Biden’s illegal immigration plan

https://youtu.be/dZ-w86r12Uw No social distancing, no masks, no quarantines. No isolation of sex criminals. Releasing drug cartel members. It's Biden's plan to control the virus and the opioid crisis.

The lockdowns of schools, churches, libraries and social activities have hurt the children in low income families the most. Democrats and their allies in the unions are once again using government control to hurt minorities. Systemic racism? How about just systemically Democrat party with business as usual? And equal opportunity plan to hurt all children, but hurts minorities more. We don't really need statistical models to tell us what we already know.

Achievement gap and coronavirus | McKinsey

How much learning students lose during school closures varies significantly by access to remote learning, the quality of remote instruction, home support, and the degree of engagement. For simplicity’s sake, we have grouped high-school students into three archetypes. First, there are students who experience average-quality remote learning; this group continues to progress, but at a slower pace than if they had remained in school.⁴ Second, some students are getting lower-quality remote learning; they are generally stagnating at their current grade levels. Then there are students who are not getting any instruction at all; they are probably losing significant ground. Finally, some students drop out of high school altogether.

Adoption of illegal immigrant children? No!

A Democrat cousin (on my Dad’s side) has claimed that the Trump Administration is cruelly stealing the children of illegal immigrants and putting them up for adoption. Eventually, after I asked for details, he provided one link which originated with Associated Press, and then was massaged by another publication. I won't show you the link--there are so many inaccuracies I wouldn't want you to post it--some people only read the headlines and continue to pass the anti-Trump rumors.

The story was built around two children of illegal immigrants who were put in foster care--2014 and 2015. Guess who was president? Further details were from the 1980s. In both cases, the parents got their children back--the agencies that provide this service for the government make it clear to the foster parents they cannot adopt. In the one case in Michigan where a judge didn't wait for the parents to be found, the federal government was the agency that stepped in to return the child.

I'm not sure why a journalist would be so deceptive in developing the story, using stories from the Obama years, and mixing it with hysteria about Trump and then adding in the 1980s. It's manipulative. We can guess which political party she/he belongs to. American children are taken from their parents when they violate the law, but Democrats see this as different. This is a way to attack Trump.

But you have to read to the end to find out that the reunited family, back in their home country, still communicate with the foster family because they know they love their little girl too. Must have been some hell hole.

Oops. Wrong president.

A story that claimed the Trump administration had the highest number of children in detention in the world was suddenly withdrawn by several media outlets because the study upon which the story was based used data from 2015 when Barack Obama was president. (PJMedia)

Of course, there will be no further stories on the plight of immigrant children because unless Trump can be vilified and maligned, there is not story. Just doesn't sell. Who cares about kids, anyway?

Charges of White Privilege

The charge of “white privilege,” or “White supremacy” hurled at Americans of European and other area countries is a way to shame, bully and induce guilt, whether or not you personally intended it that way. Shaming and bullying are also how abused women, slaves, trafficked children, and elderly are kept quiet. It’s as old as slavery. And Trump voters and conservatives of any stripe are the victims. The Left knows this well—their ideology killed 100 million in the 20^th century, and it didn’t all start with gas chambers, reeducation camps, or storm troopers. Right now, the charges are justifying creating data bases of Trump supporters so they can be publicly shamed or lose their incomes; it justifies Google CEOs for creating winners and losers in elections via social media; it justifies attacking people wearing read hats, with or without MAGA stitching; it justifies 95% of academic faculty being liberal and only those promoted and tenured; it justifies knocking down buildings and statues not just of Confederate generals (all of whom were pardoned by the U.S. government) but founders and current members of Trump cabinet.

I am more concerned about parents dragging children (and some not their own) across thousands of miles in very unsafe conditions subject to weather, assault and separation from grandparents, extended family and home than I am of well run detention centers where they are well fed and housed, and safe from traffickers (which was the intention of that regulation). Millions have been subjected to that illegal border crossing—only hundreds to detention centers, which are quickly emptied as parents’ (or other adults) cases are resolved, most to float out into the general U.S. population. I’m very concerned that U.S. border patrol is babysitting rather than keeping the borders safe for both Americans and Mexicans from all the non-Mexicans, including ISIS fighters, who cross without a problem.

I’m very concerned that the Leftist organizations and politicians have made illegal immigration an issue of race and color (and over 80% are NOT “people of color”) because they know charges of racism turn on the white guilt to shut people up and garner donations from Democrats. We have more children on the streets with brain addled homeless parents than in detention centers, but they would probably be safer, cleaner and better educated if instead of the squalor of San Francisco, they were in an Arizona facility.

Democrats endanger lives of illegal immigrants and cheat the legal ones

Based on Census data (ACS) there are about 44.5 million immigrants in the U.S., or about 13.7% of the population. (That number doesn't include foreign born here for other reasons.) Unlike Ilhan Omar, immigrants and children of immigrants are usually among the most patriotic of all Americans--especially if the stories of WWII or the Gulag or the Disappeared have been passed down. By far, immigrants are the most eager to take advantage of our property rights and free markets--something they probably weren't allowed in their country of birth.

Recently, the terms immigrant and "illegal immigrant" have been deliberately morphed although they are very different. Even finding unbiased statistical data is difficult because of slanted meanings of words. But that number gives you an idea why Democrats are rewarding illegal immigrants at the expense of the legal ones waiting and paying high legal fees and the refugees already given numbers to enter (45,000 a year). It's a numbers game for federal money, political power and electoral votes.
They are also putting the illegal immigrants at risk for trafficking, health, employment and education problems, plus 5-10 years down the road they still won't be legal but their children will be causing great stress in families. True refugees are required to apply for a green card to become a permanent resident after one year in the United States. After five years of residency, they become eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship. That is not the case for the catch and release, reward the coyotes system for those who fade into the general population.

Do native born Americans use more welfare at a higher rate than illegal immigrants?

Have you ever wondered where some anti-Trumpers and Leftists come up with their "native born Americans use more welfare than illegals" memes and mottoes? Just read such an article today by a very sound research organization, Cato, which is libertarian. "Immigration and the welfare state: immigrant and native use rates and benefit levels for means-tested welfare and entitlement programs." Alex Nowrasteh and Robert Orr, May 10, 2018.

Here's the reasoning. First of all, toss in Social Security, SSI and Medicare into the pot and call that welfare. I know more than a few Americans who would object to calling the retirement plan and insurance they paid for "welfare."

Second, don't distinguish among green card holders, permanent residents, temporary workers, students (F-1, F-2, F-3 visas) refugees and naturalized citizens and illegal border crashers from 84 countries pouring through our southern border. It wouldn't shock me too much if green card computer employees of Google, Amazon and Microsoft from India and China earning 3x the wage of the average American don't use welfare. Just chatted with a 20-something recent OSU graduate (probably Indian, but could be Pakistani) on my walk yesterday, ready to take off for Seattle to work. From student visa to work visa (H1b).

Third, neglect to point out that virtually all the in-kind benefits that come from the 50 states, originate at the federal level--the National School Lunch Program, WIC, Head Start. Since those are available to all regardless of immigration status, that's also on the wrong side of the ledger.

Fourth, ignore that no one actually has a figure on how many illegals are living among us, working 2-3 jobs, being paid under the table, and sending remittances home to Ecuador or Honduras or Kenya. The churches and non-profits who receive government grants do not ask questions--they serve all.

Table 1 in the article disproves Cato's thesis by using what most Americans would define as federal "welfare." Percentage using Cash assistance, 0.7 by natives, 0.8 by noncitizens; SNAP 9.6 by natives, 14.6 by non-citizens; Medicaid 12.3 by natives, 18.9 by non-citizens.

The article is really loosey-goosey when it comes to the children. It has a category for "child immigrants" (which could be children of green card holders, work visa holders, naturalized citizens, temporary workers) and for "citizen children of noncitizen parents." Duh! I'm not too shocked if the immigrant child of a Filipino computer programmer working for Google is less likely to be using welfare than the child of a coal miner in West Virginia whose parents lost their jobs because of a clean air regulation.

It's not fake news, just government statistics with no agreement on terms.

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are both children of immigrants

Have you ever looked up Kamala Harris' ethnicity? Some second generation Americans (parents were immigrants) turn on the very people who welcomed their parents. And she's also lived in Canada after her parents divorced. These figures were for Sept. 2018.

 "Approximately 12 percent of members of Congress are immigrants or children of immigrants. There are 12 foreign-born members, of which only one is Republican. Democrats account for 39 of the 53 members of Congress with at least one immigrant parent. First- or second-generation immigrants represent 23 states, with California having the most, and they come from various regions throughout the world. Over the course of American history, there have been 413 foreign-born Americans that have served in Congress, out of 12,000 total. For this reason, the debate over America’s immigration laws is deeply personal for some members." 

If immigration is deeply personal why do some want no borders for the country of their birth? https://news.yahoo.com/daily-digit-first-second-generation-…

Our president is also the son of an immigrant--and he seems grateful to be an American. Why do our media continue to conflate those who come illegally and those who have to follow the very difficult challenges to be a legal immigrant?

Making Trump’s case

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=eGuSdXiFtLk

CNN reporter ends up making Trump’s case for separation of families, but doesn’t realize it.  She acknowledges that children are used for sex trafficking and as drug mules.

Democrats are ridiculing “family values” of Republicans

They’re certainly right that sanctity of marriage is a Republican value, since Democrats have been in the business of destroying marriage and family since 1964, and Republicans do eventually absorb the cultural values imposed by liberals.

And they’re right that sanctity of life is a Republican value (for some Republicans); abortion doesn't appear in the RNC mission statement as it has in the DNC for 3 decades.

And they’re right that the federal government more often disregards the rights of the states when Democrats are in charge.

But they’re  wrong that the current dust up is about children from Mexico; the unaccompanied minors who are being trafficked for sex or labor come mostly from Central America 'with parents" and have passed through Mexico who doesn't want them, or won't take them as refugees.

And they’re right the protests against abortion are about liberty--the right of a child to live, the most basic form of all liberty.

I'm a little puzzled about the FBI probe, though--they confused me on that one. The left is OK with the bias shown at the highest levels? Is that OK in the Ferguson or Baltimore investigations?