Total BS: "These young people should not be punished for their parents’ mistakes."

This week we had President Obama act to give illegal aliens amnesty and work permits. Their excuse is that they want to concentrate on deporting violent criminals. My first problem is that The Government is not following through in it's obligation to enforce the law. My second problem with this is that they even intend to permit criminals to stay, as long as they are not 'violent'. And given the way that these people lie, I am afraid to find out what their definition of 'violent' is. We already know that they like keeping illegal aliens who drive drunk around, at least until they kill someone. And where do they think these violent criminals come from? They are criminals first, and before they were criminals, they were merely an illegal alien.

My next problem is the propaganda being spouted in support of this action. Take Senator Durbin's comment:

The decision would, through administrative action, help many intended beneficiaries of legislation that has been stalled in Congress for a decade. The sponsor of the legislation, Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, has argued that “these young people should not be punished for their parents’ mistakes.” - NY Times

I can buy that the children are not the guilty ones. But Senator Durbin, and his Democrat buddies have no intention of punishing the parents of these children either. Hell, he simply calls the actions of the parents to come here illegally 'mistakes'. No, a more accurate statement would be that 'these young people should not be punished for their parents’ crimes.' Their intention is to simply reward all of them, even the criminals, other than a couple token violent criminals which they will use as evidence of being tough on crime. That too is a joke, as we should be putting them in jail, instead of sending them back home to cause havoc there.

The real joke in all of this is that President Obama's actions are going to hurt his supporters the most. It is reported that not only will many illegal aliens be permitted to stay, but they will also be given work permits to compete for jobs against millions of Americans already out of work. The NY times story mentions that there are about 300,000 currently facing deportation proceedings that will be effected, but I suspect that that list will grow once illegal aliens figure out the best way to get in line to see a judge, to be excused from deportation and handed a work permit for a gift. After all, when you reward something, you get more of it. As it is, I have at least two friends overseas looking at ways to get a visa to live here. Clearly, they don't need one.

And remember, this action is all a blatant attempt to buy votes for the next election.

-------------------- --------------------

Social Welfare is OK, if it results in Lessening the Number of Those in Need

I think many conservatives would have less of a problem with social Welfare if these programs reduced the number of people in need of support.

That said, why is it that it seems that there is a constant growth in the number of people that these programs support? Nobody ever gets off these programs and those receiving support appear to breed more people destinehttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifd to require/receive support. I would say that the mere fact that half of all Americans pay no taxes is evidence of this.

The UK has an even more substantial benefits system and appears that the problems that result are even greater as the riots demonstrate. Take the story of this one benefit recipient's mother:

She is on benefits, does not live with the boy's father and has 10 other children, the court heard. - Mother of 13-year-old who smashed up shop blames government - The Telegraph, UK

AND

But the woman also suggested her son was not entirely at fault, when asked who she blamed for the looting.

''The government,'' she replied, her son by her side, adding: ''There is f*** all for them to do.'' - The Telegraph, UK

Her 13 year old son caused well over $20,000 in damage during the riot and all the mother can do is blame the Government for not finding something more productive for her 11 children to do. This is madness. Let the father(s) of the eleven children support them. People already have to support their own families, why do they have to chip in and support her's as well?

Also, I always found it strange that the UK is supporting this huge families, where the parents have not worked in years, in houses in expensive areas. Why not just ship them out of the cities and house them more cheaply in the countryside?

This brings up another pet peeve of mine. If I am being forced to support others, why can't I get a say in how they are using this support? For all this talk of 'shared sacrifice', it always seems that the tax-payers are always being asked to sacrifice more, but others on the receiving end are not asked to sacrifice at all. Not exactly fair, is it.

So, social welfare programs that over time reduce the number of those in need = Good

Social welfare programs that we (and the UK) currently have = Bad

All we are doing is growing the ranks of the poor. This support needs to come with an expiration date for those who are of working age.

--------------------

--------------------

Liberals Fleeing (and Spreading) Broken Liberal Agenda

The following comments posted on Instapundit struck a cord with me:

"The ideas and beliefs that have decimated California, are in fact, shared by huge swathes of the populace. In spite of their suffering in the world they helped create, when many of these business owners and workers move to other places they bring their dumb ideas with them. Trust me, they may be economic refugees, but they will be the first to start kvetching about the refineries down the road." - Instapundit Commenter

And this:

"Just read your postings about the attitudes that California refugees bring with them. You might note that the same problem has happened in New England. New Hampshire used to be a pretty conservative place – no state income tax, ‘live free or die’ on the license plates, etc. A flood of refugees from Taxachusetts over the past 20 years has changed that. And just as you described, the newcomers seem to have no clue that the policies they support are the very same ones that ruined the state they fled.” - Instapundit commenter

I have had similar thoughts for a while, but didn't really connect the California refugees to it. I had been thinking this about the legal and illegal aliens coming to America from both around the world, Mexico and central and South America. Many of these migrants are fleeing bad conditions in their home country. And still, they want to bring all these bad habits and practices with them. And oddly enough, they find an ally in the Liberals of this country who are also fleeing the utopias they have demanded be created here. Each group looking to the other to support their goals of legal permanent residency and redistribution of wealth through socialist programs.

The trick is stopping this spread of bad ideas. For starters, one can ask these refugees if their beliefs were so great, why is it that they left a place where they already had such benefits?

Update: An example of pushing their agenda on the rest of us, take the push for acceptance of Spanish in the US as a default second language. Americans are being shamed for not knowing Spanish as a second language and Spanish is showing up on all sorts of products. But the shame of knowing only one language only applies to Americans. There is no push for those coming to America to learn English, even though they too only know one language. Only we are being pushed to better accommodate people who are coming here, many of them illegally.

-------------------- --------------------

ObamaCare and Blood Donations

I passed by a blood drive in the area on Saturday. I was asked if I wanted to donate and the first thing that passed into my mind was Obamacare. It was a cynical thought of whether ObamaCare required blood donation. This is how bitter I feel about the crap that is ObamaCare.

You see, when the Government steps in and demands to run the show on anything, like healthcare, then they can go find the blood. As it is, they were out in an area of tax-payers. Why not go and stick needles in the half of the population that does not pay any taxes? Really, if they are not contributing tax revenue, they can contribute in other ways, like giving blood. Of course they won't, unless they get paid to do it. And this is the joke of the whole system and the Democrats pushing it. They repeatedly call for the better (revenue-earning) half of the population to do their 'fair share' and pay more taxes. And yet, there is a huge portion of the population that pays no share towards the common good. They only consume. Even when the contribute, they won't, unless there is something in it for them. Where is the fairness in that.

The only confidence I have is that the unfairness of this system will be it's doom.
--
P.S. No, I didn't donate blood. I do however vow that I will donate once ObamaCare is repealed. At that point I leave it to the nurse to get a full pint out of me. My body stops giving after about a half pint.

-------------------- --------------------