Remember - Silence is Consent - VOTE November 4th!

Illegal Voters May Decide Fate of Senate

by Phyllis Schlafly Eagle Forum October 29, 2014

Control of the U.S. Senate is up for grabs on November 4, and illegal voters may tip the balance. Estimates are that more than 14 percent of non-citizens were registered to vote in the elections of 2008 and 2010, and that could now easily exceed the margin of victory in many tight Senate races.

Democrats typically win more than 80 percent of the votes cast by non-citizens, so votes cast by non-citizens produce a net bonanza of additional votes for Democrats. Democrat Al Franken won a Republican U.S. Senate seat in Minnesota by a margin of only 312 votes in 2008, and with the immense power of incumbency he is expected to cruise to reelection this time.

New non-partisan research by professors at Old Dominion University uncovered the shocking amount of voting by non-citizens, as published by the Washington Post last Friday. Their work did not choose sides in the debate over whether non-citizens should be allowed to vote, which Congress has already answered in the negative by sensibly limiting voting in federal elections to only American citizens.

This study concluded that voter ID alone will not eliminate voting by non-citizens, because voter ID does not require proof of citizenship, such as a passport or birth certificate. But that loophole is easily closed by requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote, just as one must show proof of citizenship in order to obtain a passport.

Several states enacted common-sense provisions in order to strengthen voter integrity in this year’s election. The U.S. Supreme Court denied an attempt to block voter ID from going into effect in Texas, so at least the Lone Star State will be able to limit mischief at their polls in this election.

Other states are not so fortunate. Wisconsin passed a voter ID law that was upheld by the Seventh Circuit, but the U.S. Supreme Court then blocked that good law from going into effect this November.

In July, three non-citizens were indicted for illegal voting in Ohio in the 2012 presidential election. But most illegal voting cases end in a plea bargain that results in erasure of the convictions after a year if the defendant stays out of additional trouble for that long.

In Colorado, which could decide which party controls the U.S. Senate, votes are now cast entirely by mail with little protection against voter fraud. A total of 3.6 million ballots were sent to Coloradans based on addresses as old as 2008, which is six years ago.

One Colorado state senator said he has been to households that have received as many as seven separate ballots, and the person now living there could vote all seven ballots without anyone noticing. Paid political activists, known as “harvesters,” can gather up to ten ballots of others and then dump them all in an unguarded drop box, and there is nothing that stops harvesters from gathering and voting even more.

What happens to unused ballots that people throw out after receiving them in the mail? Most people do not shred their trash, so many unused ballots inevitably end up in apartment complex garbage bins where they are available to be filled in and sent in by unscrupulous party workers.

The lack of voting integrity makes it far from clear whether the election outcome will reflect the will of the voters. The essential role played by poll watchers is impossible in Colorado’s system of mail-only balloting.

The corrupt practice of counting votes that were cast in the names of dead people reemerged in North Carolina in 2012. The executive director of that state’s election board reported that the votes of 81 dead people were counted, most of whom had died before it was possible for them to cast absentee ballots.

A shocking total of 35,570 voters in North Carolina had the same last and first names and birth dates of voters who also cast ballots in other states. Many hundreds of those voters even had the same last four digits of their Social Security numbers as people having identical names and birthdays who also voted in other states.

Reforms passed in North Carolina are not effective in time to ensure voter integrity in this election, where there is a close race for the U.S. Senate seat. No voter ID is yet in effect there.

The top priority of Obama’s Department of Justice has been to oppose voter ID laws passed by various states. But Attorney General Eric Holder has announced his resignation, and the Senate should not confirm any successor who opposes state efforts to improve voter integrity.

 

Values & Principles, Provide Strong & Brave Leadership!

America at the tipping point, Part 2

Posted By Chuck Norris On 09/07/2014
We said on Sept. 11 that we’d “never forget.” But when our president has a no-strategy strategy for stopping Islamic extremists, isn’t Washington sidestepping our commitment of remembrance in addition to their duty to protect our land and liberties?

Indeed, they mock those who gave their lives on that day that changed America by the fact that, 13 years after Sept. 11, we still don’t have an out-of-the box strategy for outwitting radical Islam.

Christine O’Donnell at the Washington Times was right on when she wrote last week, “With just a week’s notice, Mr. Obama had an immediate strategy for dealing with the unrest in Ferguson, Mo., yet even with a year’s notice, he didn’t have a strategy for the violence and unrest in Syria. Isn’t it a priority of the federal government to present a ready defense against foreign enemies?”

As Hot Air also reported, “America has no strategy, but ISIS does: Biological terrorism.” When a Dell laptop allegedly linked to ISIS was intercepted in route to Turkey from Syria, its contents revealed “a 19-page document in Arabic on how to develop biological weapons and how to weaponize the bubonic from infected animals,” according to Foreign Policy magazine.

It’s been said that one of the reasons the world – indeed, the U.S. – repeatedly finds itself in these perilous pickles with its adversaries is that we keep cycling from valuing liberty over safety to valuing safety more than liberty.

Chris Stewart, who, together with Ted Stewart authored “7 Tipping Points that Saved the World,” which describes how radical Islam came within a hair’s breath of taking over the world in 720 A.D., was interviewed by the Blaze and asked this very point about the relation and reversal of valuing safety over liberty.

The Blaze asked Stewart, “What if we don’t really appreciate freedom as much as we think we do? Even today, average people are more concerned with safety and stability than they are with liberty.”

Stewart answered, “It’s a good point. I believe it is human nature to look around at the world today – or the world our parents lived in yesterday, or the world we assume our children will live in tomorrow – and say: well, this is the normal state of the world. Things don’t change. One of the main points of [our] book is to point out how extraordinarily unique self-governance, liberty – whatever definition you want to give modern freedom – is in this world. You can talk to historians who specialize in this area. They believe that maybe 4 or 4 ½ percent of us have been able to control our own destinies and lives.”

He added, “So it is easy to just assume that this is the normal state of the world. But we have example after example of nations that have enjoyed freedom and then saw it recede, or, for reasons you mention, collapse. There are the former Soviet bloc nations: once the Berlin Wall fell most of them marched quickly towards freedom. But since then, many of them fallen back and are increasingly turning away. It’s been documented that there are only 22 nations in existence right now that have been democracies for over 50 years. I think that fact should shock people. For more than two generations there have been only 22 nations that consistently embraced freedom. I think it illustrates pretty clearly that what we have is fragile and that it isn’t necessarily going to last.”

Our founders – like those who have fought our wars – valued liberty more than safety. And so should we. They risked everything for freedom and their republic, trusting in God as they did. Our founders wrote, “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

Sept. 11 can still serve as America’s pivotal and big wake-up call – one that even preserves our liberty and republic – as long as our leadership doesn’t slumber in safety while remembering it. But on the eve of another Sept. 11, it’s paramount for all of us to recall (indeed, remember) the costs of indecision and forgetfulness in critical times like these as well as the power of courageous leadership to deliver us.

As I pointed out last week in Part 1, history repeatedly shows us that the only way to divert America’s imminent threats and political stalemates is by strong and brave leadership – the type shown by courageous souls in critical moments of war or crises like Sept. 11. Rather than a president who values safety over liberty, we need a president who values liberty over safety. We need men and women of valor once again to rise up and fight for the mantle of freedom.

President Ronald Reagan spoke of that type of fearlessness on the 40th anniversary of D-Day, when he asked: “What impelled you to put aside the instinct for self-preservation and risk your lives to take these cliffs? What inspired all the men of the armies that met here? We look at you, and somehow we know the answer. It was faith and belief; it was loyalty and love. The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead or on the next.”

May God grant us the same type of mercy as we bravely face foes like ISIS who will do anything and everything to harm our people and bring down our Republic.

 

Faulty Leadership & Calamitous Mistakes Lead to Disaster!

America at the Tipping Point (Part 1)

9/2/2014 - Chuck Norris - Townhall.com

Is history going to repeat itself?

I recently read the book "The Miracle of Freedom: 7 Tipping Points That Saved the World," by Chris Stewart and Ted Stewart. The Stewarts describe how radical Islam came within a hair's breadth of taking over the world. As I read that chapter and reflected upon my recent columns on the Islamic State's proliferation and atrocities, I thought again:

If we don't get leadership in Washington that can deal with such matters, history will repeat itself, except radical Islam could possibly win this time. As The Blaze explained, "Chris and Ted Stewart ask a question: How unusual is freedom in history? The answer may surprise some of you. The Stewarts estimate that fewer than 5 percent of all people have ever lived under conditions we in the Western World would consider free. The book explores a series of critical events, 'obvious forks in the road leading to very different outcomes that resulted in this extraordinary period we live in.'"

The Stewarts also discuss how only 22 of the 195 countries around the world have had a democratic government that has lasted for more than 50 years. And to what do those few countries owe the great privilege of freedom? The Stewarts say not merely our own efforts to fight for it but also the efforts of others throughout history. A few noteworthy examples include:

--A small band of Greek soldiers and their naval officers in a life-or-death conflict with the Persians in 480 B.C.

--Our allies in Great Britain who refused to surrender to the crushing power of Adolf Hitler's Third Reich.

--A handful of Frankish soldiers who opposed the conquering armies of Islam more than 13 centuries ago. In my previous two columns, I discussed how President Barack Obama's foreign policy of appeasement has only emboldened our enemies, especially in the case of Islamic extremists.

No president is perfect. But compared with Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, Obama's laissez-faire foreign policy plan -- namely, ignore or negotiate with our enemies -- is only causing their expansion and empowerment. They have spread like wildfire while he has coddled them and played the passive, retreating giant. And he is not the first in recent history to make this calamitous mistake.

The British prime minister from 1937 to 1940, Neville Chamberlain, was also known for his appeasement foreign policy. Despite Chamberlain's signing the Munich Agreement in 1938 and conceding the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia to Germany, Hitler continued his blitzkrieg and invaded Poland. Rather than divert war, Chamberlain exacerbated its conditions and therefore had to work triple time to fight a stronger Germany in the first eight months of World War II.

Only when Britain hit its tipping point did it even declare war on Germany in September 1939.

President Jimmy Carter is another example of the failure of appeasement foreign policy. In reaction to the Vietnam War, Carter downgraded the role of the U.S. military and sought a more peaceful path on the planet by downplaying the threat of our enemies, too.

Dr. Robert G. Kaufman, a professor of public policy at Pepperdine University, summarized Carter's plight well. In his May 1977 speech at Notre Dame University, Carter dismissed what he called "our inordinate fear of communism." As a result, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979. The revolutionary government of Iran held 52 American hostages for 444 days, something that also bolstered the strength of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's oppressive anti-American Islamist regime.

Moreover, the refusal of U.S. military and economic aid to Grenada strengthened its relationship with communist Cuba and heightened tensions with the U.S. And not to be forgotten is Adm. Bobby Ray Inman, the director of the National Security Agency under Carter. Inman's communications were intercepted, which uncovered that Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi had made a "loan" of $220,000 to Carter's brother, Billy, to gain influence inside the White House. It took a tough president, Ronald Reagan, to right the international wrongs of Carter and regain America's place in the world.

As far as Obama is concerned, Kaufman compared his ineffective foreign policy to Carter's and wrote, "Obama also has reprised Carter's mistake of offering too little, too late." Because of Obama's foreign policy of appeasement, the Islamic State has seized Syria and Iraq -- and is spreading around the world; Hamas and Hezbollah are greater enemies of Israel; Russia is invading Ukraine; North Korea is more vigilant against the West; and Egypt and Libya are in political and military disarray. Remember, early in Obama's presidency, when supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt during the so-called Arab Spring was the new U.S. path for world peace?

Understanding the end result of Obama's appeasement foreign policy is like looking into a historical crystal ball. Radical Islam has spread over the past seven years; the global community is more volatile than ever; and the U.S. is in a more unstable and vulnerable position and inching closer and closer to another world war. As the old adage goes, if we don't learn from history, we are bound to repeat it.

The seven tipping points that the Stewarts discussed remind us that each of those who fought for freedom through the ages has -- in some way or another -- made it easier for us to grab the baton of liberty. But the fact is that each country must fight to preserve freedom; otherwise, it will unravel one thread at a time. Like a frog in a kettle, we won't realize it's over until it's too late.

That is exactly the boiling point the U.S. is at with radical Islam and other extremist powers in the world, and the only way out is through stronger leadership in Washington. Kaufman noted the only way out: "Count on worse to come until Americans elect a neo-Reaganite president who will renounce the Carteresque foreign policy of Barack Obama."

That reminds me of a video that my wife, Gena, and I made in 2012. We cited these words from Reagan, which are truer today than even back when he said them: "You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.

We will preserve for our children this last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done."

I ask again: Is history going to repeat itself? Is it already doing so?

When Will America Wake Up?

Stop Disease at the Border by Phyllis Schlafly Eagle Forum October 15, 2014 Americans against amnesty are not only worried about unemployed Mexicans crossing our southern border illegally to take U.S. jobs. More than ever, we need the fence that Congress voted for and President George W. Bush made a television photo event when he signed it into law. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) said that at least ten ISIS thugs have crossed our southern border. Hunter added, if we caught ten, “you know there are going to be dozens more that did not get caught by the Border Patrol.” Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR) says the Islamic State, ISIS, is actively working with Mexican drug cartels to infiltrate and eventually attack Americans. ISIS has told us it wants to extend a caliphate over America, so why is anybody surprised that they are doing what they said they wanted to do? The problem of invasion across our border is no longer just a jobs problem. It’s a national security problem, a welfare problem, a public school problem, and a dangerous disease problem. It’s not a problem of accepting a few lost teenagers who arrived unannounced and demanded admission. It’s a problem of our public schools suddenly being invaded by thousands of young adults who have never been to any school, who are not familiar with basic hygiene, who can’t read or write, who don’t speak English or even familiar Spanish (but speak one of 21 different Spanish or Indian dialects), and who may carry new diseases such as EV-D68. It’s a problem of requiring our newly burdened health-care establishment to deal with diseases that are not common in the United States. During the summer we suffered an outbreak of EV-D68, a polio-like enterovirus. The outbreak is widespread in Central America, from which many of the illegal kids came. The CDC reports that at least 538 people, mostly children, in 43 states and the District of Columbia became ill with EV-D68. At least five U.S. children infected with EV-D68 died this fall. Obama has refused to bar entry to the United States by people from countries where Ebola is epidemic. The problem we face is not just one African who entered our country and then died from Ebola. It’s a national health problem that has made our health care personnel carriers of a fatal African disease endangering Americans who never went to Africa. Obama sent thousands of U.S. troops to Liberia, a country stricken with Ebola. He ignores the danger to our American troops and also to other Americans when these servicemen and women return home. The safety of the American people is less important to him than posing as a world citizen. Marine Corps General John F. Kelly, commander of the U.S. Southern Command, told the National Defense University in Washington, DC that, if Ebola comes to Central America, “it will cause a panic,” that “it’s literally ‘Katie bar the door,’ and there will be mass migration into the United States.” Meanwhile, the Centers for Disease Control reports that “By the end of the year, there will be 14 million people infected with Ebola and 62 percent of them dying.” Why doesn’t Obama impose a travel ban on persons flying here from Ebola-infected countries? It’s not enough to take the temperature of airline travelers and have them fill out a written form because we know that the African who died from Ebola after arrival in the U.S. had lied on his form. Mark Krikorian points out that the U.S. has issued 13,000 visas for travel to America from the three most Ebola-infected West African countries: Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea. Will Obama let those 13,000 people into America? Dr. Anthony Fauci, the specialist on infectious diseases at the National Institute for Health, is very much opposed to closing the U.S. border. Instead, he is blaming the Dallas Hospital, saying, “They dropped the ball” by failing to determine the patient’s “travel history.” Dr. Thomas Frieden, head of the CDC, blamed a supposed “breach of protocol” for a Dallas nurse getting Ebola, and called for an investigation of how she could get the disease while following full CDC precautions. According to Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, the CDC was given nearly $3 billion to fight infectious diseases but spent only 6 percent of that for its declared purpose. A much larger share of the money was spent on community transformation grants to increase access to healthy foods and promote improvements in sidewalks to make it easy for people to walk and ride bikes. We are hearing some common sense from a few Members of Congress. House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul called for barring entry into the United States for people from West African countries wrestling with Ebola, and also temporarily suspending the 13,000 visas that have already been issued to people in those countries. Senator Ted Cruz said it best: “Our priority should be protecting the American people and preventing Ebola from coming here.”

Lawlessness Breeds More Lawlessness

Illegal Immigration: A Culture of Corruption cis.org/mortensen/corruption At a time when 83% of Americans view government corruption as a very important problem, isn't it time that we stop fostering a culture of corruption by failing to control illegal immigration? Most illegal aliens come from countries where corruption is rampant. In 2008, the average corruption score of the ten countries with the largest number of their citizens residing illegally in the United States was 3.43 out of a possible ten signifying a serious to rampant level of corruption. Corruption is involved in virtually everything illegal aliens do. They either sneak into the United States or lie to consular and immigration officials in order to obtain visas and legal entry. Once in the United States, they quickly commit felonies when they obtain and use fraudulent documents, perjure themselves on I-9 forms, and steal the identities of millions of American men, women and children in order to get jobs. Illegal aliens have an exceptionally high incidence of drunk driving infractions. They drive without licenses and without auto insurance. Their advocates try to blackmail public officials into giving them driver's licenses by essentially telling them that "If you don't give us licenses, we will drive anyway and we won't buy auto insurance. We will have auto accidents and we will flee the scene. We may even kill you. So you had better give us what we want or else." Apologists for illegal aliens reveal just how corrupting the system is when they cave in to this blackmail and blame American citizens for illegal alien crimes. Commenting on a proposal to repeal Utah's Driving Privilege Card for illegal aliens, a former Utah state legislator said "So if we repeal them [the Driving Privilege Cards] what we're going to do is we're going to make all these people drive illegally. They're not going to have insurance, so therefore when they hit somebody on the road they're just going to take off and run." This corruption extends to law enforcement agencies that ignore the legal status of individuals as well as many serious crimes committed by illegal aliens in order to maintain good relations with the illegal immigrant community. Rather than upholding the law and prosecuting and deporting drunk drivers, identity thieves, tax cheats, and a myriad of other illegal alien criminals, law enforcement officials ignore legal status and give illegal aliens a pass on many crimes in order to gain their trust. In Utah, at an immigration rally, the state's Attorney General went so far as to publicly tell the illegal aliens present, 75% of whom were likely using false Social Security numbers along with identities belonging to tens of thousands of Utah children, that he would not arrest them. Sanctuary cities offer protection to illegal aliens who are committing serious felonies including drug and human trafficking, identity theft and gang related violent crime. Universities allow illegal aliens to benefit from in-state tuition in spite of the fact that many of these students are committing serious felonies in order to get jobs to pay for their tuition. Religious leaders actively court illegal aliens. They tell them in effect, "Join with us and go forth and continue to commit document fraud, perjury on I-9 forms, and identity theft in order to get jobs. Drive without licenses and insurance. Corrupt other people's medical records with life threatening consequences. Lie and cheat every day as you go about your lives in the United States." These spiritual leaders put the interests of illegal aliens ahead of the rule of law and the American men, women, and innocent children who are the victims of their crimes. This is not only corrupt; it is cruel to both the illegal aliens who learn that crime is acceptable in the eyes of the church and to American citizens who are the victims of their crimes. The corruption extends to the Social Security Administration and Internal Revenue Service. Both of these governmental entities place the collection of taxes ahead of protecting American citizens from illegal alien driven identity theft and document fraud even though they know this is occurring. As a former director of the IRS said: "We want your money whether you are here legally or not and whether you earned it legally or not." This is just the tip of the iceberg. The corruption extends to banks that cater to illegal aliens in order to enhance their bottom lines. It extends to chambers of commerce and to the world's largest professional human resource association as they actively work to prevent the federal and state governments from requiring employers to use E-Verify that would protect millions of American children from illegal alien driven identity theft. It extends to the corrupt landscape contractor, to the family that hires an illegal housekeeper and even to those of us who do business with companies that refuse to use E-Verify. There are many things that we must do if we are to effectively address corruption in America. A good starting point would be to end the culture of corruption that surrounds illegal immigration by enforcing our borders, requiring all employers to use E-Verify, aggressively prosecuting all illegal alien driven document fraud and identity theft, and by refusing to succumb to blackmail by illegal aliens.

Relevant Today Just As It Was Then

Profiling isn't Racist By Mike Rosen 06/17/2010 With all the contrived outrage from foaming-at- the-mouth activists, the perfectly rational and justifiable practice of "profiling" is getting an undeserved bad name. This is partially explained by a fundamental misunderstanding of the term. Profiling is a method of identifying a set of characteristics that belong to persons who engage in a certain type of behavior. FBI profiling applies the science of forensic psychology to analyze crime cases for clues that lead to the identity of perpetrators. In the 1991 movie "The Silence of the Lambs," Hannibal Lecter — an imprisoned psychologist and cannibalistic serial killer — bargains for special treatment in exchange for assisting FBI agent Clarice Starling in profiling another serial killer on the loose. The term is also imprecisely used as a substitute for little more than a "description." If you've been given the description of a lost Great Dane, you won't mistake it for a toy poodle. If eyewitnesses to a murder describe the killer as a 6-foot-8, 300-pound white male, the police will broadcast that description to aid in his arrest. If that fits you, you might be stopped by a cop, while a 5-foot-1, 100-pound Asian woman won't be bothered. Race is merely one of many relevant characteristics included for purposes of identification. It's not "racist" to do so. There were distinctive physical and behavioral characteristics common to the 9/11 terrorists who hijacked airplanes, murdered 3,000 innocent people and destroyed the World Trade Center in New York. They were young, Arab, Muslim males. They and others who have attempted similar attacks have purchased one-way tickets and paid with cash. This is all part of the suicide-bomber profile, and it's why 80-year-old grandmothers are subject to less scrutiny at airports. Which brings us to the overwrought furor over "racial profiling" in Arizona under the state's new law to stem the tide of illegal immigration. As a border state, Arizona is a gateway and collection point. Lax and ineffective policies by the federal government have done little to solve the problem. The indisputable fact is that the vast majority of illegal aliens who cross our southern border from Mexico are Latino. Very few are Scandinavian or Asian. If the enforcement of Arizona's new law is successful or if the federal government ever gets serious about enforcing its own immigration laws, the vast majority of illegal aliens who will be repelled or evicted will be Latino. But their race is only incidental. It's their illegal behavior, not racism that motivates and justifies their exclusion. Major League Baseball is replete with Latino ballplayers who are in the country legally and cheered on by Anglo fans indifferent to their race. It's preposterous to claim that Arizona cops will be stopping and harassing everyone who simply looks Latino. There aren't nearly enough of them — cops, that is. Race — or raza, in Spanish — is only one element of the typical profile of an illegal alien. After a legal stop for some specific act, the police will be looking for a pattern of behavior. It might include the failure to produce a legal ID, driver's license or immigration documents (or carrying forged ones); use of a fraudulent Social Security number; an inability to speak English; and the presence of a dozen such people in the back of a van. In the event that Latinos legally in Arizona, including U.S. citizens, may be asked to identify themselves, the worst they'll suffer is a minor inconvenience. If they appreciate the magnitude of the illegal immigration problem, they'll understand. For radical Latino groups like La Raza, cries of racial profiling are a pretense. Their first loyalty is to their "race," not the U.S. Their goal is open borders for their countrymen. What they really oppose is the enforcement of our immigration laws.

Immigration Insanity Continues!

Mexico is HELPING Illegals Fight Against Deportation! Conservative Daily October 4, 2014 Fellow American, The Mexican government has been caught red-handed actively helping illegal aliens get into the United States and fight against deportation once they’re here! Mexico is supposed to be our allies and yet they continue to subvert our immigration system and help illegal aliens gain entry into the country and avoid deportation! When you combine this betrayal with the fact that the Mexican government continues to imprison Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi, it is UNACCEPTABLE that U.S. aid continues to trickle south! Now I know what you’re saying… “How does any of this trace back to me?” Well, I spent much of the last day trying to add up all of the money that the United States gives to Mexico. The grand total is more than $300 MILLION/year of taxpayer money… Think about this for a second… The United States spends MILLIONS of dollars training Mexican police, border agents, and soldiers to better enforce the border. Why are we spending the time and money to train Mexican border agents when the government goes out of its way to help illegal aliens subvert our immigration laws? In a given year, the United States gives more than $300 MILLION to Mexico through numerous USAID programs and we are scheduled to give another $900 MILLION of aid as well! That is completely unacceptable! The Obama administration has given Mexico plenty of carrots hoping to compel them to support us. It really isn’t that much to ask… In exchange for all that money, all we ask is that Mexico not subvert our immigration laws… Well, that hasn’t worked. Mexico thinks they can take advantage of our generosity. We’ve tried the carrots; it is time for Congress to show them the stick! Honestly, the United States has become a pushover. Every year, we spend BILLIONS of dollars trying to help (read: buy-off) other countries. And what do we get in return? We give $25 million to China every year, only to have the Chinese government hack into our military/spy computer systems to try to take us offline! We give hundreds of millions of dollars to countries in the Middle East that are funding and supporting terrorist organizations that attack Americans! And we give well over $300 MILLION dollars to Mexico, only to have the Mexican government actively helping illegals get into the United States and financing their legal fights against deportation! Enough is enough! We can’t fix the world by just throwing money at it, especially when the recipients of US aid hate us and are trying to destroy us! We have to get our fiscal house in order. It is bad enough that we have illegal aliens leaching off the system… now we are paying the Mexican government hundreds of millions of dollars only to have them turn around and help illegals fight against deportation! If nothing is done right now, the U.S. government is scheduled to give another $900 MILLION to the Mexican government through the Meridian Initiative over the next few years. Literally… the Mexican government is taking YOUR money and actually paying to help their illegal alien citizens to stay in the United States! This has to stop! You don’t hear anything about this in the media, do you? For the mainstream media, this is a non-issue. But that doesn’t mean that it is unimportant… The American taxpayers are essentially subsidizing illegal aliens’ legal bills fighting against their deportations and the only way to put a stop to this is for you to DEMAND it!