Posts

Who is Natural Born, Who is Not?

Now that the Iowa Freedom Summit has officially kicked off the 2016 Republican presidential primaries, it’s time that, as a matter of party policy, Republicans agreed on who is a natural born citizen and who is not.  Three conservatives… Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA), and Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL)… are prominently mentioned as potential candidates.  But the question arises, are they eligible to serve?  And if not, are conservatives and Republicans willing to turn their backs on the U.S. Constitution, cloaking themselves in the specious argument that, if the Democrats could get away with it for eight years, why shouldn’t they?  In other words, are Cruz, Jindal, and Rubio supporters willing to make the case that two wrongs make a right… the Constitution be damned?

If Republicans wish to avoid embarrassment and a potential constitutional crisis midway through a presidential campaign, party leaders would be well-advised to resolve the question before the issue blows up in their collective faces.  By doing so, they can kill two birds with one stone: 1) they can prove to the American people that, unlike Democrats, Republicans still honor the words and the spirit of the U.S. Constitution, and 2) they can permanently stain the Obama legacy by shining the light of day on his ineligibility… eight years too late, but better late than never.

Some Republicans may be foolish enough to think that Democrats, after nominating and electing  an ineligible candidate in 2008 and again in 2012, would hesitate to make a political issue out of the “natural born” status of Cruz, Jindal, or Rubio.  Those who make that assumption simply don’t know Democrats.  As former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld remarked in his book, Rumsfeld’s Rules, “Never assume the other guy would never do something you would never do.”

When the Founders drafted Article II of the U.S. Constitution, they were highly concerned that the chief executive of the United States should not, under any circumstance, be even remotely subject to or encumbered by foreign influences.

On July 25, 1787, John Jay, a member of the Continental Congress and the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, sent a letter to General George Washington, president of the Constitutional Convention, expressing his concern over the prospect that an individual with some level of potential foreign allegiance, however remote, might be elected to serve as president of the United States and commander-in-chief of the Army and the Navy.  He wrote: “Permit me to hint whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government; and to declare expressly that the commander-in-chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born citizen (italics added).”

On March 12, 1788, in Federalist Paper No. 68, Alexander Hamilton expressed the widely held fear of foreign influence on the president of the United States.  He wrote, “Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption.  These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.  How could they better gratify this than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy (presidency) of the Union?

It should be noted that the Framers did not require the president and vice president to be devoid of all friends and acquaintances in foreign lands; they did not choose to limit the presidency and the vice presidency only to those without living relatives in foreign lands; nor did they limit the presidency and the vice presidency only to those without material offshore assets.  But they did produce language in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution requiring that all candidates for president and vice president must be “natural BORN.”

Accordingly, the final product of the Constitutional Convention contained the following language, unchanged and unchallenged in the past 227 years.  Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution reads as follows: “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

As the Constitution was being drafted, southern Democrats demanded, as a means of increasing their representation in the U.S. Congress, a provision that allowed each slave to be counted as three-fifths of a person.  However, nearly a century later, the states ratified the 14th Amendment, a Republican-sponsored proposal granting full citizenship to all persons born on U.S. soil.

While the amendment was designed to give full citizenship to emancipated slaves, the authors could not have foreseen an age in which international travel would be so commonplace that expectant foreign women could travel to the U.S. just to have their babies born on U.S. soil, creating a class of citizens known as “anchor babies.”  Had they been able to predict the future, they would likely have limited the amendment to full time legal residents of the United States, almost all of whom were emancipated slaves.

The 14th Amendment does not confer, nor was it ever intended to confer, “natural born” status on children of emancipated slaves or on today’s “anchor babies” because, like our first seven presidents… Washington, J. Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, J.Q. Adams, and Jackson… none of whom were “natural born” citizens, those infants were born to parents who were not U.S. citizens at the time of their birth.  And while none of our first seven presidents were natural born, all were “citizens” on the day the Constitution was ratified and were “grandfathered” under the phrase, “…or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution.”    

Most Obama apologists, while insisting that Obama is a “natural born” citizen, even though he was born to an American mother and a Kenyan father, will agree that Arnold Schwarzenegger, for example, is not a “natural born” citizen because he was born in Austria to Austrian parents and became a “naturalized” citizen after emigrating to the U.S.

When an alien seeks to become a naturalized citizen, he/she must demonstrate that they have been of good moral character for the statutory period prior to filing for naturalization.  Then,

upon being found suitable for U.S. citizenship, applicants must swear the following oath:

“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.”

As a “citizen of Kenya by birth,” under terms of the August 4, 2010 Kenyan constitution, Barack Obama has failed to renounce his Kenyan citizenship and is required to obey the laws of Kenya whenever he happens to visit that country.  Therefore, he has not “absolutely and entirely renounced and abjured all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty…”  Nor has he shown himself to be a man of good moral character.

Any investigation into who is natural born and who is not, must have as its starting point, a realization that there are only two jobs in the entire United States, public sector or private sector, that require the incumbents to be “natural born” citizens.  Those who are naturalized citizens or regular citizens can serve in state and local office, in state courts, in the U.S. Congress, and in the federal courts.  They are even eligible to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, but they may not serve as president or vice president of the United States.

The Framers obviously intended the qualifications for president and vice president to be far and above the qualifications for any other office in the land.  As such, those who insist that the terms “citizen” and “natural born citizen” are synonymous have an obligation to explain to the rest of us exactly what they see as the exclusivity factor that make eligibility requirements for president and vice president different from those of all other offices.

The acid test for those who claim natural born citizenship involves two factors, and two factors alone.  The first is “place” and the other is “parentage.”  Individuals born in a foreign land, to alien parents, can become “naturalized,” but never “natural born” citizens; “anchor babies” born to one or more non-citizen parents on U.S. soil can be “citizens,” but never “natural born” citizens; and those born anywhere on Earth to one American citizen and one who is not, can be American “citizens” with dual nationality, but never “natural born” citizens.

In January 2009 and again in January 2013, it was the obligation of congressional Republicans to question Barack Obama’s eligibility when they met in joint session to certify the votes of the Electoral College, but they lacked the courage to do so.  Nor did they have the courage or the political will to hold public hearings on the question.  Now they have the opportunity to shine the light of day on the question of Obama’s ineligibility by openly questioning the eligibility of three Republicans.  Such hearings will show that, in terms of eligibility for the highest office in the land, Barack Obama, Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, and Marco Rubio are all “birds of a feather.”

Rubio Tears Into Charlie Crist Over His “Failed Leadership”

Rubio always loves to rip into Crist over his political flip flops and “failed leadership”.

FL Senator Marco Rubio: 5 Steps to beat Ebola

The United States is the country best equipped with the resources and power to tackle the medical and logistical nightmare that the Ebola epidemic has become. With over 8,000 people infected, more than 4,000 dead and infection rates increasing, this outbreak of Ebola is not going to go away quickly.

Yet while we need a more effective and rapid response to contain the outbreak in West Africa, we also need to make sure sufficient safeguards are in place to protect Americans. We have to make sure that every aspect of our federal government’s response — from our passenger screening efforts to our public health system — is effectively prepared to prevent the spread of Ebola.

To that end, the United States must take several steps to strengthen our response to this challenge.

First, Americans need to have some reassurance that someone in our country is in charge of confronting this epidemic and keeping Americans safe from it.

So far, inexcusably, this has not really happened. President Obama should publicly designate a senior government official to lead a task force. This person would be in charge of coordinating the U.S. response to this crisis, both domestically and internationally, including our military presence, which in a limited amount of time has already had a real impact on the ground in Liberia.

Second, we need to target the problem at the source. Containing the outbreak in Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone is the right thing to do for humanitarian reasons, but it’s also essential to protecting the American people.

The longer the outbreak lasts in those countries, the greater the chance of the disease being transmitted to other countries, including the United States. As part of the response abroad, we need to bolster public health systems in the region to help prevent the virus from expanding across more borders.

Third, we need to prevent the growing crisis in West Africa from leading to more cases in the United States.

The recent announcement of increased entry screening of those traveling from affected countries by Customs and Border Patrol at select points of entry in the United States is a good but, frankly, overdue first step. However, it will not be enough, and the State Department should institute a temporary ban on new visas to non-U.S. nationals seeking to travel to the United States from Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea.

Since March 1, 2014, over 6,000 visas have been issued to nationals of these countries. Foreign health workers coming to the United States to be trained should be exempted, provided they pass screening efforts. However, until we have a better handle on the problem, we need to prevent mass travel from the countries most affected. We should also ensure that Customs and Border Patrol agents at airports beyond the current transit points have the equipment and training to deal with potential cases. And additional travel restrictions should not be ruled out.

Fourth, the infection of two health care workers in Dallas during the treatment of Duncan raises questions about the ability of hospitals across the country to handle the extensive safety protocols required to treat Ebola patients.

Two medical facilities in the United States have already successfully treated patients that have now been cured and two others have specialized facilities for treating patients with the virus. We should consider centralizing all future cases at these medical facilities, but hospitals across the United States will still need to focus on screening and isolating suspected cases that may arrive at their facilities.

Finally, we need to increase our efforts to develop an Ebola vaccine and to increase production of antiviral drugs.

There are a few promising drugs to fight Ebola in test phases. We should speed up testing of these drugs and explore the possibility of scaling up drug manufacturing at the same time as clinical testing. Once we develop a drug with proven success, we should be ready to supply it in large numbers. In order to avoid bureaucratic red tape, we should begin discussion with the WHO, drug companies and West African governments on the processes for purchasing and distributing of these drugs.

The Ebola epidemic is a reminder of the evolving nature of our national security challenges. A sick child in Africa has advanced into a global health security issue that is now knocking on America’s door.

We can successfully address this problem, protect our people and once again demonstrate America’s compassion abroad. But much more needs to be done and it needs to happen quickly. Like other national security challenges, the longer we wait to engage, the more limited our options will become and the likelihood of success will be reduced.

Read the entire article here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Here’s Why Budget Cuts Have Nothing to Do With Developing an Ebola Vaccine

Whether There’s an Ebola Outbreak in the U.S. Depends on the Definition of ‘Outbreak’

A Second Health Care Worker Has Contracted Ebola

Ebola Cases, Already Rampant in West Africa, Expected to Double Every 3 Weeks

RELATED VIDEO: Plane that carried Ebola patient also flew to South Florida

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

EDITORS NOTE: Senator Marco Rubio is a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence committees. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

Why is the pro-amnesty Florida Chamber of Commerce defending Julio Gonzalez?

An email to supporters from the Julio Gonzalez campaign states, “Richard DeNapoli, candidate for District 74 State Representative, has been formally asked by the Florida Chamber Political Institute to discontinue the use of confidential information that he and his supporters have been using to attack Dr. Julio Gonzalez.”

So the Florida Chamber is angry that its information is being used against a candidate that it supports and endorses. It that a bad thing?

The Florida Chamber of Commerce website states:

The Florida Chamber of Commerce joined with our partners at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers and the American and Florida Farm Bureau Federations in urging Congress and the administration to work together to enact immigration reform during a Day of Action – an effort that included events in Washington, DC and in more than 60 congressional districts across 25 states.

The Florida Chamber supports a comprehensive, federal approach to immigration reform – one that serves our nation’s best interest and is crucial for Florida as we position ourselves to win the global race for talent and jobs.

Comprehensive federal immigration reform is code for “amnesty.”

The campaign website for Dr. Julio Gonzales states, “Julio’s conservative pro-growth policies have earned him the endorsement of the Florida Chamber of Commerce.” There is no mention of immigration in the issues section of the Gonzales campaign website. Gonzalez has been endorsed by both the pro-amnesty Florida Chamber and Senator Marco Rubio, who is the Republican face for amnesty. What does that tell you about Gonzalez?

In stark contrast, Richard DeNapoli has these positions on immigration posted on his campaign website:

  • No Amnesty – period,
  • E-verify for all employers to ensure the jobs magnet for illegal aliens is turned off,
  • Oppose all Obama efforts to house illegal immigrants in Sarasota County jails,
  • Demand Congress act to secure the border,
  • Support completion of the border fence,
  • Shift taxpayer funding from benefits for illegal aliens to helping keep our commitment to caring for our Veterans.

It is clear where DeNapoli stands on immigration. It is not clear where Gonzalez stands, except  that he stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the Florida Chamber of Commerce.

The August 26th Republican primary is upon us. Voters need to understand where the candidates stand on important issues like immigration.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Florida: Since 2000 52% of jobs went to legal immigrants and illegal aliens
Hundreds of Convicted Criminals Among Illegal Immigrants Released by Obama Administration
Illegals hit jackpot with lenient U.S. judges…
DREAMers plan to occupy Cruz office…
PEW: More than 60% of Hondurans in USA Illegals…
CONFUSION: Obamacare Plans to End Without Proof of Citizenship…

Florida Senator Marco Rubio gives defining pro-family, pro-straight and pro-American speech

Florida Senator Marco Rubio has taken on social issues in a major speech given at the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. Senator Rubio is taking the high ground on issues that are important to the majority of Americans.

In “Strong Values for a Strong America” Rubio states, “A strong America is not possible without strong Americans – a people formed by the values necessary for success, the values of education and hard work, strong marriages and empowered parents. These are values that made us the greatest nation ever, and these are the values that will lead us to a future even better than our past.”

Rubio notes, “No one is born with the values crucial to the success sequence. They have to be taught to us and they have to be reinforced. Strong families are the primary and most effective teachers of these values. As the social philosopher Michael Novak once said, the family is the original and best department of health, education and welfare. It is crucial in developing the character of the young. And those efforts can be reinforced in our schools, religious institutions, civic groups and our society.”

Rubio comes out strong as the pro-family, pro-straight and pro-American candidate for President in 2016. Immediately after his speech Rubio was attacked for the following statement:

Now, I know that given the current cultural debates in our country, many expect that a speech on values would necessarily touch upon issues like same sex marriage and abortion. These are important issues and they relate to deeply held beliefs and deeply divisive ideas.

We should acknowledge that our history is marred by discrimination against gays and lesbians. There was once a time when the federal government not only banned the hiring of gay employees, it required private contractors to identify and fire them. Some laws prohibited gays from being served in bars and restaurants. And many cities carried out law enforcement efforts targeting gay Americans.

Fortunately, we have come a long way since then. But many committed gay and lesbian couples feel humiliated by the law’s failure to recognize their relationship as a marriage. And supporters of same sex marriage argue that laws banning same sex marriage are discrimination.

I respect their arguments. And I would concede that they pose a legitimate question for lawmakers and for society.

But there is another side of debate. Thousands of years of human history have shown that the ideal setting for children to grow up is with a mother and a father committed to one another, living together, and sharing the responsibility of raising their children. And since traditional marriage has such an extraordinary record of success at raising children into strong and successful adults, states in our country have long elevated this institution and set it apart in our laws.

That is the definition of marriage that I personally support – not because I seek to discriminate against people who love someone of the same sex, but because I believe that the union of one man and one woman is a special relationship that has proven to be of great benefit to our society, our nation and our people, and therefore deserves to be elevated in our laws.

Watch the YouTube video of Rubio’s speech:

Read the full text of Rubio’s speech here.

In Florida 1 million Christians either did not register or did not vote in the 2010 general election. Obama won Florida by less than 80,000 votes. Perhaps Rubio is on to something?

When tolerance becomes a one-way street it leads to at best religious intolerance and at its worst social suicide. Rubio has taken the moral high ground.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Straight White Guy’ Festival Outrages Same-Sex Marriage Supporters

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is courtesy of  M.Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO.

Personal Liberty Digest Poll Results: Marco Rubio — Is Global Warming Fake?

The total number of people who voted in this poll: 18,134
1) Do you think climate change (global warming) is real or a hoax?
 9%  voted:  Real. Climate change is real as is seen in the melting of the Antarctic ice sheet and in extreme changes in temperature and weather patterns.
 88%  voted:  Hoax. Climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the green energy industry, there has been no real scientific proof.
 3%  voted:  I don’t know.
2) Do you believe human-caused greenhouse gases are to blame for extreme weather?
 4%  voted:  Yes, unregulated greenhouse gases caused by humans are causing global warming that is setting off an environmental chain reaction resulting in more extreme weather.
 95%  voted:  No, the climate is and has been historically cooling and warming throughout centuries and humans are not to blame.
 1%  voted:  I don’t know.
3) Do you, like Rubio, believe that global warming regulation and laws will do nothing but destroy the U.S. economy?
 95%  voted:  Yes, global warming laws will make everything more expensive as restrictions will change the way goods can be produced.
 4%  voted:  No, regulations and laws are absolutely necessary as we won’t have an economy if the environment is destroyed.
 1%  voted:  I don’t know.
4) Do you believe the United States should be the leader in solving the world’s climate issues?
 11%  voted:  Yes, the U.S. is the most powerful nation in the world and needs to lead by example.
 85%  voted:  No, the U.S. needs to look out for its own economy and interests.
 4%  voted:  I don’t know.
5) With which political party do you most closely align philosophically?
 2%  voted:  Democrat
 33%  voted:  Republican
 8%  voted:  Libertarian
 34%  voted:  Tea Party
 21%  voted:  Independent
 3%  voted:  Other

Thank you for your participation.

If you haven’t voted click here.

Who is Carlos Lopez-Cantera the new Lieutenant Governor of Florida?

Governor Rick Scott with Carlos Lopez-Cantera. Photo courtesy of The Shark Tank.

Many Floridians are scratching their heads about Governor Rick Scott’s selection of Carlos Lopez-Cantera as his running mate. Some see this as a pure political move to pander to Hispanics. Others are just wondering who is Lopez-Cantera, the now former Property Appraiser for Miami-Dade County turned Lieutenant Governor of the sunshine state.

Governor Scott released this biography of Lieutenant Governor Lopez-Cantera:

Carlos Lopez-Cantera was born in Madrid, Spain on December 29, 1973. He was born two months premature and was returned to his intended birthplace of Miami, Florida once he was healthy enough to travel. Lopez-Cantera graduated from Miami-Dade College and continued his studies at the University of Miami, where he graduated with a degree in Business Administration.

In August 2012, the citizens of Miami-Dade County elected Carlos Lopez-Cantera as the Property Appraiser of Miami-Dade County. Carlos campaigned on a platform to make interaction with the office of the property appraiser easier, increasing community outreach and being more responsive to the needs of the residents of Miami-Dade.

From 2004 through 2012, Carlos served as a member of the Florida House of Representatives. Over the course of his 8-year term in the Legislature, Carlos served as a member of the Governor’s Property Tax Reform Committee, the My Safe Florida Home Advisory Council and the Miami-Dade County Mayor’s Mortgage Fraud Task Force. In the Florida House of Representatives, he chaired the Committee on Business Regulation and the Government Affairs Committee. Carlos served as Majority Whip from 2009 through 2010 and as the Majority Leader of the Florida House of Representatives during the final two years of his term from 2010 through 2012.

Carlos has been married to his wife Renee since 2005 and they have two young daughters.

Marc Caputo from the Miami Herald found something interesting when researching Lopez-Cantera. Caputo reports, “It’s easy to find home- and land-owner information on the website of Miami-Dade’s Property Appraiser, with a notable exception: the house where the county’s elected property appraiser lives. Details about Property Appraiser Carlos Lopez-Cantera’s home value and taxes are simply impossible to find with his website’s search engine. That makes him an exception in South Florida… The Miami Herald accidentally discovered the issue Monday while researching Lopez-Cantera amid word that Gov. Rick Scott plans to tap him Tuesday to fill the long-vacant post of lieutenant governor.”

“Even though Lopez-Cantera’s home information is nearly impossible to find, it doesn’t mean that he broke public-records laws, Parrish said, because the property appraiser’s website is offered as a courtesy to the public, not as a right mandated by Florida statute,” notes Caputo.

Caputo states in a Tampa Bay Tribune column, “Lopez-Cantera served under Rubio in the state House and served as majority leader through 2012, after which term limits forced him from office. He then ran for and won the relatively new elected position of Miami-Dade property appraiser… Lopez-Cantera has shown he can win in the county, is well-liked by conservatives throughout the state from his time leading the GOP in the state House, has helped lower property-tax values — thereby helping cut taxes —and has a scandal-free reputation in a county known for scandal.”

Lieutenant Governor Lopez-Cantera is the first American of  Hispanic descent to hold that office.

As this year progresses there will be more information coming to light about Lieutenant Governor Carlos Lopez-Cantera. Stay tuned.

PODCAST: How Mother Nature will Accelerate the Looming Fiscal Avalanche

Many are writing about the looming fiscal cliff that Congress and the Obama administration will deal with upon return from the Thanksgiving break. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) warns of a looming fiscal avalanche.

In After Fiscal Cliff Comes Fiscal Avalanche, Rejection of U.S. Debt, Senator Lee writes, “While Washington is preoccupied with the so-called fiscal cliff, little attention has been given to the fiscal avalanche that will occur if we continue down an unsustainable, long-term path, causing markets to turn sour on U.S. debt and leading to a spike in interest rates.”

Senator Lee states, “The Congressional Budget Office projects that under the most likely policy scenario, in 30 years, net interest payments on the debt could total $3.8 trillion in today’s dollars. That is more than total government spending for 2011.”

Robert Wiedemer co-author of America’s Bubble Economy – Aftershock wrote America has suffered through a number of financial bubbles and the aftershock following each. To date each of these bubbles, the most recent being the housing bubble, have burst and fallen onto two other looming bubbles. These two bubbles are the “dollar bubble” and the “debt bubble”. Wiedemer predicts these two bubbles will burst when pricked by the pin called “inflation”.

The government fiscal policies which have lead the US to the fiscal avalanche may be helped along by mother nature.

Relying heavily on the research of experts globally, as well as his own original research that correctly predicted the change in the Sun’s behavior, Mr. John L. Casey has spelled out in his book Cold Sun a convincing case that a new cold era has arrived. In Cold Sun, Mr. Casey presents the evidence showing:

1. Global warming ended years ago.
2. The Sun has entered an ominous state of ‘hibernation.’
3. The Earth’s ocean and atmospheric temperatures are dropping rapidly and are now on a long term decline for the next thirty years.
4. Glacial ice worldwide is growing again and the threat of rising sea levels is over.
5. Why we should be preparing now for the coming cold and its ill-effects including record earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions as well as global agricultural devastation.

Mr. Casey’s predictions of mother nature taking her own course fly in the face of current government policies at the national, state and local levels. In this exclusive interview Mr. Casey explains how mother nature will have her way no matter what we try to do:

While government is focused on reducing CO2 emissions to prevent global warming, the earth is in fact cooling. According to Casey this cooling will shorten the growing season causing food prices to increase, require more fuel and energy to heat homes and businesses. The US will experience an increase in the number of natural disasters costing human life loss and property damage on a grand scale. The US ability to recover from such natural disasters here and globally will be restricted by our debt and cost to service that debt in the long term.

The world’s growing population depends on food. Brian M. Carney in his article for the Wall Street Journal asks, “Can The World Still Feed Itself?“. Mr. Carney interviews Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, Chairman of Nestle’ the world’s largest food-production company. According to Mr. Brabeck-Letmathe, “Politicians do not understand that between the food market and the energy market, there is a close link.” That link is the calorie.

Carney reports, “The energy stored in a bushel of corn can fuel a car or feed a person. And increasingly, thanks to ethanol mandates and subsidies in the U.S. and bio-fuel incentives in Europe, crops formerly grown for food or livestock feed are being grown for fuel. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s most recent estimate predicts that this year, for the first time, American farmers will harvest more corn for ethanol than for feed. In Europe some 50% of the rapeseed crop is going into bio-fuel production, according to Mr. Brabeck-Letmathe, while “world-wide about 18% of sugar is being used for bio-fuel today.”

What does this all mean?

If John Casey is correct in his predictions, and SSRC always is, then cold weather brings with it a shorter growing season and increased demand for fuel to keep people warm. Therefore, we must have policies that increase calories, not decrease the food supply.

These natural events will occur during the same 30 year period where our payments on the national debt will increase to $3.8 trillion.

RELATED COLUMN: Are we living in the Hunger Games?

FL Rep. Buchanan Opposes Military Attack on Syria

U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan, (R-FL District 16), member of the House Ways and Means Committee

U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan, (R-FL District 16), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, said today he opposes launching a military strike against Syria because there is no vital national security interest at stake. Funding for military action against Syria would require support from Buchanan’s committee.

“With no direct threat to the United States and no discernible military objective, I cannot support committing American military might to a civil war in the Middle East where the lines are blurred between friend and foe,” Buchanan said.

The Florida Congressman noted that more than 95 percent of the phone calls and emails to his office from constituents have been against American intervention. “The case has not been made for why U.S. involvement is vital to our national security.”

Buchanan also expressed concern that a “limited” military strike could weaken U.S. credibility in the world and further destabilize the Middle East.

“The last thing we want to do is incite further chaos in a part of the world that is already unstable,” he said.

Buchanan said he would continue to listen to his constituents and attend a classified briefing prior to next week’s vote in Congress on whether to authorize the use of military force against Syria.

US Rep. Tom Rooney (R-FL District 17), US Army Iraq War veteran.

Jeremy Wallace from the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports, “Buchanan said it’s clear the people he represent have a similar view. He said as of Wednesday he had received 600 calls and emails in opposition to the U.S. striking Syria. Just nine people said we should get involved he said … The region’s other House member, Rep. Tom Rooney [R-FL District 17], who represents Charlotte County and part of Manatee, has also been opposed to U.S. involvement in the Syrian conflict. Rooney said he worries that if the U.S. strikes, Syrian president Bashar Assad will respond by attacking Israel, which would likely result in a more forceful action from the United States.”

“The views of the regions two House members is vastly different than the two Senators from Florida. U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio, a Republican, and Bill Nelson, a Democrat, both have declared their willingness to strike Syria and try to oust Assad from office,” notes Wallace.

NOTE: Since Wallace wrote his column Senator Marco Rubio voted against military action SH 216 in the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In a press release after the vote to authorize force Senator Rubio stated:

“What is happening in Syria is a vital national security concern for the United States. I know Syria is far way, and some may wonder why it matters. But it matters for several reasons…

“First, Syria is of vital importance to Iran and to their ambitions to become the foremost power in the region. They use Syria to arm Hezbollah and then to attack Israel. They use it to traffic weapons and terrorists to destabilize Iraq. Second, Assad is a dangerous anti-American dictator. For example, he helped terrorists get into Iraq so they could maim and kill American soldiers. Third, this prolonged conflict is creating vast ungoverned spaces in Syria which are turning into the premier operational area in the world for jihadists to operate. And fourth, if Assad does not face consequences for what he has done, and is doing, it sends a message to other rogue governments like North Korea and Iran that they too can cross red lines without fear.

“However, while I have long argued forcefully for engagement in empowering the Syrian people, I have never supported the use of U.S. military force in the conflict. And I still don’t. I remain unconvinced that the use of force proposed here will work. The only thing that will prevent Assad from using chemical weapons in the future is for the Syrian people to remove him from power. The strike the administration wants us to approve I do not believe furthers that goal. And in fact, I believe U.S. military action of the type contemplated here might prove to be counterproductive.”

RELATED VIDEO: Rubio: My Vote Against Military Action in Syria (SH 216):

RELATEDUS funded Syrian rebels merge with al Qaeda (video)

FL citizen challenges Rubio to face his constituents – will he show up?

Sally Baptiste from Orlando, FL has challenged Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) to face his constituents on S-744. The Senate is going on summer recess and Rubio will return to Florida the entire month of August. The question is does the Senator have the courage to stand in front of his Florida constituents? Up till now Rubio has only faced a friendly media and his fellow “Gang of Eight” Senators.

The I-4 corridor is considered key to any Presidential or statewide election. Speculation on a Rubio run for the White House in 2016 or a run for reelection in 2016 abounds. Rubio has an office in Orlando.

The Villages located in Sumter County is one of the largest retirement communities in Florida and is located just North of Orlando. The Villages TEA Party is headquartered there. Presidents and Presidential candidates come to The Villages to garner support. So did Rubio during his campaign in 2010. The Villages TEA Party helped him get elected in 2010 and now has misgivings about him because of his stand on immigration. You can bet they will show up at any Orlando town hall on immigration with Rubio in attendance.

Baptiste states in a letter to Rubio, “It is time for you to ‘face the music’ in Orlando. It is time you demonstrated some courage and have a ‘Come to Jesus’ with your American Constituents in Orlando, FL on the S-744 Amnesty Bill.”

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in a 2010 study estimated it costs Florida’s taxpayer $5 billion annually to incarcerate, medicate and educate illegal aliens.

“I have a copy of the documentary ‘They Come to America II – The Cost of Amnesty‘ to give to you for viewing at an Orlando Town Hall Meeting. You and your Constituents (including me) need to watch this documentary together.  Please invite the ‘Gang of 8/10’ to join us,” Baptiste writes.

J.R. Sanchez, Legislative Assistant; Director of Outreach, Office of Marco Rubio, acknowledged the email and sent this reply to Baptiste, “Thank you for your e-mail. Have a pleasant evening. J.R.”

Below is the full text of Baptiste’s letter to Rubio:

July 17, 2013

U.S. Senator Marco Rubio
201 South Orange Avenue, Suite 350
Orlando, FL 32801

Senator Marco Rubio,

It is time for you to “face the music” in Orlando. It is time you demonstrated some courage and have a “Come to Jesus” with your American Constituents in Orlando, FL on the S-744 Amnesty Bill.

I have a copy of the documentary “They Come to America II – The Cost of Amnesty” to give to you for viewing at an Orlando Town Hall Meeting.  You and your Constituents (including me) need to watch this documentary together.  Please invite the “Gang of 8/10” to join us.  We need to face the facts about the total failure of OUR government to secure OUR southern border and OUR homeland.  Facts you seem to be totally ignorant of or you are being intentionally deceptive (aka lying) about.  How much do you really know about securing the American homeland?  How much do you really care about securing our borders?  How much do you really care about protecting American sovereignty?  The fact is….I cannot trust you to protect Americans or American sovereignty.

After the viewing of the documentary “They Come to America II – The Cost of Amnesty”, you can address your American constituents in person, you can look into the eyes of your American constituents and explain why securing our borders is no big deal to you.  You can explain why it is okay to openly invite terrorists to enter OUR country.  You can explain why it is a good thing to legalize and empower terrorists whose only goal is to destroy America.  You can also be ready to accept responsibility for the next terrorist attack that KILLS AMERICANS on AMERICAN SOIL.  You really need to think about that.

This Town Hall Meeting will allow you to demonstrate your courage and explain to AMERICANS face to face why you willingly sacrifice the American people for the illegal alien terrorists and illegal alien workers.  You can explain why you willingly risk our national security and the welfare of the American people. You can be a man and prove that you have the courage to face the American people after this extreme betrayal that some would say amount to a treasonous act against Americans and American sovereignty.

Then you can also explain face to face why as a candidate for the U.S. Senate – Florida; you continually stated you would never support amnesty.  I personally knew not to believe your campaign propaganda/rhetoric because I knew that as the Speaker of the Florida House, you repeatedly blocked bills that would have helped to control illegal immigration.  Truth be told, you have always supported Amnesty and well, to put it in simple terms…. you were the perfect GOP “Latino” amnesty puppet for the U.S. Senate.  For the record….I personally have no doubt if the U.S House GOP passes any form of S-744 Amnesty, that will be the end of the GOP and it should be.  The GOP has lost its way and needs to be abolished.

One more thing….I watched you speaking on the Senate floor when you used God and Christianity to try to guilt people into supporting your S-744 Amnesty Bill.  How disgusting is  that?  Mr. Rubio, if you really are a Christian, if you really are a God fearing individual, then you will do the right thing and have a Town Hall Meeting in Orlando and face your American Constituents.  You will join with the American people and watch the truth about national security and amnesty.  That is the right thing for you to do.

Please let me know the date and time of your Town Hall Meeting and I will be bring a copy of Dennis Michael Lynch’s documentary “They Come to America II – The Cost of Amnesty”.

May God Bless America.  May God protect Americans from the unethical and evil actions of those elected and sworn to serve and protect the American people.  The American people need God’s protection more now than ever before.

Thank you,

Sally Baptiste
Orlando, FL 32822

Has Rubio read his own immigration bill?

The Weekly Standard reports that at least five S. 744 supporters do not know what is in the bill. When asked about a provision that would give employers a $3,000 incentive to hire amnestied aliens over citizens and permanent legal residents:

Sen. Baucus said: “I don’t know if that’s been solved.”

Sen. Casey: “I just haven’t read it that closely to know.”

Sen. Blumenthal: “that’s a good question. I’d have to check.”

Sen. Carper: “I don’t have the time to drill down on it right now”

Sen. Boxer: “I think if you work for an employer who offers health care, you will get the health care you want.”

Sen. McCain’s and Rubio’s offices didn’t respond.

John Carney of CNBC writes that the Congressional Budget Office says S. 744 would create “another decade of pain” for American workers. But that doesn’t seem to trouble very many Members of the United States Senate.

Instead of discussing the higher unemployment and lower wages S. 744 would mean for American workers, the Gang is “in full horse-trading mode” according to Politico, which also reports (subscribers only) that the entire process has been “mostly via back channels and insider negotiations, with deals reached privately to lock up senators’ votes — rather than amendments adopted publicly on the Senate floor.”

Erick Erickson of Red State has a list of quotes from amnesty supporters back when they were running for office — and againstamnesty.

And Sen. Rubio (among those quoted by Erickson above) reiterated his belief that the Senate needs to convince the American public to trust it on immigration.

Sen. Paul, on the other hand, wrote “Washington parlor tricks disguised as reform will not fool the American people.”

VIDEO: Sen. Ted Cruz Speaks Against Corker-Hoeven Amendment to the Immigration Bill:

Rubio: President’s “culture of political intimidation” (video)

Senator Marco Rubio went on the Senate floor and described President Obama’s “culture of political intimidation” not unlike “the tactics of a Third World nation”.

Excerpts from U.S. Senate Floor Speech
Senator Marco Rubio
May 15, 2013

Full Speech: http://youtu.be/D8f9Lq71Jes

RUBIO: THESE ARE THE TACTICS OF THE THIRD WORLD

“So in the span of four days, [there were] three major revelations about the use of government power to intimidate those who are doing things that the government doesn’t like. These are the tactics of the third world. These are the tactics of places that don’t have the freedoms and the independence that we have here in this country. And it is shocking to Americans that this would come to light in the way that it has. I would submit to you, however, that none of this is new. That what we see emerging here is a pattern, a culture, a culture of intimidation, of hardball politics that we saw both on the campaign trail and now through the apparatus of government.”

RUBIO: OBAMA’S CULTURE OF INTIMIDATION LEADS TO THIS SCANDALOUS BEHAVIOR

“This is not just limited to the I.R.S. This is a culture of intimidation, a willingness to play hardball politics against your political opponents. Let’s not forget the case in South Carolina of Boeing, who decided to relocate, as any business has a right to do, in the United States of America. A business should have the right to locate its operations in any state it wants. Well, when Boeing decided to relocate from Washington state to South Carolina, the NLRB came after them in a complaint, which they claimed was on the merits, but it was very straightforward. They were going after them because the union in Washington state was upset about the move. And in fact, the case was dropped partially because of political pressure.  But interestingly enough, the effort was only abandoned after – after – they negotiated a contract deal with the union. Now listen, I can be up here all day and I intend to keep coming back to the floor and citing examples of this. But the point is, [what] we have going on now is a culture of hardball politics and intimidation which is unacceptable and should be chilling to every member of this body, Republican and Democrat. This is unacceptable behavior. But this is what you get with an administration, when an administration is all about politics. This administration is a 365-days-a-year, year-round political campaign. Every issue is a political campaign leading up to the election and even now, every issue is a wedge. Few times in the history of this country has anyone used this office to drive more wedges among the American people than this president and this administration. And so yes, this is the culture that has been created. ‘ They’re bad and we’re good. Our enemies are bad people. The people who disagree with us on policy are bad people. You don’t support us on guns, you don’t care about children and families. You don’t support some measure against religious liberty, you’re waging a war on women.’ On issue after issue, a deliberate attempt to divide the American people against each other for the purposes of winning an election. That is the culture that’s been created, and that culture leads to this kind of behavior. Whether it was directed or not, we don’t know that. I’m not saying someone picked up the phone in the White House and said do these audits, leak this information. I am saying that when you create a culture where what’s rewarded is political advantage, when you create a culture in your administration where everything is politics 24 hours, seven days a week, when you create a culture where every issue that comes before the Congress is used to divide people against each other, to see who can get to 51% in the next election, when you create a culture like that, it leads to this kind of behavior throughout your administration.”

RUBIO: OBAMA LABOR SECRETARY NOMINEE’S RECORD RIDDLED WITH GOVERNMENT INTIMIDATION AT ITS WORST

“And in the days to come, we’re going to be hearing more about this. We have a nominee right now to the Labor Department who has an admirable personal story which I admire and applaud but who has a history of using the government and his position in government to intimidate people to do what he wants them to do. I would submit to you that Mr. Perez’ nomination is bad for the country at any time, but in this administration, in this political culture after what we have learned in the last few days, even more so. And I hate to single him out, but that is one of the pending ones that are before us.”

RUBIO: SOON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THIS SAME IRS ENFORCING OBAMACARE

“This same IRS that was willing to do this, this same IRS that was willing to target groups because of their political leanings, this same IRS that audited Mr. VanderSloot after he happened to appear on the Obama enemy list, this same IRS will now have unfettered power to come after every American and ensure that either you’re buying insurance or you’re paying them a tax. Every American business. The front lines of enforcing ObamaCare falls to the IRS. That is what happens when you expand the scope and power of government. It’s always sold as a noble concept. It’s always offered up by government as, ‘We’re going to give the government more power so they can do good things for us.’ But the history of mankind proves that every time a government gets too much power, it almost always ends up using it in destructive ways against the personal liberties of individuals.”

RUBIO: THE CONSTITUTION IS SUPPOSED TO GUARD AGAINST THIS GOVERNMENT ABUSE

“And that’s why the framers of our Constitution were so wise to impose real constitutional limits on the power of our government, because they knew from history that this was the case. That’s why our Constitution says that unless government at the federal level is specifically given a power, it doesn’t have it. That’s why it says that. That’s why you see people stand up here on the floor and fight to protect the Constitution. That’s why these groups were formed around the country. Everyday Americans from all walks of life, people, some of whom had never been involved in politics before, who joined a Tea Party movement or a 912 movement because they feared the direction our country was going, and so they stood up and said, ‘This is wrong. This is why.’ This is why this adherence to the Constitution. Because the Constitution was based on the simple truth that if government has too much power, it almost always ends up destructive. Our framers knew better than to rely on good people being in government to take care of us. They understood that government’s power in order for us to have freedom and prosperity necessarily had to be limited, not because we’re anti-government. Of course we need a government. Who provides for our national defense?  Who is supposed to secure our borders when we’re having this immigration debate? These are important things our government needs to do. But if you give it too much power, it leads to these abuses. This is why the Constitution was so wise to limit the power of the federal government to its enumerated powers and leave to the government closest to the people most of the powers. And I think we should reexamine all these decisions that have been made that have expanded the scope and power of our government.”

RUBIO: THIS HAS A CHILLING EFFECT ON FREE SPEECH

“I don’t know how many people are aware of this, but early next year, every single one of you is going to have to buy insurance, health insurance that the government says is good enough. Maybe not the insurance you’re getting today that you’re happy with. And if you don’t buy that insurance, you are going to owe the IRS some money. That’s a tax to me. The same IRS that has shown a propensity to target people based on their political leanings. This is who we’ve empowered through ObamaCare. So this is what’s going on here. It’s not just one scandal at the IRS, it’s about a culture of hardball politics. I think in the days to come, we’re going to learn a lot more about it and we’re not going to like what we learn. For example, you think about some of our most precious freedoms, the First Amendment right to free speech. Think about if you’re a reporter at the Associated Press. Think about if you are a source unrelated to national security to the Associated Press. Think about if you’re really a whistle-blower, someone who is blowing the whistle on government activity because you work in the government and you think what the government is doing is wrong. Think about that for a second. Now all of a sudden, what are you afraid of? ‘I’m not calling that reporter back because their phone might be tapped. My number may show up on their records.’ Because the Justice Department has just shown that they’re willing to do that. Think about the chilling effect that that sends up and down the government. If there is wrongdoing somewhere in the government right now, people are probably afraid to blow the whistle because they’re afraid that they are being surveilled by the Justice Department or that the person they’re talking to is being surveilled. That’s how outrageous this is. Think about people that are thinking about getting involved in the political process, contributing to a group or speaking out, donating to a campaign or a candidate as they are allowed to do under the Constitution. They don’t want to be the next VanderSloot. They don’t want to be the next guy being targeted. They don’t want to be the next person being smeared on a website. This is unacceptable. This is an outrage. And every single member of this body should be outraged by this behavior – this culture of intimidation, these hardball politics tactics. We cannot stand for this. And I hope we will be united in condemning this and ensuring we get to the bottom of this with significant investigations and hearings from the committees in the Senate that have jurisdiction on the matter.”

Rubio and Bibi have the last laugh about Waterbottlegate

The above photo is courtesy of Jack Tinker who posted it on Twitter. US Senator Marco Rubio and Israel’s Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu share a toast and a laugh about Waterbottlegate.

Sen. Marco Rubio’s (R-FL) political action committee, Reclaim America, has capitalized on the publicity following the Florida senator’s water break during his response to the State of the Union. The PAC on Wednesday, February 13th, started selling “Rubio” water bottles. “Send the liberal detractors a message that not only does Marco Rubio inspire you…he hydrates you too,” the PAC said on a web page where the bottles are for sale. Here is a photo of the water bottle, via Marco Rubio’s Twitter feed:

OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE:

SENATOR RUBIO MEETS WITH ISRAELI PRESIDENT PERES AND PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), a member of the Senate’s Select Committee on Intelligence and Foreign Relations Committee, met with Israeli President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem this evening.  Among the topics discussed were the changing political landscape changes in the Middle East, Israel’s relations with its neighbors, peace negotiations with the Palestinians, the Iranian nuclear threat, and further strengthening the U.S.-Israeli strategic relationship.

“There is no more important relationship for the United States, perhaps in the world but certainly in the region, than Israel,” said Rubio. “It’s one that has bipartisan support and I’m proud to say that Republicans and Democrats are united on that. We remain deeply committed, above all else, to Israel’s security. Like every nation, like every sovereign people, the people of Israel have the right to be safe.

“The ties between the United States and Israel are unbreakable,” he added. “Israel represents everything the United States stands for, a vibrant democracy.  I greatly appreciate the hospitality of the Israeli people and for the opportunity to meet with President Peres and Prime Minister Netanyahu.”

The following photos are all attributable to Rubio’s Senate office. Pictures from Rubio’s trip are available in high-resolution on our website, here:

Rubio Tweets “There is only one savior, and it is not me. #Jesus”

Senator Marco Rubio took offense at the Times cover title “The Republican Savior”. In response he tweeted “There is only one savior, and it is not me. #Jesus”.

rubio time magazine cover

The TIME magazine column “Immigrant Son” by Michael Grunwald notes, “But while Rubio is a child of immigrants, he’s also a child of the conservative movement, an ambitious ideologue and former political operative who speaks partisan Republican with the fluency of a native. (Romney, by contrast, spoke it as a second language.) Like Paul Ryan, a potential 2016 rival, he’s part of a new generation of lean and hungry conservatives who grew up in the anti-government Reagan era and entered politics after the scorched-earth Gingrich revolution. Bipartisan compromise is not usually his thing.” To read the entire TIME magazine story click here.

There are questions being raised about the future of America and the role partisan politics plays in creating a country divided. At a recent TEA Party Sarasota meeting one member stated, “the political parties were merely two squads on the same team”. Big government, more regulation and higher taxes have been embraced by both Republicans and Democrats. This has led to crushing debt, unfettered spending and more government control.

Can any one politician actually make a different when the party system works against any change or reform?

We will see if Rubio will remain independent in his actions or will become part of his party’s leadership. Will political power trump his moral compass as he becomes the “new voice” of the Republican party?

Early civilizations were well aware of the danger of pride and power and knew that this could destroy kings and empires if not held in check. And thus a philosophy was developed by the very wise Greco-Roman philosophers (lovers of truth) in order to help their rulers and themselves to be vigilant about their behavior, lest they destroy themselves by pride. And thus when any great general (be it an emperor-to-be, a war general, or any victor of a great battle) was honored by a great manifestation such as a triumphal entry into his city-state, a slave (a lowly of lowlies) would ride in the chariot with him and whisper in his ear that he should remember that “he is not a god, but a mortal human being”.

A lesson that all politicians must learn?

A Florida Citizens Letter To Senator Marco Rubio on Comprehensive Immigration Reform

The following is a letter WDW recieved from a Florida resident. The letter was sent to Senator Marco Rubio:

VIA: senator@Rubio.senate.gov

RE: “Comprehensive” Immigration Reform (Read Amnesty)

Senator Rubio:

Let me say as a Florida resident I vividly remember you blocking 6 immigration bills when you were Speaker of the Florida House in 2008 stating “The House was too busy” to deal with state immigration laws.

I remember you campaigning to be senator opposing amnesty (though you supported the Florida Dream Act early in your state legislative career) as you followed in the footsteps of previous Cuban Senator Martinez who campaigned opposing amnesty and three years later in 2007 led the charge for it. It seems you couldn’t wait three years to change positions back to what you supported during your early state tenure.

That said, let me respond to what I have read regarding your proposed legislation and zero in on Comprehensive which to me means dealing with all related topics to amnesty.

It is a well known fact constantly blared by open border types Hispanics are the fastest growing segment of the population and that is correct having researched all the latest numbers. Their chant is you better deal with the criminal illegal aliens if you want our support. Look at the immigration numbers and they are correct. The tail is now wagging the dog and how did it happen? It happened through the Family Reunification immigration program you heartily support with no limits basically emptying peasant villages in Mexico and Central America and moving them into balkanized barrios around the country. It has also happened through the failure of the U.S. Government Executive Branch performing its duties in protecting our borders and regulating visa holders with no outcry from Congress.

WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE PURPOSE OF IMMIGRATION?

In 1962 then President Kennedy called for a reform of the immigration system. He did not call for an increase in immigration quotas stating we need not increase the level of immigrants allowed because “we have no lands left to settle.” Following his death the Democrat controlled Congress concocted the Family Reunification visa program introducing mass immigration favoring Hispanic countries and why is a good question? Prior to 1965 the large majority of under 250K allowed in the country annually were educated, had a skill and spoke English. Following 1965 legislation the overwhelming majority imported have been a perfect democrat candidate being unskilled, uneducated and non English speaking. When politicians and talk show hosts scratch their heads about the level of poverty in the country and how to lower it they aren’t looking at the primary cause being the importation of an endless stream of poverty. Statistics show 68% of legal MX immigrants with children are in or near poverty. The study by CIS also shows over 50% of Mexican immigrants are still on welfare 20 years after arriving in the country. Other Hispanic immigrants have similar statistics.

You have recently stated you are a BIG BELIEVER in family based immigration. Please explain why since it has shown to simply be the conduit for exporting poverty from banana republics to here?

We never had a mass amnesty in this country until President Reagan in an unwise move granted the first ever amnesty in 1986. From then until 2000 there were 6 more for a grand total of 6 million amnesties granted in 14 years. In 2012 President Obama directed an amnesty by fiat without Constitutional authority affecting more than a million criminal illegal aliens and nary a peep was heard from Congress. Representative Steve King promised on 8/17/2012 to challenge Obama’s amnesty by fiat and in my inquiry a week ago to his office he was still gathering facts. WOW!

As a result of the 7 previous amnesties we now have, based on government numbers I find highly suspect, 12 million waiting in line for amnesty. If that is the number you want to use then promise to cap it at that number.

Attempting the same thing over and over again is a form of insanity. Actually, I believe the Congress is quite content with the millions of unskilled joining the work force ranks keeping wages low for their large corporate donors like Walmart and at the same time providing them ever new customers. As far as illegal immigration goes it satisfies the needs of criminal illegal alien employers wanting cheap labor in a modern day version of slavery.

If Congressional members really cared about American workers do you think they would have allowed 125K new immigrants a month to continue to be imported to worsen the employment picture for 23 million Americans suffering through the worst recession since the great depression? I never heard a word from one Congressman or woman to at least suggest a pause of the onslaught of the endless stream of immigrants month after month. Not one word was ever even uttered and that silence is a damn loud message to American workers and all citizens.

Senator Rubio, these are tasks that need to be accomplished long before the amnesty discussion even begins for criminal illegal aliens. You said in an interview you wanted to solve their problem. Sir, who cares about solving their problem since they brought it upon themselves. The most important thing is how it will affect the citizens of this country. They are the ones who self inflicted their pain and it could end quickly by returning to their home country instead of demanding a path to citizenship.

End the nonsensical family reunification visa program that has simply uprooted tens of millions of peasants who couldn’t even spell the United States of America in English before arriving and come simply to start sucking on the government teat that is nearly dry.

Secure the borders. President Obama and Sec. Napolitano say the border has never been more secure. I suppose then the signs posted 70 miles north of the border warning travelers to beware of illegal aliens were previously 100 miles north of the border. The Border Patrol recently issued a statement they only intercept 61% of illegals attempting to enter the country and who knows how little as a percentage of the drugs entering illegally.

Senator, when you talk about securing the border I hope you mean the same way we protect the Korean border at the 39th parallel. We have been there for 60 years and rarely if ever is the border breached by anyone. If that is the case then great. However, what you promise has to be executed by the Executive Branch and President Obama has no appetite for securing the border. In fact, neither has Congress since it was promised over 25 years ago. We protect a foreign countries borders half way around but not our own and the citizens deserve to know the reason why.

Get the Visit USA program to work so visa over stayers can be located and deported. Over 40%, or perhaps more of the criminal illegal alien population has supposedly come legally and just melted into a city to live and work. With over 100 Million visitors to the United States annually the 40% number of total criminal illegal aliens appears awfully low.

Make it a felony to enter the country illegally or overstay a visa. This is a common sense measure since we currently treat the crime like jaywalking. Get permission to house the lawbreakers in Guantanamo to end their appetite for breaking our laws.

Make E-Verify mandatory for all employers and direct the SS administration to check the user is who they say they are. You achieve that by having the SS office issue a new tamper proof card with picture to all prospective employment seekers to eliminate document fraud (HR98). Regarding Mandatory E-Verify in a poll conducted by Pulse Opinion Research 89% of Whites, 81% of Blacks and 76% of Hispanics and Asian-Americans were in favor of it.

Pass and enforce Childbirth legislation that would remove a magnet to come here now granting citizenship to babies born in the USA to foreign parents by amending the Immigration and Naturalization Act (HR140) requiring at least one parent be a citizen ending the anchor baby link to the welfare system. Over 200K births like this are performed annually with taxpayers footing the majority of the bill. There is a cottage industry for birth tourism for wealthy foreign women making a mockery of our citizenship requirements. Coincidentally you would not have been a citizen either if the law is changed since when you were born your parents were not citizens of the United States but still of Cuba.

Repeal the antiquated Cuban Adjustment Act which is a knee jerk cold war relic reaction meant to damage Castro’s Cuba after the Bay of Pigs fiasco and grants any Cuban who arrives in the USA anywhere preferred treatment and a path to citizenship. This is especially important since Cuba is now granting travel Visas to their citizens. The last thing we need is an aerial version of the Mariel boat lift that forever changed Miami into what is now the fifth most impoverished City in the USA and where English is the second language.

End the corrupt Diversity Visa lottery Program that brings in people to the USA from supposedly countries that need greater representation under the guise of diversity. Senator Rubio, name a more diverse country than the United States of America; You can’t.

End the Temporary Protected Status program that is permanently temporary. Case in point are the over 200K EL Salvadorans brought here after an earthquake in their country and undoubtedly sucking on the welfare teat since. They are only here temporarily 10 years later wink wink.

Dramatically reduce the corrupt refugee program and remove the UN’s participation in determining who comes and make the US groups profiting from the refugee business get the approval from the locales where they want to dump the refugees before doing so. I understand every refugee entering costs the U.S. government $20K for shipping and handling.

End the work visa program which Milton Friedman correctly identified as corporate welfare. Work visas that allow maids and lawn mower operators into the country as specialty occupations illustrates the lengths companies will go to avoid paying U.S. workers and the fica. If the US is not graduating candidates to fill America’s needs whose fault is it since we are the third most populated country in the world and had, I emphasize had, a great education system when I attended and undoubtedly has been ruined since by the teacher unions and Federal interference.

Commission a study to determine the impact of the 12 million criminal illegal aliens will have on our welfare system, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, environment and the impact on American workers.

Commission a independent study to determine the optimum population the United States can comfortably sustain. When talking about immigration I have never heard a politician mention what our optimum population should be regarding Natural Resources and avoiding similar terrible human conditions suffered today in India, Bangladesh and China. Publish all the findings.

Senator Rubio, do those tasks necessary to get a clear picture of what you propose to do and its impact on American Society so the facts speak for themselves as to whether it is in the national Interest of the citizens of the United States of America to support or reject amnesty for the criminal illegal aliens.

I am also sending along a speech given by Democrat Ex. Governor Richard D. Lamb several years ago titled “I Have a Plan to destroy America and many parts of it are underway.” Read it and see if you can relate it to what is happening in the country today from a speech written 10 years ago.

George Fuller

Sarasota, Florida