Another Slick (and false) Journalistic Jab at the President


The first paragraph of an article went like this:

“While President Donald Trump works to build a wall on the country’s southern border, Ohio Gov. John Kasich says he wants to break down barriers for legal immigrants.” 1

Hmm, the logical conclusion of this sentence because it begins with “while” is that Kasich is doing the something contrary to what the President is attempting.

To the opponents of the President:  The President is simply attempting to enforce the law regarding illegal immigration.  He is not opposed to legal immigration, only looking to change the parameters of legal immigration to make it more fair for the entire world population wishing to come here instead of a domino effect favoring those from a few nations (sometimes called “chain migration”). 2

The article adds to the implied criticism of the President’s view of immigration by publishing Kasich’s self-promoting:

“At a time when Americans are all worked up about immigration, I believe that immigration is a good thing.”

As the son of an immigrant, this author agrees that immigration can be a win-win situation.  However, opponents of Trump’s controlled immigration don’t seem to care if our “win” portion of the deal disappears.


1 – “Gov. Kasich to immigrants: Come work in Ohio,” by Jessie Balmert, USA Today Network and published in the Cincinnati Enquirer, 5/16/2018.

2 – “Trump Wants to Block Visas for Immigrants’ Extended Family Members Because National Security Will Be in Danger,” by Jessica Kwong,, 1/4/2018.


Liberals Should Be in Favor of Sanctuary Cities for the Innocent Unborn


The mayors of two sanctuary cities, Chicago and San Francisco, have spoken recently about continuing to defy federal law when Trump takes office.

Rahm Emanuel of Chicago: “Now, administrations may change, but our values and principles as it relates to inclusion does not.” and Ed Lee of San Francisco: “Being a sanctuary city, for me, is the DNA of San Francisco.”1,2

Granted, it becomes a matter of compassion and practicality to even consider trying to deport all “illegals.”  HOWEVER, these cities create an indefensible morality of their own when they also fail to detain undocumenteds with criminal records:

“In a recent column published in the Omaha World-Herald, Michelle Root called on the Nebraska legislature to bar sanctuary city policies that allowed a drunk illegal alien driver to kill her 21-year old daughter, Sarah, on January 31.
Prosecutors reported that the 19-year-old was charged with motor vehicular homicide, but was released on just a $5,000 bond – and then quickly disappeared.”3

And it’s not a recent phenomenon (12 years ago):

“In Los Angeles, for example, dozens of members of a ruthless Salvadoran prison gang have sneaked back into town after having been deported for such crimes as murder, assault with a deadly weapon, and drug trafficking. Police officers know who they are and know that their mere presence in the country is a felony. Yet should a cop arrest an illegal gangbanger for felonious reentry, it is he who will be treated as a criminal, for violating the LAPD’s rule against enforcing immigration law.
The LAPD’s ban on immigration enforcement mirrors bans in immigrant-saturated cities around the country, from New York and Chicago to San Diego, Austin, and Houston. These ‘sanctuary policies’ generally prohibit city employees, including the cops, from reporting immigration violations to federal authorities.”4

—  With all of this “compassion” in opposition to federal laws which protect the innocent, the next natural step would be for these rogue cities to stop the killing of unborn babies who have not broken any laws!… You’re right.  No chance of that in this upside-down culture.

1 – “Mayor says Chicago will ‘always be a sanctuary city’ in face of deportation threats,” by, 11/15/2016.

2 – “Mayor Lee: SF will remain sanctuary city despite Trump presidency,” by Michael Barba,, 11/10/2016.

3 – “Illegal aliens in sanctuary cities getting away with murder,” by Chad Groening,, 11/10/2016.4 – “The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave,”, winter 2004.

4 – “The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave,”, winter 2004.

BLM Wants Reparations — Irish Americans Are Deserving, too

The Black Lives Matter, officially the Movement for Black Lives, released its platform of six demands this week.  Number two on the list is “reparations for past and continuing harms.”1

The U.S. fight for civil rights has been going on as a result of slavery which began on North America’s soil centuries ago.  Progress was realized in the 1960’s with various laws, but racial discrimination has not been eradicated, from both sides.

Obscured in the on-going strife is the fact black Americans have been not the only group poorly treated during our nation’s history.  The common misunderstanding is so pervasive to the point that most U.S. citizens would think “race” when the word discrimination is mentioned.  Women might be a second response, but most likely a distant second.

Irish Iberian

(see Footnote 2 for text and credit)

Time for a history refresher.  Irish immigrants were very poorly treated for generations after their initial influx as a result of the potato famine in the 1840’s.  Examples:

  • “They were forced to live in cellars and shanties, partly because of poverty but also because they were considered bad for the neighborhood…they were unfamiliar with plumbing and running water. These living conditions bred sickness and early death. It was estimated that 80% of all infants born to Irish immigrants in New York City died. Their brogue and dress provoked ridicule; their poverty and illiteracy provoked scorn.”4

  • “They became chamber maids, cooks, and the caretakers of children. Early Americans disdained this type of work, fit only for servants, the common sentiment being, “Let Negroes be servants, and if not Negroes, let Irishmen fill their place… The Blacks hated the Irish and it appeared to be a mutual feeling. They were the first to call the Irish ‘white nigger.'”4
  • “The Know-Nothing Party- a political party in the late 19th century—developed with “native” Americans who hated the immigrant influx particularly the Irish.”5
  • “Employers would place signs with NINA scrawled across the front. NINA spelled out is No Irish Need Apply, this would often be seen next to the No Dogs Allowed signs.”5
  • “The Irish were ostracized from American society for many things besides just being newcomers. The Irish were ostracized for being Catholic.  Many Protestants and ‘native’ Americans were distrustful of a religion that was, as they viewed it, highly irregular with its beads, meditative prayers to Jesus’ mother, oils, saints and statues.  The Irish were also categorized as angry, alcoholic beings – (the term ‘don’t get your Irish up’, stemmed from a stereotypical belief in the volatile Irish temper) who drank all the time in saloons and had regular bar brawls and parties filled with revelry and debauchery.”5
  • Even though early major league had Irish players, around the turn of the 20th century,” the large numbers of Irish fans misled the public into believing that the Irish dominated the game.”  The same book printed this:6


Baseball and No Irish need apply

Despite the cruel treatment, the Irish kept moving forward:

“The Irish were unique among immigrants… In New York City, during the Civil War, they rioted against the draft lottery after the first drawing showed most of the names were Irish.  For three days the city was terrorized by Irish mobs and only after an appeal for peace by Archbishop Hughes did it end.  In Pennsylvania they formed a secret organization called the Molly Maguires to fight mine owners who brutalized the miners and their families. They ambushed mine bosses, beat, and even killed them in their homes.  The Irish used brutal methods to fight brutal oppression.  They loved America and gladly fought in her wars… The days of ‘No Irish Need Apply’ passed. St.Patrick day paraded [sic] replaced violent confrontations…Through poverty and subhuman living conditions, the Irish tenaciously clung to each other.  With their ingenuity for organization, they were able to gain power and acceptance.  In 1850 at the crest of the Potato Famine immigration, Orestes Brownson, a celebrated convert to Catholicism, stated: ‘Out of these narrow lanes, dirty streets, damp cellars, and suffocating garrets, will come forth some of the noblest sons of our country, whom she will delight to own and honor.’  In little more than a century his prophecy rang true.  Irish-Americans had moved from the position of the despised to the oval office.”4

Our American history has its proud moments, but we also need to remember those groups who were not always treated properly.  Let’s not allow the tunnel-vision of political correctness to narrow our sense of fairness.


1 – “Black Lives Matter Releases Policy Agenda,” by Trymaine Lee,, 8/1/2016.

2 – “The Iberians are believed to have been originally an African race, who thousands of years ago spread themselves through Spain (undecipherable) Western Europe.  Their remains are found in the barrows or burying places in sundry parts of these countries.  The skulls are of low prognathous3 type.  They came to Ireland and mixed with the natives of the South and West, who themselves are supposed to have been of low type and descendants of savages of the Stone Age, who, in consequence of isolation from the rest of the world, had never been  (undecipherable) competed in the healthy struggle of life, and thus made way, according to the laws of nature for superior races.”  Credited as coming from Harper’s Weekly, 1899. Artist Unknown, Misusing Darwin’s science theories as a basis, the idea of the Irish as less than fully white persisted. This 1899 cartoon showing the Irish stereotype as less evolved, presented as scientific fact 11 years after Nast’s last cartoon was published by Harper’s. Source: Wikipedia Commons, as published I “Irish As Subhuman,”, 3/1/2016.

3 – “being or having an upper or lower jaw that projects abnormally forward,

4 – “Irish Immigrants in America in the 19th Century,”

5 – “The Irish in America: 1840’s- 1930’s,”

6 – From page 88 of “Baseball as America,” by George Plimpton, W.P.Kinsella, Paul Simon, Roger Angell, John Grisham, Jules Tygiel and others, National Geographic, Washington D.C., copyright National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, 2002.


Obama Administration Invites Terrorism — to a Community Near You?

From the answers many Democratic voters give to roving reporters these days, it is not surprising that no protest marches have filled our streets this evening against Jeh Johnson’s temporary amnesty to 8,000 Syrian refuges.  The declaration gives “permanent resident status, work permits, and other documents that would allow these migrants to remain without fear of deportation.”It also covers some who are here illegally, a staple of recruiting for Democrats.

It means that “almost anyone from Syria who is in the United States on an expired visa can stay here for at least another 18 months” as Syria has been given “temporary protected status” [TPS] because of its war-torn situation. 2

 To make matters worse:

“The background checks run on TPS participants are less stringent even than the screening of foreigners entering on some types of visas, let alone the multilayered vetting that refugees receive — procedures that FBI Director James Comey and other top government officials have said are insufficient to guarantee that terrorists cannot slip through.”3

Today, Trish Regan of Fox Business asked why does Hillary Clinton want to increase the immigration of those who “promised to seed with Islamic jihadists”?  Ms. Regan reminded us of the 1200 women who were sexually assaulted, mostly in Cologne and Hamburg, on New Years by migrants of Islamic nations.  This and the news of numerous attacks in Europe point to a reason why the UK left the organization which requires open borders in this time of war against radical Islamic jihadists.

Is this a case of taking political correctness to an extreme as Trish Regan offered?

It could be that reason or simply to create more chaos, thus “justifying” more big government control.  Any way we look at it, Obama and Hillary are welcoming the Trojan horse in to the cheers of the Left.  Because of their generosity (at our risk) these refuges can even apply for drivers licenses, too.4

Those of us who object will be reminded that we are not living up to the Christian directive to welcome the stranger.  The President and Ms. Clinton are thus following Hillary’s hero, Saul Alinsky and his 4th rule for radicals: “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules [emphasis retained].”5

To them, it is irrelevant that Christian charity does not require that we lead with our chin either.  Or as Pope Francis said recently regarding the question of how Europe can handle its wave of immigrants: “[it is] a fair and responsible question, because one cannot open the gates wide unreasonably.”6

Assuming Obama and Clinton continue to follow Alinsky, the only question left is where and when will one of these guests, or future guests if Hillary wins, strike us next?


1 – “DHS Gives 8,000 Syrian Refugees Temporary Amnesty,” by Matt Vespa,, 8/1/2016.

2 – “Obama Grants Protected Status To Syrians In U.S. Illegally,” by Leo Hohmann,, 8/1/2016.

3 – “Thousands of Syrians Get Back-Door Amnesty,” by Brendan Kirby,, updated 8/2/2016.

4 – “Called Temporary Protected Status, it is anything but temporary.  The program basically works like this: big event, like a natural disaster or war, happens in a country, US then says anyone already in the US from that country doesn’t have to go home.  They can be here on a Visa or for some other reason (illegally?) and they then can apply for TPS and virtually never go home!

“They can work, get drivers licenses, do anything a legal citizen can do except vote (and they are probably doing that too!).”

5– From “Rules for Radicals,” by Saul Alinsky, Vintage Books, New York, 1971.

6 – From “Pope: Conscientious Objection Is a Human Right,” by CAN/ EWTN News, National Catholic Register, May 29-June 11, 2016 issue.


Republicans, Please Note: Public Opinion is FINALLY Shifting to a Multi-task Approach on Immigration Reform

We have been a nation of “multi-taskers” even before the arrival of the cell phone.  That is why it was so perplexing to see a majority of U.S. citizens saying for so long that when it came to immigration reform, we must secure our borders before we attempted to solve the problem of what to do with the eleven million who are here illegally.  Polls revealed that public opinion had changed little on this issue over the last three years – until recently.1,2,3

Unfortunately, there are still significant members of Congress who are in favor of “borders first,” then work on the citizenship problem.  As Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah said in an interview yesterday with Martha MacCallum on Fox News:

“And the very first thing we need to do is secure the border.  And we also need to reform our antiquated, outdated visa system – our legal immigration processes… Then we’ll be in a better position to figure how best to treat the eleven million people who are here illegally with dignity and respect and respect for the rule of law. But these things can’t all be all wrapped together.  They can’t all happen at once.”

Securing  Our  Borders  Will  Take  a  Lot  of  Time…  And  Money

OK, so how much border are we dealing with?  The U.S. / Mexico border is 1,954 miles long and the U.S. border with Canada (not including Alaska) is 3,987 miles.Of course, this doesn’t include Florida’s coastline and the rest of our states on the Gulf of Mexico.

We’ve spent $75 billion on border control “without making a lasting difference” in the last ten years.  This is proven in that we have had operational control of just 44% of our borders according to the most recent figures from the Government Accountability Office.5  Consequently, we have a long way to go in terms of tax dollars, too.

Everyday life tells us that we can never be completely secure anyway.  Thus, waiting before addressing the second part of immigration reform is merely ill-advised procrastination.

Bad  Immigration  Policies  are  Hurting  the  U.S.  Economy

Besides unnecessarily increasing societal stress by having the eleven million to wait an extended time for a resolution of their status, it’s also wasteful.  In a forum on immigration last year, it was noted that a study by the Center for American Progress and the Immigration Policy Center estimated that an increase in $1.5 trillion GDP over ten years could be realized with the creation of a commonsense immigration process.In addition, forum host Carl Ruby reminded the gathering that “undocumenteds are sitting on money to invest.”  How often have we heard economists and financial advisors reprimand us that money “hidden in a mattress” is bad for both the owner and for the economy?

Another member of the panel illustrated an unappreciated drawback to our current system.  In some cases it would take 35 years for computer programmers to immigrate from India.  As a result, they stay home and the U.S. company outsources the work to India keeping their buying power and income taxes there.

It’s  Not  All  “Take”  for  “Illegals” 

While many believe that illegal/ undocumented aliens can be a drain our social justice system, it works in reverse, too.  For example, some obtain work by acquiring fake I.D.’s.  This turns out costing them.  By having to work in this manner, they pay into the Social System, but they’ll never be able to collect.  (All right, that may not make them any different from current young working citizens, but let’s overlook that for the moment.)  Estimates are that their employment sends $6-8 billion annually to the federal government which will not be returned to them.

A dangerous threat accompanies those who are seasonal workers following crops from six to nine months of the year.  Mr. Ruby noted that these are the conditions which lead to human trafficking.

Sister Maria Stacy, Director for Hispanic Catholic Ministries at St. Mary’s, talked about the disruption of families when the father is deported, but the wife and children stay behind.  She reminded us that we are still the same country which has said, “Give me your tired, your poor and your huddled masses.”  Therefore, “in the absence of possibilities to enter legally, we need to be compassionate.”

The  Time  is  Now  for  a  Two-Pronged  Strategy  to  Immigration  Reform

Dayton, Ohio Police Chief Richard Biehl cautioned that continuing to delay resolving citizenship issues “jeopardizes our public safety mission.”  Local officers are being asked to handle non-threatening problems like the presence of undocumenteds instead of concentrating on more serious situations.

Michael Hamilton, Executive Editor for the Ohio Conservative Review, reminded the audience that “the rule of law is indispensible… but some laws are not conducive to a more just society.”  Earlier, Carl Ruby said that the civil rights movement changed bad laws instead of insisting on enforcement.  He stressed that the same problem exists with our immigration laws today.

Therefore, we must act expediently toward a just immigration reform.  A vast majority of those who have entered our country illegally did not do so with the intent of ruining our nation as some extremists who have entered legally.7, 8  In fact, many entered legally, but have simply overstayed their visas.

A blanket amnesty, however, shows disrespect to legal immigrants who worked within the system and it undermines our system of law.  It sends the wrong message and creates division.  We can remedy the problem with a fair qualification process for would-be U.S. citizens while protecting our borders at the same time.

Our nation has thrived, not because we are the fragile thoroughbreds of sameness, but because we have combined to form the best of many ethnic backgrounds.  To wait until “our borders are secure” will ensure turmoil and hasten our decline from within.


1 – “A Fox News poll released Friday asked American voters what should happen first: 59 percent think the government should secure the border first, while 30 percent think the priority should be new legislation.
Large numbers of Republicans (72 percent) and independents (65 percent) support securing the border first. Views are fairly evenly split among Democrats, with a slim plurality putting border security (44 percent) before Congressional action (41 percent).

The national telephone poll was conducted for Fox News by Opinion Dynamics Corp. among 900 registered voters from June 29 to June 30. For the total sample, the poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.” From “Fox News Poll: Secure the Border First, by Dana Blanton, posted 7/2/2010 on www.foxnews,com

2 – CNN Poll: 62% Say Border Security Needs to be First Priority in Immigration Policy Tuesday, June 18, 2013, posted on NumbersUSA

A new CNN/ORC International survey found that 62% of Americans say border security should be the main focus of U.S. immigration policy, while only 36% say a pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens should be the top priority.
Across all income brackets and all education levels, more Americans overwhelmingly support increased border security over a pathway to citizenship.
For Americans 35 and older, increased border security as a top priority is supported by huge margins.
Sixty-five percent of Independents favor an increase in border security over a path to citizenship.  Americans in every region of the country overwhelmingly support border security as the top priority.”

3 – “On November 2-3, 2013, Basswood Research conducted a survey of likely general election voters in 20 congressional districts. These districts are widely viewed as the 20 most competitive ones currently held by Republican incumbents. The districts surveyed were: CA-10, CA-21, CO-6, FL-2, FL-10, IA-3, IL-13, IN-2, MI-1, MI-7, MI-11, MN-2, NE-2, NV-3, NY-11, NY-19, NY-23, OH-6, OH-14, PA-8.
The survey was conducted by live professional interviewers by telephone. The overall sample size was 1000, with a margin of error of +/- 3.1%, at a 95% confidence interval. Each district contributed 50 interviews to the sample; as such, data in individual districts is much less reliable.”

” When presented with three options regarding the interconnection between border security to prevent future illegal immigration and citizenship for those who are presently in the country and undocumented, the following responses were found:
17% oppose a pathway to citizenship under all circumstances;

26% favor a pathway to citizenship even without any increase in border security;

50% favor a pathway to citizenship if it also includes substantially increased border security.

76% favor a pathway to citizenship, with or without enhanced border security.

• The partisan composition of these 20 districts favors Republicans.

By party registration/affiliation, respondents in this survey were 39% Republican, 35% Democratic, and 23% Independent. The generic party preference for Congress was +6.7 points Republican.

from “RNC Reince Priebus Didn’t Get November 2013 Basswood Research Immigration Poll Memo,” posted by Somos Independents, 11/14/2013

4 – according to Wikipedia

5 from “It’s time to get serious about border security,” posted on (web site of the Houston Chronicle) by Michael McCaul, a Republican representing Texas’ 10th Congressional District, is chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security. Ted Poe, a Republican representing Texas’ 2nd Congressional District, is chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non-proliferation and Trade and vice chairman of the Immigration Subcommittee, 8/15/2013 and updated two days later

6 – Roundtable Discussion on Immigration Reform held at St. Mary’s Church in Dayton, Ohio on 8/12/2013, hosted by Ohio Conservative Review featured contributor, Dr. Carl Ruby of the Evangelical Immigration Table and Bibles, Badges, and Business for Immigration Reform.

7 – “…48 foreign-born militant Islamic terrorists have been charged, or convicted, or have admitted their involvement in terrorism within the United States between 1993 and 2001… At the time they committed their crimes, 16 of the 48 terrorists considered in this analysis were on temporary visas (primarily tourist visas); another 17 were lawful permanent residents or naturalized U.S. citizens; 12 were illegal aliens; and 3 of the 48 had applications for asylum pending.”  from “How the Terrorists Get In” by Stephen A. Camarota, September 2002, Center for Immigration Studies

8 – “GAO found that 36 of the roughly 400 people convicted of terrorism-related charges since September 2001 had overstayed their visas.”  From the same source as listed in footnote #3

9 – “… (2011) report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) revealed 40-45 percent of the estimated total population of illegal aliens — 4 to 5 million people – stayed past their visa expiration dates. But DHS’ U.S. VISIT program – which is supposed to identify people who overstay their visas by comparing entry and exit information – cannot keep up with the number of potential overstays it identifies by matching entry and exit records.
In fact, US-VISIT processes less than half of the potential overstays it identifies, and GAO found that the program has a backlog of 1.6 million potential overstay records.” From “Almost Half of Illegal Aliens Entered U.S. Legally, But Overstayed Visas: Senators Say,” by Jim Kouri CPP,, 5/2/0/2011