Official Wire » News Categories » Politics http://www.officialwire.com You are the news. Tue, 16 Dec 2014 21:02:00 +0000 en-US hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.3 Ten Most Corrupt Politicians In Washington DC http://www.officialwire.com/news/ten-most-corrupt-politicians-in-washington-dc/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=ten-most-corrupt-politicians-in-washington-dc http://www.officialwire.com/news/ten-most-corrupt-politicians-in-washington-dc/#respond Tue, 07 Jan 2014 21:00:43 +0000 http://www.officialwire.com/?post_type=news&p=715420 By Frosty Wooldridge. Marriane Williamson, author of the book A Return to Love, announced this past fall her plan to run for Congress in the 33rd district of California to stop the “Culture of Corruption” in our nation’s capital. Without a doubt, deep, systemic corruption thrives in our U.S. Congress. It flourishes in our White House. […]

The post Ten Most Corrupt Politicians In Washington DC appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
By Frosty Wooldridge.

Marriane Williamson, author of the book A Return to Love, announced this past fall her plan to run for Congress in the 33rd district of California to stop the “Culture of Corruption” in our nation’s capital.

Without a doubt, deep, systemic corruption thrives in our U.S. Congress. It flourishes in our White House. Thomas Jefferson, our third president, tried to pass term limits, but failed in the face of those who love power and expect to maintain it.

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, released its 2013 list of Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians.” www.JudicialWatch.org, the list, in alphabetical order, includes:

 Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH)
 CIA Director John Brennan
 Senator Saxby Chambliss
 Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
 Attorney General Eric Holder
 Former IRS Commissioner Steven T. Miller / Former IRS Official Lois Lerner
 Former DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano
 President Barack Obama
 Senator Harry Reid (D-NV)
 Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius

Dishonorable Mentions for 2013 include:

 Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg
 Outgoing Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) / Incoming Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D)
 Former Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ)
 National Security Adviser Susan Rice

As a 27 year old staff attorney for the House Judiciary Committee, Ms. Hillary Clinton suffered firing by her supervisor, lifelong democrat Jerry Zeifman who said, “She is a liar. She was unethical and dishonest. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

If you remember the murders at the U.S. embassy in Benghazi that suffered a terrorist attack that killed four people, her reply, “What difference does it matter?”

Mr. Barack Obama continues his cover-up of his incompetence in fortifying the embassy and ignoring all calls for help. Good men died because of malfeasance and ineptitude.

Let’s start with Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH):

House Speaker John Boehner became a master at what Government Accountability Institute President Peter Schweizer calls the “Tollbooth Strategy.” As Schweizer explains in his new book, Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes, and Line Their Own Pockets:

“You pay money at a tollbooth in order to use a road or bridge. The methodology in Washington is similar: if someone wants a bill passed, charge them money to allow the bill to move down the legislative highway.”

According to Schweizer, Boehner used the “Tollbooth Strategy” to collect more than $200,000 in political donations from executives just days before holding votes on bills critically important to their industries. [Reference]

Additionally, Boehner continues his blockade of the E-Verify Bill to force employers to check legal status of anyone seeking employment. I suspect the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, up to its eyeballs in promoting illegal immigration cheap labor, paid big bucks to keep E-Verify from passing into law. No doubt Marriott, Holiday Inn, Tyson Chicken, McDonald’s, Chipotle’s, Hormel, La Quinta, endless restaurant chains, construction, painting, landscape and other huge companies paid huge bribes to make sure they continue to hire illegal aliens rather than American citizens at a living wage.

Speaker Boehner does not stand-alone.

Attorney General Eric Holder lies so much, hides so much, aka, Fast and Furious, that he cannot tell the truth from a lie.

Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) makes the “Ten Worst” list for what he actually did in 2012, but which was finally exposed in 2013. Just as with House Speaker Boehner, Chambliss’s misdeeds were revealed in Peter Schweizer’s book, Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes, and Line Their Own Pockets.

Judicial Watch said, “Chambliss is highlighted as one of the key abusers who used leadership PAC loopholes to convert campaign cash into lavish lifestyle upgrades for themselves and their family members.

The New York Times reported, “The book details the extravagant expenses of Senator Saxby Chambliss, Republican of Georgia, for instance, whose leadership PAC spent $10,000 on golf at Pebble Beach, nearly $27,000 at Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse, and $107,752 at the exclusive Breakers resort in Palm Beach, Fla. The amount Mr. Chambliss spent at the Breakers in the 2012 election cycle, the book reports, is three times what the senator gave to the National Republican Senatorial Committee during the same period.”

Former DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano may be one of the biggest liars of all. In August 2013 Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano stepped down from her post with “pride and regret” stemming from her failure to help push through the so-called “Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act.” The truth: Napolitano played a major role in doing an end run around existing immigration law by helping President Obama implement his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) directive in lieu of DREAM Act passage.

Documents obtained by Judicial Watch in June 2013 revealed that Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) “Abandoned required background checks in 2012, adopting, instead, costly “lean and lite” procedures in effort to keep up with the flood of amnesty applications resulting from the DACA directive.”

The granddaddy liar of them all: Barack Hussein Obama.

President Barack Obama actually tops this “Top Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians” list for 2013 as the driving force behind so many of the misdeeds.

This is Obama’s seventh straight year on the list, dating back all the way to 2007 (in 2006, he earned a “Dishonorable Mention”). He is a master at catch-me-if-you-can, corrupt politics.

“This year, he has again acted as a one-man Congress, rewriting entire sections of federal law on his own,” said Judicial Watch. “Not only is his administration secretive and dishonest; its callous disregard for the rule of law undermines our constitutional republic. Examples include:

Perhaps Obama’s most outrageous actions over the past year were his continual lies about the ability of Americans to keep their own health insurance under Obamacare. According the Free Beacon, Obama misled the American people a total of 36 times between 2008 and 2013 with his promise, “If you like your health insurance, you can keep it.” And according to NBC News, Obama knew, even as he repeated his lie, that “more than 40 to 67 percent of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them.”

Let us not forget Nevada Senator Harry Reid and all the senators that voted for the S744 Amnesty Bill that legalizes 20 to 25 million illegal aliens. They and he never stood up for enforcement of internal employment laws against employers of illegal aliens, or our borders, but they bend over for big business’ cheap labor interests—against American workers.

Last year, Harry Reid made the Judicial Watch Ten Worst list for his influence-peddling scandal involving ENN Energy Group, a Chinese “green energy” company for which Reid “applied his political muscle” – and which happened to be a major client of the Nevada law firm in which Reid’s son, Rory, is a principal.

 Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts totally. As Marriane Williams said, “We face a culture of corruption” in Washington DC that works against the interests of all Americans—but we continue voting them back into their power positions to screw all of us. Then we wonder why our country continues an 11-year useless war, $18 trillion debt, 14 million unemployed, 48 million subsisting on food stamps, endless immigration, falling wages and vanishing Middle Class.

[Join me, Frosty Wooldridge, with Dave Chaffin, host of the Morning Zone at 650 AM, www.KGAB.com, Cheyenne, Wyoming every Monday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m., as we discuss my latest commentaries onwww.NewsWithViews.com about issues facing America. You may stream the show on your computer. You may call in at: 1-888-503-6500.]

© 2014 Frosty Wooldridge – All Rights Reserved

 

The post Ten Most Corrupt Politicians In Washington DC appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
http://www.officialwire.com/news/ten-most-corrupt-politicians-in-washington-dc/feed/ 0
What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 15 http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-15/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-15 http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-15/#respond Wed, 18 Dec 2013 16:14:17 +0000 http://www.officialwire.com/?post_type=news&p=715144 By Frosty Wooldridge. This “immigration invasion” moves at such an imperceptible speed, few Americans realize it and most don’t possess a clue as to the end result. Those who understand the final equation feel paralyzed and helpless in the face of our president and Congress representing illegal aliens and doubling legal immigration rather than upholding […]

The post What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 15 appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
By Frosty Wooldridge.

This “immigration invasion” moves at such an imperceptible speed, few Americans realize it and most don’t possess a clue as to the end result. Those who understand the final equation feel paralyzed and helpless in the face of our president and Congress representing illegal aliens and doubling legal immigration rather than upholding our laws and dramatically reducing legal immigration.

Forty to fifty years from now, historians will write on various aspects of the collapse of the United States of America. They will write about how America turned into a schizophrenic-multicultural society; a linguistically chaotic country with dozens of languages competing to be understood to get what they wanted; and conflicting cultures that competed for dominance.

Those historians will speak to the enclaving and fragmentation of a once “whole” people in a once “cohesive” culture. They will speak to the environmental collapse of our water, energy and resources. They will speak to our loss of quality of life and standard of living. Their verdict: America immigrated itself into population and cultural overload by adding 100 million immigrants.

A reader named Greg H. asked, “How do we convince the politicians? They do not seem to give a rip what the constituent on the street wants them to do. They have their agenda and their donations (bribes)! How do we convince the mainstream media? They have their agenda and must follow the politically correct mantras handed to them by the powers that be and create reality with the news they report! Defy and die! Lie and be ‘wealthy’! I appreciate the phone numbers and email addresses provided and will do my part to help but I go toward this endeavor with little hope!”

Yes, it seems pretty hopeless. Let me again repeat the reason for this series on what America will look like in 2050—a scant 37 years from now.

At the current legal immigration numbers of 1.0 million annually, their birth rates and chain-migrated relatives—immigration will add 100 million people to the USA by 2050. That means our country will be forced into adding another 20 of our most populated cities across our landscape. Or, it means each city will be doubled in size. It means we will have to water, house, warm, transport, educate, feed, medicate and create jobs for 100,000,000 people.

If the current S744 Amnesty Bill becomes law in 2014, the speed of this immigration invasion doubles to 2.0 million annually. Which doubles birth rates and chain-migrated relatives.

But that’s not all, according to demographic projections; we Americans will add another 38 million of our own citizens, enough to add another 10 of our largest cities to that list.

The numbers become SO overwhelming, so much so, most people become frightened into denial or inactivity. If we do nothing, we become victims of our own government and the power elite that purposely flood our country. Do you want your children to become victims? If not, take action.

First of all, share these to short videos to all your networks; they graphically and compellingly show what we face:

In a five minute astoundingly simple yet brilliant video, “Immigration, Poverty, and Gum Balls”, Roy Beck, director of www.numbersusa.ORG, graphically illustrates the impact of overpopulation. Take five minutes to see for yourself:

“Immigration by the numbers—off the chart” by Roy Beck; This 10 minute demonstration shows Americans the results of unending mass immigration on the quality of life and sustainability for future generations: in a few words, “Mind boggling!” www.NumbersUSA.org

Unless you take action by sending this “solution to our crisis” out to every network in America, we will most definitely become victims.

Send this video out to your network:

Check out this link with Wooldridge on bicycle and Lester Brown and panel discussion:

The key is to spread this knowledge enough to create a powerful and enlightened American citizenry fully engaged and take action.

Tomorrow’s America project.

Producer: Dr. GEORGE A. COLBURN

Flood the following media services with letters and phone calls demanding they address America’s population future:

George Noory: coasttocoastam@aol.com
TheEarlyShow@cbsnews.com
Today Show: todaystoryideas@nbc.com
Nightline@abcnews.com
Matt Lauer: today@nbc.com
Bill O’Reilly: Oreilly@foxnews.com
comments@foxnews.com
Brian Williams: nightly@msnbc.com
Greta van Susteren: Ontherecord@foxnews.com
Dateline@nbc.com
Editor: letters@washpost.com
Editor: wsj.ltrs@wsj.com
Editor: letters@time.com
Editor: letters@newsweek.com
Ombudsman@npr.org
Editor: letters@nytimes.com
Editor: openforum@denverpost.com
KathleenParker@washpost.com
60M@cbsnews.com
letters@latimes.com

Letter template to news media, newspapers and national journalists:

Dear NBC, CBS, CNN, 60 Minutes producers, Newsweek, Time, Terri Gross, Robert Seigal, Steve Inskeep, Diane Sawyer, Scott Pelley, New York Times, Kathleen Parker, George Will, your US Senator, US Congressman (woman), etc:

At the current rate of legal immigration, their birth rates and chain-migration, America faces an added 138 million people added to our country by 2050—a scant 37 years from now. That means our top 30 most populated cities will be duplicated or those cities will double in population size. How will we water, house, warm, transport, feed, educate and medicate that 138 million people? How will we maintain quality of life and standard of living? Please investigate and report on the ramifications of adding 138 million people as well as the damage to our environment. We must discuss our future as a civilization before it becomes unsustainable, irreversible and unsolvable.

This series educated you to our future “IF” we continue this immigration invasion. If 10,000 readers of this series wrote an email, letter or made a phone call, those news services, senators and journalists could not ignore this issue. If 100,000 readers wrote, phoned and emailed, we will start a national discussion, debate and resolution.

With your kids in the balance, take action. The worst decision you can make is to feel that you can do so little that you do nothing at all.

Click here for part —–> 123456789101112131415,

[Join me, Frosty Wooldridge, with Dave Chaffin, host of the Morning Zone at 650 AM, www.KGAB.com, Cheyenne, Wyoming every Monday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m., as we discuss my latest commentaries onwww.NewsWithViews.com about issues facing America. You may stream the show on your computer. You may call in at: 1-888-503-6500.]

© 2013 Frosty Wooldridge – All Rights Reserved

The post What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 15 appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-15/feed/ 0
Liberty of Conscience in the Public Square: Challenges to the Affordable Care Act http://www.officialwire.com/news/liberty-of-conscience-in-the-public-square-challenges-to-the-affordable-care-act/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=liberty-of-conscience-in-the-public-square-challenges-to-the-affordable-care-act http://www.officialwire.com/news/liberty-of-conscience-in-the-public-square-challenges-to-the-affordable-care-act/#respond Tue, 17 Dec 2013 20:47:17 +0000 http://www.officialwire.com/?post_type=news&p=715126 By Dr. L. John Van Til. Editor’s note: The subject of this article is derived from a conference paper that Dr. Van Til will present at the 2014 Annual Conference in April. It is not surprising that Obamacare, especially the HHS mandate, has generated dozens of lawsuits. The question is: What is at issue here? The […]

The post Liberty of Conscience in the Public Square: Challenges to the Affordable Care Act appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
By Dr. L. John Van Til.

Editor’s note: The subject of this article is derived from a conference paper that Dr. Van Til will present at the 2014 Annual Conference in April.

It is not surprising that Obamacare, especially the HHS mandate, has generated dozens of lawsuits. The question is: What is at issue here?

The answer is nothing less than the preservation of the integrity of the two religion clauses of the First Amendment. In 1791, the first drafts of these clauses spoke of “liberty of conscience,” primarily because each state had written a liberty of conscience clause in its own constitution. The final draft stated, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibit the free exercise thereof …”

The important question, however, is what do the religion clauses mean? The answer is not difficult to see, although the Supreme Court in recent decades has cluttered the meaning.

Let’s first consider the establishment clause. One of the largest points of contention after the American Revolution was whether to disestablish the Anglican Church in Virginia. Thanks to the arguments of Madison and Jefferson it was, indeed, disestablished. In early 1786, with overwhelming support, the Virginia House passed into law “An Act for Establishing Religious Freedom.”

Other states quickly followed Virginia’s example. The specific intent of these measures were to ensure that there would be no state-sponsored churches. Everyone knew at the time, and for the next 160 years, that the phrase “an establishment of religion” directly referred to a church. It meant nothing more, nor anything other, than an organized place of worship. It was the place in which religious convictions were formally practiced. Helping to define what religion meant, Jefferson, echoing John Locke, said, “Religion is the duty we owe our Creator.”

Over a century and a half passed, and the Supreme Court began to muddle the meaning, especially in 1947’s Everson v. Board of Education. Justice Hugo Black took it upon himself to change the phrase from “an establishment of religion” into “the establishment of religion.” This dramatically altered the meaning of this clause.

Here is a tremendous example of how words, or even a single word, hold power. That seemingly little change in the use of an article, from “an” to “the,” altered American jurisprudence profoundly. This change by Justice Black allowed subsequent courts to examine all sorts of religious issues in the name of “the establishment of religion.”

This makes March 2014 all the more important. The court will hear oral arguments on the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties cases. Will the court follow Justice Black’s version of establishment, or look at the cases as free exercise issues? To put the importance of this into perspective, consider that later cases in Black’s tradition have suggested that a public prayer is establishing religion. There is no doubt that confusion has been the result. Perhaps some of these older cases should be re-heard by the Court.

The second religion clause, the free exercise clause, was settled earlier in a rather straightforward manner in 1940’s Cantwell v. Connecticut.  In this case, Jehovah’s Witnesses were proselytizing and distributing literature door to door. They were arrested and convicted for not having a required permit. The Supreme Court said that “the statute, as construed and applied … deprived them of their liberty without due process of the law.” Here, the court quoted both religion clauses of the First Amendment. It also stated, “Freedom of conscience … cannot be restricted by law.”

What does this mean about religious liberty in the public square? First, the clause on establishment means only one thing: Congress and the states shall not create state-sponsored churches. It does not open the door to all sorts of imaginative “religious” issues. Second, the free exercise clause means that everyone has liberty of conscience. Together, these clauses sharply limit the state in all matters of religion, and that includes the Supreme Court. Clearly, the state has no power to create churches, nor authority to suppress liberty of conscience—which is a religious exercise.

In light of this, it is easy to conclude that the state has no power or authority to establish a national church. It would seem also that the state has no power to prohibit the free exercise of religion as it pertains to a legitimate business practice such as providing benefits to employees that do not violate a business owner’s conscience. But this issue remains to be resolved by the Court. Will the Court preserve the integrity of the First Amendment, or participate in fundamentally transforming the United States of America?

 

Dr. L. John Van Til is a fellow for humanities, faith, and culture with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College.

The post Liberty of Conscience in the Public Square: Challenges to the Affordable Care Act appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
http://www.officialwire.com/news/liberty-of-conscience-in-the-public-square-challenges-to-the-affordable-care-act/feed/ 0
What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 13 http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-13/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-13 http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-13/#respond Tue, 10 Dec 2013 22:51:49 +0000 http://www.officialwire.com/?post_type=news&p=714988 By Frosty Wooldridge. Part 13: will we save ourselves from our current path toward a disastrous future? After reading the harsh realities of this series about adding 100 million legal immigrants to our country within 37 years, do you think our more astute leaders will move a finger to speak up? To change course? Do […]

The post What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 13 appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
By Frosty Wooldridge.

Part 13: will we save ourselves from our current path toward a disastrous future?

After reading the harsh realities of this series about adding 100 million legal immigrants to our country within 37 years, do you think our more astute leaders will move a finger to speak up? To change course?

Do you think our president, Congress, corporate CEOs, governors and mayors of the country will do anything to change course toward a sustainable population and future for all Americans?

Do you think major academics or presidents of leading universities will speak out about the ramifications of adding 100 million immigrants in three decades?

Will the media talking-heads such as Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer and Scott Pelley report on what we face? What about David Gregory at “Meet the Press” or Bob Shieffer of “Face the Nation” or Wolf Blitzer at CNN or Shepard Smith at FOX News speak up?

Will we save ourselves by stopping mass immigration or will we continue with the “frog in the pot” metaphor where the frog would jump out immediately if we threw him in boiling water, but if it slowly rises to boiling, he will float until he boils to death?

Will any of the world’s leaders speak up with a plan to change course? How about the world’s religious leaders? Surely, those intelligent men and women understand what another three billion people, that’s 3,000,000,000 in the next 37 years added to the planet will most certainly create horrific environmental damage and human suffering on a gargantuan scale.

Will humanity save itself by the simple choice of stabilizing human population to live within the carrying capacity of the planet? Will the USA change course?

Guess what? We could, but history tells us anything, we won’t.

Daniel Quinn, author of Ishmael: an adventure of the mind and spirit, said, “We have created civilizations around the world that continually grow, expand and wreak havoc on the natural world. We expand our populations to the point that we cannot stop what we are doing to the natural world. It appears that we will continue destroying the planet’s biosphere until its environment collapses. At that point, we will not be able to save ourselves from its wrath.”

One reviewer said, “The point remains that we are killing the Earth along with ourselves and it is nearly too late to check our fate.”

In America, we resemble that New York commuter train last week heading around a 30 mile per hour curve at 82 miles per hour. The conductor fell asleep. By the time he awoke to apply the brakes, nothing could save him or his passengers.

When you look at the warning signs like Fukushima as it radio-actively contaminates all our oceans, or Thyphoon Haiyan or Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy—the natural world presents plenty of warnings—but we turn a deaf ear.

Examine these quotes by some of the top minds in the world. Do you think they are kidding?

Nobel laureate Dr. Henry Kendall, said, “If we don’t halt population growth with justice and compassion, it will be done for us by Nature, brutally and without pity – and will leave a ravaged world.”

Do you think he’s kidding? His research shows us galloping headlong into Mother Nature’s wrath.

Harvard biologist Dr. Edward O. Wilson said, “The raging monster upon the land is population growth. In its presence, sustainability is but a fragile theoretical construct. To say, as many do, that the difficulties of nations are not due to people, but to poor ideology and land-use management is sophistic.”

Wilson’s brilliance equals da Vinci’s, Galileo’s, Einstein’s and Pimental’s. Yet, no one listens. Are we that totally stupid as a society?

The late Dr. Albert Bartlett said, “Unlimited population growth cannot be sustained; you cannot sustain growth in the rates of consumption of resources. No species can overrun the carrying capacity of a finite land mass. This Law cannot be repealed and is not negotiable.” www.albartlett.org , University of Colorado, USA.

Bartlett died this fall, but one look at his website shows you that we cannot survive what we are doing to our civilization. You would think, after he gave his program to 1,600 audiences worldwide for 40 years to top leaders, they would act on his knowledge. Result: no actionwhatsoever!

Finally, we keep immigrating ourselves to death. Dr. Otis Graham, author of Unguarded Gates said, “Most Western elites continue urging the wealthy West not to stem the migrant tide [that adds 80 million net gain annually to the planet], but to absorb our global brothers and sisters until their horrid ordeal has been endured and shared by all—ten billion humans packed onto an ecologically devastated planet.”

Lester Brown, author of Plan B 4.0 Saving Civilization said, “The world has set in motion environmental trends that are threatening civilization itself. We are crossing environmental thresholds and violating deadlines set by nature. Nature is the timekeeper, but we cannot see the clock.”

Do you think you or your kids will escape this mess? As a world traveler, billions of humans worldwide cannot escape their fate. Neither will we. Better to take action today rather than wait until we reach that 30 mile per hour curve at 82 milers per hour, or, wait until that 100 million immigrants manifest in our country.

Seriously get your butt in gear and take action! What I passionately hope: that you understand that you (we) possess the future of our country in our hands by our actions today.

If you don’t want to see our country turned into a schizophrenic, cultural quagmire as well as overpopulated beyond saving, call Speaker of the House John Boehner at 1 202 225 0600:

“Mr. Boehner, I understand that S744 doubles legal immigration from its current 1.0 million annually to 2.0 million while giving amnesty to 12 to 20 million illegal migrants. Do you understand that such an amnesty would flood America with over 100 million immigrants by 2050—a scant 37 years from now. How will we be able to water, house, work, feed, educate, medicate and care for that many people when we already suffer 48 million Americans who cannot secure jobs and live on food stamps? How will we maintain our environment and standard of living in light of those numbers. As an American citizen, I demand that you reduce all immigration to less than 100,000 annually and enforce the laws on the books to arrest, prosecute and jail employers of illegal migrants. That will help illegal migrants to go home on their own dime when they don’t have a job. Our own unemployed citizens can take those jobs at a living wage.”

Also: call your own U.S. Senators and leave the same message.

Do the same for all the email addresses below to start a national conversation:

George Noory: coasttocoastam@aol.com
TheEarlyShow@cbsnews.com
Today Show: todaystoryideas@nbc.com
Nightline@abcnews.com
Matt Lauer: today@nbc.com
Bill O’Reilly: Oreilly@foxnews.com
comments@foxnews.com
Brian Williams: nightly@msnbc.com
Greta van Susteren: Ontherecord@foxnews.com
Dateline@nbc.com
Editor: letters@washpost.com
Editor: wsj.ltrs@wsj.com
Editor: letters@time.com
Editor: letters@newsweek.com
Ombudsman@npr.org
Editor: letters@nytimes.com
Editor: openforum@denverpost.com

Part 14: China buying up America’s land and businesses.

Click here for part —–> 1234567891011121314,

[Join me, Frosty Wooldridge, with Dave Chaffin, host of the Morning Zone at 650 AM, www.KGAB.com, Cheyenne, Wyoming every Monday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m., as we discuss my latest commentaries onwww.NewsWithViews.com about issues facing America. You may stream the show on your computer. You may call in at: 1-888-503-6500.]

© 2013 Frosty Wooldridge – All Rights Reserved

The post What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 13 appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-13/feed/ 0
Pope Francis And The Economists http://www.officialwire.com/news/pope-francis-and-the-economists/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=pope-francis-and-the-economists http://www.officialwire.com/news/pope-francis-and-the-economists/#respond Sat, 07 Dec 2013 21:29:07 +0000 http://www.officialwire.com/?post_type=news&p=714929 Editor’s Note: This article first appeared at Forbes.com. The recent economic statements by Pope Francis in his apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (EG) read as a call for a “Third Way” economic system ruled by experts and people of good will. Pope Francis writes, “Growth in justice requires more than economic growth, while presupposing such growth: it requires de­cisions, […]

The post Pope Francis And The Economists appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
Editor’s Note: This article first appeared at Forbes.com.

The recent economic statements by Pope Francis in his apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (EG) read as a call for a “Third Way” economic system ruled by experts and people of good will. Pope Francis writes, “Growth in justice requires more than economic growth, while presupposing such growth: it requires de­cisions, programs, mechanisms and process­es specifically geared to a better distribution of income, the creation of sources of employment and an integral promotion of the poor which goes beyond a simple welfare mentality.”

Pope Francis does not call for the socialization of the economic system and he does not point to any totalitarian country as a model. He states that this is “not a social document” and recommends the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church as a more substantial guide for study and reflection. Nevertheless, as he did not include references to point 42 of John Paul II’s seminal encyclical Centessimus Annus, which legitimizes a free-enterprise system based on a rule of law respect of human dignity, and as Francis’ language sometimes seems hostile to free markets, many Christian economists, and policy pundits, are alarmed. Several have questioned if the Pope has been negatively influenced by the Peronist culture of Argentina. Peronism has, as one of its pillars, an economic system that falls between socialism and capitalism. Juan Domingo Peron was an early champion of the Third Way.

In EG, the Pope reaffirms that the Church does not have a “monopoly on the interpretation of social realities or the proposal of solutions to contemporary problems.” Within the hierarchy of the Church, many different economists are consulted. One economist who has a strong influence on the Vatican is Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz, who some credit for dressing the Third Way economic system in academic garb.

There is no doubt, however, that Stiglitz’s writings had an impact on the second most influential Argentine at the Vatican: Monsignor Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Science. Stiglitz was appointed to the academy in 2003 and had been chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Bill Clinton. John Allen, a respected Vatican observer, wrote in 2003 that Stiglitz, “in that capacity, will help guide Vatican policy on global economic issues.” Allen also added that Stiglitz was a personal favorite of Sánchez Sorondo. During a program sponsored by the Acton Institute, I had the privilege of sitting next to Sorondo and he told me that Stiglitz was indeed his favorite economist. John Allen further added: “Stiglitz argues that the Clinton team made a mistake by accepting that the government should stay out of economic policy, leaving the finance sector to dictate the rules of the game. Stiglitz is thus likely to bolster what has already been the strong line of John Paul II, that public authorities must intervene in economic affairs to ensure that the benefits of globalization work for the common good.”

Most of the statements on economics coming out of the Vatican that disturb free-market champions have been preceded by similar statements from noted economists. Such is the case with Francis’ apostolic exhortation. The paragraph that has garnered the most critical comments from market-oriented scholars is the one chiding the notion that economic growth will always “trickle-down” and “inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world.” It is hard to find an economist who would argue that there are no exceptions to this theory. We can easily find high rates of growth coexisting with injustice and lack of inclusiveness. China and India are good examples.

The use of the word “trickle-down,” difficult to translate and usually used to denigrate the free economy, has opened the door for many discussions. It is likely that EG was originally written in Spanish. The Pope used the term “derrame” (spillover). Scottish philosopher and political economist Adam Smith wrote about the “universal opulence which extends itself to the lowest ranks of the people” in a “well-governed society.” When translated, “derrame” has been used for Smith’s word “extend.” Smith never defended “the absolute autonomy of the marketplace and financial speculation.” He did not have an absolute “trust in the unseen forc­es and the invisible hand of the market” and he understood the importance of a well-governed society.

An incomplete litany of other laments and economic admonitions from the Pope include: “a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system”; accepting “the dominion of money over ourselves and our societies”; the “dictatorship of an imper­sonal economy lacking a truly human purpose”; the “widespread corruption and self-serving tax evasion”;  and “the invasion of ways of thinking and acting proper to … cul­tures which are economically advanced but eth­ically debilitated.”

Since the publication of EG, Catholic economists have been providing answers and criticisms to each of these points. We can note that empirical studies show that economic freedom is the best antidote to corruption. Also notable is the work of free-market scholars of great prestige, such as the late Wilhelm Roepke, who created blueprints for a “Humane Economy.”

The best contribution that free-market champions can make is to become outstanding and convincing economists so that influential leaders incorporate all economic truths into their moral admonitions. A good example to follow is that of Gary Becker, the Nobel Laureate from the Chicago School, who has been a member of the Pontifical Council of Science longer that Stiglitz. Becker’s sound economic research and his respectful demeanor during meetings at the Vatican earned him that spot. The writings of Nobel Laureates from other schools of thought sympathetic to free enterprise, such as F.A. Hayek and James Buchanan from the Austrian and Public Choice schools, also deserve more attention from the Vatican.

Juan Carlos de Pablo, one of the best professors at the Pontifical Catholic University in Buenos Aires, where I studied and taught, told his classes that, “if economists do not know economics, how can you blame the bishops for their economics?” Pope Francis has acknowledged the role of the laity in many areas, not only economics. Those of us who are Roman Catholics and are convinced about the economic and moral superiority of the free economy have a duty to engage the Vatican in a fruitful and respectful dialogue.

 

Dr. Alejandro A. (Alex) Chafuen ’84 is president of the Atlas Economic Research Foundation and a member of the board of advisors for The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. (The opinions expressed by the author are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Grove City College, Atlas Economic Research Foundation, or their boards of trustees.)

The post Pope Francis And The Economists appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
http://www.officialwire.com/news/pope-francis-and-the-economists/feed/ 0
What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 12 http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-12/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-12 http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-12/#respond Sat, 07 Dec 2013 16:59:42 +0000 http://www.officialwire.com/?post_type=news&p=714925 By Frosty Wooldridge. Part 12: collapsing civilization One reader of this series asked that I write about what we face 10 years from now instead of 37 years from now. He asked me to become more “relevant” as to what our country faces. He felt that 37 years in the future felt too far away […]

The post What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 12 appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
By Frosty Wooldridge.

Part 12: collapsing civilization

One reader of this series asked that I write about what we face 10 years from now instead of 37 years from now. He asked me to become more “relevant” as to what our country faces. He felt that 37 years in the future felt too far away to make any impact on Americans today.

The run-up to that 100 million, that’s 100,000,000 immigrants by 2050 won’t be a pretty one. We face greater and greater consequences within 10 years by adding 30 million that will magnify to 60 million in 20 years and reach 90 million 30 years and 100 million immigrants within 37 years. On top of that, we will add another 38 million of our own. Total: 138 million people to feed, water, house, warm, transport, work, educate, medicate and try to maintain some kind of balance with our environment. This won’t be pretty for anyone.

We remain on course to become SO large that we cannot solve our problems. To give you an example, India today suffers 1,000 children that die every 24 hours 7 days a week of water borne disease like dysentery and diarrhea. They die because India cannot maintain clean water from its toxic rivers, lakes and underground water supplies. Millions upon millions of Indians urinate and defecate onto the soils in India because they lack toilets and sewage treatment plants. Yet, they add 11 million new citizens into their society every year, year in and year out. Most Indian people live in horrendously degraded conditions. Air pollution, unsafe water and horribly crowded cities make life in that country a living hell. Guess what, it’s coming to America.

Millions of Indians immigrated to America in the last few decades. They arrive and then, chain-migrate their relatives through our immigration laws. They command virtually all the motel chains in America with your tax dollars being used to fund them.

Who can blame them? If we give them the keys to the country, they would be fools to pass it up. They flee a country that cannot save itself from itself.

When I visited India, it made me sick to my stomach to see little children starving in the cities. No one could help them because their numbers exceeded any aid. I witnessed so much misery that I had to “harden” my emotions in order to make it through each day. Most of Asia lives in utter misery and deprivation. They cannot fix or solve their predicament.

Even more sobering, demographic experts project somewhere between 50 and 100 million refugees streaming into other countries in the next 10 to 20 years. Africa’s desperate refugees already pour into Europe. They overrun Spain and Greece. As Haiti adds another projected three million to its present day nightmare, they will swim, boat and paddle their way to Florida by the hundreds of thousands.

Dr. Jack Alpert, at www.Skil.org, a research scientist predicts that we could see 1 billion people perish around the globe from lack of food within the next 10 years; 15 years at the most.

Watch these two videos: Alpert shows where these countries lack enough water and arable land to feed their populations:

The Human Predicament and What to Do About It, Feb. 2012

Overpopulation Means Civilization Collapse, Aug. 2011

Do you think they will sit in their own countries and starve? Will they wait to be saved? Answer: No! They will migrate to Canada, America, Europe and Australia.

Instead of shielding ourselves from the coming nightmare facing our country, our intellectually-challenged Congress injects millions upon millions more immigrants into our country. Whether it’s the 48.1 million Americans subsisting on food stamps today, to 100 million devouring food stamps in 30 years—something must give.

I can only imagine that our civilization will begin to collapse even before that 100 million legal immigrants manifest. If we do manage to hang on, it means race riots, food riots and racial separation where European-Americans flee to Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota and South Dakota. Chicago, LA and Detroit portend our future. They possess one thing in common: massive influx of legal and illegal immigrants that drive out Americans.

In the end, people align with their own tribes and we possess so many different tribes that we lack any cohesion within our society to maintain any rational order. With another 100 million immigrants from all over the world, we encase a “schizophrenic society” and like Humpty Dumpty, “All the king’s horses and all the king’s men, couldn’t put Humpty Dumpty together again.”

As the great historian Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall, and that, “An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.”

As Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm said on the eight methods for destroying America, “First, turn America into a bilingual or multi lingual and bicultural country. History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar Seymour Lipset put it this way, “The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon—all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons and Corsicans.”

We write our own death sentence with passage of the S744 amnesty into law in 2014. We face 100 million volatile, multi-language, multi-religious and multiple-cultures that lack any compatibility with our civilization. If the sheer numbers don’t destroy us, the endless conflicting cultures will ring our death knell.

Part 13: dealing with watering, feeding, transporting and housing 100 million more immigrants in 37 years.

Click here for part —–> 12345678910111213,

[Join me, Frosty Wooldridge, with Dave Chaffin, host of the Morning Zone at 650 AM, www.KGAB.com, Cheyenne, Wyoming every Monday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m., as we discuss my latest commentaries onwww.NewsWithViews.com about issues facing America. You may stream the show on your computer. You may call in at: 1-888-503-6500.]

© 2013 Frosty Wooldridge – All Rights Reserved

The post What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 12 appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-12/feed/ 0
Do We Want More Affordable Health Care? http://www.officialwire.com/news/do-we-want-more-affordable-health-care/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=do-we-want-more-affordable-health-care http://www.officialwire.com/news/do-we-want-more-affordable-health-care/#respond Fri, 06 Dec 2013 18:24:07 +0000 http://www.officialwire.com/?post_type=news&p=714899 By Tracy Miller. The problems with the healthcare.gov website offer a glimpse of the way the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is likely to fail at accomplishing its most important goals: providing affordable, high-quality health care to all Americans, without increasing the deficit. The ACA is the latest of a series of attempts by the federal […]

The post Do We Want More Affordable Health Care? appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
By Tracy Miller.

The problems with the healthcare.gov website offer a glimpse of the way the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is likely to fail at accomplishing its most important goals: providing affordable, high-quality health care to all Americans, without increasing the deficit. The ACA is the latest of a series of attempts by the federal government to use subsidies and regulations to make health care affordable for all Americans regardless of their health status. The ACA, like the regulations and subsidies that came before, only increase the problems resulting from the incentives created by our health care system. If Congress repealed the ACA, along with other regulations and subsidies that distort the market for health care, health care could become more affordable and provide better quality than it ever will be under the rules and subsidies of the ACA.

A major problem with our health care system is that it costs much more to insure people with major health problems than it does to insure the majority who are in reasonably good health. If health insurance premiums were determined by the market, they would be affordable for most who are in good health, but unaffordable for many who have serious health problems. Over the years, governments have used a variety of regulations and subsidies to make it easier for sicker members of the population to afford health insurance.

One way that the cost of health insurance is kept down for sicker people is through employer-sponsored health insurance plans. Although these plans arose in response to wage controls during World War II, they have grown in importance because of tax deductions and a variety of regulations. If the tax deduction was not limited to group health insurance plans offered by employers, many of the healthiest workers would buy their own low-cost health insurance in exchange for a higher wage from their employers, who would save the cost of premiums on those workers.

Employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) works well for those working for large corporations. One drawback is that it discourages workers from changing jobs, particularly if they develop a health condition that will increase the likelihood that they will incur major health care expenses. To keep premiums from rising for ESI plans, health insurers may choose not to cover pre-existing conditions of newly hired workers. To protect those who change jobs from not being covered, several state governments require ESI plans to cover pre-existing conditions, sometimes allowing a short waiting period following the hiring of a worker.

Small companies that provide ESI have an incentive to hire only healthy workers if regulations do not permit insurance companies to exclude pre-existing conditions from the coverage they offer. A small firm also has an incentive to find an excuse to lay off a worker who develops costly health problems while employed, since insurers are likely to raise premiums for firms whose workers incur higher health costs.

Because all of the existing subsidies and regulations are not enough to keep those with chronic health problems from facing premiums that are much higher than average, the ACA requires insurance companies to provide full coverage for everyone who applies, regardless of health status, and prohibits companies from varying premiums except based on age or whether the insured smokes. It includes an individual mandate so that healthy people will not opt out of buying insurance. The greater the percentage of healthy people paying premiums, the lower the premiums for everyone, including those with chronic illnesses.

No existing government regulation or tax policy has succeeded in preventing many of those with high health risks from being charged more for their health insurance. Even with its mandate, it is doubtful that the ACA will succeed at providing insurance that enables those with chronic health conditions to pay the same prices as everyone else and still receive high-quality health care. Government may be able to force insurance companies to provide affordable coverage to high-risk people, but without adequate incentives, don’t be surprised if the insurance pays for care from a very limited network of health care providers, severely limiting the options of high-risk clients.

Rather than fighting market forces, the best way to promote affordable health care is to allow entrepreneurs competing in the market to devise a solution that would make it profitable for insurance companies to cover those with high health care costs. One solution, proposed by the Heritage Foundation, is health status insurance, whereby people insure against declines in their health status. If early in their lives people could pay extra for insurance against developing a chronic health condition in the future, then insurance companies could afford to cover everyone regardless of what happens to their health over their lives. Premiums for health status insurance would be affordable, even if set high enough to compensate insurance companies for the expected cost of providing high quality care for chronic illnesses, which some fraction of their clients would develop later in their lives.

Affordable health care remains the goal. To get there, let’s leave it to the free market.

 

Dr. Tracy C. Miller is an associate professor of economics at Grove City College and fellow for economic theory and policy with The Center for Vision & Values. He holds a Ph.D. from University of Chicago.

The post Do We Want More Affordable Health Care? appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
http://www.officialwire.com/news/do-we-want-more-affordable-health-care/feed/ 0
What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 11 http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-11/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-11 http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-11/#respond Tue, 03 Dec 2013 22:09:24 +0000 http://www.officialwire.com/?post_type=news&p=714812 By Frosty Wooldridge. Part 11: Nation of refugees, cultural conflict, social schizophrenia Despite the origin of the term from the Greek roots “skhizein” which means “to split”, schizophrenia does not imply a “multiple personality disorder.” The term means a “splitting of mental functions.” You might say that someone suffering from a multiple personality disorder walks […]

The post What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 11 appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
By Frosty Wooldridge.

Part 11: Nation of refugees, cultural conflict, social schizophrenia

Despite the origin of the term from the Greek roots “skhizein” which means “to split”, schizophrenia does not imply a “multiple personality disorder.” The term means a “splitting of mental functions.” You might say that someone suffering from a multiple personality disorder walks around with an endless number of “distinct” persons in his or her head. All of them compete for dominance. All of them create chaos in that person’s mind.

Enter the term “multiculturalism” where multiple cultures reside in the same country. Ultimately cultures conflict with one another via people, passions and language.

Jonathan H. Turner defines it as a conflict caused by “differences in cultural values and beliefs that place people at odds with one another”. He defines this conflict as, “One that occurs when peoples’ expectations of a certain behavior coming from their cultural backgrounds are not met. They face others that possess different cultural backgrounds and different expectations.”

We proved that cultures don’t mix when we usurped the Native American Indians of North America. They have not integrated into the white man’s culture whatsoever.

“Cultural conflicts are difficult to resolve as parties to the conflict have different beliefs,” said Turner. “Cultural conflicts intensify when those differences become reflected in politics, particularly on a macro level. An example of cultural conflict is the debate over abortion. Ethnic cleansing is another extreme example of cultural conflict. Wars can also be a result of a cultural conflict.”

The African-Americans versus European-American conflict rages in the United States without pause from 1776 to 2013. No amount of laws, education, forced integration, police or legal consequences stop racial discrimination, racial bias, racism or violence.

Whether in the NFL two weeks ago with one black and one white player fighting over race or the Zimmerman-Martin killing or voting a black president into the White House—Americans fail to resolve the racial-cultural divide that permeates every city in America where blacks, Mexicans and whites mix.

Today, blacks in big cities practice a new game where they “Knockout” a white person from behind with a hammer or 2×4 board. “Black flash mobs” run around major US cities looting stores and killing white people. They take a video of their kills and boast on You Tube. Much the same occurred in the 80s, 90s and last decade with blacks car- jacking whites in Detroit, Michigan at stoplights. Whites fled to the tune of over 1.0 million over 20 years. Their flight dropped Detroit from 1.85 million to its current 680,000 today—over 90 percent Arabic-Black minority.

Illegal alien Mexican migrants attempt to fight their way into America demanding we suspend our laws in favor of legalizing their lawlessness. As their numbers continue to grow, we can expect violent demonstrations. They demand Americans speak Spanish and wherever Mexicans command dominant numbers, Americans must teach Mexican kids in Spanish. Mexican racism runs deep and virulent.

If you look at Norway, United Kingdom, France, Sweden, Belgium and Holland today, you see the results of multiculturalism turning their countries into “Schizophrenic societies.” All of them see major crime waves of rapes, murders, shoplifting, bursting prisons, schools in chaos, enclaving of entire cities into cultural ghettos, language changes, cultural changes and loss of societal cohesiveness. Belgium, once all-European, will become an Islamic caliphate within four decades. Its culture and language face ultimate displacement by its Islamic immigrants.

Of special note, Swedish women can no longer walk down the streets of Stockholm by themselves for fear of being accosted, raped or murdered by Muslim immigrant males. Same in Norway and in France where Muslims dominate a specific enclave!

The United Kingdom, Holland and France face similar fates.

Within 37 years, the United States faces becoming a “Schizophrenic Society” with 100 million immigrants streaming into its borders from 150 countries around the world. Some cultures will create and harbor their own in ghettos like the ones they fled. Others will compete for dominance like the Islamic immigrants as they follow the prime directive of their Koran—“You must convert or kill all non-believers, especially the Jews.”

As this series winds down as to what America will look like in 2050, you cannot help but cringe at the loss of your own language, culture and way of life. You may be sickened at what you see already occurring across America in Mexican ghettoes like Los Angeles, Houston and along the border with “colonias” that reek of third world misery.

If you don’t want to see our country turned into a schizophrenic cultural quagmire, call Speaker of the House John Boehner at 1 202 225 0600:

 

“Mr. Boehner, I understand that S744 doubles legal immigration from its current 1.0 million annually to 2.0 million while giving amnesty to 12 to 20 million illegal migrants. Do you understand that such an amnesty would flood America with over 100 million immigrants by 2050—a scant 37 years from now. How will we be able to water, house, work, feed, educate, medicate and care for that many people when we already suffer 48 million Americans who cannot secure jobs and live on food stamps? How will we maintain our environment and standard of living in light of those numbers. As an American citizen, I demand that you reduce all immigration to less than 100,000 annually and enforce the laws on the books to arrest, prosecute and jail employers of illegal migrants. That will help illegal migrants to go home on their own dime when they don’t have a job. Our own unemployed citizens can take those jobs at a living wage.”

Do the same for all the email addresses below to start a national conversation:

George Noory: coasttocoastam@aol.com
TheEarlyShow@cbsnews.com
Today Show: todaystoryideas@nbc.com
Nightline@abcnews.com
Matt Lauer: today@nbc.com
Bill O’Reilly: Oreilly@foxnews.com
comments@foxnews.com
Brian Williams: nightly@msnbc.com
Greta van Susteren: Ontherecord@foxnews.com
Dateline@nbc.com
Editor: letters@washpost.com
Editor: wsj.ltrs@wsj.com
Editor: letters@time.com
Editor: letters@newsweek.com
Ombudsman@npr.org
Editor: letters@nytimes.com
Editor: openforum@denverpost.com

Click here for part —–> 1234567891011,

[Join me, Frosty Wooldridge, with Dave Chaffin, host of the Morning Zone at 650 AM, www.KGAB.com, Cheyenne, Wyoming every Monday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m., as we discuss my latest commentaries onwww.NewsWithViews.com about issues facing America. You may stream the show on your computer. You may call in at: 1-888-503-6500.]

The post What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 11 appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-11/feed/ 0
What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 10 http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-10/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-10 http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-10/#respond Sat, 30 Nov 2013 17:33:15 +0000 http://www.officialwire.com/?post_type=news&p=714747 By Frosty Wooldridge. Part 10: Standard of living Do you think the Chinese with 1.3 billion people, while harnessing the most powerful economic engine in the world, enjoy a high standard of living? What about India with 1.2 billion people? Do you think the majority of Indians enjoy a high standard of living? Both countries […]

The post What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 10 appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
By Frosty Wooldridge.

Part 10: Standard of living

Do you think the Chinese with 1.3 billion people, while harnessing the most powerful economic engine in the world, enjoy a high standard of living? What about India with 1.2 billion people? Do you think the majority of Indians enjoy a high standard of living?

Both countries suffer majorities, over 2.0 billion people, living in utter despair, poverty, overcrowded cities and horrendous pollution.

Worse, they cannot find a way out of their predicament. In fact, no matter how smart their leaders, no matter how many factories they build and no matter how many jobs they create—most Indians and Chinese will NEVER rise to the standard of living enjoyed by the majority American citizens today.

Why? Simple: both countries add eight million and 11 million people annually, net gain. They cannot keep up with education, jobs, housing or a clean environment. The more people, the more their problems grow beyond solving.

As a footnote, I heard Arun Gandhi, grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, in a speech several years ago where he said, “Endless millions of Indians are born in the streets, live in the streets and die in the streets without ever enjoying a toilet, shower, lavatory or bed.”

“Unlimited population growth cannot be sustained; you cannot sustain growth in the rates of consumption of resources. No species can overrun the carrying capacity of a finite land mass. This Law cannot be repealed and is not negotiable.” Dr. Albert Bartlett, www.albartlett.org, University of Colorado, USA.

The people in seemingly successful societies have not and cannot improve their standard of living. Why? They suffer from the “exponential function” which destroys their viability as a civilization.

Let’s define “standard of living”:

The level of wealth, comfort, material goods and necessities available to a certain socioeconomic class in a certain geographic area. The standard of living includes factors such as income, quality and availability of employment, class disparity, poverty rate, quality and affordability of housing, hours of work required to purchase necessities, gross domestic product, inflation rate, number of vacation days per year, affordable (or free) access to quality healthcare, quality and availability of education, life expectancy, incidence of disease, cost of goods and services, infrastructure, national economic growth, economic and political stability, political and religious freedom, environmental quality, climate and safety. The standard of living is closely related to quality of life.

About 2/3 of the world’s population cannot measure up to that definition. Over 3.5 billion out of 7.1 billion people do not enjoy a toilet, shower and lavatory. Over 2.0 billion cannot secure a clean glass of water to drink daily.

So, let me ask you this: how do we think we can add another 100 million immigrants to the United States in three decades and hope, pretend, wish or dream that we can maintain our standard of living? How do we think we can bring their standard of living up ours when they couldn’t attain it in their own countries?

This week, I spoke on the Jeff Rense Show to the nation. I told the worldwide audience the enormity of our predicament. I told them that our Congress expects to jump our 1.0 million legal immigrant injection annually to 2.0 million annually—as well as present a blanket amnesty to over 20 million illegal migrants that jumped our borders and call our country their home.

How many people constitute 100 million? That number would fill 20 of our top most populated cities. The audience gasped and the phone board lit up. Very few Americans comprehend the mind- numbing numbers we face if S744 passes next year or any year. Most Americans don’t possess a clue as to their children’s fate.

This much is certain: if we allow our Congress to pass an amnesty and inject another 100 million immigrants from 150 countries—we will not enjoy anything near our current “standard of living.” The more people, the less the wages. The more people, more people compete for limited jobs. The less the jobs, the more the human frustration, poverty and personal defeat. The more people, the more degraded our environment. The more people, the less everyone partakes of a dwindling American pie.

By these 10 parts of the series, you understand our predicament and you appreciate what your kids face. This won’t be pretty for anyone. Therefor take action with the addresses I provide at the end of these commentaries.

First of all, call Speaker of the House John Boehner at 1-202-225-0600 and tell him your feelings about S744. Leave a message on his answer machine or speak to his secretary. Call often in the coming months. Tell him:

“Mr. Boehner, I understand that S744 doubles legal immigration from its current 1.0 million annually to 2.0 million while giving amnesty to 12 to 20 million illegal migrants. Do you understand that such an amnesty would flood America with over 100 million immigrants by 2050—a scant 37 years from now. How will we be able to water, house, work, feed, educate, medicate and care for that many people when we already suffer 48 million Americans who cannot secure jobs and live on food stamps? How will we maintain our environment and standard of living in light of those numbers. As an American citizen, I demand that you reduce all immigration to less than 100,000 annually and enforce the laws on the books to arrest, prosecute and jail employers of illegal migrants. That will help illegal migrants to go home on their own dime when they don’t have a job. Our own unemployed citizens can take those jobs at a living wage.”

Do the same for all the email addresses below to start a national conversation:

George Noory: coasttocoastam@aol.com
TheEarlyShow@cbsnews.com
Today Show: todaystoryideas@nbc.com
Nightline@abcnews.com
Matt Lauer: today@nbc.com
Bill O’Reilly: Oreilly@foxnews.com
comments@foxnews.com
Brian Williams: nightly@msnbc.com
Greta van Susteren: Ontherecord@foxnews.com
Dateline@nbc.com
Editor: letters@washpost.com
Editor: wsj.ltrs@wsj.com
Editor: letters@time.com
Editor: letters@newsweek.com
Ombudsman@npr.org
Editor: letters@nytimes.com
Editor: openforum@denverpost.com

Click here for part —–> 12345678910,

[Join me, Frosty Wooldridge, with Dave Chaffin, host of the Morning Zone at 650 AM, www.KGAB.com, Cheyenne, Wyoming every Monday 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m., as we discuss my latest commentaries onwww.NewsWithViews.com about issues facing America. You may stream the show on your computer. You may call in at: 1-888-503-6500.]

The post What America Will Look Like In 2050, Part 10 appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
http://www.officialwire.com/news/what-america-will-look-like-in-2050-part-10/feed/ 0
The Senate Would Be More Efficient Without The Filibuster, And That’s The Problem http://www.officialwire.com/news/the-senate-would-be-more-efficient-without-the-filibuster-and-thats-the-problem/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-senate-would-be-more-efficient-without-the-filibuster-and-thats-the-problem http://www.officialwire.com/news/the-senate-would-be-more-efficient-without-the-filibuster-and-thats-the-problem/#respond Fri, 29 Nov 2013 17:16:09 +0000 http://www.officialwire.com/?post_type=news&p=714732 By Charles W. Dunn Editor’s note: This article first appeared at Forbes.com. What would the Senate be like without the filibuster? It would be a more efficient body, but efficiency has never been a hallmark of democracy. Reflecting on Senate Rule 22, the so-called cloture rule that allows for filibusters, former Senate parliamentarian Floyd M. […]

The post The Senate Would Be More Efficient Without The Filibuster, And That’s The Problem appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
By Charles W. Dunn

Editor’s note: This article first appeared at Forbes.com.

What would the Senate be like without the filibuster? It would be a more efficient body, but efficiency has never been a hallmark of democracy.

Reflecting on Senate Rule 22, the so-called cloture rule that allows for filibusters, former Senate parliamentarian Floyd M. Riddick dramatically stated its importance when he said, “Coming from the House to the Senate, it is like going from prison to freedom. . . . I’m talking about the freedom of time to develop what you are trying to get over. . . . I just can’t imagine debates in the Roman Senate ever being developed under the House procedures.”

What would America be like without the filibuster? That’s the vital question. William F. Hildenbrand, former secretary of the U.S. Senate, said the filibuster is “the one way a bad bill can be stopped. It is a way of calling public attention to a bill. . . . Without it, the . . . [minority] here would be steamrolled. If you ever take away the filibuster, I think the people would be the losers.”

Conservatives and liberals have benefited from the filibuster. Conservative Strom Thurmond of South Carolina talked for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Liberal Wayne Morse of Oregon talked for 22 hours and 26 minutes against the Tidelands oil bill of 1953. In the short run they appeared to thwart majority rule. But in the end the Senate passed and the public accepted changes on these controversial social and economic issues.

And more recently Texas Senator Ted Cruz’ filibuster of 21 hours and 19 minutes in opposition to Obamacare not only foreshadowed overwhelming popular opposition to the Affordable Care Act, but also demonstrated that Democrats should never have passed that legislation in the first place without Republican support.

Just because the majority can impose its will does not mean that it should.

Assembly-line speed is not necessarily a virtue when applied to the resolution of serious social and economic problems. Persons obsessed with productivity often fail to recognize that the legislative process is designed not just to produce results but also to insure that the results are the best possible.

In a democracy issues are supposed to be thoroughly debated so that voters can make intelligent decisions based on the best data available. Research to get the facts, debate to determine the alternatives, and compromise to achieve agreement on issues require a good deal of time.

Senate Rule 22 is a rational way not only to maintain America’s legislative system, but also to enhance society’s acceptance of legislative decisions. By deliberating at length on legislation, the Senate performs the useful function of gradually educating and preparing people for change.

One has only to imagine what could have happened had there not been extensive debates about civil rights prior to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Debate and deliberation help cushion the impact of change, and aid in stabilizing American society with its diversity of volatile interests.

In modifying Senate Rule 22 to allow a simple majority to confirm most presidential nominations, Democrats have opened the door to further modifications, namely allowing a simple majority to act on Supreme Court nominations and legislation.

But even the present modification poses two serious problems. First, it strengthens executive power at a time when Americans have grown weary of its excesses. Second, it enables the president to pursue a narrow ideological agenda in making his nominations.

To illustrate, the president can now nominate judges far to the left of the American mainstream, which will enable him to more easily secure judicial support for his policies in critical judicial tests, especially before America’s most important appellate court, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.

President Obama and Senate Democrats have won, but America has lost.

 

Dr. Charles W. Dunn is author and editor of 21 books on American politics, chairman emeritus of the U.S. J. William Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board, and a founder of, and contributing scholar to, The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College.

The post The Senate Would Be More Efficient Without The Filibuster, And That’s The Problem appeared first on Official Wire.

]]>
http://www.officialwire.com/news/the-senate-would-be-more-efficient-without-the-filibuster-and-thats-the-problem/feed/ 0