Categories
Archives
Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !

Obamacare Brainiacs

Gruber-Head-NRD-600-w-logo

Obama Deports American Jobs

by Daniel Greenfield,

Obama123
ObamaObama’s excuse for his illegal amnesty will be that the immigration system is “broken” forcing him to act. But when Obama says that the system is broken, he means that some parts of it still work and so he intends to break immigration all the way through to benefit his own corrupt political allies.

That will hurt his own voters the most, but the Democratic Party has a notoriously masochistic relationship with its voting base. It beats them up and then it gaslights them by hugging them and telling them that it was really the mean Republicans who punched them in the face.

When African-American unemployment rates rise, the workers who can’t find jobs because of all the brand new DREAMERs won’t blame the White House, they’ll blame the evil Republicans for income inequality, assuming Sharpton manages to read the term correctly from his MSNBC teleprompter.

According to Obama our immigration system is broken because it doesn’t allow illegal aliens who illegally crossed the border to take American jobs. That’s not a broken system, that’s what the system is supposed to do.

When illegal aliens aren’t allowed to legally take American jobs, that’s how you know the immigration system is working.

In the language of progressivism, helping means ruining and fixing means breaking. A system that fulfills any useful purpose must be reformed out of all usefulness. If the tattered shreds of the immigration system still keep a single Democratic voter from legally cashing a welfare check and casting a vote, then immigration must be reformed and helped and fixed until it is completely destroyed.

The immigration system is broken because it was reformed so many times that it makes as much sense as an outhouse on a space shuttle. Its main function now is to bring millions of people without jobs to a country where millions are out of work. Obama wants to fix that by adding millions more people.

Our system of immigration is a perfectly good system for importing lots of low wage workers. The only problem is they’re being imported into a country where there are a lot more low wage workers than there are jobs. The cost of providing food stamps and social services for the immigrants and the Americans they put out of work is passed on to the shrinking middle class which kills more jobs.

Some Republicans would like to modify it to help Mark Zuckerberg bring cheaper third world programmers and engineers to replace the Americans over at Facebook. Why settle for just wiping out the working class, when you can also take out chunks of the middle class?

Our immigration system made perfect sense back when we were opening factories everywhere. It made sense when new ranches needed hands and land needed working. It makes a lot less sense when the government is fighting a war on carbon, when ranches have to get out of the way of the spotted red toad and farms are starved of water in the name of the environment.

The million immigrants a year are not entering booming industries, but serving as cheap labor in declining ones. And they’re doing it in a country where declining industries and poor workers are already being subsidized by taxpayers in a dozen different ways. Why then should taxpayers also be subsidizing the replacement of American workers with Somali and Honduran workers?

Who benefits from that except the Democratic Party which not only killed the industries, but is now managing to kill the American workforce? The glorious future of the new economy is a government subsidized Chinese factory using foreign workers to make subsidized solar panels in Oklahoma while taxpayers remain on the hook for the subsidies which used bonds sold to Chinese investors.

Declining industries tighten their belts by cutting costs. They find the cheapest employees they can. Those cheapest employees become a constituency for the nanny state. The nanny state makes it even more expensive to operate. The cycle spins on until the only industries left are state subsidized and everyone directly or indirectly works for the state. And the only items of collateral with which to borrow more money to subsidize them with are the land and the people. That’s not America. That’s Africa.

The Obama economy has created mostly low wage jobs. Those jobs continue to be filled by immigrants. There still aren’t enough jobs so Obama is proposing to create even less jobs by adding more immigrants by legalizing more illegal aliens.

There is something broken here, but it’s not so much immigration as Obama and his party.

Last week I spoke to a British immigration lawyer who described how difficult it was for seniors in the United Kingdom to retire in the United States. While most countries welcome wealthy retirees, our system makes it difficult for them to move and bring their money over here.

Meanwhile in his 2013 State of the Union address, Obama had praised Desiline Victor, a 102-year-old Haitian woman who had moved to the United States at around 80 and never learned to speak English, but did spend hours waiting in line in Florida to vote for Obama. There are plenty of senior immigrants coming through family reunification for a big bite of a social welfare system they never paid into.

But the Democratic Party would rather have a voter than a worker. And so what we have is not an immigration system, but a migration system.

That’s why Obama and his people fought so hard against an Ebola travel ban. It’s why the New York Times editorialized against allowing Cuban doctors to defect because of the “brain drain” but instead urged that “American immigration policy should give priority to the world’s neediest refugees.”

America certainly takes in plenty of needy people, but what the New York Times is emphasizing is that we should be taking in people with nothing to contribute and keeping out those who do. Its ideal immigrant will at best be a low wage worker and at worst a permanent welfare case. We don’t want Cuban doctors. We want Somali muggers and Liberian Ebola cases and Pakistani terrorists.

Immigration is not meant to serve American interests. America is meant to serve immigration.

The end result of this immigration policy will be a stratified society with a permanent lower class and a thin upper class whose leftists can always start a riot by shouting about income equality without ever being able to offer it. Without social mobility what we will have left is social instability. There will be lots of young men with time on their hands to build bombs or throw stones.

If the left doesn’t win through the system, they’ll have their revolutionary constituency standing by.

The only way we can afford the immigration policy that we have now is with a lot more industry and a lot less welfare. Instead our immigration rates were widened and rerouted to the Third World even as our actual industries declined. We kept on taking workers we didn’t have jobs for. We built ghettoes and rust belts and our politicians kept on reciting robotic speeches about being a nation of immigrants.

Immigration requires opportunity. We still have it, but less of it than we used to. Our immigration system is not based on opportunity. It’s based on a migratory flow of Democratic Party voters.

What broke the system was making it as open as possible to those who had the least to offer while closing it tightly to those who had the most to offer. Now Obama wants to import illegal aliens while deporting American jobs. He wants to trade American jobs to illegal aliens for Democratic votes.

If the immigration system is to work again, it should work for America… not for Obama.

One video to explain Jon Gruber and Obamacare

Only the average Obama voter was fooled. Republicans were reading that bill as fast as they could… trying to warn people that it absolutely was being sold as a lie to the American public. Not a single Republican would sign on to that lie. Remember that congressmen, Joe Wilson yelling at Obama… when Obama was lying during his “state of the union” address?… “You Lie”… well, he was right. He should have gotten medal for calling the Deceiver and Chief out on his bullshit to the American people. Now, just a few days ago… we see Obama lie again… saying he didn’t know the very guy he introduced as one of the chief architects of ObamaCare. Please… Obama supporters… grow some balls and call out your president.

Gruber Earned $5.2 Million from Obamacare Deception

Gruber1112a

by MICHAEL PATRICK LEAHY

MIT Professor Jonathan Gruber, the Obamacare architect who bragged about deceiving the “stupid” American people to secure passage of the bill, has been paid an estimated $5.2 million by the federal government and 12 state governments for consulting services to assist in the design and implementation of the Affordable Care Act.
Breitbart News exchanged emails with Professor Gruber on Tuesday in an attempt to confirm this estimate, but Gruber would neither confirm nor deny the amounts.
“You have been paid in excess of $5.2 million for your economic consulting services related to the design and implementation of Obamacare by the federal government and 12 states, which include: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Vermont, Michigan, West Virginia, Maine, Colorado, Oregon, Connecticut, Delaware, Kansas, California,” Breitbart News wrote in an e-mail to Gruber. “Could you confirm these facts put together from press reports?” we asked.
“Thanks for writing,” Gruber responded by email late Tuesday night. “I have no comment at this time. Sorry.”
Gruber, who was eager to expound upon his role as the architect of Obamacare in numerous public settings between 2009 and October 2014, has offered the same empty response to most press inquiries since the first video of his confessed deception broke on November 7. On November 8, he appeared on the progressive-friendly Ronan Farrow program on MSNBC. With that exception, the once talkative Gruber has now turned incommunicado.
Breitbart’s estimate of $5.2 million is based on publicly available reports on the amounts of Gruber’s Obamacare design and implementation contracts with the federal government ($392,600) and four states: Michigan ($481,050), Minnesota ($329,000), Vermont ($400,000), and Wisconsin ($400,000), as well as assumptions about contract sizes with eight additional states with which Gruber has contracts: West Virginia, Maine, Colorado, Oregon, Connecticut, Delaware, Kansas, and California. The amount of those contracts has not been publicly reported:
As The Washington Post reported on Friday, “It’s safe to say that about $400,000 appears to be the standard rate for gaining access to the Gruber Microsimulation Model.”
Adding the $2 million from publicly disclosed contracts to the estimated $3.2 million from known contracts whose amount have not yet been publicly disclosed brings the current estimate of Gruber’s Obamacare-related earnings to $5.2 million.
Gruber’s Obamacare-related financial bonanza is based, in part, on the ubiquitous use of his proprietary Gruber Microsimulation Model in virtually every executive and legislative entity involved in the design and implementation of Obamacare: the White House, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Congressional Budget Office (which is charged with providing Congress “independent” analysis of the impact of proposed legislation), and most state governments.
Gruber has essentially enjoyed a monopoly on economic analysis of Obamacare since February 25, 2009, barely a month after President Obama’s inauguration. On that date, the federal government issued a public notice that “[t]he Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE), intends to negotiate with Jonathan Gruber, Ph.D. on a sole sources basis for technical assistance in evaluating options for national healthcare reform.”
According to Solicitation Number AES2009 for Technical Assistance in Evaluating Options for Health Reform, “The basis for restricting competition is the authority 13.106-1(b) because only one source is reasonably available to satisfy agency requirements. The anticipated contract period will be for one year.”
In essence, someone in the Obama administration wanted to make Gruber’s proprietary Gruber Microsimulation Model the “must have” analytic tool not only for the federal government, but also for every state government that would subsequently implement Obamacare after it became law, something that would not become reality until a year later, in March 2010.
It is unclear who in the Obama administration was behind this effective grant of monopoly to Gruber. Though the solicitation stated the contract was to be performed for the assistant secretary for Planning and Evaluation, no one occupied that office on February 25, 2009, when the solicitation was issued.
The assistant secretary for Planning and Evaluation at the Department of Health and Human Services position had been empty since its previous occupant, now Senator-elect Ben Sasse (R-NE), resigned at the end of the George W. Bush administration in January 2009. Due to political difficulties encountered with President Obama’s first choice as Secretary of Health and Human Services, former Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD), none of the top positions at HHS were filled in February 2009.
President Obama did not nominate Kathleen Sebelius to be secretary of Health and Human Services until April 2009. It was not until a month later, in May 2009, that President Obama nominated Dr. Sherry Glied to become the assistant secretary of Planning and Evaluation.
Who then authorized the sole source contract to Professor Gruber in February 2009?
On Tuesday evening, Breitbart News posed that question to Dr. Glied, who is now the dean of the School of Public Service at New York University.
“All this [the sole source Gruber contract] happened before I arrived and I don’t know who arranged it,” Glied emailed Breitbart News. “By the time I arrived, I think the contract was over.”
The most disturbing fact of the ubiquitous nature of the Gruber Microsimulation Model is the degree to which it may have influenced the economic model used by the Congressional Budget Office in March, 2010 when it delivered its faulty scoring analysis to Congress prior to the passage of Obamacare that the bill would reduce the deficit over ten years.
According to its enabling legislation, the Congressional Budget Office is charged with providing Congress with “independent” analysis of the budgetary and economic impact of major proposed legislation. But CBO’s favorable scoring of Obamacare in its March 2010 analysis has led several conservatives to question the degree to which that document was independently developed.
Not only are there questions surrounding the degree to which the CBO model reflected the same biases found in the Gruber Microsimulation Model used by the Obama administration, two of the economists on its staff charged with implementation of that model were protégés and former Phd. students at MIT of Professor Gruber, as first reported by the Weekly Standard.

The Vanishing White Democrat

by Daniel GreenfieldJames Carville,

It wasn’t all that long ago that the Democrats were predicting the end of the Republican Party.

With the rise of Obama, James Carville began peddling a new book “40 More Years” promising that the Dems would rule for generations.

Just this year Carville predicted that the Republican Party would become extinct if it lost to Hillary Clinton. But it was the Democratic Party that was going extinct in Carville’s own backyard.

Republicans began winning Senate seats in Louisiana for the first time in a century in just the last ten years. If Landrieu loses, then both of the Louisiana’s Senate seats will be unprecedentedly held by Republicans.

And Louisiana isn’t an outlier. Bill Clinton couldn’t stop Arkansas from going full Republican with two Republican senators and a full suite of Republican representatives for the first time in history. That’s all the more amazing in a state that only had two Republican senators before that for over a century.

The Democratic Party is going extinct in places like Louisiana, Arkansas and West Virginia. It’s vanishing because the working class White Democrat is becoming extinct.

Even Carville hedged his bets while predicting the end of the Republican Party by joining FOX News.

A generation ago, white Democrats outnumbered white Republicans. Today it’s the other way around. Under Obama, barely a quarter of white people still identify as Democrats.

Republicans didn’t just win a few elections. They swept across entire legislatures in western and southern states. They took state senates and governorships in places like New York and Illinois. It’s not that Republicans had a particularly compelling message, some did and some didn’t, but that Democrats had assumed that enough white voters would continue showing up to prop up their rainbow coalition.

They were wrong.

The latest Pew poll shows that 74 percent of Democrats support ObamaCare, but only 29 percent of white respondents do. The Democratic Party is becoming a party without white people. Under Obama, the Democratic disadvantage among white voters doubled without any corresponding gains among minority voters.

Meanwhile Republicans increased their share of white voters. And that’s only telling part of the story.

The nation’s largest party is “none of the above”. Independents began to decisively outnumber both parties under Obama. Hispanic voters are increasingly identifying as independents. So are white men.

And though the independents come from both parties, they increasingly swing Republican in key races.

The Democratic model depended on the combination of an overwhelming minority vote combined with a second place showing in the white vote. That model may no longer be feasible, especially in states with a shortage of unemployed white hipsters with PhDs and protest signs who know all the latest social warrior mumbo jumbo but can’t change a flat tire.

The Democrats had to bet on turnout and changing demographics to salvage the situation. They played up racial tensions to increase turnout and championed open borders to shift demographics and those tactics only deepened their problems with white voters.

Tribalism helped Obama win a second term, but it didn’t fix the underlying flaw in the Democratic model. And it actually worsened the situation. The more the Democrats sounded racially divisive notes, the more they alienated white voters, not just by abusing them, but by ignoring their concerns.

ObamaCare became emblematic of a party that tuned out what used to be its base. And so its base left forcing the Democrats to discover that they couldn’t actually win without white voters.

Republican congressional candidates won 64 percent of white working class voters. Landrieu won just 18 percent of the white vote; 22 percent among white women and 15 percent among white men. That’s less than the amount taken by a second Republican candidate in the race, Rob Maness.

Those numbers alone indicate why the Democrats won’t put any real money behind her. If Landrieu can’t even compete for the white vote, then there’s no reason to waste good money on her.

Mark Pryor won only 31 percent of white voters. Nunn won 23 percent of white voters. The Dems didn’t do this badly everywhere, but where they lost it was usually because the white vote sharply tilted away from them enough to offset their overwhelming minority percentages.

The Democrats have a white voter problem. The party is betting that it won’t outlast Obama because it confused its own propaganda with reality and decided that white voters hate Obama because he’s black.

It was never Obama’s race that was the problem. It was the Democratic Party’s embrace of leftist radicalism at the national level while waging identity politics wars along the lines of race and gender.

Republicans don’t have a problem with black people. Democrats do have a problem with white people.

The party is now under the sway of an elitist class of white leftists for whom “white people” is an insult, not a group of voters. And by “white people” they mean the sort of voters who conclusively tossed them out in West Virginia, Nevada and Arkansas.

The elitists of the new Democratic Party envision themselves as the white protectors and organizers of a minority country whose property and rights they will redistribute as they see fit in a new Socialist order. There is absolutely nothing in this creepy little vision that appeals to anyone except the grubby Grubers frustrated at having to work so hard to dupe the insufficiently stupid American voters who won’t just let them play with their health care toys without insisting on tediously voting against higher taxes.

It’s this elite that steadily began alienating white voters with its policies. The situation became critical under Obama not because of his race, but because he fully endorsed their insane power grab.

Now the Democrats are hoping that Hillary Clinton can save their party, but first she has to decide who she is. Hillary has tried to play up racial appeals to white voters before overcorrecting and going the other way. At times she sounds like she wants to appeal to working class voters and at other times she returns to her native element pushing the policy toys of the technocracy.

Instead of the Democratic Party’s Great White Hope, Hillary more closely resembles Mary Landrieu veering between accusations of racism and support for the Keystone pipeline. The left’s attacks on Landrieu for supporting the pipeline only highlight the impossible dilemma of any Democrat trying to run to the right of Obama and Nancy Pelosi. They have to either abandon their voters or their party.

Unlike European parties, American politicians were supposed to put loyalty to their constituents ahead of loyalty to their party. The Democratic Party put its own politicians in the impossible position of being defined by a centralized party seeking to eliminate anything reeking of conservatism while expecting them to win in conservative parts of the country. The Dems didn’t lose. They committed suicide.

The Democratic Party has moved so far to the left that it has alienated all white voters who aren’t on the left and its botched programs like ObamaCare are even beginning to alienate minority voters. Minority support for ObamaCare has hit a new low. Finding white support for ObamaCare requires a microscope.

But the Democratic Party can’t change. It has become dependent on a small donor class of men like Bloomberg, Soros and Steyer whose ad buys and think tanks dictate their agenda. To win, Hillary, Biden and any other candidate must first win over billionaires whose priorities of gun control, no pipeline and lots of big government are exactly the things that have pushed the Democratic Party to the edge.

James Carville was half-right about the 2016 election. If Hillary doesn’t win it, one of the big two parties may go extinct. But it won’t be the Republicans.

How to Confront the Islamic State

by Geert Wilders

geert_New2
The Islamic State is an Islamic cancer. It is a poisonous snake based on the Quran and the life of Muhammad, a criminal who 14 centuries ago went, murdering and decapitating, from Medina to Mecca. His self-appointed successor Caliph Baghdadi is now at the gates of Baghdad and Damascus. He has followers all over the world, including in our country, our cities and streets.

Again, people are beheaded according to the Koranic commands such as Sura 47 verse 4: “When ye meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks and when ye have caused a bloodbath among them bind a bond firmly on them.” Even moderate Muslims cannot escape violence because, according to the Koran and the Sharia, they are apostates.

All the gullible minds who say that the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam are committing a serious politically-correct error, whether they are Obama, Cameron, Rutte or Samsom.

We are at war. War has been declared against the free West. Our freedom, our culture, the future of our country and our children are at stake. We must strike back hard, in the Netherlands, in the rest of the West and also in Iraq and Syria. Hence, my party supports the Government’s decision to deploy Dutch F16s against the Islamic state. We say: Let us bomb them.

But we have no understanding for the fact that we are only going to bomb in Iraq and not in Syria. Is it OK for the Government that people are beheaded, women raped and genocide committed in Syria because a mandate under international law is missing? What a cowardice. The government says it understands the United States when they bomb the Islamic State in Syria, but it does not participate itself. Understanding, but no participation, what a cowardly half-heartedness.

Even more important than fighting the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria is fighting Islamic terrorism in the Netherlands. The security of the Netherlands should be priority number 1. Our citizens have to be safe on the train, in the streets, when walking their children to school and shopping. That is what truly matters. In its letter to Parliament, the Government only devotes two paragraphs to national security. There is even more attention for issues of gender and the position of women in the Arab world. That is a travesty.

Madam Speaker, we must protect the Netherlands. That is why we were elected. To protect our citizens. Not only the citizens of Iraq and Syria, but also and especially our own people here in the Netherlands. Why is the army not deployed to protect our railways stations? And in their uniforms and heavily armed, of course.

And why do we try to stop jihadists when they want to leave our country? Last Sunday, the Minister of Security and Justice proudly said that the passports of 41 jihadists had been canceled so they could not leave to Syria or Iraq. What a stupid act. Now they walk around here, in our streets. People who want to wage jihad elsewhere, decapitate, commit attacks, walk our streets because of the decision of the Minister.

I have been saying it for ten years and I will repeat it once again:

Close the borders to immigrants from Islamic countries. Enough is enough. The Islamic culture of hatred does not belong in the Netherlands. 65 per cent of the Dutch agree with this.

Let jihadists leave the country, but let them never come back. Reintroduce border controls.

Evict everyone who expresses sympathy for the Islamic State, deprive them of their Dutch passports. Let everyone with a passport from an Islamic country to sign an anti-Sharia declaration.

Wake up, I say to the Government. Protect not only the Iraqi people against the Islamic State, protect the Dutch against the Islamic terrorist threat in our own country. That is your job and that is your responsibility.

Take that responsibility. Do your duty.

Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !