Citizen Lobbyist

The article I posted Thursday, Bill to improve health care…in Mexico!, was favorited at digg.com (thank you all who dugg it). An appearance on digg.com means many more readers, and that’s good. Voters really should have as many alternative news sources and hear as many differing opinions as possible.

Unfortunately, among the hundreds of comments the article generated, some charged that the article was inaccurate. They buried it, and now there is a big red

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

above the title.

[Read more →]

The health care mess in the United States is a top concern of voters. Too many Americans find that, despite their best efforts, they are unable to provide quality health care for their families. Too many Americans live in fear that an illness might leave them destitute. Too many Americans spend years sacrificing to pay skyrocketing premiums only to discover that, when the need arises, their policies offer protections that are next to worthless.

Most of us agree that it’s simply not right that so many Americans, sincerely trying their best to provide for their families, are at the mercy of a phalanx of greedy insurance companies, medical malpractice lawyers, health care corporations, and other profiteers that have used decades of influence in Washington to institutionalize their chomp hold on the public jugular.

What would Americans think, then, of a member of Congress who introduced legislation, not to improve health care in the United States, but to improve health care in Mexico?

Insane? Drunk? Unworthy of public office?

What would Americans think, then, of a bill introduced in Congress that required federal agencies to come up with a plan, not to expand health coverage in the United States, but to expand health coverage in Mexico?

Impossible? Unthinkable? Wildly irresponsible?

What would Americans think, then, of the motives of a senator, who not only introduced a bill to improve Mexico’s health care system and extend coverage to a growing population of 120 million people, but gave health insurance companies the right to help devise the plan?

Blatantly corrupt? Grossly indifferent to the well-being of the American people? Downright treasonous?

[Read more →]

Well, I was rooting for Ron Paul for president, then I saw that Robert DeNiro was backing Barack Obama. Obama makes the movie star “believe.” So, naturally, I switched my allegiance immediately. I want a president who makes movie stars “believe.”

John McCain and Barack Obama sponsored S.1033. Do not forget what this piece of legislation would have done.

[Read more →]

By an amazing coincidence, John McCain makes the same argument immigration lawyers make in denying the bills he supports are amnesties. You can see for yourself by reading a copy of the talking points, essentially one falsehood repeated in various forms, circulated on Capitol Hill by the American Immigration Lawyers Assn (AILA).No one is surprised that AILA traffics in deceit. One would expect deceit from an organization of immigration lawyers. This is a group of people, after all, whose stock in trade is the desirability of the United States as a place to live. They enrich themselves selling off a desirability they had no hand in creating, degrading that desirability in the process, while using their profits to pervert the legislative process in Washington so that US immigration policy enriches them even more.

[Read more →]

In early 2005, ProjectUSA sponsored a contest in which people who contributed to the cost of it, could vote for whichever slogan they preferred on a billboard that would target a member of Congress who supported amnesty.

John McCain “won” in a rout, drawing donations from Maine to San Diego.

A billboard in Phoenix was contracted for with Viacom Outdoor, a division of the global media giant, Viacom, Inc. It would read, “John McCain supports amnesty for illegal aliens,” with a reference to a particularly horrific AILA-authored perennial threat, the AgJOBS amnesty.

[Read more →]

In May, 2006, Senators John McCain and Ted Kennedy were striving to pass a complex piece of legislation through the Senate. It wasn’t going very well. Opponents of the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act wouldn’t stop calling the bill an amnesty.

When it comes to infuriating the citizenry, nothing works so well as a proposal to reward millions of foreign nationals illegally present in the United States with the gift of citizenship. [Read more →]

Rudy Giuliani, repeat after me: amnesty is relieving a class of lawbreakers [amnesty is relieving a class of lawbreakers] of the penalty required by law [of the penalty required by law] at the time they broke the law [at the time they broke the law].

For foreign nationals now illegally in the country, the minimum penalty required for their violations of US immigration law is, reasonably enough, repatriation. They must go home. They must go home for a period of at least three to ten years. Then, and only then, will they truly be going to the back of the line and not receiving an amnesty.

Quizzed about his position on illegal immigration on Fox News, Rudy Giuliani said millions of illegal aliens who have not committed a crime in the United States would not have to leave the country before becoming citizens. [Read more →]

For those who may share my fascination with the awfulness of the Washington Post’s immigration coverage, you won’t want to miss this corker by the policy geniuses on the Post’s editorial board.

CHECK OUT the asparagus you have for dinner, the cucumber in your salad and the pear on your plate for dessert. Chances are none would be there if not for the undocumented farmworkers who plant and pick most of the fruit and vegetables grown in this country.

[Read more →]