re: immigrant laws

I believe the points made by the author of "Immigration Laws" are valid.  The arguing over state’s rights vs. federal rights in regard to immigration laws and the politicizing of immigration by political parties allows the most important fact to be overlooked, which is this:  United States’ citizens’ financial and physical lives are in grave danger because of the illegal immigration problem that the U.S. government does not address.

The federal law charges the federal government with the responsibility of protecting the borders of the United States from illegal immigration and to keep the U.S. citizens’ safe from her enemies.  Unfortunately, the Obama administration has refused to reach out and help Arizona with the increasing problems illegal immigration brings on not only the government and law enforcement agencies of the state, but on the people of the state, as well.  Even after Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s repeated attempts to engage the federal government, to persuade the federal government, to do the job they are legally required to do, the current administration has refused to step in to help secure the Arizona borders.  To make matters worse, as the blogger has stated, the federal government has even brought a law suit against the state of Arizona for doing the job the federal government itself is supposed to be doing.

I also agree with the blogger’s statement that allowing immigrants to stay in this country illegally benefits the political party that supports the social welfare programs that would benefit these immigrants.  Typically, immigrants come to the United States with very little, financially speaking, and without a job waiting for them once they arrive.  They are not even allowed to be employed if they are illegally in the U.S.  This is federal law.  Therefore, illegal immigrants are typically migrant workers, underpaid workers, or unemployed. Because of the inability to legally find viable jobs, these illegal immigrants are financially supported by the U.S. government and given access to the social programs offered by the government (welfare, food stamps, health care, free public education, and even, in some states, free college tuition). While it is supposed to be illegal to vote if you are not in this country legally, many illegal votes are cast.  Therefore, those illegal immigrants who are going to benefit from the social programs offered by the government typically vote for the party that supplies these benefits, not for the party that wishes to reduce and eliminate them altogether.  Historically, the Democrat party is the party of welfare, started by FDR some 60 plus years ago.  With the current president being a member of the Democratic party, it is easy to understand why he would want these illegal immigrants to stay in this country…they are a very important part of his party's numbers.

Not only do illegal immigrants impose a financial burden on the tax payers whose taxes pay for those welfare programs, some illegal immigrants also pose a security threat to individuals and to the United States itself.  One needs only look at the Arizona and Texas borders to see the tragedy left behind by the drug smuggling cartels.  Not only have hundreds of Mexican citizens been killed in their own country by these cartels, but the Mexican authorities who try to stop these cartels have been killed in large numbers, as well.  Sadly, that violence has spilled over the border and into the United States. In fact, even a US Border Patrol agent, Brian Terry, was recently killed by a Mexican cartel member. Bullets have been fired across the Texas border and become embedded in a US high school in south Texas.  Drugs are brought across the borders and sold to U.S. citizens.  If the borders were secured, much of this illegal drug trafficking would be brought to a halt and, it is likely, many of the drug cartels would be brought down and destroyed.

If 9/11 taught U.S. citizens anything, it has taught them that anyone can enter at any time and use any thing to destroy the citizens of this great country.  Every due diligence is in order here and every stop should be taken out of the way to protect this country’s citizens and dealing with illegal immigration is  huge piece of this equation. 

Hold A Bachelor Degree and Need A Job? GOOD LUCK.

I had planned on attending medical school or pharmacy school to become either a doctor in the NICU or a pharmacist. However, after seeing the rise of tuition costs and the pay wages remaining steady where they have been, I had to give it second thoughts. According to The Associated Press, 1 in 2 college graduates are either underemployed or not employed at all. It has been estimated that 1.5 million bachelor’s degree holders, or 53.6 percent, under the age of 25 were jobless or underemployed last year.

There is a strong demand for employees in the science, education, and health fields, but the fields of arts and humanities tend to be much more difficult for job findings. The assumed reasoning behind this is the lesser need for employees, as we have numerous technological advances from those last 12 years. For example, banks are not in need of as many bank tellers since you can now deposit checks through the ATM at the drive thru at some banks.

I have now taken business management into consideration and, although I do not enjoy classes relating to the subject matter, I feel as though it will spark the interests of employers when looking for business managers. I also think that prior experience is a must. Many of the bachelor degree obtainers did not have much prior work experience, if any at all. Job employers and prospective employers do not wish to see this on a resume, especially with the job economy the way it is. This is, what I believe to be, a danger in children and teens and college students growing up to receive everything they wish from parents or other: iPads, iPhones, college tuition paid in full, brand new BMW for 16^th birthday, etc. First, students are not being taught a worth ethic at all and no – I do not consider a few household chores around the house as “work ethic”. Work ethic includes showing up to a job on time and being responsible. Second, I believe that this generation is being taught that life is fair and they will receive whatever they wish at the snap of their fingers. When students get into the real world after college, they begin to see that they cannot just find a job right away and not having any work experience makes it even more difficult. I have worked at a retail company for 4 years and plan on working there through college, making it 6 years, partially in a management position. I believe that this will make me a good candidate for a job someday: this experience combined with a business management degree. Another danger for students searching for jobs is the “job hoppers”. I recently spoke with a family friend about this situation and the way it looks on resumes. She responded to this by informing me that her job puts “job hoppers” into their own folder and does not even consider them. The reason for this being that if an individual has a new job every 6 months, an employer can only expect them to last that long at their company. For this reason, rather than go through the hiring process once again in 6 months, why not just go through it once and find someone who will potentially stay?

Fresh out of college, these bachelor degree holders are feeling obligated to take jobs as baristas, waters, waitresses, bartenders and cashiers just to ensure that they have at least a small source of income. College students are not making the money they need in order to pay phone bills, car insurance, gas money, and apartment rent, much less student loans. Because of this, parents have to assist their young adults in paying student loans which, in turn, causes the parents to become short on money and more cautious of their spending. This not only causes problems for the family, but also for the economy. If the parents of many students do not have enough money to buy certain things, then companies start going out of business, hereby causing more job losses, which causes even a bigger problem. Andrew Sum, director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University, evaluated the number of college students with jobs and their hourly rate; in response to this, Sum said that many recently graduated college students are challenged what he calls a “double whammy”: rising tuition and poor job outcomes. On the bright end of the scale, the Southern US, anchored by Texas, was most likely to have young college graduates in higher-skill jobs! J

These statistics are based on an analysis of 2011 Current Population Survey data conducted by Northeastern University researchers, which was supplemented with material from Paul Harrington, an economist at Drexel University, and the Economic Policy Institute.

In this article, they also mention that “according to government projections released last month, only three of the 30 occupations with the largest projected number of job openings by 2020 will require a bachelor’s degree or higher to fill the position — teachers, college professors and accountants.”

theRESPONSE.

In a March post on a blog written by a colleague, it is evident that this blog was written shortly after the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman case first broke in the news media. The date of the blog verifies this as do the comments made by the blog author. The comments seem to have come from the very first reports that were given by major news stations immediately after the tragic event took place.

Since March, when this blog was written, much information has changed from initial reports to information from a more thorough investigation. Information has definitely been revised regarding the on-air replays of the call George Zimmerman made to police.

The early news reports put together bits and pieces of the police recording, but these bits and pieces lead the listeners to believe that George Zimmerman’s comments to the police dispatcher were racial. Recently, when the entire tape was played from beginning to end, it could be told that the news stations had rewritten the script to make it sound as though George Zimmerman was chasing and targeting Trayvon Martin because of racial prejudice. When the entire tape was played, the dispatcher was the one who asked the specific race question to George Zimmerman; Zimmerman did not offer that information without solicitation from the police dispatcher. After investigating further into George Zimmerman’s background, the media found that George Zimmerman had been the opposite of a racist: he volunteered his own time to teach at-risk and minority youth.

This blogger also mentions the size differential between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin as a valid reason Trayvon Martin could not have been the aggressor in this case. News outlets repeatedly showed a photo of Martin as a 10-13 year old boy. After several weeks, the media disclosed that the photo of Martin was not current and that he was now over 6 feet tall.

Further, according to police reports, when George Zimmerman was told to stop following Trayvon Martin he did. Also according to police reports, Zimmerman was walking to find the address of his location – a request made by the police dispatcher. The blogger sites Florida statute 776.012 which states a person may be justified in using force if he or she is protecting himself or herself or someone else. According to reports from witnesses, Trayvon Martin said to George Zimmerman as Martin was on top of Zimmerman, assaulting him, something similar to, “You’re going to die tonight.” Those words would certainly cause any human to fear for his life and cause him to go into a mode of survival.

This country is founded on the presumption of innocence until found guilty. This blogger, as well as the news media, tried and convicted George Zimmerman in the court of popular opinion, after swaying that opinion with “facts” (audio police reports that were tampered with) and flawed and invalid photos of Trayvon Martin (pictures shown that were four or more years old). Those in positions of leadership in this country, like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, convicted George Zimmerman before he could even go to trial.

The lynch mob that is the media has already sentenced George Zimmerman without due process. The blogger asks why nothing has changed in this country in 55 years. Perhaps he as well as others who have already convicted George Zimmerman should take a long, hard look at what is truth and what is fallacy, especially now that the investigation is underway and information is being dissected as opposed to false primary reports.

196 days. 4706 hours. 282382 minutes. until ELECTION DAY.

“The Government…” I shudder at the sound of these words. My first reaction / response is always “No Comment.” so how I am going to write a 250 word minimum blog post on this, I am not quite sure. J

November 4, 2008 –

            Obama gets elected the 44^th president of the United States of America.

Under Obama, nearly 5 million Americans, according to Forbes, have fled the workforce in hopeless despair. These 5 million citizens are not counted as in the workforce, but they were also not counted in the 8.3% unemployment rate. If they were counted as part of the unemployment rate, the unemployment rate would actually be 11%. In March of this year, the BLS [Bureau of Labor Statistics] found 243,000 new jobs, but, in the same week, they also reported that an additional 1.2 million workers had dropped out of the work force together. In January of 2009, 11.6 million Americans were unemployed. In January 2012, 12.8 million were unemployed. America was 12.6 million jobs short of employment at the beginning of the June 2009 recession until January 2012 when America was 15.2 million jobs short. According to Forbes, there were also 24 million Americans that had been looking for work but were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the four weeks preceding the survey. If you were to tally these individuals into the survey, it would bring the unemployment rate to 15.1% as opposed to 11%.

And the national debt? Don't even get me started.

According to CBS News, the National Debt has increased more during Obama's three years in office than it did during all 8 years of Bush's presidency combined. During Bush's 8 years, the national debt rose $4.899 trillion while, under Obama's three years, the national debt has risen $4.939 trillion. On Bush's last day in office and Obama's first day in office, the national debt was $10.626 trillion. The national debt has now reached $15.566 trillion, according to the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), according to Heritage Foundation, contains 18 separate tax increases. By 2019, these tax increases will have cost taxpayers $503 billion since 2010. The Heritage Foundation also noted that nearly half of the new revenue raised by the PPACA is due to three major tax hikes alone.

Obama promised America change and WOW. He definitely brought it! Unfortunately, it was not the change America wanted to see.

I disagree with the changes that have been brought on and I am hoping that America will have common sense and that, seeing these statistics, they will vote for another candidate who appears to be more promising in bringing changes -- this time for the good -- to our beloved country. That is, if America cares to do research rather than just hop up from the couch after watching Family Guy and vote without prior knowledge. :)

Insert Post Title Here

In the recent article “VA Governor Downplays Mandatory Ultrasounds By Saying It’s Only Required In A ‘Small Minority’ Of Cases published by ThinkProgress, Amanda Peterson Beadle, an editorial assistant for the company, does not only talk about Bob McDonnell’s view on the ultrasounds, but also the reasons for the closures of many of the clinics in the state. Beadle received a B.A. in journalism and Spanish from the University of Alabama. She was editor-in-chief of the campus newspaper and interned at the Scripps Howard Foundation Wire, the Press-Register, and the Ludington Daily News. In the article, Amanda Peterson Beadle writes about how the mandatory ultrasound bill that the Virginia Governor, Bob McDonnell signed, and went into law last month. This ultrasound bill requires all women who have an abortion in the state to have an ultrasound first. In the beginning of the creation of the bill, McDonnell supported a more invasive version of the procedure, but then backed down to a less invasive ultrasound.

Bob McDonnell said that the women “have a right to know” all available medical information before making a decision. However, the bill adds an unfunded, unnecessary burden for women seeking an abortion. McDonnell was interviewed by All Hunt of Bloomberg. In this interview, the Virginia Governor argued that “in almost all the cases already these ultrasounds are already required for medical reasons” and that “the important part, really, is to be able to show the woman the ultrasound along with all the medical information.”

Amanda Peterson Beadle claims that this invasive law is the Republican lawmakers’ attempts to limit women’s access to abortion procedures by making it difficult or forcing clinics to close. She brings up the evidence that burdensome and expensive state regulations are put on abortion clinics, which aids in the forcing of closures for the clinics. Beadle shares that 20 of Virginia’s 23 abortion clinics were affected by the new regulations. Some of these 20 clinics had to make changes to their clinics; these changes included larger hallways, bigger parking lots, and certain health and cooling controls. The clinics told Beadle that in order to comply with the new regulations, it cost them between $150,000 and $3 million each.

I think that Amanda Peterson Beadle is right on target with her explanation for the closings of the clinics. It is quite a chunk of cash in these rough and difficult economic times to have to make such drastic renovations to the clinics. Laura Meyers, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Metropolitan Washington, agrees with this thought. In a recent interview with the Washington Examiner she said that “to put more onerous regulations on health care providers that are not necessary seems very counterproductive.” I agree with Meyers. I think that the regulations are definitely tedious and burdensome and it is counterproductive to spend such money on these new regulations when that is not the main reason for the existence of the clinics. If the clinics are suited for the neighborhood or amount of traffic that flows through the clinic, then I think that the bigger parking lots, etc. are unnecessary.

To Take the STAAR Test or Not?

Remember the old TAKS test? The Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills recently got renamed to STAAR - State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness. The STAAR tests will be tougher and more accurate than the TAKS tests, as well as offer a more accurate measure of the effectiveness of classroom instruction. After 30 years, however, these standardized tests have not improved the quality of the schools, according to a recent editorial put out by the Austin American Statesman.

The state government is using more than $400 million in taxpayer money to pay a company called Pearson Education to develop these standardized tests. I agree with all things said by the author of this editorial, Edy Chamness. This local contributor, mother of a third grade son and former teacher makes some very clear and well thought out points on the flaws of this situation.

First, Chamness argues that "after spending millions of dollars on testing, there isn't any money left for classroom instruction". Chamness is right on point when she says this. Our taxpayer money is going to the creators of these standardized tests rather than to the actual education needed to teach these children in order to even pass the TAKS or STAAR tests. It doesn't make much sense, does it?

Chamness goes on further to discuss how Texas teachers are having to "interrupt hands-on, quality instructional time to 'teach the test'. Rather than being taught educational and informative material from a textbook or curriculum that will be more beneficial for later use such as college, the schoolteachers are basically teaching off the test. The teachers learn what the students need to know for the test and teach that only.

Not only is the STAAR test disadvantageous to students academic knowledge, it is also proven to be an instigator boredom, test anxiety and depression. These tests have also been proven to damage their curiosity and desire to learn. STAAR tests narrows the teachable curriculum and wastes valuable education time, as well.

In response to these tests, something called "Texas Parents Opt Out" has formed. The Texas Parents Opt Out organization is more adamant about authentic, hands-on, experiential learning. The TPOO organization believes, and rightly so, that this type of learning helps make the instructional material that is taught more meaningful and relevant.

The STAAR tests are mainly focused on reading and mathematics. The TPOO feels that the other subjects should be focused on or emphasized just as much as the math and reading. These subjects include foreign languages, physical education, social studies, art, science, and music. The "hands-on, experiential learning" and "discovery-based" approach to concepts includes portfolios, projects, and experiments.

The TPOO lets parents know that they are able to opt their children out of these tests via Chapter 26 of the Texas Education Code. This chapter "gives parents the right to remove their child from any activity that the parent believes is immoral".

This chapter gives parents the right to choose whether or not they would like their child to participate in the new standardized testing or not.

Birth Conrol Mandate

President Barack Obama recently mandated that religious employers will be required to cover birth control for women as preventative care free of charge. The only exceptions to this rule are churches and houses of worship. All other religious organizations have been ordered to comply by August of 2013. Religious employers are in complete and utter disagreement with this decision, especially Catholics who, by nature, do not believe in contraceptives. Roman Catholics argued that this mandate would force3 them to violate church teachings. By enforcing this mandate, the religious rights and freedom of the United States are being infringed upon. It is a violation of the first amendment which clearly states:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press: or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

In addition to this violation of the first amendment, the Associated Press also pointed out that it is also “undermining most vital institutions, such as Catholic charities, schools, and hospitals.”