Last night’s Iowa debate was a bit Shakespearean; Banquo’s ghost hovering around a dining table with all the diners aware of the ethereal presence, and a bit shaken by it. In this case, of course, the ethereal entity was Texas Governor Rick Perry, whose entry into the race will definitely shake things up. As the debate made clear once again, the GOP nomination contest is all about finding the one, or two, alternatives to Mitt Romney, who remains the frontrunner but leaves a sizable share of the Republican base, including many regulars, uneasy. Romney’s weaknesses—his shifts, even contortions, in positions; his poor record as a job creator both at Bain Capital and as governor of Massachusetts; his role in healthcare reform; his plasticity—are sizable enough that lots of people are looking for a credible alternative. Credible, in this case, means someone with enough appeal to the Tea Party conservative base to keep them reasonably enthusiastic, but with enough of a record of governance to keep persuadable voters in the general election, including mainstream Republicans and Independents, interested and not frightened off.
Will Perry do the trick? Based on the debate performance, it seems pretty unlikely that any of the other candidates will. Of course, there are several who will excite the base, starting with Rep. Michele Bachmann, who remains an intriguing prospect. But the performance of those with mainstream potential, including Tim Pawlenty and Jon Huntsman, was not very impressive. Pawlenty seems to have totally lost his mojo. It’s puzzling why Huntsman insists on trying to occupy some of the same narrow strip of the bedrock Right that the other candidates are vying for, when his only chance of emerging in a credible way is to do impressively well in New Hampshire with Independents voting in the GOP primary. So Perry seems to fill an important niche—he is not very mainstream in his rhetoric or governance, but can crow about Texas’s record on jobs even as he tries to distract attention from the state’s miserable rating on nearly all social indicators and its huge looming budget deficits. He will be an interesting test of whether voters yearn for a more pugnacious, arrogant version of the last Texan to win the Republican nomination.
There is another point to make about the Iowa debate. Nearly all the commentary was about tactical positioning, who is up and who is down, who is attacking and who is being attacked. What about the substance? Such as the fact that several of the major contenders, including Romney, Bachmann, and Pawlenty, openly proclaimed their willingness, even, in the case of Bachmann, eagerness, to breach the debt limit. Since the debt limit is a reflection of debts already incurred by vote of Congress, and since a vote for the Ryan budget was itself a vote to increase America’s public debt by additional trillions, and since it is clear that staining the full faith and credit of the United States would have severe deleterious implications for decades, that stance is, in a word, irresponsible. It is in more words, reckless, hypocritical, and unpresidential. For Romney, a frontrunner, who talks about his understanding of the real economy, it shows either a fundamental lack of understanding of basic economics or a lack of principle that is deeply troubling. In a larger sense, it reflects the reality of contemporary Republican politics, an uncontrollable desire on the part of candidates to appeal to a narrow sliver of a base without regard for real-world consequences. The need to move right (or left, as the case may be) to win a nomination before pivoting to the center is nothing new. The positions now taken in that first move are just more out the realm of reason than we are used to seeing.
print this page
Why was Rep. Michele Bachmann exempted from being asked questions on illegal immigration? Her stance on this issue is far above the rest who stood behind their dais in Ames, Iowa? Was this leaving Bachman out of this social issue premeditated? Whether this was the case or not, she strands strong as this uncontrolled illegal immigration invader problem has been ignored by administrations for years. Bachmann will not tolerate any form of Amnesty as President. Every Sanctuary City and state that does not comply by cutting of these ordinances will lose federal funding. It’s been said many times before, that American cannot afford to subsidize Mexico, Central America, Europe, Pacific Rim or other nation; its inhabitants impoverished and desperate illegal immigrants anymore? This illogical problem is crippling America’s economy by the massive payouts for families, which have migrated illegally across our sovereign border.
Of course open border disciples, business lobbyist will deny the obvious, that this illegal incursion is drowning us in debt—with no end in sight. (FAIR) American Federation of Immigration Reform that of 2009, reported that overall costs to subsidize the illegal alien household was calculated through, federal, State, County and Municipal sources that it was a $113 Billion dollar problem. Federation for American Immigration Reform issued a report in which they estimate the total annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level is estimated to be $113 billion combined. The states are bearing the burden of the costs; while the government share is nearly $29 billion, it escalates to $84.2 billion at the state and local level. The annual outlay that illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers is an average amount per native-headed household of $1,117. The state-by-state breakdown begins on page 4 of this report at: http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer/USCostStudy_2010.pdf?docID=4921
Education for the children of illegal migrants and immigrants constitutes the sole largest outlay to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Virtually all of those expenses are absorbed by state and local governments. At the federal level, only about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. At the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs is allied with the illegal immigration occupation and recouped through taxes collected from illegal nationals. Nearly all illegal aliens do not pay income taxes; only those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal immigrants when they file tax returns. Many are also claiming tax credits resultant in payments from the U.S. Treasury. Please note this is not a static expenditure, but these dollars amounts are raising all the time.
Ask yourself, why the Grand Canyon State of Arizona had not choice, but to clamp down against the massive dollar amounts spent to appease illegal alien homesteads How can a small South Western state that is mostly desert, afford to pay out $2 Billion dollars annually for foreigners? Then again– how can Leftist legislators in Sacramento, California, justify taking taxpayer’s money and giving it to illegal aliens when these persons truly don’t exist, other than in ICE enforcement records or Homeland Security? HAS ANY READER THOUGHT OF CHECKING THEIR STATES PAYOUT TO FOREIGN NATIONALS? Although they come here through the magnet of jobs, welfare and each year bring their children. The estimates of 300.000 babies enter via a broken, intermittent border fence, that can no-way be fully enforced without the deployment of troops. Instant citizen for babies is above most payments, is an incredulous cost forced on taxpayers by Liberal judges legislating from their gavel.
Because entering America without papers is not a—FELONY—it is essentially a giant hole in the wall, which imports not only millions of illegal aliens, but a massive population of criminals; bringing death, mayhem and ID theft on the unsuspecting citizens and residents. As I said in my commentary yesterday, the only way to sever the incentive of jobs (which I never thought I would admit) is issuing every citizen and legal resident a government ID CARD. This could be used to get employed US workers. (8 million illegal aliens have stolen jobs from mostly low income Americans according to reputable sources.) The same official ID card could be presented for voting; instead of the mess we have now, with convicted felons, deceased and illegal aliens, fraudulently using the election process to alter an elections direction.
You would also use this federal ID CARD to be checked against other data bases, official birth records to see if you have the right to be issued a driver’s license, vehicle insurance, welfare or other Public entitlements. I shouldn’t gloat over the welfare payouts in California, but it is a self inflicted wound caused by the Liberals in the capitol. California, the Godfather of Sanctuary State has a $19 Billion dollar budget gap, with a staggering cost of $21 Billion $ according to the National Conference of State Legislators in 2009. We must wonder how the welfare costs have escalated in two years in the once Golden State?
MY EARLIER BLOGS: http://brittanicus-enoughisenough.blogspot.com/
No Copyright. Distribute Freely.