class="archive category category-rino category-396">
RINO
April 13, 2013 | 
Author I’m a bit short of time but I am putting this cross post from 454Monte.com on Bobo’s page to reach folks that may be from TN that frequent this blog.
This post was written in regards to the recent vote on the Anti-Gun bill S649 that no less than 16 Republicans defected and voted to allow it to come to the floor for debate.
“What could POSSIBLY go wrong with my vote to allow SB 679 to be opened for Debate?!?”
That’s the prevailing wisdom that Bob Corker R-TN seems to be espousing after being brought to task for his recent defection to the Democrats on S – 679.
S-679 as I mentioned on the below post is the latest ‘Gun Control” Legislation brought to the floor of the Senate by Harry Reid D-NV
Corker and 15 other Republicans, or RINOS as they are being called now a days, jumped ship and voted to allow the bill to proceed forward for debate.
After the vote I kept an eye on Senator Corkers Facebook page and predictably, it lit up with comments ranging from bitter disappointment with this vote all the way to calls for his recall. On Friday, possibly realizing the amount of anger over his vote – Senator Corker’s (I am assuming) staff posted this on his FB page:
There’s a lot of confusion out there. Here are the facts: Senator Corker is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and has an “A” rating from the NRA. http://1.usa.gov/ZlPS1J His vote Thursday was to allow S. 649 to be debated and amended and was not scored by the NRA. There will be another vote next week (which will also require 60 votes for passage) to allow a final vote on the bill. Senator Corker has said he will filibuster any legislation that violates our Second Amendment rights.
Browsing through those comments I think I just found the fabled 90% the Main stream media is touting as “for gun control”…but they got it wrong. Easily 9o% plus of the comments on Senator Corker and Senator Alexander pages are Pro Gun and they are in a word …outraged.
Nice try at Damage Control Senator – it didn’t work. Just to be even more of a thorn in your side – I’ve already called the NRA and they are on notice that if your A rating is not withdrawn IMMEDIATELY That they can rest assured any further donations from this life time member are done.They’ll be panhandling in the back alleys of D.C. with the bums and crack whores before I give them one red cent. That gos for you too Lamar Alexander.
I don’t care if it takes 60 or 6 Million votes to pass this bill Senator, the fact of the matter is you both are ON RECORD as voting for a bill that has put the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution directly in the cross-hairs of the very people you were elected to oppose. The Liberal Democrats. You have BOTH ran for office on a promise to the people of TN to protect the 2ND amendment rights of your respective districts. You lied. You will be held accountable.
But hey, thanks too, for further alienating your voters by telling us we’re ‘confused” Really, Let me dispel any confusion on YOUR part Mr. Corker – I’m not confused. Not the least little bit. I know a liar when I see one.
But to help dispel any confusion YOU might have – My rights are NOT up for Debate – Not by Bob Corker, Not By Harry Reid, Not by Lamar Alexander, not by any of you fools in DC playing political games. Your vote on S 649 Was and will remain a clear cut case of ignoring the wishes and will of your constituents in TN and I fully intend – no matter HOW you vote moving forward on this legislation – to give my political contributions to your challenger, and vote against you and your cohort Mr. Alexander. You two political clowns have betrayed the people of TN for the last time if I have anything to say about it.
Does the word PRINCIPLE mean anything to you Mr. Corker? Look it up, maybe it will clear up YOUR confusion.
Sadly? Blue Collar Muse a fellow TN Conservative Blogger I’ve dealt with in the past seems to think this vote or behavior of Mr. Corkers and the other 15 Republicans is okay. It’s not Muse. Not even remotely.
I disagree with both you and Senators Corker and Alexander. Vehemently. And Here’s why.
As I’ve stated previously – there are ALREADY 300+ Federal and State Gun control measures on the books. In my opinion every one of them if not outright unconstitutional they are certainly pushing the limits. For example, Concealed Carry Permits. I’ve long held that CCW permits are an blatant infringement of the 2ND Amendment. I have a right enshrined in the US Constitution to keep and bear arms. No where in that Constitution does it say “if the state says I can” likewise laws against Open Carry. I can’t help it if seeing a gun holstered on my hip make liberals wet their britches, not my problem – but it IS a clear cut infringement of MY rights to keep and bear arms when I have to restrict where and when and how I carry my sidearms. So I don’t. I carry when, where and how it suits me, the politicians and their unconstitutional laws be damned.
But back to the point of the post – and why the Blue Collar Muse and I disagree…what could possibly go wrong with my elected representatives playing politics with the Bill or Rights?
This – the gavel had barely closed the vote to allow S 649 to proceed when the amendments started pouring in. Specifically SA 711 from who else? Senator Diane Feinstein and her band of merry collaborators.
This amendment quite frankly makes the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 look like it was written by the NRA – It is that bad. I won’t post the entire thing here, it’s too long, but take the time to go look at SA 711 using the link I provided above.
So my question to Corker and people like the Muse are….did you think this WASN’T going to happen? What about you Muse? Did you not think the woman who is on record as saying if she had to votes to force Americans to “turn in their firearms” she would have done so – was NOT going to immediately amend this bill…and insert language that outlaws HUNDREDS of commonly owned firearms? That they were not going to attempt to strip millions of Americans of their rights using language that deems them “mentally deficient” because they visited a doctor for treatment of something as simple as insomnia?
Confusion Senator Corker? No – the only one confused here is you. You are confused on the clear and simple language of the United States Constitution.
There are only two possible outcomes of your vote allowing this to proceed. You were pandering for votes from anti gun types – or you are in bed with the likes of Diane Feinstien. Lock.Stock. AND Barrel. Which is it?
No matter what it is – this TN resident is committed. I will work tirelessly to see you voted out of office for your vote on allowing S649 To proceed. You too Mr. Alexander. Enjoy your tax payer funded retirement gentlemen.
Posted in A Nation at Risk, Bill Of Rights, Civil Rights, Freedom, Politics, RINO, Second Amendment, US Constitution | 
Tags: 2nd Ammendment, guns | 
2 Comments »
I first learned of this over at TexasFred’s blog.
Texans join uprising against RNC rules change
Republicans from Texas are leading a mutiny at their national nominating convention in Tampa and fighting proposed rule changes that they say amount to a power grab by entrenched GOP operatives at the expense of grassroots activism.
The issue could explode in a floor fight Tuesday, just after Republican leaders open the first full day of the convention and turn to consider party rules. Although the process is usually a quiet one, the dispute over the new delegate selection process proposal advanced by Mitt Romney supporters threatens to shine a spotlight on the schism.
You should go read the rest of the article he posted. I’m going to take a different approach than he did. After I read his post, I decided to do a little research on the process and what it is that is being challenged. So – HERE (opens up a .pdf) are the rules for the 2012 RNC Convention:
DELEGATE SELECTION PROCESS
The states are listed alphabetically below; please scroll to your state for information concerning how its 2286 authorized National Republican Convention delegates are selected. It takes 1143 delegates to select a nominee. Each state’s total number of allotted delegates is shown, usually broken into three categories: RNC, CD and AL.
The RNC delegates are that state’s representatives on the Republican National Committee comprised of the GOP State Party Chair and its National Committeeman and Committeewoman.
The CD delegates come from each state’s Congressional Districts. They usually are elected either by voters in that state’s Presidential Primary or by delegates to the Republican State Convention.
The AL (At Large) delegates are not selected from any specific districts, but rather from the state as a whole. They usually are assigned candidate representation reflecting their state’s Presidential Primary results.
Both the AL and CD delegates normally are “bound” to the candidate they represent for a certain voting period during the National Convention. Examples: one round of convention voting, two rounds, until released by candidate, or by a vote of the entire state delegation. This “binding” becomes extremely important if the Party’s nominee has not been determined by the Primary Elections prior to the National Convention, as the delegates then will be free to vote for a different candidate once they are “unbound.” It takes 1143 delegates to nominate the GOP’s 2012 Presidential candidate.
If there is a convention or caucus process, it is important to be a part of that process from the beginning, so check the dates carefully and plan to participate either to become a National Delegate yourself or to be sure that those representing your state reflect your pro-life, pro-family values. There are an equal number of CD and AL alternates elected who would be seated in place of absent delegates. Those spots should also be filled by pro-life, pro-family individuals.
If you want to see how the individual states determine their apportionment of delegates to any candidate – check out the .pdf file up there. Okay – so that’s the 2012 process. And – from Michelle Malkin’s blog – here is the proposed rule change:
This past Friday, the RNC’s Convention Rules Committee voted – after several contentous votes – to change the party’s rules to allow future presidential candidates to have veto power over who can be delegates from any state – in other words, take power away from the grassroots and their ability to elect fellow conservatives as delegates.
This represents a brazen move by several Washington Beltway consultants and party insiders to diminish the power and influence of conservatives over the party.
Go to her blog to read the full story – this is being reported by a long-time blogger that is at the RNC Convention and attending the Rules Meetings.
Okay – the rules issued by the RNC states that certain delegates are “bound” to their candidate unless specifically released by that candidate to be able to vote for the Presidential nominee of their choice. Depending on the states – some are all or nothing and others may be apportioned. For instance – here in Florida – it is a winner take all apportionment – meaning since Romney won Florida – he gets all of the delegates. Texas is a different story – they have “At Large” delegates that are apportioned proportionately among all candidates in addition to “Congressional District” delegates that are elected or selected at state conventions. They are equally apportioned congressional district within a certain % threshold. There are generally more CD’s that AL’s.
So, here is the problem – we’ll use Texas as an example – the numbers aren’t real, but they are based in reality. Lets say Texas has 100 total delegates – under the proportional system – each candidate gets the proportion of delegates to the proportion of votes they received in the primary election. Romney got 69% of the vote, so he should get 69 of the total AL & CD delegates. Ron Paul got 11.9% of the votes, so he should get 12 of the total AL & CD delegates. Rick Santorum got 8% of the vote, so he gets 8 delegates, and so forth and so on until all delegates are assigned to the candidates.
So – these delegates are “bound” to their candidates in Congressional District Caucuses in which they cast their votes for their candidates. This is the way it has always been. It allows for minority candidates to have a seat at the table. During these caucuses, delegates can actually try to win over other delegates to their side in future rounds of the caucuses. The states set the terms for how long a delegate is “bound” to their candidate and when they can choose to move over to another candidates side to cast their vote. In some cases, you will hear that certain candidates have already specifically released their candidates to vote as they wish – or the candidate doing the releasing will release them to another candidate.
What is at stake is that the GOP is attempting to give the “presumptive nominee” the authority to choose his delegates and disavow state elected delegates selected to represent another candidate. What the GOP see as a threat is that, as previously mentioned before, minority delegates can work hard to bring their candidate’s platform to the other delegates and potentially win over a majority of the delegates and choose a minority candidate as the state’s candidate. So, for instance – in Texas where Romney won 69% and Ron Paul won 11% – Ron Paul supporters could pull over a majority of the 69 to their side – building up steam, until they get to the last round – if they have a large majority – the rest of the delegates will go to the majority side – whereby giving all 100 delegates to Paul instead of Romney. This is how our convention system works.
There is no such thing as a “presumptive nominee.” In our convention system – you don’t have a presidential nominee until a single candidate receives the majority delegates. In this case, for 2012 – that magic number is 1,143. The GOP is afraid there are enough Tea Party people who would rather see Santorum, or Gingrich as the Pres and Ron Paulite supporters out there that don’t want Romney as the Presidential candidate. If they can muster enough delegates to keep Romney from reaching that 1,143 number – he will not be the nominee. They will have to start the process over until they find a candidate that can get that number of delegates.
If you recall – Hillary managed to get 1,000 delegates on her side and it was holding back Obama’s ability to be named as the Presidential candidate. Hillary had to release her delegates and personally nominate Obama before he was able to reach that goal. The GOP is afraid that will happen here and that the Tea Party candidates and/or Ron Paulies won’t release their delegates.
I say, so what? This is America and this is the way our election process works. We should NOT be allowing those good ol’ boys in the GOP establishment to start dictating to we the people who we have to choose as our President. This is an affront to our electoral process and an affront to conservatism. The establishment isn’t happy that we’re not happy with their chosen RINO.
Posted in Conservative, Constitution, Elections, Politics, President, Republicans, RINO | Tags: at large, congressional district, convention, delegates, Elections, RNC, Romney, Ron Paul, Tampa | 4 Comments »
Nope – not making that up at all! Obama seriously thinks Romney is an extremist.
I can’t speak to Gov. Romney’s motivations,” Obama said. “What I can say is that he has signed up for positions, extreme positions, that are very consistent with positions that a number of House Republicans have taken. And whether he actually believes in those or not, I have no doubt that he would carry forward some of the things that he’s talked about.
Is that a hoot or what? Romney the RINO is extreme! The same man who implemented a program in his own state that Obamacare was modeled after. The same man who was at one time pro-abortion. Well – rather than list them all here – just see Romney in his own words:
The point is that the fact Obama considers Romney as an extremist just absolutely proves that he is the most extreme leftist President we have ever had in this country. Romney is probably more Center-Left than he is Conservative. Obama tries to paint himself as being Center-Left and sometimes as a moderate. So, you just have to wonder – if Romney is a far-right-winged extremist – really – what exactly does that make Obama then?
Just more proof that Obama is showing his true marxist colors.
Let’s see what those extreme positions are:
JOBS & ECONOMIC GROWTH
Mitt Romney will rebuild the foundations of the American economy on the principles of free enterprise, hard work, and innovation. His plan seeks to reduce taxes, spending, regulation, and government programs. It seeks to increase trade, energy production, human capital, and labor flexibility. It relinquishes power to the states instead of claiming to have the solution to every problem.
Hmm..not so extreme. Actually sounds like he wants to implement those same values and traits that this country was founded on – and going placing the constitutional boundaries on the Federal government back in place. Yup – that is extreme!
FOREIGN POLICY
Our country today faces a bewildering array of threats and opportunities. As president, Mitt Romney will safeguard America and secure our country’s interests and most cherished ideals. The unifying thread of his national security strategy is American strength. When America is strong, the world is safer. It is only American power—conceived in the broadest terms—that can provide the foundation for an international system that ensures the security and prosperity of the United States and our friends and allies.
A Romney foreign policy will proceed with clarity and resolve. Our friends and allies will not have doubts about where we stand and what we will do to safeguard our interests and theirs. Neither will our rivals, competitors, and adversaries. The best ally world peace has ever known is a strong America. The “last best hope of earth” was what Abraham Lincoln called our country. Mitt Romney believes in fulfilling the promise of Lincoln’s words and will defend America abroad in word and in deed.
Wow! Going back to being that “Shining Light on the Hill” that Reagan was talking about. Putting American exceptionalism back in to the world market – and – oh my God – actually supporting and standing beside our staunchest allies. That man is no doubt an extremist for wanting America to be number 1 in the world again and giving hope to those oppressed people in other nations.
LIMITED GOVERNMENT
The mission to restore America to health begins with reducing the size of the federal government and getting our fiscal house in order. President Obama has put our nation on an unsustainable course. Spending is out of control. Yearly deficits are massive. And unless we curb Washington’s appetite for spending, the national debt will only continue to grow.
As president, Mitt Romney will cut federal spending and regulation, and bring much-needed reforms to Medicare and Social Security. Mitt will work toward balancing the budget, reducing the size and reach of the federal government, and returning power to the states and the people.
THAT EXTREMIST BASTARD! How dare he suggest we balance our budget, stop the free-fall spending, and reducing our deficit all while putting the government back in it’s place as constitutionally required! What is he thinking?
IMMIGRATION
Mitt Romney will protect legal immigration and the 4.5 million who are waiting in line to enter the United States legally by taking a strong stand against illegal immigration. He believes that illegal immigration must end and has a proven track record of advancing that goal.
What an extremist viewpoint he has on immigration! He really wants to secure our borders and discourage illegal aliens. Why does he believe that those 12 million criminals who crossed illegally in the dark of night should not get preference over the 4.5 million who actually did it legally and have been waiting as much as 10 years to become citizens. I don’t understand his extreme position that those illegal aliens should not be able to utilize all of our American resources (schools, health care, jobs, food stamps, welfare) and still be able to claim tax refunds so they can send all that money to Mexico to improve their economy.
ENERGY
Producing more domestic energy would create good jobs and bolster local economies in a wide variety of energy-producing regions that effectively “export” their product to the rest of the country. While countless jobs are engaged in the actual energy-production process, they are a small fraction of the full workforce that benefits. For instance, before the first barrel of oil is pumped out of the ground, entire industries are hard at work creating the equipment and providing the services used in drilling, production, and the long chain of supporting industries that brings energy from inside the earth to the consumer.
The ripple effects into the non-energy sectors of the economy are commensurately important. If instead of sending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas we can send them to our own energy-rich centers, the nation as a whole will experience the economic benefits that we currently see other countries enjoying at our expense.
How dare he? I think he actually needs to be put on that domestic terrorist list for holding this extremist idea! He REALLY wants to start producing energy domestically by increasing oil, coal, and natural gas production within OUR own borders! Doesn’t he know that we HAVE to remain dependent on foreign oil to keep those Islamofascists knee-deep in money so they can continue to kill Americans and infidels? Doesn’t he know that we need to invest in GREEN technology that has not been proven to work? We must continue to invest in technology that won’t produce real results for 50 years. Such extreme position!
Okay – enough of that. I think you guys get the point. You can see the rest of his message on the remaining issues on his website. As liberal as Romney is – he is actually putting forth some real common sense ideas (well – these are not new ideas). In fact, I believe many of these ideas actually were founded in the late 1700′s by a few radical guys we call our forefathers. I don’t know – seems like reducing government, balanced budgets, reduced deficits, fair taxes, domestic energy production, legal immigration, government spending caps, strong military, and job growth are hardly extreme.
What do you think?
Posted in America, Conservative, Elections, energy, Freedom, government, illegal aliens, Islamofascists, Mexicans, Obama, P-BO, Politics, President, Republicans, RINO, Taxes, US Constitution | Tags: Conservative, Elections, extremists, Mitt Romney, Obama, Paul Ryan, policies, Politics | 5 Comments »
Been awhile since I had time to check in here at the Bobo…
Yes CMBlake…I saw you post and was utterly awash with guilt for not keeping my promise to keep the home fires lit here at the BoBo (um believe that one and I got some good beach front land in AZ for ya too.)…..but hey, life’s busy these days what can I say?
So I guess I will ramble a little about the debacle called the GOP primary ..Here we are for the most part about 9months out from the General Election, with 2 RINO’s and a “cranky old man” (McCain Ver. 2.0) and not a true conservative GOP candidate to be found…*sigh*
These candidates the GOP sent to forced down our throat are I guess, what we’re supposed to think of as the “best of the best”, the “Statesmen” we’re going to hand the keys to and tell them to run a nation with the largest economy in the world and of 300+ million souls. *Gak* (Sorry I choked on my beer there trying to get the word “statesmen” past my bullshit filter).
BTW ? How’s come I’m still seeing Perry Signs in SC where I am currently at..news flash SC..Perry is no longer running…Jus’ saying…I digress.
I find myself pretty much wincing at any of the three remaining candidates, I don’t know why the F-ing blankety blank the GOP can’t get it’s act together, I swear it’s always this “lesser of too evils game with them.
Far as I’m concerned…..None of them are particularly “electable”, at least that’s the view from up here in the nosebleed seats.
I’m am going to laugh tho if Cranky Ol’ Ron Paul pulls off an upset, and a part of me leans toward voting for cranky old Paul … what the hell, why not? It CAN’T get any worse than what we have now…can it? Maybe Paul will be the force of “Change” in the swamps of the Beltway…yeaahriiiight.
In all honesty He’s the MOST right on the issues that matter to me personally, just not so sure I trust this whole “Libertarian” movement thingy yet or not
. I can’t say why I don’t trust them specifically, it’s a gut feeling. Something about the “Libertarian” view / stance makes my brain itch, and since that seems to be where most of his support is, well there’s misgivings there. His stances on foreign policy are tough to swallow. I’m not saying he’s wrong in his thoughts per say, it’d actually be okay with me, it’s just that it’s no longer realistic in the least to say we’re going to pick up our toys from around the globe and just go the hell home.
Gingrich? Mmmmno, if a man can’t keep his pecker in his pant’s after being married, he ain’t getting the football…nope sorry.
We’ll not mention also his flip flops on AGW, and 2nd Amendment treachery either..I didn’t forget Newt, I don’t think a lot of voters who cherish the right to keep and bear arms did either pal…Am I being a one issue voter? You betcha.
Romney..Not in this life time Mr Architect of Masscare which was purportedly the model for the abortion of a Federal bill now dubbed” Obamacare…and oh BTW? I know people from MA, & they hated you for your sell outs on 2nd Amendment issues too..Now you want to sell out the REST of the country’s 2nd Ammendment rights….I donthinkso Lucy……Strike Two Mitt…you’re done.
Who was it that ever said I’m a one issue voter? Mheh.
**** UPDATE ****
Sorry folks, I realized this morning that I totally forgot about Rick Santorum …apologizes in advance for any confusion…..I’ll write about Rick later …I’m off to the salt mines…
Guest post from Vulcan’s Hammer
Yesterday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger revealed a new “austerity” budget for the state of California. Needless to say, any budget that was to be proposed with any cuts in spending in these tough economic times was going to be met with some resistance. Here is a quote from the SFGate
California would eliminate its welfare program, most state-subsidized child care and make deep cuts to prison spending, health care and human services programs under the governor’s revised budget proposal unveiled today.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said the budget plan – which he said includes no tax increases – reflects the dearth of options left to the state. He also revised the projected deficit from $20 billion to $19 billion.
But while there were many suggested cuts, the governor also proposed increasing funding for the University of California, California State University system and community colleges, saying the money should help stop tuition hikes. He also plans to fully fund parks.
He said the state has tackled all the “low, middle and high hanging fruit,” and must now “take the ladder away from the tree and shake the whole tree.”
And he warned that he will not sign a budget unless the Legislature tackles reforms of the state’s tax, pension and budget systems that he blamed for the current woes.
“I believe a budget should be a reflection of what we in California value most, and what my administration stands for, in good times and in bad,” he said. “It should still provide a safety net for our most vulnerable citizens, but we are not because our budget system is broken. I now have no choice but to stand here today and call for the elimination of some important programs.”
Surprisingly, most of the comments left by readers supported Schwarzenegger’s cuts to some of the social programs while increasing funding for the University of California. We’ll see how long that lasts. I can already see the interest groups forming to fight any cuts to their budgets. I don’t understand why Schwarzenegger chose the university system over the social programs to exclude from budget cuts, but I have a feeling that the liberals that lead the state legislature are going to dump Mr. Schwarzenegger’s budget proposal with the usual angry rhetoric. Stay tuned.
Posted in Democrats, Guest Bloggers, Liberals, Politics, RINO, Socialism | Tags: california, economy, Liberals, Politics | 2 Comments »
Yes – this post has it all.
The Hispanic Caucus is planning on voting “NO” if the ban on illegal aliens in the Senate version isn’t changed.
The comment made in justifying this position is as follows:
Hispanic Democrats say they haven’t moved from their stance that they will not vote for a healthcare bill containing the Senate’s prohibitions.
They claim that while it may be politically popular in some parts of the country to ban illegal immigrants from using their own money to buy coverage, it is not good policy. Illegal immigrants will, one way or another, need medical attention in the United States, and it would be cheaper and more humane to provide them coverage if they pay for it. Otherwise, they will seek treatments in the nation’s emergency rooms, effectively increasing medical costs.
The BOLD is mine for emphasis. Okay – let’s see if I understand this correctly – are they referring to money that was “earned” illegally by providing illegal services as their “own” money? Is the Hispanic Caucus suggesting that illegal aliens using illegally obtained money be able to openly, without verification of residential status, enter in to a contractual agreement with the government to purchase legal health services? Wouldn’t that make the government complicit in money laundering?
Secondly, is that even a legally binding contract if legal services are purchased using illegally obtained money? Isn’t this the same thing as an individual who robs a bank and then takes that money to the local electronics store and purchases a DVD? When that crook is caught – the DVD is confiscated as well. So – then what happens when that illegal alien is then caught and deported? Since that illegal alien can no longer utilize the health insurance that was purchased – will the government then refund the money or will the government confiscate it knowing it was illegally gotten to begin with?
And – we also learn that in the new immigration reform bill that Schmucky Shumer and Lindsey RINO Graham are pushing through there is a provision requiring a national biometric ID card.
Lawmakers working to craft a new comprehensive immigration bill have settled on a way to prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants: a national biometric identification card all American workers would eventually be required to obtain.
Under the potentially controversial plan still taking shape in the Senate, all legal U.S. workers, including citizens and immigrants, would be issued an ID card with embedded information, such as fingerprints, to tie the card to the worker.
Over at CATO, Jim Harper notes the obvious slippery slope problems with this:
Once in place, watch for this national ID to regulate access to financial services, housing, medical care and prescriptions—and, of course, serve as an internal passport.
Really? The government’s idea to prevent illegal aliens from getting work in this country is to “tag” every single American citizen in order to keep track of us? I have a few words for those idiot politicians - Aww HELL FUCKING NO! Whatever happened to our right to privacy? This would absolutely be the biggest fucking Big Brother government controlled push for invading our privacy than has EVER been conceived. Where the hell do these idiots come up with this shit? Do they really think we’re living in fucking Russia or something? Hell, even Russians have more privacy than we do these days.
This bill is doomed from the get-go if they even attempt something like this. Hey – idiots – I have a really great idea for you if you REALLY want to prevent illegal aliens from coming to this country and obtaining jobs illegally from the 15 million unemployed AMERICAN workers – Build that fucking fence already – and actually ENFORCE the laws already on the books. DENY every one of those fucking illegal scumbags any and all American taxpayer services – you know – things like – free public education, free health care through the ER, free Medicaid, free food stamps. STOP allowing them access to the services that WE AMERICANS are actually paying for. Actually start asking for identification and proof of residency when they show up with with hands out begging for AMERICAN TAXPAYER funded services.
Don’t fucking “tag” and track me because you don’t want to do what is right for this country because you can’t seem to keep track of all the fucking ILLEGAL ALIENS that are sucking this country dry!
Oh – wait – that’s right – you AREN’T trying to keep them out are you – this is another AMNESTY bill and WE THE PEOPLE are the one’s that are supposed to take it up the ass – right?
Assholes!
UPDATE for TFT – In addition to enforcing the rules to keep those illegal aliens out – I wholeheartedly 100% agree with punishing those idiot employers that hire them illegally. While one reader – Evan – believes we should “fine the shit out of them” I believe we should jail their asses.
UPDATE 2 – h/t to Brittanicus for pointing this out – Everyone who opposes amnesty for illegals and wants to be part of a larger movement and build a coalition as well as stay informed with all issues related to the illegal immigration problem – please sign up at NumbersUSA. While I am all for immigration – I am really concerned about our illegal population and the lack of enforcement of the laws. Finding this site tells me I am not alone in that feeling.
Posted in government, health care, Idiots, Illegal immigrants, Liberals, Mexicans, Politics, progressives, RINO | Tags: amnesty, government, health care, illegal aliens, Liberals, Politics, progressivism | 15 Comments »
