It’s All About the Kids, Right?

From Ben Shapiro at Breitbart

…in the Los Angeles Unified School District, two perfect attendees throughout high school received new Chevrolet Sonics, priced at $18,000, for showing up to school every day. During the 2012-2013 school year, LAUSD has handed out monthly prizes to kids who were present every day…the LAUSD system is paid by the state of California only for attendance. Every student is worth $32 per day from the state to the LAUSD system. That means that when students skip school, the unionized teachers and administrators pay the price…It isn’t Oprah running LAUSD and handing out cars. It’s the teachers unions, which are mainly concerned with creating bizarre incentive systems to get butts in the seats rather than knowledge in the brains.

 

Read it here: Attendance Challenge

DJH

 

Schumer’s Victory Dance

Sen. Chuck Schumer gleefully said on the Senate floor that “illegal immigration will be a thing of the past” once his immigration bill is passed. Where, exactly, is the pride in solving an illegal act by making it legal? Is that the best we can do? Apparently, it is, and it is one more sign of our escalating decline.

There is little doubt that if Schumer’s “solution” is put into place, border crossings will increase by those seeking the amnesty Schumer is eager to offer. Crossings are already rising in Texas. Schumer’s promise of securing the border later is as meaningful as “you can keep the health insurance you have”. Our government has a long history of reneging on promises and cutting funds.

When society stigmatized divorce, we made divorce easily obtainable. Today, 50% of marriages end in divorce and the family unit is crumbling. When illegal alcohol spurred out-of-control organized crime, we made alcohol legal again and organized crime flooded the country with drugs. We “solved” illegal gambling by making it legal through casinos and membership in Gambling Anonymous is steadily rising. When teen pregnancies increased, we handed out condoms in elementary schools and began actively encouraging their frequent use, resulting in a single motherhood epidemic. We “solved” the problem of dangerous back-alley abortions by making abortion legal, resulting in more and more abortions that have gone so far as murder outside the womb.

There is a pattern here. Society and our “leaders” are solving difficult problems with easy fixes and no forethought to consequences. The current easy fix being generated for our runaway drug problem is to make drugs legal. Does anyone really believe flooding the free market with legal, dangerous drugs (and that will surely be a result) will curtail their usage?

Chuck Schumer’s victory dance is not only premature, it is ridiculous. Amnesty, especially before securing the border, is a politically expedient fix for a difficult problem that will cause more problems. Obamacare is a perfect example of a hasty, politically expedient fix resulting in a nightmare.

When will we ever learn?

David J. Hentosh

Rubio Has It Backwards

Sen. Marco Rubio stated: “First comes the legalization. Then come the measures to secure the border. And then comes the process of permanent residence.” The security of this country should ALWAYS come first and if Rubio doesn’t understand that, he needs to go. Border security has been neglected far too long and a focus on social issues over security is dangerous and irresponsible.

Rubio’s backward agenda is one more sign that conservative values are being eroded by media pressure and vote pandering. The leftward shift of the political middle ground is being assisted by those who are freely giving up ground in a foolish effort to be popular with the loudest segment of the population rather than be true to long-held conservative values. This is an abandonment that will have dire consequences. Then again,  consequences no longer seem to matter.

David J. Hentosh

Progressive Immigration Failure in Sweden

Progressives love to point to Sweden as an example of the type of utopian society they believe their agenda creates, but this past week’s riots in Sweden are a direct result of the continuing denial such an agenda demands. In the face of these riots, that denial continues as the press tries hard not to report that the overwhelming majority of rioters are Muslims.

Starting in the 80’s, Sweden began admitting a large number of third world immigrants, creating a generous welfare system to help them settle and assimilate. Economic and political upheaval in countries such as Somalia, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Iraq brought a huge number of Muslims to welcoming Sweden. Rather than assimilate, however, they created their own communities mirroring the values and traditions of their Muslim homelands.

The progressive, non-judgmental attitude prevalent in Sweden not only allowed these communities to shun assimilation, it allowed, and encouraged, an entire generation of Muslim immigrants to grow dependent on the welfare system while being infused with values and traditions that clash with Western societies. The violence towards the West found in the Middle East Muslim world, therefore, became part of their upbringing.

As Sweden tries to address the economic burden of their welfare system and revamp immigration policies, accusations of discrimination abound from those who have benefited most from those progressive policies. The autonomous communities that have been allowed to form are becoming offensive to many and as refusal to change continues, discrimination will undoubtedly occur.

There is much confusion on the part of officials in Sweden concerning the riots. Fully engrossed in progressive idealism, they do not understand how the recipients of their generosity could do such a thing. For those without progressive blinders, it is an inevitable result of being conditioned to welfare and treated with non-judgmental deference.

There is a lesson to be learned from this, but it is highly doubtful progressives here will see it. They have the same idealistic blinders on, believing open immigration and unlimited welfare works. The mainstream media agrees and will continue to conceal the rot such policies bring. They are much too invested to turn back now and will not allow riots in Sweden to be an omen.

David J. Hentosh

Legal Immigration Needs Reform, Too

Once again, Ann Coulter shatters PC protocol and vocalizes what many think but fear to say. With so many people from around the world wanting to come to America, why is it that we refuse to be more selective with our immigration process? Bowing to diversity with our immigration policy is, literally, killing us.

From Ann Coulter

My thought is, maybe we should consider admitting immigrants who can succeed in America, rather than deadbeats…But we’re not allowed to “discriminate” in favor of immigrants who would be good for America. Instead of helping America, our immigration policies are designed to help other countries solve their internal problems by shipping their losers to us.

The problem isn’t just illegal immigration. I would rather have doctors and engineers sneaking into the country than legally arriving ditch-diggers…since 1969, about 85 percent of legal immigrants have come from the Third World. They bring Third World levels of poverty, fertility, illegitimacy and domestic violence with them. When they can’t make it in America, they simply go on welfare and sometimes strike out at Americans.

During the three years from 2010 through 2012, immigrants have committed about a dozen mass murders in this country, not including the 9/11 attack. The mass murderers were from Afghanistan, South Korea, Vietnam, Haiti, South Africa, Ethiopia and Mexico. None were from Canada or Western Europe…We ought to be able to do something about the people we chose to bring here.

Read it all here: The Problem Isn’t Just Illegal Immigration

DJH

Here Comes the Immigration Reform Farce

A bipartisan group of senators is ready to put forth a so-called “broad” immigration bill that is nothing but a farce. In today’s skewed political climate, “bipartisan” is only mentioned when conservatives cave in to the loud, shrill demands of the left. If a liberal moves to the right, he is called a traitor, a racist, or much worse, but never “bipartisan”.

Amnesty, the only goal of progressives’ immigration reform, is on the way. The “bipartisan” demand to secure the borders first, an absolute necessity before real immigration reform can begin, was given lip service and then watered-down to appease the “bipartisan” senators who will now pretend they fought hard for, and won, a working compromise.

The bill allows ten years of planning and/or securing the borders before any real impediment to citizenship can be put into place for failing to comply. Meanwhile, a path to citizenship for illegals will begin immediately with nothing to stop it from morphing into full-blown amnesty. In the span of ten years with little border security, that “path” to citizenship will become a fully paved, toll-free, four-lane, busy highway.

True comprehensive immigration reform is impossible until the borders are secure. Therefore, other immigration reforms will not even become a topic for discussion. One of those other reforms in need of addressing is assimilation.

According to a Hudson Institute’s comparison study of native-born to naturalized American citizens, native-born Americans are: 30% more likely to consider themselves American rather than citizens of the world; 30% more likely to believe the U.S. Constitution is a higher legal authority than international law; 31% more likely to believe schools should focus on American citizenship rather than ethnic pride; and 23% more likely to believe all citizens understand English.

Assimilation allowed the US to become a successful “melting pot” never before seen in the history of the world. We have become a less cohesive society the more we have ignored the importance of assimilation. We can’t realistically address this or other reforms until the borders are secure. This latest bill is a farce, reforms nothing, and opens the door to chaos.

David J. Hentosh

Putting the Cat Back in the Bag

Once the proverbial cat is out of the bag, it is next to impossible to get it back in. So it has been with laws. Once on the books, it has been very, very hard to get a law repealed unless, that is, repeal dovetails with the progressive agenda.

Colorado is set to erase the crime of adultery from its books in order to “keep the government out of people’s bedrooms” and because the law is “archaic”. It seems we are to ignore that the government has already been in our bedrooms forcing health insurers to pay for abortions and provide free contraception. As long as the government is watering-down morality, bedroom intrusion is acceptable.

The traditional family unit is no longer considered as important as self-gratification. Adultery, divorce, abortion, out-of-wedlock pregnancy, and open marriage have not only become acceptable, they are often being advocated. An entire generation has been raised with a low regard for the family unit and are left with no cornerstone for building the future.

Obamacare was passed hastily in order to satisfy Obama’s personal desire for universal health care. He did not read or understand the bill beforehand and didn’t care how damaging it could be as long as it was passed. Unfortunately, it will now be very difficult to get any of it changed or repealed. The common good was neglected in order to benefit 10% of the population – and there is no going back.

Gun control and immigration reform are the current cats being let out of the bag. Both require a serious and impartial analysis of consequences, but both will be handled by knee-jerk, emotional legislation instead. Years from now, there will be a lot of consternation as legislators try to repeal thE soon-to-be hastily passed laws. They will chase those cats for a long time but they will never get them back in the bag.

David J. Hentosh

Expanding Torture

The United Nations special rapporteur on torture, Juan E. Méndez, is trying to take human rights to a level that will interest far left progressives and stun those who are more reasonable. He is attempting to define certain medical actions and omissions along with some national policies as “torture”.

Specifically, Mendez zeroes in on abortion, wanting us to believe “…restrictions on access to abortion and about absolute abortion bans as violating the prohibition on torture and ill treatment.”  Mendez even suggests that denying prenatal testing could be considered torture because it “is imperative to a woman’s ability to exercise reproductive autonomy”.

Mendez takes his idea to an even more absurd level by considering prostitutes (“sex workers”) or anyone else to be tortured when required to undergo mandatory HIV testing. Furthermore, he considers drug addicts being tortured when deprived of parental rights because of drug use. One can easily imagine where he stands on Mumia Abu-Jamal.

This removes water boarding as the prominent torture controversy and, intended or not, labels the pro-life movement a crime against humanity. Equating the abortion issue with slavery no longer seems as ridiculous in comparison, but one can expect that the so-called “pro-choice” crowd will embrace it.

The UN will take this seriously but, thankfully, fewer and fewer people take the UN seriously. The international community, however, may embrace such an idea in its quest for a universal government that can legislate all nations down, or up, to an equal level. That, certainly, is desirable with progressives in the US, so don’t be surprised if this idea begins to grow legs. It is dumb enough to become popular.

David J. Hentosh

Stigmatizing From the Left

As always, Ann Coulter pulls no punches when holding liberals accountable for their actions and she never fails to present facts highlighting liberal hypocrisy. Mayor Bloomberg’s “Big Gulp” fiasco provided a perfect springboard for Ann to do her thing.

From Ann Coulter

Posters are popping up in subway stations and bus stops giving statistics about teen pregnancy…It’s one thing to stigmatize “Big Gulp” drinkers, but liberals are hopping mad at this attempt to stigmatize teen pregnancy, 90 percent of which is unwed. To put it another way, if you’re a New York teen with a distended belly these days, it had better be because you’re pregnant…Liberals act as if gun owners, soda-guzzlers and smokers are innocent victims of the gun, food and cigarette industries, but the $542 million-a-year birth control industry is a quarry of angels…

Far from opposing stigmas, liberals are the main propagators of them — against cigarettes, guns, plastic bags, obesity, not recycling, Fox News, racist “code words,” not liking “Lincoln” and junk food…And what exactly was the purpose of the Journal-News publishing the names and addresses of every legal gun owner in various counties in New York state a few months ago? To congratulate them? To start a hunting club?

Los Angeles has banned plastic bags at supermarkets…But a little ad campaign describing the downsides of teenage pregnancy — which is still subsidized — and liberals howl in protest…single mothers are revered victims — victims in need of an ever-expanding social safety net, staffed with well-pensioned government workers…It would be hard to make the case that fast food, plastic bags and cigarettes do more damage than single motherhood.

Read it all here:  Trouble in the Nanny State

DJH

Insurance or Tax?

A bill introduced in the New York State Assembly would require the state’s residents to acquire liability insurance as a condition for gun ownership. The annual cost for $1 million in liability insurance is estimated to be between $1600 and $2000.

Proponents of the bill will certainly argue that this is no different than requiring insurance coverage for car registration or home insurance in order to obtain a mortgage. There is logic to that argument, but the bill opens the door for an onslaught of requirements for insurance.

Clearly, this is a mandate to buy insurance, though it is not the same as the mandate from Obamacare because it does not require everyone to buy insurance. However, if this bill were to land in a court’s lap for a decision, could it be labeled a tax?

No one expected the Supreme Court to rule the Obamacare mandate to be a tax, especially after Obama adamantly assured us it was not a tax. However, that is what occurred and, as with many court rulings, it created a slippery slope that a NY court may decide to slide down. Stranger things have happened.

Once that door is wide open, could liability insurance be required for ownership of a bow and arrow, machete, BB gun, darts, or a nail gun? How about for ownership of a dog, baseball bat, skateboard, or a bicycle? Could a purchase of cigarettes, alcoholic beverages, or prescription painkillers require liability insurance or an additional health policy?

That may sound crazy but not too long ago it sounded crazy to buy water in bottles like soda, pay for a cable to receive free TV, hand out condoms in grade schools, or provide sex-change operations to prison inmates. Perhaps this may be a good time to buy stock in insurance companies.

David J. Hentosh