We knew this was coming…Obama’s auntie

Do the right thing!

Do the right thing!

Barack Obama’s Kenyan aunt lost her bid for asylum more than four years ago, and a judge ordered her deported. Instead, Zeituni Onyango stayed, living for years in public housing.

Now, in a case that puts the president in a tough position both personally and politically, Onyango’s request is being reconsidered under a little-used provision in U.S. immigration rules that allows denied asylum claims to be reheard if applicants can show that something has changed to make them eligible.

“If she goes back to Kenya, she is going to be much more in the limelight, and that, in and of itself, could put her at a greater risk. The chances of her going back and keeping a low profile are gone at this point,” said Boston immigration attorney Ilana Greenstein.

Onyango, 56, the half-sister of Obama’s late father, moved to the United States in 2000. Her first bid for asylum was rejected, and an immigration judge ordered her deported in 2004; she continues to live in public housing in Boston.

Obama has said repeatedly that he didn’t know his aunt was living in the United States illegally and believes that laws covering the situation should be followed. If she wins asylum, he could look soft on immigration enforcement. If she loses, he could face criticism from immigrant advocacy groups.

In reality ladies and gentlemen how could this be when at least half of America knew about her? We are going to be gently here….but why does this Barack Obama lie so often?

People who seek asylum must show that they face persecution in their homeland on the basis of religion, race, nationality, political opinion or membership in a social group.

Onyango’s reasons for seeking asylum have not been made public, and her immigration hearing will be closed at her lawyer’s request.  I guess this is what they mean about relatives and friends coming out of the ‘woodwork’ when you make it….lottery, White House, Congress. (Full story here.)

art_10

Advertisements

3 Responses

  1. terrific site this americanage.wordpress.com formidable to see you have what I am actually looking for here and this this post is exactly what I am interested in. I shall be pleased to become a regular visitor 🙂

  2. Rampant population growth threatens our economy and quality of life. Immigration, both legal and illegal, are fueling this growth.

    I’m not talking just about the obvious problems that we see in the news – growing dependence on foreign oil, carbon emissions, soaring commodity prices, environmental degradation, etc. I’m talking about the effect upon rising unemployment and poverty in America.

    I should introduce myself. I am the author of a book titled “Five Short Blasts: A New Economic Theory Exposes The Fatal Flaw in Globalization and Its Consequences for America.” To make a long story short, my theory is that, as population density rises beyond some optimum level, per capita consumption of products begins to decline out of the need to conserve space. People who live in crowded conditions simply don’t have enough space to use and store many products. This declining per capita consumption, in the face of rising productivity (per capita output, which always rises), inevitably yields rising unemployment and poverty.

    This theory has huge implications for U.S. policy toward population management, especially immigration policy. Our policies of encouraging high rates of immigration are rooted in the belief of economists that population growth is a good thing, fueling economic growth. Through most of human history, the interests of the common good and business (corporations) were both well-served by continuing population growth. For the common good, we needed more workers to man our factories, producing the goods needed for a high standard of living. This population growth translated into sales volume growth for corporations. Both were happy.

    But, once an optimum population density is breached, their interests diverge. It is in the best interest of the common good to stabilize the population, avoiding an erosion of our quality of life through high unemployment and poverty. However, it is still in the interest of corporations to fuel population growth because, even though per capita consumption goes into decline, total consumption still increases. We now find ourselves in the position of having corporations and economists influencing public policy in a direction that is not in the best interest of the common good.

    The U.N. ranks the U.S. with eight third world countries – India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Bangladesh, Uganda, Ethiopia and China – as accounting for fully half of the world’s population growth by 2050. It’s absolutely imperative that our population be stabilized, and that’s impossible without dramatically reining in immigration, both legal and illegal.

    If you’re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, I invite you to visit my web site at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com where you can read the preface, join in my blog discussion and, of course, purchase the book if you like. (It’s also available at Amazon.com.)

    Please forgive the somewhat spammish nature of the previous paragraph. I just don’t know how else to inject this new perspective into the immigration debate without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory.

    Pete Murphy
    Author, “Five Short Blasts”

    • Dear Pete:

      Awesome reply and comment, thank you! As a writer you perhaps more than others realize just how important these comments are to the spirit and motivation of those who write.

      I plan on visiting, moreover, camping out at your website for awhile insofar as it appears to have some teeth, critical thinking, and innovation. And as far as our political leadership is concerned they could use big doses of how to think, topped heavily with innovation.

      Pursuant to your comment: I agree that there will be extreme changes predicated upon consumer demand versus space; however, the challenge will always exist vis-a-vie ‘the consumption function.’ I was extraordinarily interested in your theory on the macro level; consequently, on the micro level is where the ‘trench warfare’ will dig in.

      If there is anything that could be proffered about American leadership, it is definitely within the notion of timing. Our elected officials are and have always been the wait until the last minute type which I find to be haphazard and very dangerous.

      Our current population maintenance (I love that notion!) is a prime example. This problem is so overboard that unfortunately there are about 15 million people who are going to get amnesty for lack of any other planning, reform, or quality control within our own borders.

      Just one last matter here for now: This entire notion (pipe dream is better!) of globalization, in my humble opinion will never come to fruition as it is envisioned now. How does a moral nation bring into the fold nations such as Sudan, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Mexico, and especially where the United States exploits labor at such a cost that those recipients of wages do not or are not able to increase their own standard of living?

      jps

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: