Merry Christmas!

This is what I say to those I meet this time of year.  It is the same greeting that my family and friends would get, so it applies to benign-looking strangers as well, meaning them nothing but good.  My Jewish and Islamic friends also get “Merry Christmas”.  Not surprising among reasonable people, they smile and return the blessing.  Likewise, when I notice (not being a theologian or scholar) that it is Ramadan or Al-Hijra, I will tell Muslims to have “a blessed” one and I post a hearty “שמח חנוכה!” when I see that Hanukkah is approaching.

The way I see it, if I would bestow the same wishes to my children, they should be pleased if I wish them well in the same way.  Likewise, if they are sincere and would give their loved ones the same greetings, then I am satisfied with their intent when I get a “شهر رمضان المبارك” (I admit I cannot even come close to pronouncing the Arabic).  I’m not worried about being diminished somehow or being tagged for eternal punishment.  I don’t believe that God, the only one that gets it right with a sea of imperfect humans underfoot, would do anything other than smile.

Don’t get me wrong, I am rock-solid in my faith and believe I have most of it right.  I know that I misunderstand some things, but, “behold, I stand at the door and knock.  If any man hears me and opens the door, I shall come in and eat with him”.  If I have Jeshue’s or Jehovah’s name wrong, or make some other error because of what I have been taught, He will come to me if I am sincere.  He makes up the difference.  That’s called “grace”.  If He will cover for me, why not any other human striving (according to his experience) to be Godly?

But this “happy holiday” business?   Holiday?  If they’re lumping in everything from October to January, that’s one thing.  If not, exactly which Holy Day are they celebrating (with their Christmas trees and presents) if not Christmas?  The Festival of Lights and Islamic New Year are over.  Kwanzaa (not a holy day, but a cultural event) isn’t until after Christmas.  This appears to be a rather vapid attempt to avoid being offensive by some and an attempt to deny the true nature of the celebration by others.  Some make it “winter solstice”, which is just the name of the shortest day of the year. 

This last group (atheists) insists that any mention of anything to do with God (they often make it “magical sky-god” to be as offensive as possible) is unconstitutional.  They demand that ancient city names be changed, historic memorials and other artifacts be hidden or destroyed, etc.  Real Taliban stuff.

The First Amendment says that the government will not set up a state religion, but otherwise, the free exercise of religion shall not be prohibited.  This is referred to as “freedom of religion”.  One is also free to opt out of participating in religion.  But it doesn’t even suggest that anyone can be free from seeing or hearing about it.  ‘Freedom from religion’ (protection from exposure) means staying home.  Interestingly, the phrase “separation of church and state” does not exist anywhere in either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution.  It is widely attributed to a 1947 SCotUS decision, referring to an 1802 letter from President Jefferson to a religious group.  Jefferson confirms a division between religious and government business, but goes on to wish them the blessings of the “Father and Creator”.

And a Happy New Year!  I was going to save pedestrian, D.C. news for future scribbling, but we have been given gifts too important to ignore.  The Democrats have been ignoring the will of the People and the Constitution as if November’s election never occurred.  They delayed responsible legislation (like a budget and the expiring tax cuts) all year to cram it all into this false-crisis “lame duck” session, along with tons of Socialist agenda items.  Instead of a “continuing resolution” (50 pages, simply continuing all programs at current levels until the new Congress in January), they (most Dems, a couple Republicans) came up with a gargantuan “omnibus spending bill”.  Yet another 1,900 page monster, crammed with hidden/confusing language, and at least 8,000 new, Progressive spending projects that would increase the deficit by another trillion dollars. 

They also tried again to force through their DREAM act (Democrats’ Registration Extravaganza by Amnesty measure?), which would give illegal alien “children” up to 35 years old immunity from deportation upon application, and eventual citizenship, in return for their “service” in accepting money, free food and free education for years, if they promise to accept the additional burden of more free cash and education.  And priority over Americans’ kids.   And ability to vouch-in their entire families.

  

Well, the conservatives did as we told them in November:  they largely held the breach against the blitz in favor of illegal aliens, massive debt and crippling tax increases.  They had to give up on “paying for” the extension of unemployment, so it wasn’t a great deal for the country. They wanted some cuts somewhere to offset that cost (most of the “$700 billion – no, $900 billion – no, $1 trillion, GIVEN to the rich”).  However, it seems that the Progressives’ much touted “pay as you go” resolution (and recent screaming about debt) was just an inconvenient truth for them to sidestep.

So, while we still have a lot repair work to do, we will be in much better condition than we feared (or they planned) in January.  We can breathe a bit easier and enjoy the more important truth.  The Good News that is the reality of this season.

False premise in “sacrifice”

In the Dec 19th Perspectives (Inland Newspapers), Garland Byrum’s and Daniel Jeffs’ letters are used to ‘debate’ whether it is “time for sacrifice”.  People have always sacrificed here.  Americans have long been the most charitable people on Earth, whether in support of our own citizens or responding to distant emergencies.  Our government typically gives more than any other (and most combined) to any given aid drive and our people freely donate more than our government.

Byrum is a lawyer with the American Institute for Progressive Democracy and 1st V.P. of the Democratic Club of Claremont (his ‘USAPAC” could be any one of several by that name ranging from “Conservative Leadership” to the “Communist Party, USA”).  He admits that our deficit (quintupled since Progressives took supermajority control of the government and equal to the first 42 presidents’ combined) is “unsustainable”.

From there he departs from reality, asserting that “common good cannot be sustained by cutting expenses alone” and if there is a government program that we individually benefit from, “adding taxes will require sacrifice”.   He then recites the Left’s class warfare mantra of looting “the rich”, using partial information about tax rates.

Byrum’s “common good” likely includes giving 47% of the population a complete pass on income taxes, while the top 2% pay about 70% of those taxes.  They also get “rebates” on the taxes they didn’t pay.  These are I.R.S. return numbers, not skewed statistics to be quoted with “but they use loopholes”.  The loophole asterisk belongs with his citation of Eisenhower’s “91%” tax rate: the 1950’s tax code was rife with loopholes and less than half of that rate was actually paid.  It has been proven over and over through history that overtaxing the rich just makes the rich go elsewhere to hire and invest, while “common good” free rides make the poor dependant on their welfare masters and run up the debt.  Socialist “rich” cry for higher taxes (and their loopholes) but somehow fail to donate to the government, while conservative “rich” donate far more to charity.

What made young America a superpower in only 150 years, and THE superpower in another 100 (despite Socialist waste, interference and sabotage), was maintaining a minimum level of centralized government and allowing the individual desire to prosper bring the entire economy up with it.  They let families and local charity or faith-based groups do their much better job of caring for the needy.  Then local or state approved government programs took care of the little that remained.

The correct ending for Byrum’s, “…if there is a government program…”, is not, “…adding taxes will require sacrifice.”  The correct ending is, “…it should be eliminated in favor of the better system.”  The Constitution does not provide for centralized welfare control among the enumerated powers.  It is the several states that created the United States, and they and their People actually hold most of the power.  Until the 1920’s Progressives, our debt and deficit rates were almost flat, because the system worked.  Certainly, we cannot just cut people off.  We must honor the contracts we made with the poor, the elderly and the sick.  But we can start the process of moving responsibility and control back out where it belongs; gradually move people into equal or better programs that are NOT going through the vast bureaucracy.   Better yet, help many of them out of indentured servitude and, over time, into self-sufficiency.  This means no welfare-imposed limits on prosperity for minorities and the poor.

The reason that too many politicians and lawyers don’t like this obvious answer is that power over the federal valves that control the flow of trillions of dollars is vast power.  Even a little “leakage” to individuals and their cronies is measured in billions of dollars.

Daniel Jeffs’ “Why give more?” doesn't appear to be written for this debate, but his points are all solid.  He has served the People at the local level for decades.  He does not appear to be one of the growing numbers of unionized “public servants” that double-dip and triple-dip to bring home more in retirement than they ever earned.   He, like most of us, is still willing to contribute what he can: his time and experience to help others.

When the people recognize (as 70% now do) that our system has been corrupted to favor centralized power over efficient use of charity and local control, they get frustrated by the continued waste and abuse they now see in the stunningly arrogant, “lame duck” session.  Only a month after a historic repudiation of the Left by voters, Progressives (even a few in the GOP) were cramming another TRILLION dollars of pork into bloated giveaway bills as if it was their right to do so.

Conservatives stopped most of the additional damage.  Repair will come, but slowly.  If government (especially the higher levels) would get out of the way, more people would have more money to contribute as well.

Funny “give” and “take” - - and WWRHD?

We see some funny word usage these days.  Not kid’s jargon or some techno-lexicon.  I mean political Leftspeak. Much is obvious, such as when the current President says anything about “making Progress” or that he will “consider” Republican  proposals.  Some is more obscure.

Let’s leave “journalist” (i.e. anti-American/hacker/extortionist/anarcho-Socialist/terrorist) DeRange (or LeStrange or whatever his name is) for another day.  Lots of double-talk among far-"right" anarchists that conveniently destabilize democracies for the picking of  far left Socialists.

We see “Liberation Churches” and allied Socialist (therefore Atheist) sponsored “Spiritual” centers and programs.  Black Liberation Theology (their name, not mine) is: God wants people to be heavily taxed and the wealth distributed subjectively by government, and whites (regardless of individual history) must “give everything” in reparations for slavery and can only be saved collectively.   That would be the profane “Reverend” Jeremiah Wright and Obama’s current “spiritual advisors” (how many Presidents have had a whole squad of them, like Emperor Palpatine’s Dark-Side viziers?).  For the record, I do not believe the PotUS is a Muslim.  In fact, Obama professed his “collective salvation” in several speeches this fall.  My humble opinion is that he simply favors Islam (of any sort) over ‘Christianity of the past’, but is just as devout as his "Christian" advisers. 

advisor “Reverend” Jim Wallis founded Progressive Socialist Sojourner magazine.  Asked if he favored “redistribution of wealth [Marxism] in society” under B.L.T. he responded, “Absolutely, without any hesitation. That's what the gospel is all about.”  I missed those verses somehow; were they in red?  That’s what Jesus would do?  I seem to recall him giving tax collectors and usurers a hard time, even as he strove to save them, individually.

Next is “Reverend” Otis Moss Jr, who preaches LT like Wright.  Then stridently (and pitifully) self-hating “Father” Michael Pfleger, also pushing LT like “Reverend” Kirbyjon Caldwell (who plays all sides to favor Socialism) and “Bishop” T.D. Jakes (T.D. Jakes Ministries, Inc: CD sets on sale this week and soliciting corporate partners) to round out the crew – er, conclave.  All of them generally (mis)invoke the Bible, God or Jesus only when pinned down, preferring the vaguer “spiritual”, “moral”, “ethical”, “compassionate”, etc.

This high-sounding vagueness (with no mention of God at all) is the dialect of Socialist moral-tweaking frauds; just sounding like churches.  ‘Why are you such an immoral, racist hater, that you would deny the spiritual basics of ethical life to children?!?’  They pretty much just extort money by guilt and divert it to leftist groups that abuse/ridicule/sabotage anything Constitutional, values-oriented or American.  Then, if you delete the pseudo-spirituality altogether and begin the (rather pitiful) insulting “magic sky-god” stuff, you get mainstream “Sojourner” fodder*. 

After 2 years with Progressive super majorities and the White House spending like 40 previous Presidents combined, we find ourselves with a (really, really) lame duck congress.  They did not bother to draft an annual budget or settle extensions to avoid massive, across-the-board tax increases until now.  Never mind that they are (still under Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi) dithering over DREAM amnesty bills, protect Vegas poker gaming, attacking the 1st Amendment, debating giving Russia our defense plans, finally wrapping up Rangel’s guilt and posturing over Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in the few days before adjournment.   

As to the Income, Inheritance, Capital Gains, and other taxes (listed, with a leftist bias [ignoring that their lowest beneficiaries PAY NO INCOME TAX TO START WITH] HERE) that will skyrocket for everyone unless Bush’s cuts are extended, let’s see what Speaker Pelosi says.  She declares that every unemployment dollar "creates jobs" and “pays back 2 to 1”.  That is, people will spend their (2 full years of) unemployment checks (that we pay for) on the basic bills they have always paid, somehow pumping up the economy above normal and cutting unemployment.  On the other hand, Nancyspeak is that “giving billions to the rich” (employers and investors that are chomping at the bit for opportunities to hire or invest to get richer; already paying 90% of all taxes while 47% pay none) would do nothing for the economy.  Really? All of history is wrong?  And “GIVING”?  Excuse me; aren’t we arguing about how much government will take away from the earners?  Actually that’s incorrect; it’s how much more will be taken from them.

Pelosi continues that she won’t allow an extension “unless it includes a cut for middle class”.  Hmm.  Only Nancy’s bill would exclude anyone; Republicans incessantly say to “cut everyone’s taxes”.  Her imaginary, class-warfare-conservatives are “holding the middle class hostage”.   They also somehow forced “$90 billion (bailout)” past the Dem’s supermajority for rich bankers, “and now they want tax breaks…after all they put us through?”   Wow.

She repeats this mantra, trying to make it come true: ‘mmm, investors don’t want to invest,  mmm, unemployment creates jobs, mmm, employers don’t want to employ, mmm, spending lowers the debt,  mmm, success is evil,’ etc.  She adds that the 5 million jobs Dems destroyed over 2 years somehow “created more jobs than the entire 8 years of the Bush administration” and that they saved “values, veterans, the Heartland, the auto industry”, unicorns and the Golden Fleece along the way.  Progressive congressmen parrot Nancy’s, “give $900 billion ($700B last week) to the rich”, Leftspeaking that “Americans agree with us”.  This is from polls that showed  (3 separate questions) more favor breaks for ‘just the poor’ than ‘just the rich’, but 66% favor “cut everyone’s taxes”.

Obama double-Left-speeched on Dec 6 and 7.  To him, jihadist, mass-murdering terrorists don’t exist, but Republicans that negotiated with him are “hostage takers” that “have harmed the hostages”.  With an eye to his own re-election**, he admitted that “to stabilize the economy” he had to extend the Bush tax cuts for everyone (breaking his promise to punish the rich).  But he also claimed that any improvement in jobs or the economy would be because of his already-failed stimulus and extending unemployment.  He also admitted that Socialist “purists” might let the extensions lapse (creating massive hardships), then institute reductions next year that could be called “Obama tax cuts”.  He reminded his “sanctimonious” Progressives that they need to get what they can this year and keep usurping power into the future as they always have.  The Left responded by threatening to let the tax cuts expire, adding, “You’re another one!” [my summary].  They are irate that many successful people might go unpunished and keep some of their money.

Finally, since we’re in la-la land, let’s revisit the Leftspeak argument for their open hatred of (and now-admitted goal of looting) the rich**: Robin Hood.  He stole from the rich and gave to the poor, right?  Actually, the conglomerate figure (11^th-12^th cent) that was Robin o’ the Hood, led resistance against usurping government that insulted, over regulated and overtaxed the people; he stole from abusive tax collectors [not recommended present day] and returned the money to those that earned it, letting them take care of each other in genuine charity.

Seems that What Robin Hood Would Do is closer to What Jesus Would Do than what Socialists Would Like To Get Away With.

*Worshiping the rock we live on rather than the "sudden, infinite release of energy" (with no physical source) that virtually all scientists now credit with the act of creation of everything.
** Trying (a la the 1998 'trust me, I'm no Socialist' campaign and not to be confused with actual movement away from the extreme Left) to look sensible and capable for his own benefit, as Soros et all call for his replacement (interesting talk for a foreigner who "is just into finance" and not globalization).  Forced into his true persona by the pressure, he actually promises more Progressive Socialization and specifically raising taxes in 2012.
 ***Excluding of course, Hypocrite-Socialist billionaires Warren Buffet, George Soros, etc.  They loudly proclaim that the rich should "give much more" to government programs for the poor (than they already do).  When they are told (over and over) that the government accepts donations from any that choose to give, they suddenly only speak Sanscrit or suffer from spontaneous deafness.  Given the same opportunities to support charities, mere millionaires usually out-give them to help the truly less fortunate.  Soros, of course gives millions every year; to anti-American Socialist groups and campaigns that destabilize economies (which he eventually collapses to profit from in money markets).

Meh, 'unusual methods', 'creative accounting', shenanigans, fraud, LYING TO THE SOVEREIGN AMERICAN PEOPLE?

Below is a direct reprint from the Washington Post web site (as printed in several other newspapers).  Other than capturing some background links under the by-line, it is copied as published, including the author's text source links.  He doesn't need any help from me in getting this point across.

~SophosArchaeus

Unusual methods helped ICE break deportation record, e-mails and interviews show

[Thanks to WashingtonPost.com]

By Andrew Becker

Center for Investigative Reporting
Monday, December 6, 2010; 12:08 AM

• VIDEO: ICE press conference (October 6, 2010)
• LINK TO: Documents, emails and interviews

For much of this year, the Obama administration touted its tougher-than-ever approach to immigration enforcement, culminating in a record number of deportations.

But in reaching 392,862 deportations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement included more than 19,000 immigrants who had exited the previous fiscal year, according to agency statistics. ICE also ran a Mexican repatriation program five weeks longer than ever before, allowing the agency to count at least 6,500 exits that, without the program, would normally have been tallied by the U.S. Border Patrol.

When ICE officials realized in the final weeks of the fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, that the agency still was in jeopardy of falling short of last year's mark, it scrambled to reach the goal. Officials quietly directed immigration officers to bypass backlogged immigration courts and time-consuming deportation hearings whenever possible, internal e-mails and interviews show.

Instead, officials told immigration officers to encourage eligible foreign nationals to accept a quick pass to their countries without a negative mark on their immigration record, ICE employees said.

The option, known as voluntary return, may have allowed hundreds of immigrants - who typically would have gone before an immigration judge to contest deportation for offenses such as drunken driving, domestic violence and misdemeanor assault - to leave the country. A voluntary return doesn't bar a foreigner from applying for legal residence or traveling to the United States in the future.

Once the agency closed the books for fiscal 2010 and the record was broken, agents say they were told to stop widely offering the voluntary return option and revert to business as usual.

Without these efforts and the more than 25,000 deportations that came with them, the agency would not have topped last year's record level of 389,834, current and former ICE employees and officials said.

The Obama administration was intent on doing so even as it came under attack by some Republicans for not being tough enough on immigration enforcement and by some Democrats for failing to deliver on promises of comprehensive immigration reform.

"It's not unusual for any administration to get the numbers they need by reaching into their bag of tricks to boost figures," said Neil Clark, who retired as the Seattle field office director in late June, adding that in the 12 years he spent in management he saw the Bush and Clinton administrations do similar things.

But at a news conference Oct. 6, ICE Director John T. Morton said that no unusual practices were used to break the previous year's mark.

"When the secretary tells you that the numbers are at an all-time high, that's straight, on the merits, no cooking of the books," Morton said, referring to his boss, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. "It's what happened."

ICE declined to make any officials available for interviews. In selected responses to e-mailed questions, spokesman Brian P. Hale wrote that the agency did nothing different from previous years but did not deny that ICE had focused on voluntary returns when it faced a shortfall weeks before the fiscal year ended. Rather, field offices were reminded of the voluntary return option, he said.

"ICE offered eligible aliens . . . the opportunity to accept voluntary return," Hale said. "The decision to accept VR [voluntary return] was the aliens'."

Those efforts did not appear to result in a spike in voluntary returns. Statistics provided by ICE show that voluntary returns peaked at 8,960 in June, before dipping and then leveling off in the last two months of the fiscal year. A total of 64,876 immigrants were voluntarily returned to their home countries in 2010.

Chris Crane, president of the American Federation of Government Employees National Council 118, the union that represents ICE immigration agents and officers, said offering voluntary return was not common practice for the agency. The union has been at odds with Morton over what it calls lax enforcement and gave him a no-confidence vote in June.

"It's breaking the rules to break the record," Crane said. "You don't change the way you do business to meet some quota. Morton said we don't do quotas. But that's what this is."

New accounting

On Oct. 1 - the start of fiscal 2011 - Robin F. Baker, an acting ICE assistant director, cheered field directors on to the finish line in an e-mail obtained by the Center for Investigative Reporting.

"We are just 1061 shy of 390,000. However, we still get to count closed cases through Monday, October 4th so . . . keep having your folks concentrate on closing those cases," Baker wrote.

Starting in 2009, ICE began to shut its books for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30 in the first few days of October. Any deportations that take place in one fiscal year but are confirmed after Oct. 5 are added to the next fiscal year's statistics.

Based on the new accounting approach, the agency counted 19,422 removals from 2009 in the 2010 statistics. In 2010 itself, 373,440 other people were deported.

Current and former ICE employees also point to an expanded U.S.-Mexico partnership as another way the agency increased overall deportation numbers.

Known as the Mexican Interior Repatriation Program, the bilateral effort between the U.S. and Mexican governments focuses on reducing the deaths of migrants attempting to cross the border during the scorching Arizona summer. Mexicans caught by Border Patrol agents in the Sonoran Desert region and southern Arizona are turned over to ICE agents, who carry out the removals to Mexico.

In a February memo, James M. Chaparro, ICE's head of enforcement and removal operations, called on field directors to "maximize" participation in the program, which he outlined as one of the ways to increase removals and "move us into position to meet or exceed the fiscal year goals."

Since its launch in 2004, the program had never started earlier than July 7. This year, the first flight full of Mexicans departed June 1. By starting in June, ICE tallied 6,527 returns that in the past would have been handled - and counted - by the U.S. Border Patrol. Overall, a record 23,384 Mexicans between June and September accepted flights back to Mexico City, and then a bus ticket to their home town, at a cost of almost $15 million.

ICE spokesman Hale said the agency started the program early because of available funds and a timely agreement between the United States and Mexico. He acknowledged that some of the immigrants removed through the program were caught or detained hundreds of miles from Arizona.

Select individuals from west Texas were offered an opportunity to volunteer for safe return to their place of origin in the interior of Mexico," Hale said.

He also confirmed that Mexican nationals detained near Seattle - possibly as many as 500 immigrants, according to one local officer - were also included on the flights.

A year-end scramble

The surge to break the deportation record in the final weeks of the fiscal year consumed the agency, said a high-ranking immigration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the person wasn't authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

"They had everyone burning the candle at both ends to reach 390,000," the official said. "They were basically saying anything you can do to increase the overall removal number, that's what you should do - over everything else."

lIn the Seattle area, immigration officers were instructed to give the voluntary return option to immigrants who did not face mandatory detention and didn't have attorneys.

lIn the Atlanta area, ICE officers were told to persuade immigrants who had already asked to see an immigration judge to instead voluntarily leave the country.

lIn Chicago, officers were told to stop releasing eligible immigrants and monitoring them with electronic ankle bracelets, which might spur more to accept voluntary removals, according to a Sept. 22 e-mail.

"Due to our increase in funding for detention for the remainder of the fiscal year, do not release anyone on an order of recognizance at this time," James McPeek, an assistant field office director in Chicago, wrote in the e-mail to employees. "Another option is to offer a VR [voluntary return] and keep in custody - this will increase our removal numbers for the fiscal year."

An ICE employee in Louisiana, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal, estimated that over a two-week period at least 100 to 150 Mexican nationals, some of whom had multiple drunken driving convictions, had their court cases reassigned as voluntary return, which was not common practice. ICE agents elsewhere reported similar numbers.

Several ICE employees said, however, that once the fiscal year ended, their offices reverted to infrequently offering the return option. In the Pacific Northwest, some employees received an e-mail stating just that.

"Effective immediately: do not offer V/Rs [voluntary returns] to aliens who have been convicted of or are pending DUI," ICE supervisor Elizabeth Godfrey wrote Oct. 4.

ICE's goal for 2011 is to remove 404,000 immigrants.

Andrew Becker is a reporter for the Center for Investigative Reporting. He can be reached at abecker@cironline.org.