t. For example, the area of Tucson, Arizona. So what they’re asking is that it not be left to the discretion of the Administration or agencies, but that the law specifically says where and how those resources will be used so that there is no waste and that the—the errors of the past are not repeated.”

Senador Marco Rubio: “Yo estoy 100 por ciento comprometido al tema migratorio, la reforma migratoria. Al contrario, voy a seguir trabajando para asegurarnos que eso no sea el resultado. El punto mío es que si no tenemos esos–si no podemos asegurar la frontera, si no podemos tomar las medidas necesarias para ganar la confianza de nuestros colegas, esto nunca se va a convertir en ley. Estamos gastando el tiempo. Pero yo no creo que va llegar a eso. Yo simplemente pienso que si nosotros podemos llegar a una medida razonable, no, tiene que ser algo razonable. Pero una medida razonable para asegurar la frontera y prevenir cualquier tipo de otra ola de migración ilegal en el futuro que vamos a tener más de suficientes votos para poder lograrlo”.

Maria Elena Salinas: “Vamos a tratar de entender cómo lograr esto. En este momento, la frontera está más segura que nunca. Hay más de 21,000 agentes fronterizos, 651 millas de muro, más de 300 torres de vigilancia. Y el proyecto que usted ayudó a redactar tiene aún más fondos para seguridad en la frontera. Entonces, ¿cuáles son esas medidas que considera que son clave para que la reforma se apruebe en el Senado? ¿Qué más quieren los republicanos”?

Rubio: “Bueno, el problema–, no solamente son republicanos. Hay cuatro, cinco demócratas que lo están pidiendo también en el Senado. Y el punto es el siguiente: Ellos lo que quieren es detallar exactamente de dónde es que se van a utilizar esos recursos porque, sí, hay sectores de la frontera que están mucho más seguros pero quedan algunos sectores que no lo son. Por ejemplo, la área de Tucson en Arizona. Entonces ellos lo que están pidiendo es que no se le dejen a la discreción de la administración o de las agencias, sino que en la ley específicamente diga dónde y cómo se van a utilizar esos recursos para que no haya malgasto y no se repitan los–los errores del pasado”.

Florida Republican Club cancels speech on “radical Islam” – Speaker responds

Dr. Jonathan Matusitz

WDW – FL received a copy of the letter below, which was sent from Dr. Jonathan Matusitz to Peter Schorsch, Editor of the St. Petersburg Blog. Dr. Matusitz was schedule to speak at the Pinellas County Republican Executive Committee (PCREC) on Monday, June 10th. His appearance was cancelled due to pressure primarily from board member, Chris Latvala who posted an objection on his Facebook page.

Dr. Matusitz is an associate professor in the Nicholson School of Communication at the University of Central Florida (UCF). He studies globalization, culture, terrorism and health communication. On top of having 95 academic publications and over 100 conference presentations, he taught at a NATO-affiliated military base in Belgium in 2010.

The unedited letter follows:

Dear Peter Schorsch,

To my dismay, it is the first time that some Republicans have openly expressed their objection to my presentation on Islam. As a UCF faculty, I never intend to be controversial; rather, I try to be factual and 100% correct. If I didn’t think Islam poses a threat to Western civilization, then I would not stick my neck out by delivering public presentations on that subject. As Anna Phillips has aptly remarked in the Tampa Bay Times, I make a distinction between Islam (the threat) and the average Muslim (who is NOT the threat). What you also need to know is that, unlike other faiths, Islam is not just a religion; it is also a political system and global ideology. And, unfortunately, such political system and global ideology are profoundly anti-Western.

Based on your (and Chris Latvala’s) comments, you expressed concerns that my presentation on the “Islamic Threat to America” at the Republican Party of Pinellas County may hurt the election of local Republican candidates because (1) you think that my speech is not important to the mission of the party and (2) you think it may alienate Muslim voters as the purpose of my speech is to criticize Islam. It is obvious that both you and Chris would sacrifice pro-American conservative values in order to earn votes from people of all religions and creeds.

Please allow me to be clear: your strategy of earning votes from Muslims will not be efficient. Indeed, in regards to Muslim constituents themselves, for the past few decades, in the Western world, no matter what method Republicans and Conservatives have used to earn votes from Muslims, the vast majority of the latter have always voted for Democrat, Socialist, or left-wing parties. Below are statistics about Muslim votes in Western European countries and North America.

Muslim Vote in Western Europe

According to a poll conducted by France 24 (a French news channel), 95% of French Muslims voted for Ségolène Royal, the Socialist candidate, against Nicolas Sarkozy (http://www.france24.com/en/20120315-secular-france-religion-decisive-electoral-factor-muslim-jewish-vote-sarkozy-hollande)

According to a poll conducted by Le Figaro (a French newspaper), 93% of French Muslims voted for François Hollande, who became the Socialist President of France in 2012 (http://www.businessinsider.com/muslims-hollande-france-sarkozy-2012-5)

According to a poll conducted by The Guardian, only 16% of British Muslims tend to vote Conservative (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/feb/23/muslim-votes-tory-election)

According to The Position of Muslims in the Netherlands: Fact Book 2010, “Turks and Moroccans traditionally vote for left-wing parties” (p. 24) (http://www.forum.nl/Portals/International/english-pdf/Muslims-in-the-Netherlands-2010.pdf)

Muslim Vote in North America

According to a CAIR poll published on Fox News, 85% of American Muslims voted for Obama in the 2012 Presidential Elections (http://nation.foxnews.com/muslim-american-votes/2012/11/09/poll-85-american-muslims-voted-obama)

In the 2011 Canadian elections, only 12% of Canadian Muslims voted Conservative (http://www.dennisgruending.ca/2011/05/election-2011-political-and-religious-polarization/)

Peter, I just want to make sure that you clear out the misconceptions that you have about me. You referred to me as “controversial” and “apolitical,” and that is flat-out wrong.

Thank you for reading this.

Dr. Jonathan Matusitz

RELATED COLUMNS:

Republican Party of Pinellas County stifles free speech

“The Americans fear that their cultural barrier has been broken and now Jihad has become a normal career choice for any youthful American Muslim”

RELATED VIDEO: 

Panel Discussion – Radical Islam and U.S. National Security – Orlando, FL 4/20/2013. Frank Gaffney – Moderator, Pamela Geller, Jonathan Matusitz, and William J. Murray.

Four Words to Watch in the Immigration Debate

This column courtesy of the Heritage Foundation:

The Senate will begin debate on the Gang of Eight’s immigration proposal next week. Here are four words to watch out for as the Senators make their case—and warnings about what they might mean.

1. COST

“Cost” is one word that should come up in the immigration debate, because the Gang of Eight’s amnesty proposal has a cost that is simply too high for Americans to bear. Heritage analysis found that amnesty would cost taxpayers trillions of dollars.

Amnesty means that illegal immigrants become legal—and become eligible for Obamacare benefits, Social Security, welfare, and Medicare. But they won’t pay enough into the system in taxes to cover the cost of all these benefits, meaning the rest of the taxpayers will have to bear the burden. This simply isn’t fair to hard-working Americans.

2. BORDER

Despite claims of security—and talk of amending the bill—the Gang of Eight immigration bill doesn’t secure the border. Instead, it “delivers nothing new—other than the promise of spending a lot more money and running up our debt.” As James Carafano, Heritage’s E. W. Richardson Fellow, explains: “Amnesty immediately creates an incentive for illegal border crossings and overstays. Thus, the bill’s strategy would drive up the cost of securing the border.”

3. AMNESTY

Heritage President Jim DeMint has said that it’s a false choice for people to say that amnesty is necessary to immigration reform. Amnesty encourages more illegal immigration, and that is not what immigration reform is supposed to do.

Former Attorney General Ed Meese, Heritage’s Ronald Reagan Distinguished Fellow Emeritus, reminds us that America has tried this before, and it didn’t work:

Today they call it a “ road-map to citizenship.” Ronald Reagan called it “amnesty.” And he was right. The 1986 reform did not solve our immigration problem—in fact, the population of illegal immigrants has nearly quadrupled since that “comprehensive” bill.

4. “COMPREHENSIVE”

Beware the word “comprehensive.” As Meese notes above, the amnesty of 1986 was also called a “comprehensive” approach to immigration reform. It doesn’t work, and it’s not what we need. We need a separate, step-by-step approach to immigration reform. An approach that works—that the American people can trust—would start with reforming the legal immigration system and enforcing the security measures that are supposed to be in place.

Read the Morning Bell and more en Español every day at Heritage Libertad.

Governor Scott Signs “Infants Born Alive” Legislation

Cantonment, Fla. – Today, Governor Rick Scott signed HB 1139 to grant infants who survive abortion procedures the same rights as infants born naturally.  Governor Scott was joined by First Lady Ann Scott and pro-life supporters from across the state to sign this bill at Florida Baptist Children’s Home in Cantonment.

Governor Scott said, “As a father and grandfather, there is nothing more precious or special than welcoming a new child into this world and by signing this bill, we are protecting the most vulnerable among us and affirming their rights as individuals. This legislation ensures common-sense measures are taken to help care for the babies who survive abortion procedures and grants those infants the same rights as infants who are born naturally.

“I also want to applaud bill sponsors Senator Anitere Flores and Representative Cary Pigman for their commitment to ensuring this bill became law. Representative Pigman is a U.S. Army reserve lieutenant colonel who is currently deployed in Kuwait and proudly serving our nation.  I was pleased he was able to join our event today via Skype so we could recognize his hard work on this legislation and for his selfless service to our nation.”

Senator Anitere Flores said, “This legislation is about protecting the sanctity of life, and with the signing of this bill today, Governor Scott is fighting for those most vulnerable-this is a victory for Florida.”

Representative Cary Pigman said, “I was pleased to sponsor this important legislation this year and proud that Governor Scott is protecting the lives of those most vulnerable.”

Representative Clay Ingram said, “Governor Scott is committed to protecting those most vulnerable, and with the signing of today’s legislation, he is making sure all babies are treated fairly and with dignity.”

Representative Matt Gaetz said, “I applaud the Governor for standing up for children. It’s amazing to me that something like this needed action by the Legislature, but I’m glad we took important steps forward in protecting life.”

Sheila Hopkins, Director for Social Concerns/Respect Life of the Florida Catholic Conference said, “The Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops applauds Governor Scott for protecting the life and human dignity of children born alive during or after an abortion.  It is our duty to protect the weakest and most vulnerable in society and this legislation does exactly that.  Thank you Governor Scott.”

Dr. Jerry Haag, President of Florida Baptist Children’s Home said, “On behalf of the Florida Baptist Children’s Homes, we applaud Governor Scott’s commitment to protecting the unborn.  Our children are our most sacred treasures and it is imperative that all children- those born and unborn- are valued and treated fairly.”

John Stemberger, President of the Florida Family Policy Council said, “The Florida Family Policy Council supports Governor Scott’s commitment to life and applauds him on signing this legislation.  We affirm with Governor the first principle that all life, born and unborn, has intrinsic worth and value and deserves to be protected. This is a great human rights victory for the Sunshine State.”

IRS favored HAMAS linked CAIR while targeting Iraq War Veteran who exposed them

In a strange twist of fate, it appears that in 2009 the IRS targeted Iraq War veteran David Gaubatz who was involved in exposing the HAMAS front group Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). Based upon Gaubatz’s book Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret World that’s Conspiring to Islamize AmericaRep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., and other congressional leaders asked the IRS to investigate CAIR. Gaubatz’s book called attention to CAIR’s missing IRS filings and foreign donations.

World Net Daily reports, “At the same time the Internal Revenue Service delayed or denied requests for tax-exempt status from hundreds of conservative non-profit groups, it was quietly restoring the tax-exempt status of an Islamist front group accused of collaborating with terrorists. Last year, the politicized agency reinstated the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations’ tax-exempt status despite years of delinquent tax filings. CAIR officials had met with officials inside the White House before the decision was made.”

In an email to WDW Gaubatz states, “Once my book (Muslim Mafia) came out in 2009, I got a letter from the IRS for an audit. They wanted a copy of my book, info about the Center for Security Policy, World Net Daily, etc… and then slammed me with a $146,000 tax bill. I had always completed my taxes on time and paid what I owed. I had two accountants go through my tax info, and in actuality the IRS owed me, but I am too small to fight the govt. Now they take it out of my disability pension (from war in Iraq).”

Gaubatz notes, “Anna Prillaman (IRS Tax Compliance Officer from Richmond, VA office) was reviewing my book Muslim Mafia, and wanted to know exactly which mosques I visited in 2007 and 2008…The IRS insisted I list the individual mosques.” Prillaman gave Gaubatz 15 days to respond to the tax bill.

World Net Daily notes, “Though Democrat-connected CAIR did not officially endorse Obama, many of its staffers helped turn out the Muslim vote for his re-election. CAIR boasted that its own polling showed more than 85 percent of Muslim-Americans voted for Obama. In 2011, the IRS stripped the group’s national office of its nonprofit status for failure to file annual tax reports as required by federal law.”

“During the years CAIR failed to disclose its donors to the government, it solicited funds from Libya, Sudan and other terror-sponsoring foreign governments, according to ‘Muslim Mafia‘. CAIR is not registered as a foreign agent. CAIR repeatedly failed to file its annual disclosure report, IRS Form 990. CAIR blames a clerical error for the delinquency and claims to have completed the forms. However, several news organizations, including Politico.com and Gannett Co., have asked CAIR for the 2007-2010 documents, and CAIR has not been able to produce them,” states World Net Daily.

CAIR’s is an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror-financing case, this failure to comply with federal disclosure laws is all the more troubling,” U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf, the co-chairman of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, wrote the IRS in a separate request for investigation in 2011.

World Net Daily found:

CAIR’s terrorist ties run deep. The Justice Department lists it among U.S. front groups for Hamas, a Palestinian terrorist organization. And several CAIR officials have been convicted or deported on terrorism-related charges.

The FBI says that until suspicious ties between the leadership of CAIR and that of Hamas are resolved, it will no longer work with CAIR as a partner in counter-terrorism efforts.

Despite these red flags, the IRS in June 2012 sent CAIR-Foundation Inc. a letter stating the controversial nonprofit had regained its tax-exempt status as a 501(c)3. At the same time, the IRS demanded tea party and other patriot groups turn over donor rolls, membership lists and contacts with political figures, among other things, before the agency would consider granting tax-exempt status to them.

CAIR Foundation, which is listed at the same 453 New Jersey Ave. address as CAIR’s national headquarters in Washington, told the Washington Post that “all the paperwork issues have been resolved” concerning the organization.

However, WND has obtained CAIR-Foundation Inc.’s latest filing, and even this tax document is incomplete. It is a partial return for the calendar year 2011, covering only the period from Aug. 9, 2011, to Dec. 31, 2011. The final page of the return, in fact, requests an extension from the IRS.

“Additional time is required to obtain information necessary in filing a complete and accurate return,” states CAIR’s accountant Joey Musmar.

The filing says the organization solicited $3,964,990 in gifts, grants and other contributions that “were not tax deductible.” An annual fundraiser raised a net $106,879.

At the beginning of 2011, CAIR’s liabilities exceeded its assets by $940,279.

It also owed “CAIR Inc.” $722,261 for “charity consulting.” This amount is listed as a “loan.” CAIR Inc. is listed as a “C Corp.”

CAIR insists its tax returns for 2007-2010 exist. Yet it still won’t produce them, despite repeated requests. According to the IRS, nonprofits must make their tax returns available to the public upon request.

CAIR lists Todd Gallinger, director of chapter development, as its contact for such matters, at (202) 488-8787 and tgallinger@cair.com.

It’s not clear what, if anything, the IRS investigated concerning CAIR’s filings. The agency did not respond to requests for comment.

21,000 deadly attacks by Islamic terrorists since 9/11

According to the website The Religion Of Peace another gruesome milestone has been reached. This milestone has been ignored by politicians and media the world over. It is important to understand that the war against Islamic extremism is not over, as much as President Obama would like to think so.

The recent Boston bombing, beheading in London and attempted murder of a soldier in Paris indicate attacks will continue and could escalate. Turmoil and terrorist attacks in Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and across North Africa do not bode well for our national security.

The Periodical  Review: Summary of Information from Jihadi Forums – The Second Half of January 2013 published by ICT’s Jihadi Websites Monitoring Group summarizes notable events discussed on jihadist Web forums during the second half of January 2013. Following are the main points covered in the report:

  • The Taliban-Pakistan and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan announce the formation of a new group dedicated to liberating Islamists incarcerated in Pakistani prisons. They reiterate the obligation to wage jihad against the Pakistani regime, and promise to assassinate Pakistani security personnel tied to the imprisonment of Muslims.
  • Following demonstrations by the Sunni minority against the discriminatory policies of the Iraqi regime, the Islamic State of Iraq calls Sunnis to take up arms against the Shiite regime, to eliminate the growing threat to Iraq.
  • The French invasion of northern Mali and their war against jihadist forces ignites a wave of protests by Muslims worldwide and increasing threats of attack on French civilian and military targets.
  • Abu Yahya al-Humam, the Emir of the Sahara region for Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), reveals the intention to establish an Islamic emirate in the Sahara encompassing all local jihadist organizations, which France had forced to retreat.
  • The Global Islamic Media Front (GIMF) publishes a new issue of Sada Al-Jihad. It is the first issue to appear since 2010.
  • Ahrar Al-Sham, a Salafi-jihadist group active in Syria, officially announced its establishment.
  • On January 21, 2013, a new jihadist web forum was launched: Al-Kitab wal-Saif.

Please click here to view the full Second Half of January 2013 report in PDF format.

Returning to a pre-9/11 policy of dealing with terrorism as a law enforcement issue (a.k.a. the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center) only leads to more violence.

TROP

may2013

RELATED COLUMNS:

Seven months ago: 20,000+ deadly terror attacks by the ‘Religion of Peace’ since 9/11

A year ago: 19,000+ deadly attacks by Islamic terrorists since 9/11

Two years ago: 18,000 deadly terror attacks committed by the ‘Religion of Peace’ since 9/11

Rubio: Immigration reform bill will not pass as is

Rubio: “There will have to be improvements. … If we can make sure we put in place enforcement mechanisms and a guest worker program that ensures this will never happen again in the future, we’re going to have responsible immigration reform.”

“And if we don’t have that then we won’t have immigration reform, and I think our country will suffer for it.”

Washington, D.C. – As the Senate prepares for a June floor debate on S.744, the “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act,” U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) continues to work with his colleagues to fix our immigration system, strengthen our borders, and end de facto amnesty. Rubio used this week’s second installment of Marco’s Constituent Mailbox video series to address questions from his constituents about how to fix America’s broken immigration system.

In a letter, Lynn from Wesley Chapel shared her concerns about the unintended consequences of a large immigration reform bill and called for pilot programs and smaller pieces of legislation instead. Watch Rubio’s video response above and read his response below:

Senator Marco Rubio: “Lynn, that’s an excellent question. That is exactly the issue we are grapplingwith. First, I say you make a very compelling argument for repealing ObamaCare because, in fact, ObamaCare is an impediment to hiring. And the fact that people are thinking the way you are proves it. The fact of the matter is that ObamaCare will keep people from being hired. The problem we are balancing that against is that these folks have violated the laws of the United States, our immigration laws, and it isn’t fair or right for them to benefit from a government subsidy like ObamaCare. It will drive up the cost of this bill tremendously, in essence be unsustainable. And it isn’t fair either. So we cannot allow them to have access to ObamaCare benefits while they are here on their probationary and provisional status. The other reason why is because we want to make sure people that are being legalized in this country can sustain themselves. The last thing we want to do is legalize 11 million people and have a significant percentage of them be dependent on government. It’s not that we are not compassionate. It’s that we cannot afford it, it isn’t responsible, and it isn’t fair to the people that did it the right way. As far as the complex piece of legislation, that’s always been my initial preference: to do it in separate pieces of legislation so we can keep them from being traded against each other. In essence, so we can avoid a deal where they say to us, ‘We agree to more border security if you water down the guest-worker program or vice versa’. I don’t want that to happen and so far it has not.

“The problem with immigration though is that it is complex because it is all interwoven. It’s all related to each other. It’s literally impossible to do one part without doing the other. Let me give you an example. You can do border security, you can build fences, and we should. You should hire more border patrol agents, and we should. You should improve technology, and we should. But that alone is not enough because the magnet of employment is still in place. If we don’t have an E-Verify system for workers in America, for every single employer in America, people are still going to try to come. They are going to try to come for those jobs. That’s why you have to do E-Verify and border security, but even those two things are not enough. You also need to relate it to a guest-worker program. Why? Because our economy does need temporary workers in certain sectors like agriculture.  And if you do not find a legal way for people to come here and be able to do that, then they will come illegally to do that, and so that’s why you also need a guest-worker program.

“Related to all of that, of course, are the other issues involved in immigration reform. For example, the 11 million that are here now. You can only imagine, if we implement universal E-Verify – meaning no one can work in America unless they have legal documentation, but you have 11 million people sitting there that one day we intend to get to but not now, who are not legalized – none of those 11 million will be able to work anymore. So now you’re going to have a very serious problem in our society – a bunch of people in America that want to work, can work, but cannot because of E-Verify. So it’s better to understand who they are and legalize them now so they can start paying their taxes, and start proving who they are and what they’re here for. In addition to all of that, we want to freeze the problem that we have in place right now. Right now it’s 11 million, we think it’s about 11 million people – not all of them are going to qualify for this, by the way – but we think we can get them to come forward, learn English, pay a fine, start paying taxes, undergo background checks for national security and criminality. We can understand who the problem is and freeze it in place. If we wait to do it in the future, that 11 million, that number could grow. And it will be harder and harder to sift out those who have been here long enough to qualify and those who do not.

“So what I have found is that all of these issues are inter-related. You can’t deal with one without dealing with the other, otherwise it doesn’t work. And that’s why it’s so complex because the issue is complex. But I give you my word, that if this issue becomes one of those old-fashioned Washington issues where they start horse trading, one part of it for another part of it. If each of these are not dealt with as separate issues even though they are dealt with in one bill, then I won’t be able to support that anymore. I made that very clear from the beginning, and I continue to make that clear now. And that’s why I continue to ask for an open, transparent and extensive process. So the American people can know exactly what it is we’re doing, so that all views can be considered and heard, and so improvements can be made to this legislation. And let me tell you, there will have to be improvements. Because the good thing is the American people, the vast majority of them throughout the political spectrum, have clearly said that they are prepared to responsibly deal with those that are here illegally, but they are only willing to do so if we can take measures that ensure that this problem will never happen again in the future. And so, if we can make sure we put in place enforcement mechanisms and a guest worker program that ensures this will never happen again in the future, we’re going to have responsible immigration reform. And if we don’t have that then we won’t have immigration reform, and I think our country will suffer for it.”

RELATED COLUMNS:

BLACK LEADERS: IMMIGRATION BILL WILL ‘HARM’ AFRICAN AMERICAN WORKERS

Pinellas County Gun Show/Sheriff Gualtieri’s “Operation” falls flat

The Florida Constitution gives county governments the option to pass a gun show ordinance.  Article VIII, Section 5 (b) allows counties to require background checks for private gun sales on “property to which the public has the right of access.” The language targets the large gun shows often held at fairgrounds and convention centers. Holders of concealed carry permits were exempted from the background checks.

According to Lee Williams from the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, “For Guy Lemakos, owner of 2 Guys Gun Show Promotions, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri’s plan to enforce the seldom-used county ordinance requiring background checks for private sales was ‘much ado about very little’. No arrests were made either Saturday or Sunday at the 125-table Largo gun show, Lemakos said.”

Read more about it here: Sheriff Gualtieri’s background check plan |

The NRA and Florida gun owners were concerned that Sheriff Gualtieri was planning to infringe of the US Constitutional rights of gun owners.

The NRA in an email to Florida members stated:

Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri has vowed to “start” enforcing a little known county ordinance that requires background checks at local gun shows for all sales — including all private sales between individuals.

We wish we could tell you how it’s going to work but we can’t.  We don’t know.

How he plans to enforce the ordinance has not been made public, although Sheriff Gualtieri did admit that his monitoring and enforcement of the ordinance will also involve undercover operations.

As we told the press, the timing of Sheriff Gualtieri’s decision to begin enforcing the little known ordinance is curious.

Our big concern is entrapment.  If Sheriff Gualtieri’s “plan” doesn’t include notifying attendees at gun shows of the change, there are no assurances innocent people will know he has a new enforcement agenda.  When people don’t even know an ordinance exists, there is little chance they will know it’s going to be enforced.

Williams reports, “Maybe now Sheriff Gualtieri and the County Commission understand that their big attack on gun shows is viewed as political posturing,” said Florida NRA chief Marion Hammer. “Rather than being spun by a reporter, maybe Sheriff Gualtieri should have asked the Commission to suspend the ordinance until someone can prove it’s needed.  Political eye-wash is expensive for taxpayers.”

It appears the plan was much ado about nothing. However, Florida gun owners are keeping a watchful eye on Gualtieri.

RELATED COLUMNS:

UPDATE: No arrests made for Pinellas County background check law

Gun show background check law to be enforced, Pinellas sheriff says | Tampa Bay Times

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/pinellas-sheriff-to-revive-enforcement-of-county-law-closing-gun-show/2122166

http://thegunwriter.blogs.heraldtribune.com/12451/sheriff-gualtieris-background-check-plan/

Florida pours billions into public education with no change in student achievement

The Florida Department of Education (FDOE) released the 2013 FCAT 2.0 test results on Thursday, May 23rd.

According Anastasia Dawson from the  to the Tampa Tribune, “Statewide, only 17 percent of 23,182 students passed the retake of the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test’s reading portion, while 21 percent of 8,143 students passed the math portion of the test. In Pinellas, 19 percent of the 781 that took the reading test passed, up from 18 percent last year, and 21 percent of the 216 that took the math test passed, up from 19 percent last year.”

“Students who don’t pass the FCAT retakes will not be eligible to receive their high school diplomas and instead will be given certificates of completion,” notes Dawson.

The statewide FCAT results for 3rd Grade students show no improvement in student reading performance. Only 57% of 3rd Graders achieved a satisfactory level of reading achievement. In 2013 43% of 3rd Graders are not reading at grade level. According to FDOE data 18% of 3rd Graders “demonstrated an inadequate level of success with the challenging content of the Next Generation Sunshine State Standards”. This is no change from reading scores in 2011 and 2012.

The FDOE reported FCAT writing scores, “In 2013, 2 percent of students in grades 4, 8 and 10 were performing at 1.0 on FCAT 2.0 Writing. This is an increase from 1 percent in 2012. In 2013, 82 percent of students in grades 4, 8 and 10 were performing at 3.0 and above on FCAT 2.0 Writing. There is no state required “passing” score for FCAT 2.0 Writing that is used for promotion. However, FCAT 2.0 Writing scores are used in the calculation of school grades.

Dawson reports, “Scores plummeted last year after the state introduced new requirements for the FCAT writing test that were stricter on grammar, spelling and logical arguments. In response, the state decreased the satisfactory score that schools are graded on from a 3.5 to a 3.0 to help cushion the impact. The highest possible score is a six.”

Governor Rick Scott just did a “pay raise victory tour” around the state touting  his support for public school teachers. Perhaps he should have waited until the FCAT 2.0 scores were released?

Florida has transitioned from the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test® (FCAT) to the FCAT 2.0 to align with new academic standards. The FCAT 2.0 measures student achievement of the Next Generation Sunshine State Standards (NGSSS), which specify the challenging content Florida students are expected to know.

During the next two years, Florida will transition to the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts and mathematics. As part of this transition, Florida will replace the FCAT 2.0 and Florida End-of-Course Assessments currently being administered in writing, reading, and mathematics with new assessments that are aligned to the Common Core State Standards. FCAT 2.0 Reading and FCAT 2.0 Writing will be replaced by one assessment in English Language Arts.

Lower the standards for writing, increase public school teacher pay and get no change in student performance in reading and writing? Doing the same thing and expecting different results?

The Common Core is coming!

To learn more about FCAT 2.0 test results in Florida click here.

Immigration Reform in One Infographic

This column is courtesy of the Heritage Foundation’s The Foundry:

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill on Tuesday. It will go to the Senate floor after the Memorial Day recess. Heritage has pointed out the problems with this “comprehensive” approach — including the staggering costs of amnesty and a failure to secure the border.

Puzzle_Immig_v2_450px

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.