Are Americans capable of understanding their plight? It has been said that most can neither do simple math nor comprehend what they read. That may explain why they do not see what is happening to their country, or why they do not seem to care. Yet, those with these basic skills also appear gullible to the propaganda they are continually fed. Is the answer, that the message is so desirable that they cannot resist accepting?
Now, who could resist such ideas as "more is better," "we are creating jobs," "diversity is beautible," "globalization is inevitable and we must adjust to compete," "cheap labor will reduce prices," "growth increases economic wealth," "we need growth to save our social security system," and "free-trade will boost the economy." They do sound inviting, desirable, and difficult to resist, because they so plausible. Yet, these ideas are causing our nation to disintegrate.
The drum beaters proclaim that globalization is the answer. If we expand to foreign markets, our economy will grow through the melding of our economy with the global economy by free trade, capital mobility, and uncontrolled migration. The result is an erasure of our national
boundary for economic purposes. The shifts in trade patterns have resulted in the loss of millions of jobs, contributed to declining real income and making the U.S. the largest debtor
nation. We have lost U.S. captial and U.S. labor cooperating to produce U.S. goods to compete against other nations. The result means that without employing U.S. labor these global capitalists will be unable to sell their products, because of loss in our purchasing power. Can we say the benefits outweigh the negatives?
If more is better, how can we ever resist having even more? With only 4.8% of the world's population we consume 25% of the oil, and 30% of world materials. We import more than $700
billion more than we export. We borrow $3 billion per day to fuel our greed. We are fast approaching the time when we will be unable to pay our debt, which now cost us $400 million daily to just pay the interest on the $9.2 trillion. We are told growth will get us out of debt.
If only we could grow faster, our problems would disappear.
The economist would have you believe that the foundation of our economy is growth. We grow our population with legal immigrants and illegal aliens as a means of maintaining our consumption-based economy.
Consider, the following and then ask yourself is this what you want for your children, grandchildren, or should we get really serious about controlling both legal and illegal immigration. Between 1990 through 2000 we added 32.7 million people; an increase of 13.1 percent. If we continue on this path our population in 2020, 2040, 2060, 2080 and 2100 will be 360, 460, 589, 753 and 964 million, respectively.
Agronomists and ecologists have a different view of population growth. Piemental and Giampietro (1994) indicated the U.S. has about 400 million fertile acres, and estinates are that
one acre of land is lost to urbanization and highway construction for every person added to the
population. They estimate that by 2025 we will be forced to cease exporting food in order to
provide for the increase in our own population or continue to borrow in order to buy it from other countries. We are already on the verge of bankruptcy because of the expanding population. Can we continue to pave over our nation? At what point do we exceed the carrying capacity of our arable land? How much genetically inspired food do you want to ingest?
Someone is suggesting that we taxpayers subsidize farmers to delay them from selling their land. When Joe Farmer sees the sign on his neighbor's land that says "200 acres for sale, $40,000 per acre," you can bet he is calculating. "Now, that's a cool $8,000,000 today, and I am 65, and..." Obviously, the state doesn't have enough money to compete. So, if you want to preserve farmland you had better seriously re-think the growth model.
Besides why are we allowing the destruction of this nation? Can we not see the damage being
done by the greed of some individuals and international corporations, at the expense of our environment, our economy, our quality of life? Why should economic growth be more important
than the happiness of the citizens? I do not need another exotic restaurant to be content! How
long will it be before our debt outstrips our ability to pay even the interest on the debt???
What then will happen to growth???
Unhappy Americans in Idaho
Another Blog Site: www.allaboutimmigration.blogspot.com
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Friday, March 28, 2008
IDAHO: A Guest Opinion on Growth
An important topic is growth, including population growth that fuels the economic monster. Our Treasure Valley is not immune to growth, and as you well know we are suffering under the weight of our expansion. The legislature is having an increasingly difficult time getting the necessary funds to pay for all the things necessary to continue growing. Doesn't anyone have a better idea than adding more people?
Progress comes at a price for those caught in the maelstrom of growth.
Brainwashed Americans believe growth is necessary for the assumed benefit of higher incomes and the distribution of taxes over a larger base. This philosophy has accelerated the destruction of our God given heritage---the land.
We have lost 50 percent of the original wetlands, 90 percent of old growth forests, 99 percent of our prairies, and currently losing topsoil at a rate 20 times the rate that it can be replaced.
Obviously, our leaders are "stuck on stupid” if they believe that growth can be managed, regulated, or controlled while still promoting population growth.
How well are we managing growth? It should be evident that on a national level we are not doing so well. In less than 50 years we have increased our population from 150 million in 1960 to more than 300 million today. Eighty percent is due to immigration (both legal and illegal). In 1960 our debt was 310 billion; today it is approaching 10 trillion and does not include the 50 trillion in IOU's to social security and medicare. Millions of jobs have been outsourced. Much of our manufacturing has moved to countries with cheaper labor, because our government has instituted unfair trade deals. One must conclude there is a strong correlation, and no doubt a causal relation, between population and debt.
Taxpayers, not businesses, feel the pain when we add more lanes to I-84, add emission testing, build larger jails, provide drug treatment facilities, build another 100 subdivisions, and add luxury seating for those that can afford the view. All the while government encourages large corporations, along with their need for more cheap workers to come to Idaho, and do so tax-free? In this whirlwind we are continually in a state of catch up. There is never enough money to fund the needs that growth demands. In a panic our legislators use their only weapon; impose more taxes. And, who pays?
The Idaho Department of Labor, August 2007, says our personal income rose 9.9 percent in the Boise Metro area from 2005. The Statesman, in October 2007, said Idaho's cost of living outpaces wages. Eighty-seven percent of open jobs pay less than a living wage. An Idaho Community Action Network study said a single adult with two kids needs to earn $23.44 per hour to cover necessities. Not even the average Micron worker earned that much. Who pays such wages when illegal aliens work at near minimum wages and legitimize that scale?
Does it ever occur to our smart growth managers that adding more people to the mix increases the amounts of governmental services, increases the need for more infrastructures, while simultaneously increasing demands from our limited resources? Do they really care? Business and professional groups having a common economic interest in promoting growth, only fund the election of candidates that are willing to support their view. Once elected the officials reward their benefactors with incentives and subsidies that stimulate further growth regardless of the impacts on the citizenry. Remember, all growth has it’s limits!
Unhappy Americans from Idaho
Additional Blog Site: www.allaboutimmigration.blogspot.com
Progress comes at a price for those caught in the maelstrom of growth.
Brainwashed Americans believe growth is necessary for the assumed benefit of higher incomes and the distribution of taxes over a larger base. This philosophy has accelerated the destruction of our God given heritage---the land.
We have lost 50 percent of the original wetlands, 90 percent of old growth forests, 99 percent of our prairies, and currently losing topsoil at a rate 20 times the rate that it can be replaced.
Obviously, our leaders are "stuck on stupid” if they believe that growth can be managed, regulated, or controlled while still promoting population growth.
How well are we managing growth? It should be evident that on a national level we are not doing so well. In less than 50 years we have increased our population from 150 million in 1960 to more than 300 million today. Eighty percent is due to immigration (both legal and illegal). In 1960 our debt was 310 billion; today it is approaching 10 trillion and does not include the 50 trillion in IOU's to social security and medicare. Millions of jobs have been outsourced. Much of our manufacturing has moved to countries with cheaper labor, because our government has instituted unfair trade deals. One must conclude there is a strong correlation, and no doubt a causal relation, between population and debt.
Taxpayers, not businesses, feel the pain when we add more lanes to I-84, add emission testing, build larger jails, provide drug treatment facilities, build another 100 subdivisions, and add luxury seating for those that can afford the view. All the while government encourages large corporations, along with their need for more cheap workers to come to Idaho, and do so tax-free? In this whirlwind we are continually in a state of catch up. There is never enough money to fund the needs that growth demands. In a panic our legislators use their only weapon; impose more taxes. And, who pays?
The Idaho Department of Labor, August 2007, says our personal income rose 9.9 percent in the Boise Metro area from 2005. The Statesman, in October 2007, said Idaho's cost of living outpaces wages. Eighty-seven percent of open jobs pay less than a living wage. An Idaho Community Action Network study said a single adult with two kids needs to earn $23.44 per hour to cover necessities. Not even the average Micron worker earned that much. Who pays such wages when illegal aliens work at near minimum wages and legitimize that scale?
Does it ever occur to our smart growth managers that adding more people to the mix increases the amounts of governmental services, increases the need for more infrastructures, while simultaneously increasing demands from our limited resources? Do they really care? Business and professional groups having a common economic interest in promoting growth, only fund the election of candidates that are willing to support their view. Once elected the officials reward their benefactors with incentives and subsidies that stimulate further growth regardless of the impacts on the citizenry. Remember, all growth has it’s limits!
Unhappy Americans from Idaho
Additional Blog Site: www.allaboutimmigration.blogspot.com
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Judge stops deportation proceedings against Danbury family because of anchor babies
A federal judge ruled in favor of the defendant and has stopped deportation proceedings against a Danbury family. The judge said that deporting Tereza Pereira and Carlos Lima would result in an exceptional hardship on their two American-born sons, one of which is an honor student at Danbury High School.
Comments:
Without reading the decision, this is a travesty of justice. The two parents are here illegally, those that employ them are violating the law and those that rent to them are violating the law.
All subject to fines and imprisonment.The "anchor baby" children are not American citizens simply because of birth in the United States because they are sons of people who are not citizens.
In the same sense, that a son or daughter of a foreign diplomat born in the United States, is not a citizens.
The rationale that their deportation would cause undue hardship to the anchor babies is a judge making up the law. Nowhere in the immigration law is anything like that remotely proposed. By the same line of argument, one could argue that parents who robbed a bank should not have to give up the money because it would be an undue hardship on their children.
I think this will be a very important case, and should be argued to the Supreme Court. It has ramifications far beyond Danbury and impacts millions of anchor babies born in the United States. I am not so sure why they will immediately get any green card, but note if the millions of anchor baby children are deemed citizens, then under family unification, a one-year old can apply for entry of its parents. In fact, a de facto amnesty.
The impact of illegal immigration, while having these touching personal stories, is an unmitigated disaster for American citizens. Ecologically it means going from a population of 300 million (far too high) to 450 million in about fifty million years. Economically, it will impact the poorest Americans and send states like California into bankruptcy. Politically, it will mean that Los Angeles will probably declare itself independent from the U.S.(as Kosovo), Reconquista will be accomplished and California, AZ, NM and TX will become part of Texas.
Those who are championing this open borders decision better be prepared to know what they are heading toward, if decisions like this are finally the law of the land.
On 7/7/06, Mexican American professor Armando Navarro, who has organized many pro-illegal alien rallies, was quoted in the Los Angeles Times as saying, "A new majority is forming. Everything will change. The White House will be within our reach. We might have to change the name to the Brown House."
(thanks to Chuck Hammer for putting out the alert)
Unhappy American
Comments:
Without reading the decision, this is a travesty of justice. The two parents are here illegally, those that employ them are violating the law and those that rent to them are violating the law.
All subject to fines and imprisonment.The "anchor baby" children are not American citizens simply because of birth in the United States because they are sons of people who are not citizens.
In the same sense, that a son or daughter of a foreign diplomat born in the United States, is not a citizens.
The rationale that their deportation would cause undue hardship to the anchor babies is a judge making up the law. Nowhere in the immigration law is anything like that remotely proposed. By the same line of argument, one could argue that parents who robbed a bank should not have to give up the money because it would be an undue hardship on their children.
I think this will be a very important case, and should be argued to the Supreme Court. It has ramifications far beyond Danbury and impacts millions of anchor babies born in the United States. I am not so sure why they will immediately get any green card, but note if the millions of anchor baby children are deemed citizens, then under family unification, a one-year old can apply for entry of its parents. In fact, a de facto amnesty.
The impact of illegal immigration, while having these touching personal stories, is an unmitigated disaster for American citizens. Ecologically it means going from a population of 300 million (far too high) to 450 million in about fifty million years. Economically, it will impact the poorest Americans and send states like California into bankruptcy. Politically, it will mean that Los Angeles will probably declare itself independent from the U.S.(as Kosovo), Reconquista will be accomplished and California, AZ, NM and TX will become part of Texas.
Those who are championing this open borders decision better be prepared to know what they are heading toward, if decisions like this are finally the law of the land.
On 7/7/06, Mexican American professor Armando Navarro, who has organized many pro-illegal alien rallies, was quoted in the Los Angeles Times as saying, "A new majority is forming. Everything will change. The White House will be within our reach. We might have to change the name to the Brown House."
(thanks to Chuck Hammer for putting out the alert)
Unhappy American
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
THE BIBLE WARNS US OF BARACK OBAMA
The Bible has warned us that 'A man will come from the East that will be charismatic in nature and have proposed solutions for all our problems and his rhetoric will attract many supporters!
'When will our pathetic Nation quit turning their back on God and understand that this man is 'A Muslim'....First, Last and always....and we are AT WAR with the Muslim Nation, whether our bleeding-heart, secular, Liberal friends believe it or not. This man fits every description from the Bible of the 'Anti-Christ'!
I'm just glad to know that there are others that are frightened by this man! Who is Barack Obama?
Very interesting and something that should be considered in your choice. If you do not ever forward anything else, please forward this to all your contacts...this is very scary to think of what lies ahead of us here in our own United States...better heed this and pray about it and share it.
Snopes. com ..' confirms this is factual. Check for yourself.
WHO IS BARACK?
Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHEIST from Wichita , Kansas.
Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii.
When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, 'He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school.
'Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that that he is not a radical.
Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.
Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta.
Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world.
Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. Do we know that to be true?
Barack Hussein Obama, will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama might turn his back to the flag, who knows?
Do you want someone like this as your PRESIDENT?
Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy.
The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!
Please forward to everyone you know.
Would you want this man leading our country?...... NOT ME!
Unhappy American
'When will our pathetic Nation quit turning their back on God and understand that this man is 'A Muslim'....First, Last and always....and we are AT WAR with the Muslim Nation, whether our bleeding-heart, secular, Liberal friends believe it or not. This man fits every description from the Bible of the 'Anti-Christ'!
I'm just glad to know that there are others that are frightened by this man! Who is Barack Obama?
Very interesting and something that should be considered in your choice. If you do not ever forward anything else, please forward this to all your contacts...this is very scary to think of what lies ahead of us here in our own United States...better heed this and pray about it and share it.
Snopes. com ..' confirms this is factual. Check for yourself.
WHO IS BARACK?
Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHEIST from Wichita , Kansas.
Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii.
When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, 'He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school.
'Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that that he is not a radical.
Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.
Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta.
Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world.
Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. Do we know that to be true?
Barack Hussein Obama, will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama might turn his back to the flag, who knows?
Do you want someone like this as your PRESIDENT?
Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy.
The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!
Please forward to everyone you know.
Would you want this man leading our country?...... NOT ME!
Unhappy American
Monday, March 24, 2008
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: (Published) Idaho Press-Tribune, October 2, 2006
The Meaning of Illegal and Amnesty…..Let’s Stop the Word Games, please…..
Entering the Unites States, other then by legal means, is a violation of U.S. law and is therefore, “illegal.”
Any foreign citizen that has entered the United States, other then by legal means, is in violation of U.S. law and illegally residing in the United States and is therefore subject to arrest and deportation for violating U. S. law.
Any plan that will allow people in the Unites States “illegally” stay in the United States legally, without being subject to arrest and deportation, is therefore an, “Amnesty.“
The McCain (Reid)/Kennedy plan, which allowed people in the United States “illegally” to stay in the United States legally, without being subject to arrest and deportation is an, “Amnesty“ and therefore, those supporting McCain's plan; granting “Amnesty” to people in the United States illegally, regardless of how they try to disguise the plan, it is still an “Amnesty“ plan.
Any plan that not only provides an “Amnesty” for those in the United States “illegally” but also allows a path to U.S. citizenship is not only an “Amnesty” for violating America law, but a reward for violating American law, which makes having that law useless.
A nation without a border is not a nation, therefore, any plan that allows a path to U.S. citizenship is not in the nations best interest and may cause the loss of U.S. sovereignty over it's own territorial borders, which will eliminate the United States of America as a sovereign nation of the world, which would therefore make advocating such a plan not only stupid, but close to being treasonous. Get it?
You're a traitor and a criminal if you aid and abet an “illegal alien” even if you change the language to "Undocumented Immigrant". It's a nice criminal try though.....
Unhappy American
Additional Immigration Information: http://www.allaboutimmigration.blogspot.com/
Entering the Unites States, other then by legal means, is a violation of U.S. law and is therefore, “illegal.”
Any foreign citizen that has entered the United States, other then by legal means, is in violation of U.S. law and illegally residing in the United States and is therefore subject to arrest and deportation for violating U. S. law.
Any plan that will allow people in the Unites States “illegally” stay in the United States legally, without being subject to arrest and deportation, is therefore an, “Amnesty.“
The McCain (Reid)/Kennedy plan, which allowed people in the United States “illegally” to stay in the United States legally, without being subject to arrest and deportation is an, “Amnesty“ and therefore, those supporting McCain's plan; granting “Amnesty” to people in the United States illegally, regardless of how they try to disguise the plan, it is still an “Amnesty“ plan.
Any plan that not only provides an “Amnesty” for those in the United States “illegally” but also allows a path to U.S. citizenship is not only an “Amnesty” for violating America law, but a reward for violating American law, which makes having that law useless.
A nation without a border is not a nation, therefore, any plan that allows a path to U.S. citizenship is not in the nations best interest and may cause the loss of U.S. sovereignty over it's own territorial borders, which will eliminate the United States of America as a sovereign nation of the world, which would therefore make advocating such a plan not only stupid, but close to being treasonous. Get it?
You're a traitor and a criminal if you aid and abet an “illegal alien” even if you change the language to "Undocumented Immigrant". It's a nice criminal try though.....
Unhappy American
Additional Immigration Information: http://www.allaboutimmigration.blogspot.com/
WHO CARES? WHO CARES? WHO CARES?
It is not difficult to understand why the President and Congress want amnesty for 30 million illegal aliens, allow another 60 million of their relatives to come, and permit the other 40 million in Mexico to come in when the North American Open Borders policy takes effect by 2010?
But, what gives the President and the other misfits the right to destroy this country without our consent? Wouldn't you at least feel better if they asked for our permission? One gets the opinion that the people have given these clowns rights that are not expressly apart of our U.S. Constitution...you know that g-- d--- piece of paper that Bush refers to.
If not, why are we being so pathetically meek in our response to their egregious attacks on our freedoms under some guise of "War on Terror?" Is that not an act of terror to allow open borders? Help me to understand why watching football, curled up with a mountain of chips drooling with salsa, is more important than saving one's country? Doesn't it occur to "Joe Sixpack, or his fellow compadres," that if they want to enjoy their 3-4 hours of bliss they better start paying attention to what the government and the secret police are up to? He and his pals may have to work those hours in a sweat shop to pay for the chips and salsa, but not have the time nor resources to watch or afford the state controlled TV sets.
Do you comprehend what American's want from their country? I am having difficulty.
Additional Information: www.allaboutimmigration.blogspot.com
UnhappyAmerican
Jack M. Moutrie
But, what gives the President and the other misfits the right to destroy this country without our consent? Wouldn't you at least feel better if they asked for our permission? One gets the opinion that the people have given these clowns rights that are not expressly apart of our U.S. Constitution...you know that g-- d--- piece of paper that Bush refers to.
If not, why are we being so pathetically meek in our response to their egregious attacks on our freedoms under some guise of "War on Terror?" Is that not an act of terror to allow open borders? Help me to understand why watching football, curled up with a mountain of chips drooling with salsa, is more important than saving one's country? Doesn't it occur to "Joe Sixpack, or his fellow compadres," that if they want to enjoy their 3-4 hours of bliss they better start paying attention to what the government and the secret police are up to? He and his pals may have to work those hours in a sweat shop to pay for the chips and salsa, but not have the time nor resources to watch or afford the state controlled TV sets.
Do you comprehend what American's want from their country? I am having difficulty.
Additional Information: www.allaboutimmigration.blogspot.com
UnhappyAmerican
Jack M. Moutrie
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Senator Barack Obama's Illegal Alien position?
In response to the recent appearance of Sen. Barack Obama at Taco Bell Arena in Boise Idaho,
I sent a letter to Keith Roark, State Chairman of the Idaho Democratic Party requesting the following information:
I might add the letter was published in the Idaho Press-Tribune, March 23, 2008.
State Chairman: Keith Roark
It is of great interest to me that 14,000 people would fill Taco Bell Arena to encourage the promotion of a most Liberal Presidential Candidate.
Candidate Obama’s agenda promotes immediate pathway to citizenship for all illegal aliens, while, at the same time, providing legal drivers’ license for all foreign nationals.
There are some of us in Idaho who are concerned his one word mantra of “change” is nothing more than advancing socialism in the United States..
All the above actions would make more illegal and legal persons dependent on the federal government at the expense of businesses and taxpayers.
Is the Democratic Party of Idaho in full support of Sen. Obama’s positions? Does the Party condone ignoring our immigration laws? Is it no concern of the Party that rewarding individuals who have compromised the sovereignty of this nation by entering this country illegally only serves as a magnet to attract additional unlawful entry? Will America be benefited by the forthcoming additional illegal entry of uneducated, unskilled foreign nationals?
As a concerned (Independent) American, I have concerns about the agendas of all the present presidential candidates. It particularly concerns me that people can be so easily fascinated with the charisma of a candidate such as Sen. Obama and, possibly?, be ignorant of his agenda.
I feel this will be a crucial election for this nation. I think we should all make ourselves aware of the positions of the presidential candidates. Thus, I am contacting you for clarification of the Idaho Democratic Party’s positions.
I await your response,
Jack M. Moutrie
One Unhappy American
I sent a letter to Keith Roark, State Chairman of the Idaho Democratic Party requesting the following information:
I might add the letter was published in the Idaho Press-Tribune, March 23, 2008.
State Chairman: Keith Roark
It is of great interest to me that 14,000 people would fill Taco Bell Arena to encourage the promotion of a most Liberal Presidential Candidate.
Candidate Obama’s agenda promotes immediate pathway to citizenship for all illegal aliens, while, at the same time, providing legal drivers’ license for all foreign nationals.
There are some of us in Idaho who are concerned his one word mantra of “change” is nothing more than advancing socialism in the United States..
All the above actions would make more illegal and legal persons dependent on the federal government at the expense of businesses and taxpayers.
Is the Democratic Party of Idaho in full support of Sen. Obama’s positions? Does the Party condone ignoring our immigration laws? Is it no concern of the Party that rewarding individuals who have compromised the sovereignty of this nation by entering this country illegally only serves as a magnet to attract additional unlawful entry? Will America be benefited by the forthcoming additional illegal entry of uneducated, unskilled foreign nationals?
As a concerned (Independent) American, I have concerns about the agendas of all the present presidential candidates. It particularly concerns me that people can be so easily fascinated with the charisma of a candidate such as Sen. Obama and, possibly?, be ignorant of his agenda.
I feel this will be a crucial election for this nation. I think we should all make ourselves aware of the positions of the presidential candidates. Thus, I am contacting you for clarification of the Idaho Democratic Party’s positions.
I await your response,
Jack M. Moutrie
One Unhappy American
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
