Obama Administration Deporting Illegals?

This is an interesting and informative article I found on Huffington Post today.  It seems that for all the demonization Republicans heap on Obama for not enforcing the illegal immigration laws, their claim might be up for debate.  According to this article, the Obama Administration has deported more illegals than the Bush Administration did.  One big difference is the percentage of criminal illegals being deported has risen under Obama.    What are your views, thoughts and comments?    Is Obama being a hypocrit or is he simply following our established illegal immigration laws and trying to resolve this issue the correct way?    Indypendent

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/20/little-girl-who-challenge_n_583432.html

What Rand Paul said…

It was a terrible example that Rand Paul used but his point has merit.  I will use this example to explain what he was really trying to point out and the point he was trying to make.

It is the picnic to celebrate Steven and it has been said that anyone wanting to celebrate knowing Steven and his life is invited to come to the picnic.  As we are joining together, there is a knock at the door.  It is George Walker Bush!  Along with him is a Federal attorney and they have a copy of a federal law that states that you can not refuse G.W. Bush to come in and join you.  You can not refuse to allow him to eat any of the food even.  It is not a matter of Bush being hungry and there is no where else for him to eat.  It is that he simply wants to eat at your house and you have no right to deny him or refuse to allow him to come in.

Does the Federal Government, and should it have, the power to tell you who or what you can not refuse to allow into your private property?  Do they have a right to tell you who you have to be tolerant to?

Where does your civil rights ends and those of everyone else start?

It could be argued that your bias toward Bush is not based on real and factual issues, that you hate him enough to deny him access because of your perceptions of what he has done. What kind of person he is and what he may do while on your property.

That is the kind of issue that Paul was trying to point to as being Government intrusion into your property and life.

This is focusing only on one issue but Woolworths was not refusing to feed blacks when they were hungry and there was no where else they could go eat.  If the Federal Government has not funded the lunch counter or the food being served should they have a say on who is served or not served?  Likewise if the Government is not paying for the picnic or the food there do they have the right to tell you that G.W. Bush should be allowed to come?

These issues are a part of the Libertarian believe system and is a reason I am not a Libertarian though have some leaning towards its stances.

Saving America’s Economy

The picture above shows what the current crop of Republicans in Congress have to run on in elections this fall.  How successful do you think this strategy will prove to be?  Although the Party of No didn’t participate beyond saying, “Hell No!,” here’s some facts about how the Stimulus bill passed by the Democratic majorities under the leadership of President Obama has saved America’s economy —

• Income tax rates in 2009 were the lowest they’ve been since Harry Truman was president.  The tax rate paid by all Americans — rich and poor, combined — has fallen 26% since the recession began in 2007.  Federal, state and local income taxes consumed 9.2% of all personal income in 2009, the lowest rate since 1950, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reports.  One-third of last year’s $862 billion economic stimulus went for tax cuts.
• Most state governments counted on The Stimulus money to stay afloat.  Most states are now seeing reports from their Departments of Labor showing how many jobs in their states are funded solely by The Stimulus package.
• American auto makers are making profits again.
• In 2010 small businesses will receive a tax credit of up to 35% of their premium costs for employee health coverage.

Check out the web site where the Obama administration is tracking the money.  It’s an enormous task — publishing a real-time, reliable accounting of what the government is doing — and it wouldn’t have been possible a decade ago. Call it Government 2.0, or Democracy 2.0 — Deputy OMB Director Rob Nabors says it’s time for a new era. “We’ve never really been in a position before where the government took on the responsibility of showing at a state level, at a local level, how federal dollars are being spent.  We’re allowing the public to connect the decisions that government makes in a way that’s relevant to their civic lives,” he says. “And that feedback look gives a sense of empowerment that they never had before.”

Recovery is slow going, but this wasn’t any run-of-the-mill recession, it was the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.  Our economy continues to sputter and joblessness persists — there is still work to be done, but great progress has been made.  Obama’s economic policies helped America avoid a depression.  America is going forward!  We’ll get there even without Republican help.

Thursday, 5/20/10, Public Square

KANSAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY

Have you ever seen the Harlem Globe Trotters?  If so then you also saw the Washington Generals, the basket ball team that plays against the Trotters. The Generals are made up of pro basket ball players, they are not just a bunch of wannabes and they do win sometimes. Nor is the game just a give-a-way for the entertainment of the crowd, both sides are playing to win.  Although often it could be thought that the Generals are there just to make it look like a real contest.  It’s how the Trotters play and how the Generals play that makes the difference. One plays with style and trick shots while the other plays like any NBA team plays.

Often it seem like the Kansas Democratic party are the Generals, they do have the knowledge and skill to play and win, but not the ability to out play the Kansas Republican party.  It is assumed that the other side is going to win so perhaps the feeling is why try the best you can?  There have been examples of Democratic wins.  Like the Generals once in awhile there is the unexpected win and it shows that the end result is not always a sure thing for the Republicans.  It could be that the Republicans are just so sure that they will win that they slack off and do not play the game they know how to play.

Now the obvious problem and differences between the two parties is that the Republicans do walk in lock step. Only on rare occasions does the average Republicans not vote for the R, it is only when the candidate who the party puts up is such a loser that the everyday Republican shakes awake long enough to not vote straight party line.  Otherwise the party is united and it is a foregone conclusion that who ever is the Republican candidate is who the party voter will vote for and support.  The Democratic does not have that luxury, every candidate is a repeat of the duel between Obama and Clinton, the party divides into a out and out fight based on degrees of ideology. And how far each candidate is to the left, a battle between the more centrist and progressive.

Now keep in mind this is Kansas, not known for the majority being left leaning.  Barbara Boxer is exactly where she needs to be to win an election.  If she was in Kansas, she would be standing next to P.P. and T. B. shouting about how evil this State is!  Kansas is at best a center right state, not totally blinded by a hard Right ideology but still Right or center leaning.   Another part of the problem is that with the Republican party it is the higher level of the State party who controls the party and they are for now hard Right.

But the Democrats are more working from the bottom up, saying that it is the most passionate who controls and moves the Kansas Democratic party. Who are the most passionate?  Well just look at the people here and on the other blog, those outnumbered by the more moderate and thoughtful. But are driven by the emotional response who are the passionate.  Who want to go toe to toe and get in the face of the Republicans, dreams of the fight and never give a inch in the debate or decision. Those are the ones who are the day to day movers within the Democratic party.

While it is true that the Republicans here have a battle between the moderate and the extreme on occasions. For us it is a long and drawn out process that it takes a building up a head of stream. And any changes only come after nearly a decade then may remain the same for the next decade or two.

With the Democratic it is a battle fought every year and often it is the one with the most passion that wins.

Why can not the Democratic come up with a candidate that is winnable?

(First Democrat Party Headquarters in Kansas)