Visas, Immigration, Illegal Immigration, Population Control, Wars, Religions, and Discrimination

Visas, Immigration, Illegal Immigration, Population Control, Wars, Religions, and Discrimination

As faimagesCAJK81ZEr as we see it – “it” being the operative word for the conditions currently going on in the United States – and seriously asking ourselves, “How good for us is all the squabbling.”  I’m not the first person to wonder about the rubbish we, as a nation, have gotten ourselves into; however, I would like to be ahead in the line of who it is that is trying with due-diligence to stop and get out of” it.”

And I will openly admit that I feel that the mainstream media has a firm foothold on how public policy and how American awareness feels about it. Therefore please, allow me to ask you a question and just hopefully we’ll get some responses to this question: “America is in trouble, what we can do to help our current government end this trouble?”

Just some fundamentals for us. Should the government (for whatever reason) continue to have a free give away Diversity Lottery on visas for 80,000 or more people per year?

In this article, it should be made known that at least 50% of all legal immigrants coming to America are awarded entitlements as at their arrival? What does good moral character mean? Do you feel as though so kind of legislation should be made prohibiting these individuals from gaining access to the USA?

And this entire notion of while a person is here in the USA while visiting from Russia, Iran, or Mexico, or anywhere for that matter, who goes into labor gives birth and WHAM! They have got a US citizen in their hands, which in turn makes every member of that child’s family or extended family worthy of receiving entitlements? Is that fair?

Now as for Senator’s: Schumer, Rubio, Graham, McCain, Flake, Durbin, Menendez, and Bennett commonly referred to as The Gang of Eight collectively these 8 senators wrote the first draft of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013, commonly known as “the immigration bill.” As we already know, the House didn’t even look at the Bill so it was basically debunked on release. Did the USA need another Sub-Committee?

scalesDo we need to reevaluate the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 to regain control of our country? Currently, that act is viewed by most not as lifting the limits of immigrants from certain countries as much as with the Kennedy backing it is viewed now to be an act of civil rights legislation and those rights for potential immigrants. From the act itself”

  • It created a seven-category preference system, which gave priority to relatives of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents and to professionals and other individuals with specialized skills.
  • Immediate relatives and “special immigrants” were not subject to numerical restrictions. Some of the “special immigrants” include ministers, former employees of the U.S. government, foreign medical graduates, among others.
  • It added a labor certification requirement, which dictated that the Secretary of Labor needed to certify labor shortages.
  • Refugees were given the seventh and last category preference with the possibility of adjusting their status. However, refugees could enter the United States through other means as well like those seeking temporary asylum. How much has this notion changed?

Even if America is the land of opportunity why do politicians feel it’s necessary to spread that opportunity immediately?

CLOUD finger-illusionsDid you understand what the leader of Iraq meant when he stated, “Death to America and Israel”? Why is it so important to give visas to people who disagree with our way of life? This is confusing to me. “Let their blood run down the streets” is something we hear, beheading innocent individuals is just another thing we see. How long will it be until America shows the fortitude it once had?

Arden V

Whew! I found this to be an Interesting Thought…

Whew! I found this to be an Interesting Thought…

68b3a361d9136bb4d1d858e85765e2289f754d89_jpg_cf“What, only Republican presidents get to nominate judges? Is that in the Constitution? I used to teach constitutional law. I’ve never seen that provision” —  President Barack Obama, in remarks given yesterday at a rally for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton in North Carolina.

But wait! There is more — President Obama went on to chide Republican senators for their stance on blocking all future Supreme Court nominations if Clinton wins the presidency, saying, “[T]he reason they said they wouldn’t have a hearing or vote for my Supreme Court nominee, bucking all of American history, was because, ‘We thought the American people should decide the next Supreme Court justice.’ Now they’re saying, ‘Well, if they don’t decide the way we want them to decide, maybe we won’t even do that.’ Eleven years ago, Richard Burr said a Supreme Court without nine justices would not work. Well, what changed?” Senator Burr recently vowed to keep any of Clinton’s Supreme Court nominees from being confirmed. 

However, I do think that Barack Hussein Obama, President, Nah, Cheerleader for Hillary Clinton and bonafide hater of Donald Trump. Upon hearing the bountiful mouth of Cheerleader Barack Obama in both North Carolina and Florida. I am positive that somewhere between Obama’s Justice Department and the Oval Office I’d face arrest charges even if it were telling the truth about this asinine clown.

“[T]he reason they said they wouldn’t have a hearing or vote for my Supreme Court nominee, bucking all of American history,” let’s be telling the truth here Mr. Cheerleader, the entire population of this great nation (with the exception of a few!) voted you in as the first African American president not once but twice pandering to your lies, misrepresentations, and utter bull squat.

arden B

Has Anyone even taken into Consideration..?

Has Anyone even taken into Consideration..?

King What it is that I am referring to is the inadvertent (we hope) mistake of reenactment of the peculiar institution that although was prevalent in the Southern portion of the USA, nonetheless of reparations, welfare reform after reform, making societal changes, and as ugly as it is — has anyone seen the new proposal document released by the Black Lives Matter movement?

I do hope that nobody reading this article assumes for an instant that the colonists as well as the slave traders who virtually made and installed the peculiar institution could have found any humanitarian reason for it. Furthermore, the comment above about “and ugly as it was” has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the Black Lives Matter movements’ proposal document.

I would hope to think that every American — regardless of color, race, gender or societal standing would have already read the appropriate particulars (like anything in the form of Black history) to understand that what was done to that peculiar institution was Liarsabhorrently wrong.

Much the way I feel that Barack Obama’s handling of welfare reform — yes, regardless of data with regards to education and the Head Start disaster, he nonetheless over appropriated the amount and easiness for anyone to collect food stamps.

Which ties into the thesis of this article perfectly. Looking back through recorded time and history most blacks were brought to this country from Africa. Of course, this process lasted until those places where colonies of blacks were either being held, bought and sold or were being held captive in, were finally of age to bring them to the Southern plantations.

So inasmuch as illegal immigrants are concerned which the Pew Charitable Trust believes is holding around 11.8 million people; however, for the sake of an acute examination we believe it is fair to count the number of refugees and those who are seeking asylum from other nations as well are but the prologue to the next peculiar institution?

If one were to look at the depressed wages, or the lack of driver’s licenses, or utilizing proper documentation for the effective showing who, from where and what they are doing in this country.

scalesAt its utmost frailty, it does look as though the Democrat Party is enhancing a different prospective of the  peculiar institution. The biggest difference that is occurring at the present time — and some may debate and/or argue the difference of time, place and infringements done to the individuals really is an awkward point. However, looking at the true consideration as it now stands — we ask for your consideration and brain power:

  • It is ostensibly certain that illegal aliens will find some kind of government housing.
  • As well as some kind of work; it is of paramount importance that one realizes:
  • That there will always be a program (entitlement?) that will enhance someone to come:
  • Albeit, health care, unemployment, welfare, job corps, or aid to families with dependents:
  • In daycare, pregnancy leaves, new-born status care and the hope of citizenship
  • The Democrat Party will always have or find a way to accommodate anyone they can use.

Therefore, if anyone cares to read the first page of The Contemplative Thinker, there exist at least ten articles that will prove the point we are making.

victorian_line

Michelle Obama: Election About ‘Who Will Have the Power to Shape Our Children’

Michelle Obama: Election About ‘Who Will Have the Power to Shape Our Children’

michelleIf anyone did not miss the majority of the Republican National Convention RNC, seriously now, who on earth could be more proud of Mr. Trump’s adult offspring?

Sure I thought it was a little dicey having each one of the Trump clan taking such powerful speaking engagements; however, for me and most of my colleagues were in particular agreement at how well polished, strongly spoken, as well as impeccable adult children that each of Mr. Trump’s children are.

First lady Michelle Obama argued that Donald Trump is no example for America’s children during an impassioned pitch for Hillary Clinton’s candidacy at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia on Monday evening.

Well she has indeed proved that she is no smarter than her lying and nontransparent husband is outright.

Obama threw her support behind Hillary, noting “there were plenty of moments when Hillary could have decided that this work was too hard, that the price of public service was too high, that she was tired of being picked apart for how she looks or how she talks or even how she laughs.”

“But here’s the thing. What I admire most about Hillary is that she never buckles under pressure. She never takes the easy way out. And Hillary Clinton has never quit on anything in her life,” she continued. “And when I think about the kind of president that I want for my girls and all our children, that’s what I want.”

Right here with the above statement is what conjures up such discontent inside of me toward these people. Hillary Clinton has shown me as a professional person that she is a masterful liar. That is her easy way out. So please Mrs. Obama, what’s your excuse for Hillary moving on without Bill in their marriage?  1500px-DesertStormMap_v2_svg

Obama reflected on “the story of this country, the story that has brought me to this stage tonight, the story of generations of people who felt the lash of bondage, the shame of servitude, the sting of segregation, but who kept on striving and hoping and doing what needed to be done so that today I wake up every morning in a house that was built by slaves.”

There we go — for what’s it worth, we will never, ever be able to heal from what a small proportion of America’s earliest agrarians have done. And as long as this crap happens we never ever will.

James_Madison_140x190The first lady said she wants “a president who will teach our children that everyone in this country matters, a president who truly believes in the vision that our Founders put forth all those years ago that we are all created equal, each a beloved part of the great American story.”

Lady, you certainly need to put more emphasis into my column. Although you single handedly ignored everything that was written yesterday – which certainly allows me to know where your knowledge level is, however, just a quick question: Do you and what’s his name Barack, Berry or Whatever communicate?

arden B

Greta Van Susteren inspires with “Why don’t we try something new?”

Greta Van Susteren inspires with “Why don’t we try something new?”

Whilst reading last evening I make it a point to happen across other influential person’s writings and I must admit that Greta van Susteren’s article on her site, posted onto Face Book did precisely what the doctor ordered.

eagle4Greta writes, “The nation is – or at least it seems so to me – terribly divided. Everyone has picked a group – whether it be by gender or ethnic background, etc. – and placed a stake in the ground. When this happens, people divide, not unite. This is taking sides, not joining together and you know what happens when people just take sides.”

Continuing she says, “Why don’t we go back to the old concept of America being a melting pot and all of us being Americans with first emphasis being on common goals.

I wrote at pretty good length an (hopefully) inspiring response that having sat on it for about 18 hours I would like to share with you and again, hopefully, get some response.

I do not think Greta is in error whatsoever with her feelings. The fact has it that the American mind-set has changed and primarily so with visitors, students, as well as illegal immigrants just making plans to sojourn to America for a spell.

0930-cittest_thumbnail_288_croppedFor the last 150 years or so, to be an immigrant with citizenship aspirations one needed to aspire to assimilate in every American way possible. Let’s say that 100 or more years ago, acquiring written and spoken English skills was not a problem. At all —

One specific issue is that people come to America now – not for the sake of the Nation – yet rather for the life styles and standards of living for their children and relatives that supersede their own. You see, it is not for the Nation that they come, rather, it is for what they can take from the country.

And I will point a finger of blame here, or what is mentioned as attribution. Years ago our wretched Congress as well as other branches within the federal government thought it overly wise to liberalize America. By this what I mean is the unadulterated inclusion of every sojourner’s wants and needs. Although fact has it that these people did not earn their keep.

As long as special interest groups AND American rights and privileges could be bestowed upon these people,flageag9 what on earth was different? Therefore the mentality of these individuals grabbed those special interest groups. Then it is logical that sojourner’s would also lobby or protest congressional officials and in most cases – those who had the least power – special interests within unions, universities, colleges, and school districts in order to make them feel as though they did.

I find that there is a critical piece of this situation missing. Several actually… Pride in yourself as well as country; achieving the American Way or The Great American Dream, takes giving it all away…meaning give one’s self away for the great Nation that one is making.

This my friends is where America is suffering. Some or most say it is coming from the White House. Others say it is from a bunch of idealistic congress people. One must remember that when everyone assimilates, then there is NOT groups or otherwise divide.

victorian_line

When one thinks of the mainstream media

images (21)When one thinks of the mainstream media in our country it is laughable how many times these alleged “writers, journalists, commentators, news anchors, people of high notoriety and those again with lower values deliberately defraud anyone and everyone who reads, listens, or watches their stories.

It would take much to sit here and write out the false claims that many of these huge name — Dan Rather, Brian Williams, and others — who have misreported stories for their own publicity and certainly for their own financial gain.

Yet, let us look at some of these people and how they have deliberately misreported even what an aspiring person has said — in other words, taken people, positions, and what they’ve held and through laziness and doing a shotty job of not re-listening to an original tape, or even a video, or for whose sake take quality notes especially when one is going to quote someone else.

Recently a reporter completely took what Mr. Donald Trump spoke about and rather than redoing anything, created an extreme load of excrement and before those who have business with Mr. Trump had complied by doing their due-diligence have in the opinion of this writer, become worse for not having done their jobs.

ms13tatoosTrump deplored immigrants from Mexico who “have lots of problems” and are “bringing those problems to us.”

“They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists,” he said, adding, “and some, I assume, are good people.”

Jorge Ramos, a prominent Univision host, called Trump’s remarks “absurd” and “prejudiced.” But is there any truth about what he is saying?

“At Univision, we see first-hand the work ethic, love for family, strong religious values and the important role Mexican immigrants and Mexican-Americans have had and will continue to have in building the future of our country,” the company said. Again is there any truth to the matter? Of course there is…

There are two lines of text transcribed from the original article at the Washington Post that Mr. Trump proffered, and four plus lines of text (same article) from the prominent Univision host proffered by Jorge Ramos.

However and most importantly — did anyone read, “truth about the matter? Of course there is… Trump is basically using his freedom of speech rights in stating, “deplored immigrants from Mexico ” so other than speaking the gospel truth about his observations what has Mr. Trump done that is wrong.

It absolutely chills me of late (since Washington inside the beltway crowd started it) at how people are demanding apologies2011-04-29 20.25.06 from people who are telling the truth. Did you know that your President Barack Obama, released in one day over 36,000 felony committed criminals from prisons around the nation? Let me think about this one, do you think that maybe out of 36,000 prisoners released, that just maybe some of them had  “have lots of problems” and are “bringing those problems to us.” “They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists:” even the reporter from the Washington Post eluded to the “truth to the matter, of course there is…”

Okay I have been able to write the entire truth. But I would be being very remiss if I did not duly warn our reader’s that as long as you are putting up with a former Secretary of State (Hillary Clinton) not telling the truth to otherwise evidence of facts of her lying and misrepresenting the truth, or continue to allow your President Barack Obama to break Constitutional law on a whim because…”he can” focus on the issues people.

Who Could Possibly Trust Hillary Clinton now..?

Who Could Possibly Trust Hillary Clinton now..?

Hillary clintonWhat happens to people in government? Basic transparency is not only critical but also not an option for a public official. Neither is it a mere inconvenience to be ignored.

Newbies may deserve a benefit of the doubt; but those who have been around the block a time or two deserve nothing but relentless investigation. Furthermore, an investigation by independent contractors. I cannot speak for you but this much I know — Partisan politics as well as doing something to your own simply does not work in Washington, D.C.

Which, of course, brings us to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, one-time first lady and U.S. senator, who also seems to be running for president. Clinton has become caught up in a mind-numbingly unnecessary scandal of her own making after the New York Times revealed that she conducted government business entirely on a private email account as Secretary of State.

Few, if any, believe her claim that she was unaware such an action would create questions. After all, it is — or at least should be — considered standard operating procedure for public officials to conduct public business on government-operated email, and she should have known better.

However we contend that Mrs. Clinton was very much aware of her actions and definitely knew what she was doing. Yet, hillary_collage_resizedwhat she did not count on was getting caught! Moreover we believe just as we did during the “brain tumor, throat disorder” and whatever else she was suffering from — all during the Benghazi bull squat orchestrated by her boss and the Attorney General.

While Clinton was Secretary of State, she failed to utilize her government email account, using her own personal one instead. She isn’t the first to do it, but she failed to disclose massive batches of emails.

Her department was obligated to preserve her email records, and that didn’t happen until after she left office in 2013. Clinton and her designated staff members were allowed to pick and choose which emails were eventually turned over to the government and which to leave out as “private.” To claim she had no intent to deceive misses the point — it was still wrong. According to the Federal Information Act, it is officials who are to separate what is potentially hazardous for national security or any secret documents or actions. However, as we now know, Mrs. Clinton conducted this activity on her own.

What about her private-account emails to representatives of foreign governments? What about emails to U.S. officials on their private or government accounts?

This came about because the State Department asked all ex-secretaries for emails and other records from their time in office as part of an effort to improve its record keeping. Clinton’s advisers turned in 55,000 pages. About 900 were given to the House select committee investigating Benghazi.

How do we know they turned over everything of public interest? At the moment, we have little more than their word for it.

hillary_internThe Clinton camp’s cavalier disregard for the public’s need to know is disappointing but not surprising. If private email accounts aren’t in the hands of the government, they are beyond the reach of the Freedom of Information Act and congressional scrutiny. That’s why the rules exist. It should be up to government archivists who value transparency over concealment, to exercise their professional judgment about what is personal and what isn’t.

Thankfully, a 2014 law bars use of private accounts unless officials copy or forward emails into government accounts within 20 days. Now the public understands why such measures are necessary.

Restore transparency to the process and open the documents to inspection now.

victorian_line