Michelle Malkin: The criminal raid on Social Security

TownHall.com ^ | Wednesday, January 7, 2004 | Michelle Malkin

[CWOJackson]

So what brand do you prefer?

[WhiteGuy]

No one hears words of denial from you...............

It seems that there is a small but very influential group here at freerepublic who would happily wear the knee pads if only "he" would ask.

Likewise when the president follows the liberal playbook, that same group believes that this is the "new conservatism".

We should all examine what we really believe in.

[CWOJackson]

LOL! Yes, there are folks at play using the liberal play book...and those who wear their knee pads.

[montag813]

If Clinton was pulling the crap Bush is, conservatives would be screaming bloody murder.

This is worth repeating....

"If Clinton was pulling the crap Bush is, conservatives would be screaming bloody murder."

[montag813]

Even Bush's supporters admit he would be doing this to buy some votes. He must be very desperate to win the election if he had to go this far.

The media reports actually say the reason for all this is "to repair relations with Mexico, and to win Latino votes for the 2004 Election" (FoxNews). But why?

With economic numbers blowing out 20-year figures, Iraq stable, Saddam captured, approval rating pushing above 63% and rising, Bush is a shoo-in for re-election. Therefore it makes absolutely no POLITICAL sense to do this to attempt to "win votes" of a group which overwhelmingly votes Democrat normally. The ONLY thing which could defeat Bush is another major terror attack, and this giveaway would not garner a single extra vote for him if that happened.

As a political consultant, this makes no political sense to me. I would tell my candidate to scrap it.

[Dr Warmoose]

Wouldn't it be ironic if all the Free Traitors™ got their SS acounts hijacked through this program

There has been talk of doing a "One Time Tax"® on all IRA/401k accounts (those accounts that have a huge tax hickey for early/unauthorized withdrawal). How the scheme works is that the Traitor in Chief will deliberately bankrupt Social Security by encouraging international fraud and corruption, the tens of millions of people who have paid not just a few years, but a lifetime, into SS will be threatened by having their checks cut-off, and in response (since SS leaches will constitute the voting majority) they will demand the Fe'ral Government scrape up funds to continue their parasitism. The greatest source of untapped loot is the individual retirement plans of responsible Americans. The "One Time Tax"® will of course be slightly lower than the tax penalty for early/unauthorized withdrawal - IOW, they will steal your money through this "The Tax Fairness and Equity Law to Save Mexican Children" confiscation scheme, or they will confiscate your money through the penalty system.

The only way you aren't going to be screwed, is if you were smart enough to offshore your savings out of the grasp of our kleptocratic Fe'ral Government. Of if you have been living an irresponsible lifestyle and you have no savings for them to confiscate to help Vicente "Milosevic" Fox keep his dictatorship and ethnic cleansing programs intact.

There is another tactic that appears to be encouraged by the Traitor in Chief, and that is for you to personally engage in tax fraud. If it is OK for illegal aliens to systematically and deliberately commit serial and continual felonies for the sole purpose of rewarding themselves with benefits purchased by others, then apparently it is OK for you to cheat and steal as well. If an illegal alien can use that bogus Matricula Consular Card (that ironically is only accepted in the US for Mexico doesn't even recognize it as credible ID) and fraudulent SS cards, then so can you. I am sure there is a Constitutional Right to engage in fraud - if not now, surely some judge will find one in the penumbra. I heartily encourage American from sea to shining sea to follow our President's suggestion and engage in criminal fraud and abuse of every social service that you can. When the fraud levels jump over $1 Trillion annually, then, and only then, will the jerk-offs in Washington DC figure it out, or the sheeple will start the shooting that always occurs when Tyranny and Lawlessness that 'W' is encouraging is made the order of the day.

[KantianBurke]

The Illegals Solution: Credit to Sabertooth.

---

Dealing with Illegals doesn't have to be the enormous burden on resources many imagine, not would it have to infringe on civil liberties.

I've posted this on a few threads, but I keep getting requests:

This problem is no harder to solve than wanting to solve it. We can get rid of Illegals rather effectively, by rolling up our sleeves and getting the Illegals to get rid of themselves.

The first order of business, of course, is to enforce existing laws on the books against Illegals and those who employ them. Also, politicians must be held to account when they pander otherwise.

Then...

1: Eliminate all mention of Section 245(i), even if expired, from the US Immigration and Naturalization Code. No more Amnesty, ever.


2: Get legislation through Congress that would enable States to deny goodies to Illegals, a la Prop #187.


3: Outlaw Mexican matricula consular IDs, and kick banks accepting them out of the FDIC. Legal depositors will withdraw from recalcitrant banks.


4: Beef up Border Security with manpower, resources, and a Volunteer Reserve, if necessary. No troops, and no messing with posse comitatus, this should be a civilian effort.


5: Beef up the immigration courts and set deportation hearings for two weeks after apprehension, with no bail.


6: Run sting operations at day laborer sites.


7: Establish two-way communication between the IRS and Border Security, and start apprehending and deporting Illegals using false SS numbers (no, the current overhyped voluntary program doesn't count).


8: Seize the assets of businesses knowingly hiring Illegals under the RICO Act, as they are ongoing criminal enterprises. Prosecute executives who knowingly hire Illegals.


9: Compile biometric information on Illegals, and declare that they will be permanently ineligible for immigration and citizenship.


10: If the United States declares that the above proposals against Illegals will be diligently enforced after a certain date, many Illegals will leave beforehand, and a relatively small number of well-publicized cases of enforcement throughout the Lower 48 will result in millions of Illegals deporting themselves.


11: End the busting of immigration caps by limiting family reunification to spouses and dependent children, and counting them against the caps when they are brought in. Require all future immigrants to declare their future intent to bring in family upon arrival. This way, families can immigrate in a controlled, orderly fashion without the current deceptions being used against the American public. We must have truth in immigration.


12: Outlaw anchor babies, and give the option to the Illegal parent of taking the child with them upon deportation, or putting them up for adoption.


13: Outlaw bilingual ballots, and resume the English-speaking requirements for citizenship.


14: Establish English skills as a prerequisite for future immigrants. Let's start admitting folks who will hit the ground running toward assimilation.


15: Shut off new immigration to nations that offer dual citizenship. Disqualify current immigrants from those nations from future American citizenship.


16: Make Mexico and Central America our cheap import sources of choice with tariffs on manufacturing from other sources, especially China.


17: In return, Mexico must open up to American investment by allowing the sale of real estate to us and guaranteeing property our rights. Getting Mexico to fix its economy is crucial.


18: Establish a guest worker program where an initial bond is posted by the Illegal and his employer, say $500 each, with more withheld from the Illegal's earning, as security for his departure from the US by the specified date. Guest worker visas must be applied for in the workers' countries of origin, and participants are only eligible to be employed by their sponsoring employer. Violation of these terms will render the worker ineligible for any future visas or residence in the US. Any guest worker program can only come after anti-Illegal measures are in place. Handshake promises of future diligence will not be trusted from any politician of either party, including President Bush.
The list above is by no means comprehensive, and can be adopted piecemeal or in a single package. That said, incrementalism is probably going to be the way to go, especially politically.

These measures would provide a little carrot and lots of stick for Illegals already here to get themselves out. Some of them will need to be tested in the courts, which is another reason to adopt them piecemeal, so that an injunction against omnibus legislation can't stall the whole effort.

We ought to be looking initially at easy, politically safe legislation, like the new accounting for family reunification, Border Security/IRS cooperation, English speaking citizenship requirements, and a few others. Our politicians are a trembling, timid bunch, and need to gain a little self-confidence before they'll tackle more difficult issues.

Note a few things that aren't on my list: troops or walls on the border. I think they are a futile diversion from cost effective solutions. The best possible wall at the border is to let foreigners know that we respect our sovereignty, and they had best do the same.

Note that their are no house to house searches.

Note also that I don't call for an immigration moratorium, though others may. I think their position is within the respectable mainstream of a dialogue about immigration, and while it's possible that I might change my mind later, but I am not currently persuaded that an outright moratorium is or will be necessary.

The main problem is multimillion-strong mass of Illegals, and the secondary problem is how we currently select legal immigrants for rapid assimilation into American society. I believe my proposals adequately address both situations, but there is certainly room for debate on the back end.

Note also that I have a guest worker program that is actually honest and responsible, and not an Amnesty by another name. My program would ensure that law-abiding foreigners are background-checked before entry, rather than rewarding lawbreaking Illegals after the fact.

All of the above could be adopted while allowing politicians so-inclined to chant the "compassionate conservatism" mantra.

A few final thoughts...

My proposals will cost money and require an expansion of the federal government in certain areas. However, this expense and expansion is all well within the legitimate, Constitutional responsibilities of the federal government. There will be a greater expense initially, as we ramp up to deal with the backlog of Illegals, but a number of my proposals are at least partially self-funding. Also, success in these endeavors will eventually reduce the need for them, and as many Illegals would leave on their own.

In contrast, there would be also be an increased expense and expansion of the government if there is an Amnesty, as checking backgrounds and processing 8 to 12 million Illegals wouldn't be cheap. However, such increases and expansions would only serve to reward the lawlessness of Illegals and the cowardice of politicians, thereby encouraging more of the same in both, unless there were also enforcement proposals like mine in effect for the American Interior.

But, if we strengthened and enforced our laws consistently within our borders, then we don't need the phantom solution of Amnesty anyway.

[montag813]

Here is the text of the email I sent to the White House this morning:

They wont read it. Send a fax instead. 1000 times better chance of being reviewed.

[MEGoody]

"Dean just doesn't scare me enough to make me hold my nose and do that again for Bush II, and that may be the fly in the ointment that Rove has not figgured on."

So I presume that if Dean wins (God forbid), you (and others like you on here) won't be complaining about it.

Yeah, when hell freezes over.

[MEGoody]

"Give it a rest. That is NOT what is going to happen."

Uh, it was a quote not speculation on what might happen.

[MEGoody]

"Us who are concerned about the eroding Constitutional protected rights will still have our voice heard."

If you're rights were truly eroding, your voice would be heard only by you in a lonely jail cell.

[MEGoody]

Good e-mail.

I'm not in favor of this particular action, but those on the thread who are so vehemently anti-Bush. . .

Wonder why they don't join DU - they'd find more like-minded individuals there.

[MEGoody]

"My proposals will cost money and require an expansion of the federal government in certain areas."

The anti-Bushies won't like your proposal then.

[jimt]

I couldn't agree more !

[KantianBurke]

First, its not my proposal but Sabertooth's. Second if you had bothered to read the sentences after the one you posted, you would have refuted your own point.

"However, this expense and expansion is all well within the legitimate, Constitutional responsibilities of the federal government. There will be a greater expense initially, as we ramp up to deal with the backlog of Illegals, but a number of my proposals are at least partially self-funding. Also, success in these endeavors will eventually reduce the need for them, and as many Illegals would leave on their own."

[wjcsux]

Okay John, you know the rules...

[MissAmericanPie]

Let's weigh this, Dean, bumbling fool that most likely won't get one piece of legislation passed, Bush, amnesty granting globalist who disdains the USofA, it's people, it's sovereignty, it's manufacturing, it's citizenship, who has signed every spending bill, and constitution destroying piece of legislation that has passed his desk.

You bet, I would gripe every day Dean is in office, which will never happen. That does not eliminate my right to gripe about Bush every day he is in office either.

[MEGoody]

"First, its not my proposal but Sabertooth's. Second if you had bothered to read the sentences after the one you posted, you would have refuted your own point."

Not at all. My point, if you'd pay attention, is not whether I agree or disagree, but that anything that costs more money will upset those who have labeled themselves the 'real conservatives.'

[StarFan]

As only Michelle can tell it!

[StarFan]

Well thought out proposals by why keep it to ourselves? Why not share them with the White House, O'Reilly, Lou Dobbs, Michael Savage and Michelle Malkin to gather steam.