Dream a little dream . . .

What's What With Pelosi's Monstrosity

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:48:00 +0000

Below you will find the report on Pelosi's Monstrosity, known as HR3962, from Congressman Pete Sessions out of Texas. Here is my warning and notice to every single Congressmen and/or Senator who has voted or is planning on voting for this bill. This is it. You will never serve another term in Congress. You have pounded the final nail into your liberal coffin and I, and millions of other Americans, have made it our mission in life to keep you from ever serving in this capacity again. Kiss goodbye to Washington, D.C. in January 2011 you will no longer work or reside there.

The Hill Report
A Weekly Newsletter from Congressman Pete Sessions

Week of November 1 – November 7, 2009

Tonight, I voted against a government takeover of your health care. I have heard the message loud and clear: the majority of 32ndDistrict residents (My addition: neither do the rest of hardworking Americans) do not want higher costs, fewer options, and government interference between patients and their doctors.

So it’s a sad day for America. Ignoring the undeniable opposition of the American people, House Democrats placed their partisan political agenda over personal decision-making and passed a government takeover of health care by a vote of 220 - 215.

From criminalizing non-compliance of insurance mandates to establishing 118 new bureaucracies to control health care inAmerica, Speaker Pelosi’s 2,032-page health care reform bill tramples on the freedom and individual liberty upon which our nation was founded:
$250,000 fine and 5 years in Jail—Maximum sentence for an American guilty of not purchasing government-approved health coverage
5.5 Million—Number of jobs that could be lost as a result of taxes on businesses that cannot afford to provide health coverage, according to a model by President Obama’s Economic Advisor
$729.5 Billion—Total new taxes on small businesses, individuals, and employers who cannot afford to provide coverage that meets federal bureaucrats’ standards
$1.055 Trillion—New federal spending of your tax dollars for a government takeover of health care
114 Million—Number of individuals who could lose their current coverage under the bill’s government-run health plan, according to non-partisan actuaries at the Lewin Group
43—Entitlement programs the bill creates, expands, or extends
118—Additional offices, bureaus, commissions, programs, and bureaucracies the bill creates over and above the entitlement expansions
3,425—Uses of the word “shall,” representing new duties for bureaucrats and mandates on individuals, businesses, and States
2017—Year Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund will be exhausted—an entitlement crisis exacerbated by the bill, which cuts nearly $450 Billion from Medicare
I am appalled by this blatant attack on American freedom. Every American should be outraged.

Turning the House of Representatives into a graveyard for good ideas, House Democrats voted down House Republicans’ common-sense health care reform alternative that would lower health care premiums and increase access to affordable, high-quality care – without adding to the national debt.

Totaling only 219 pages, the alternative health reform bill includes coverage for pre-existing conditions, institutes real medical liability reform, enhances Health Savings Accounts, enables large insurance pools and purchasing across state lines, and provides incentives for states to reduce costs and increase insurance.

In fact, on Wednesday the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office reported that the House Republican health care alternative bill could lower health care premiums by 10 percent and reduce the national deficit by $68 Billion over the next 10 years.

The American people want lower health care costs, and that is exactly what the Republican alternative would deliver. Instead of an unsustainable trillion-dollar government-run health care program, our plan would reduce the national debt and demonstrates the effectiveness of fiscally-responsible health care reform.

I voted in favor of this patient-centered reform that would preserve individual choice and access to the best quality care in America. Yet, House Democrats rejected the opportunity to provide real reform, voting down the alternative bill by a vote of 258 to 176.

In the end, Speaker Pelosi’s bill wasn’t about quality health care for all Americans – it was about advancing a radical, liberal agenda intent on expanding government control and diminishing the free enterprise system.

I believe that the American people will hold House Democrats accountable for their vote for government-controlled health care. I stand with the American people in this fight. Together, we must defeat the Pelosi health care bill and bring about true reform that provides every American access to quality health care of their choice.

Have a good weekend.
Sincerely,

Pete Sessions

Are you kidding me? I thought this was to help the pour and downtrodden of the nation to have healthcare? I thought this was to take care of Americans too pour or too damned lazy to work, to have healthcare? How are they to afford it if they are tossed in jail for not having government run insurance? How are they to afford it when they get out and are working a dead-end, minimum wage job to pay the fine, which would be the equivalent of using a thimble full of water on a raging forest fire.

Nancy Pelosi has become the biggest pariah this nation has seen and the Democrats are dancing around like minions leaping gleefully around the bonfire of our rights and freedoms, and singing, "All hail to Queen Nancy." She, with her viciously botoxed face simply smiles and bows her head to her loyal subjects while inwardly cackling that Americans will now pay the price for the nation she has come to hate so much. Her partner in crime, Harry Reid, now has the ball in his court and will soon take the side of Nancy Pelosi as two of the most hated people in America.

Oh yes, liberal politicians, all you who have participated in the dismantling of the Constitution, I have made it my personal mission to not only see you tossed out of office, but to have individual cases of treason levied against each of you. So laugh it up while you can, your days are drawing to an end.

We must:

Inundate the Senate with phone calls, every single Senator, at let them know how dangerous a "yes" vote on this legislation will be. Let them know how dangerous it will be if they combine their travesties of justice and healthcare with Pelosi's.

Also, contact every single congressman who voted for HR3962 and let them know you have now made it your personal mission to make sure they never serve another term in office for betraying the American people with this healthcare legislation.

This is what I am going to do and ask all I know to do. In the meantime, look at available candidates, study them and see which are the true Americans who love and will defend the Constitution, the Republic and remain fiscally conservative. Here in our race, with Mark Shurtleff dropping out, I’ve been on the phone day and night looking to see who will replace Mark in this race. It is looking like a couple of men will be stepping up, one of which is a strong possibility. I have been assured by those I trust that I will really like this man. I am sitting down to meet with him this next week and grill the guy. I’ll look into him and let you know what I think. He might be the best answer to Mark dropping out.

For the House, Jason Chaffetz is still the best answer although I am still not 100% comfortable with him. Until the man has some power we won’t know his true measure. But for now he is voting correctly on just about every issue.

And last, but certainly not least, educate your children about the real America and not the America the liberals are painting. Teach them to love the Constitution. Teach them to know the founding fathers and why they chose a Republic form of government over a straight Democracy. Teach them to realize the wisdom in being fiscally conservative, defending the unborn, defending the Constitution, defending the America God entrusted to us.

I am going to start taking Sheryl Devereaux's Constitution classes (they are free) when she starts them over in a couple of weeks. And then keep up with everything else I am doing.

We, as in America, are truly in this position now because we have an uneducated populace as to who America really is and what our purpose is. We have to change that if we hope to save her, and we will save her!

I leave with you with a quote I've posted on this blog before by President Harold B. Lee:

"Men may fail in this country, earthquakes may come, seas may heave beyond their bounds, there may be great drought, disaster, and hardship, but this nation, founded on principles laid down by men whom God raised up, will never fail. This is the cradle of humanity, where life on this earth began in the Garden of Eden. This is the place of the new Jerusalem. This is the place that the Lord said is favored above all other nations in all the world. This is the place where the Savior will come to His temple. This is the favored land in all the world. Yes, I repeat, men may fail, but this nation won't fail. I have faith in America; you and I must have faith in America, if we understand the teachings of the gospel of Jesus Christ. We are living in a day when we must pay heed to these challenges.

"I plead with you not to preach pessimism. Preach that this is the greatest country in all the world. This is the favored land. This is the land of our forefathers. It is the nation that will stand despite whatever trials or crises it may yet have to pass through." (Ye Are the Light of the World, Harold B. Lee, p350-51)

Today is the Day!

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:07:00 +0000

It's a little hard to believe. Several years ago, when I began contemplating opening a publishing house, even I could not have imagined that the day would arrive when my publishing house signed Attorney General Mark Shurtleff as our first author. Stunning! Even more so, never could I have imagined that the great-great granddaughter of Dred Scott would fly in to help Mark celebrate the release of this incredible book about her ancestor. You will get the opportunity to not only meet and hear from Mark Shurtleff tonight, but also Lynne Jackson as she shares with us a little bit about Dred.

Today is the National Book Launch Party introducing Am I Not a Man? The Dred Scott Story to the nation. Mark will be at the Barnes & Noble at The Gateway in Salt Lake City tonight. (Details at the end of this post.)

We, at Valor Publishing Group, really sat down and pulled together a real party. Something fun, entertaining, enlightening, inspiring, tasty and you'll walk away with a copy of one of the most important books of our generation to grace the shelves of your home libraries.

Really, this book has opened my eyes to so much and I truly have developed a deep and abiding respect for Dred Scott and have come to understand how important he is in the course of American history. Indeed, the long night of slavery which existed in the U.S. was but a small fraction of what existed around the world. But the greatest part of that travesty of justice, was that it ever existed in the United States of America at all...the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Mark Shurtleff has does an incredible job bringing into full living color the life and times of Dred Scott. Am I Not a Man? The Dred Scott Story will educate and inspire you to remember who you are and that when something is really important, it is worth spending the rest of your days fighting for that very thing. With Dred Scott, his first wife was sold to another plantation and he never saw her again. Can you imagine the incredible heartbreak to have the one you love ripped from your arms and sold to another. It is virtually incomprehensible, not to mention monstrous.

But Dred Scott never gave up. He simply didn't. One day he met Harriet, the one woman who would stand by his side until his dying day, supporting and loving him as he fought for freedom and the right to be his own man. The sons of the family who had owned him when he was younger subsidized and fought that battle with him. When the infamous Dred Scott vs. Sanford decision was handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court, one of the worst decisions the U.S. Supreme Court has ever handed down, and freedom was denied him, the Blow family sons bought the Scott family and promptly freed them.

I walked away from this book thinking to myself: Never give up. Never say die. Never walk away. Although Dred Scott was physically a small man, he was, and remains to this day, a giant among men. He is an inspiration to me and I am so glad that I was able to learn so much more about him and what was going on in America during that time.

Mark, I thank you for dedicating so much of your life to bring Dred Scott to the attention of the world. Thank you for fighting through the trials and obstacles of life and persevering. Dred Scott didn't give up and neither did you. Both of you are an inspiration to me.

Tonight, the festivities will begin at 5:30 p.m. Here is the schedule:

Barnes & Noble Booksellers
The Gateway
6 Rio Grande Street
Salt Lake City, UT

5:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Calvary Baptist Choir
6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mark Shurtleff signs copies of his book Am I Not a Man? The Dred Scott Story
7:00 p.m. to 7:05 p.m. Alex Boye’ sings “Am I Not a Man and a Brother?”
7:05 p.m. to 7:10 p.m. Connie Hall reads her winning essay “Stand Up for Freedom”
7:10 p.m. to 7:20 p.m. Lynne Jackson speaks about Dred Scott
7:20 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Mark Shurtleff reads 1st Chapter and Q&A
8:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Drawing for Grand Prize and signing of any last books

I truly hope to see as many of my Blogland friends there as can come. This is a culmination, as well as the beginning of something big, of a longtime dream for me. Oddly, dreams really do come true as long as you're willing to work hard enough for them.

If you're not near the Wasatch Front, you may purchase your own copy through Amazon.com:

Hardcover: 534 pages
Publisher: Valor Publishing Group; 1st edition (November 3, 2009)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1935546007
ISBN-13: 978-1935546009
Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.3 x 1.8 inches
Shipping Weight: 2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
Average Customer Review: 4.6 out of 5 Stars - See all Amazon reviews (5 customer reviews)
Amazon.com Sales Rank: #289,508 in Books

Purchase now.

Cleon Skousen: Defender of God and Country

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:00:00 +0000

I've really been delving into the writings of Cleon Skousen lately and started digging on the internet to learn more about this great defender of America and God. Truly, I am in awe of his mind and his immense patriotism and righteousness.

I found his obituary, which was amazing:

Obituary of W. Cleon Skousen

W. Cleon Skousen, prolific supporter of God, country, and the unlimited potential for greatness in all people, passed away at his Salt Lake City home on January 9 of natural causes incident to age, just 11 days shy of his 93rd birthday. He was lovingly surrounded by his wife of 69 years, Jewel, and many family members.

The Making of AmericaKnown by millions for his devoted understanding and support of the U.S. Constitution, his love of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, his insights into politics, religion, good government, and human nature, he leaves behind an exhaustive work of scholarship created over three-quarters of a century that covers dozens of specialties. Among the 46 books he wrote are the best sellers, The Naked Communist, The Naked Capitalist, So You Want to Raise a Boy, The Making of America, The Five Thousand Year Leap, and Fantastic Victory about the Israel-Arab war of 1967.

His books on religion, such as The First 2,000 Years, Prophecy and Modern Times, Isaiah Speaks to Modern Times, Treasures from the Book of Mormon, and Days of the Living Christ, reached millions of readers in the Christian, Jewish and Islamic communities.

And his speech entitled "A Personal Search for the Meaning of the Atonement" is perhaps the most widely distributed audio tape among members and missionaries of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints-a fact that made him smile in astonishment. "I've had missionaries tell me that speech has been translated into Russian, Spanish, Portuguese, and French, and has been passed around on every continent where missionaries serve."

Skousen served 16 years in J. Edgar Hoover's FBI as an agent and the communications director during the waning years of the gangster era and WWII. He also was the editor of the nation's leading police magazine, "Law And Order."

He was a popular teacher of several thousand students at Brigham Young University for 16 years, and a popular speaker across the country where he sometimes gave as many as 300 speeches a year. His devotion to America's founding fathers and the Constitution led to the creation of The Freeman Institute that later became the National Center for Constitutional Studies, an organization through which his speeches and writings educated and united large segments of voters to elect senators, congressmen, governors and presidents who loved the Constitution.

Known for his untiring devotion to principle and integrity, he served as Salt Lake City's chief of police and created what Time Magazine called "A model police force." After 4 years of service, the city mayor created a firestorm of protest when he fired Skousen on trumped-up charges, an event the mayor later called the worst political mistake of his life.

Warmly embraced with the friendly honorarium "a living national treasure," Skousen and his wife maintained a modest home in Salt Lake City that became a mandatory stopover for any person with political aspirations both in Utah and beyond. Friends and visitors included ecclesiastical leaders of all faiths, politicians from all major parties, students of all ages, and of course, local missionaries every Sunday night.

Skousen was born in Raymond, Alberta, Canada on Jan. 20, 1913, and was educated in Canada, Mexico and the U.S. He served a 2-year mission for the LDS Church at age 17. He earned his PhD at George Washington University. He and Jewel are the parents of eight children, 50 grandchildren, and 67 great-grand children. He was preceded in death by three brothers and two sisters, his daughter Kathleen, two grandchildren, and one great-grand child. He is survived by his wife Jewel, and children David (Judy), Orem, UT; Eric (Cheryl), Orem, UT; Julianne (Glenn) Kimber, Alpine, UT; Sharon (Russ) Krey, Washington; Harold (Anne), Riverton, UT; Paul (Kathy), South Jordan, UT; Brent (Myralynne), West Jordan, UT.

Deseret News - Friday, 13 January 2006

Glenn Beck, oddly, was the one who brought Cleon Skousen back to the forefront of my mind. On one of my book tours, I was signing books at Moon's Book Store in Dallas, TX when I found Br. Skousen's Days of the Living Christ. I don't think I signed enough books to pay for what I purchased that day. But I believe that is when I truly began loving the mind of Cleon Skousen. He was so unabashedly patriotic and truly understood the divine purposes of the United States of America. For that alone, I could offer the man my greatest and utmost respect.

Everyone who is a follower and reader of my blog knows how deeply I love America, what she stands for and equally, why she was created. Certainly, at this time our nation's history I believe the wisdom and knowledge of Cleon Skousen could go a long way in helping Americans to understand where we came from and where we are headed.

I am unwilling to give up the fight for America. I believe there is so much more to America than most Americans know. It is one of our divine missions to remain as the bastion for liberty to the world. In order to do that, we must restore the U.S. Constitution as the rule of law. Help me, America. Let us take our nation back.

Have you called your senators and congressmen and filled them in on how you feel about what's going on?

Have you called the White House and left Barack Obama no doubt about your feelings as to what he's been doing?

Have you educated yourself on the U.S. Constitution, the Republic form of government, the dangers of Socialism/Communism and our founding fathers?

Have you shared with your family, friends, neighbors and peers what you're learning and the truth about America?

Have you taught your children the truth about America instead of what is being taught today?

Have you awakened to the dangers facing America now and simply said, "Not on my watch."

We must roll up our sleeves, dig in and simply get the job done. The alternative is unacceptable.

I Have to Share -- Achmed

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:00:00 +0000

I am so sorry. I'm apologizing in advance. The language is a little rough in this video, but it is so funny I just can't stand it. I have watched it a few times and I keep laughing so hard I just can't take it. So be forewarned.

Jeff Dunham's "Achmed the Dead Terrorist":

Born somewhere east of his current residence, Achmed the Terrorist was truly a terror...at least he attempted to be. He tried and failed many times to do what his contemporaries could, and that was to blow stuff up. One fateful day he finally succeeded in detonating a bomb, but unfortunately for him, the only person he managed to kill was himself. Now better known as Achmed the Dead Terrorist, the conflicted, lovable fiend continues to incite terror in the hearts of...no one. (www.jeffdunham.com)

I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I did warn you! Pardon me while I catch my breath. Laughing this hard hurts.

Mark L. Shurtleff Celebrates “Am I Not A Man, The Dred Scott Story” with National Launch Party

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:25:00 +0000

NEWS ITEM – NEWS ITEM – NEWS ITEM – NEWS ITEM

Mark L. Shurtleff Celebrates Release of First Book,
“Am I Not A Man, The Dred Scott Story” with National Launch Party

Dred Scott descendant, Lynne Jackson, and recording star, Alex Boye, to speak and perform at the event sponsored by Valor Publishing Group.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

27 October 2009 - Orem, UT Mark L. Shurtleff, Utah State Attorney General and author, will be joined by Lynne Jackson and recording artist, Alex Boye’, on Tuesday, November 3, 2009 at Barnes & Noble Booksellers in Salt Lake City’s Gateway for the national launch of his new book, Am I Not a Man; The Dred Scott Story, published by Valor Publishing Group.

Candace E. Salima, president of Valor Publishing Group, has planned several activities for the book launch party and hopes to attract a wide spectrum of new fans for Shurtleff “We are so excited for Mark and hope this becomes an opportunity for the public to know him on a different level.”

Musical tributes by the Calvary Baptist Choir of Salt Lake City will be featured, with a special performance by Alex Boye, dedicated to the memory of Dred Scott. Lynne Jackson, the great-great granddaughter of Dred Scott, will be a guest speaker at the launch party. In addition to the performances and presentations, Valor Publishing Group has commissioned baker Cindy Parvizi of CakeFlake to create two specialty cakes for the occasion.

Mark Shurtleff’s historical novel details the story of Dred Scott, a freed slave who was forced back into bondage, and his fight to regain his liberty. Scott is arguably the most important figure in the 18th century struggle for freedom from slavery. His tragic case against the U.S. Supreme Court emboldened the abolitionist movement of the time and became part of Abraham Lincoln’s presidential platform and key reference for the historical, the Emancipation Proclamation.

The national book launch and release will start at 5:30 p.m. at the Barnes & Noble Booksellers location in Salt Lake City’s Gateway open air mall. Festivities will end at 8:30 p.m.

Lynne Jackson will be available for interviews on November 3rd. Mark Shurtleff is available for interviews from October 28th to November 3rd.

Barnes & Noble Booksellers
The Gateway
6 Rio Grande Street
Salt Lake City, UT

5:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Calvary Baptist Choir
6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mark Shurtleff signs copies of “Am I Not a Man? The Dred Scott Story”
7:00 p.m. to 7:05 p.m. Alex Boye’ sings “Am I Not a Man and a Brother?”
7:05 p.m. to 7:10 p.m. Connie Hall reads her winning essay “Stand Up for Freedom”
7:10 p.m. to 7:20 p.m. Lynne Jackson speaks about Dred Scott
7:20 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Mark Shurtleff reads 1st Chapter and Q&A
8:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Drawing for Grand Prize and signing of any last books

Mark Shurtleff and Lynne Jackson are available for live interviews on November 3rd. Mark Shurtleff is available for interviews on other days according to his schedule.

For more information, contact:

Candace E. Salima
Phone: 801-358-6213
Email: candace@valorpublishinggroup.com
www.valorpublishinggroup.com

# # #

Obama and His Unholy Gang

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:13:00 +0000

Obama and his unholy gang are like rabid dogs, frothing at the mouth, snapping and snarling at everyone who does not genuflect and shut up. Stupidity is running rampant in the Obama Administration. Who will draw their cancerous wrath now?

During Obama's campaign he blackballed any reporter, television or radio station who dared to call him what he was, a socialist. Hard-hitting questions weren't allowed and those stations were cut off.

Then Americans became fed up with his antics and his unholy desire to destroy America as a republic and build it back up into a communist society. So they gathered together, by the millions, and participated in rallies, emailing, phone and fax campaigns and raged at Obama and his unholy gang of thieves, demanding they STOP, as is their right as citizens of this great nation, in the destruction of America. So with foam dropping from his fangs, Obama let loose his equally rabid minions on hard-working Americans and had them declared right-wing extremists and domestic terrorists.

Then healthcare came onto the scene and Americans got a look at what the 111th Congress, under the guidance of the head rabid dog, Obama, was crafting and hit the proverbial ceiling. No, senators and congressmen didn't read the legislation but Americans did and we took to the streets again and demanded the inhumane and monstrous legislation be stopped cold. So Nancy Pelosi, who frightens small children with her overly botoxed face, started attacking hard-working Americans.

Then the collective giant rabid head of the Obama Administration turned its bloodshot, crazed eyes on FoxNews. Immanuel and Axelrod took to the airwaves and began the collective ridiculing of FoxNews, whose viewership immediately jumped 20% in response to the schoolyard bullying which is the staple of Chicago-style politics. The White House press secretary began making snide little comments any time a FoxNews reporter asked a question. Anita Dunn, in all her glorious idiocy, picked up the hammer and took her turn at FoxNews. And on it went, turning this White House into, in the eyes of the world at large and certainly in those of an angry nation, a farcical rabid dog who had lost all sense of rhyme and reason.

While Obama wrings his hands and dithers about how many troops to send to Afghanistan, American lives are being lost. While Anita Dunn memorializes Mao Zedong in the same breath with Mother Teresa, Obama's 40+ czars continue to spout their anti-American, anti-Constitution, pro-communist agendas while Obama continues on his perpetual campaign to "make people 'like' him."

Barack Obama is the neighborhood bully. Plain and simple, there is no other way to put it. You either see things his way or your toast. Barack Obama cannot STAND to be challenged. He prevaricates, stammers and stutters his way through his threats. Compares Nancy Pelosi to a washerwoman wielding the mop of change, cleaning up the mess left behind by previous administration. He remains unwilling to accept responsibility and runs his czars out in front of the public like so much cannon fodder while he sits in the corner, giggling as he rubs his hands together gleefully watching the fall of America. Oh yeah, the Teflon Don has nothing on Barack Obama.

Hey Obama, I'm serving notice. We can see you. We're on to your tricks. We're on to your sleights of hand. We're on to your lies. We're on to your communist agenda. We're on to your sheer unadulterated hatred of America. We're on to your cowardice. We're on to every single failing which has the brightest spotlight shining on it right now.

You cannot shut us up. You cannot shut us down. You cannot attack America and walk away unscathed. In November 2010, the Democrats will lose Congress and you will be left with no way to further your communist agenda. All who have chosen to attack the Constitution instead of honor their oaths and defend that divinely inspired document will find themselves collectively kicked out on their butts and men and women of integrity and true patriotism will fill the halls of Congress. You pathetic, traitorous son of a bitch, shut up or get out of the way, I don't care which. Just be aware that you are officially the worst president the United States has ever seen, and that took some doing. Your days are numbered and Americans across this nation are fighting hard to make sure you do not serve a 2nd term, even to impeach you before the first one finishes.

It is my suggestion you resign before you are impeached and tossed into prison for committing treason. It is my suggestion you fire your 42 czars and tell them to to get the hell out of the country and save you a spot, because communists are not welcome in the land of the free and the home of the brave. It is my suggestion you do not sign the Climate Change treaty in December, for in so doing you will sound the death knell to your political career. It is my suggestion you back off of Cap & Trade before Americans become so enraged they lose all sense of reason. It is my suggestion you drop the public healthcare option and fining poor Americans because they can't afford health insurance before Americans decide to run you out of town on a rail. It is my suggestion you drop all pretension of being American, admit to America that you are communist-Muslim sympathizer who will destroy this nation if you are left unchecked.

Man up, you lily livered coward. Your time in America is through. Stop before you shame your daughters utterly and completely. Stop before it is too late. For there are millions upon millions of Americans who will not allow America to fall. Do not try us. You will not like the result.

Obama Set to Cede America's Sovereignty and Financial Future

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:00:00 +0000

United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change

Lord Christopher Monckton spoke on the proposed UN Climate Change treaty which will rob America forever of her sovereignty. Lord Monckton spoke at the Minnesota Free Market Institute on the topic of global warming and debunked the entire thing. However, he also discussed the following:

"At [the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in] Copenhagen, this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed. Your president will sign it. Most of the third world countries will sign it, because they think they’re going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regime from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won’t sign it.

"I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word “government” actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, “climate debt” – because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.

"How many of you think that the word “election” or “democracy” or “vote” or “ballot” occurs anywhere in the 200 pages of that treaty? Quite right, it doesn’t appear once. So, at last, the communists who piled out of the Berlin Wall and into the environmental movement, who took over Greenpeace so that my friends who funded it left within a year, because [the communists] captured it – Now the apotheosis as at hand. They are about to impose a communist world government on the world. You have a president who has very strong sympathies with that point of view. He’s going to sign it. He’ll sign anything. He’s a Nobel Peace Prize [winner]; of course he’ll sign it.

"And the trouble is this; if that treaty is signed, if your Constitution says that it takes precedence over your Constitution (sic), and you can’t resign from that treaty unless you get agreement from all the other state parties – And because you’ll be the biggest paying country, they’re not going to let you out of it.

"So, thank you, America. You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege merely to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free. But, in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your humanity away forever. And neither you nor any subsequent government you may elect will have any power whatsoever to take it back. That is how serious it is. I’ve read the treaty. I’ve seen this stuff about [world] government and climate debt and enforcement. They are going to do this to you whether you like it or not.

"But I think it is here, here in your great nation, which I so love and I so admire – it is here that perhaps, at this eleventh hour, at the fifty-ninth minute and fifty-ninth second, you will rise up and you will stop your president from signing that dreadful treaty, that purposeless treaty. For there is no problem with climate and, even if there were, an economic treaty does nothing to [help] it.

"So I end by saying to you the words that Winston Churchill addressed to your president in the darkest hour before the dawn of freedom in the Second World War. He quoted from your great poet Longfellow:

Sail on, O Ship of State!
Sail on, O Union, strong and great!
Humanity with all its fears,
With all the hopes of future years,
Is hanging breathless on thy fate!

# # #

Call your congressmen, senators and the White House every single day throughout the remainder of 2009. Tell them NO to U.N. Climate Change Treaty. Tell them NO to Cap & Trade. Tell them NO to Socialized Healthcare. Tell them NO to Socialism. Tell them NO to Communism. And then simply ask them, when they are going to start fulfilling their oath instead of violating and start defending the Constitution and the interests of the American people instead of robbing us of all we hold dear!

Long live America, her Constitution and her Republic. We will be that bastion of liberty and freedom again. We are America. And now is the hour. Stand up. Speak up. Be heard.

Elder Dallin H. Oakes on Religious Freedom

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 12:00:00 +0000

13 October 2009
Transcript of Elder Dallin H. Oaks speech given at BYU-Idaho on 13 October 2009.

Dallin Harris Oaks (born August 12, 1932) is an American attorney, jurist and religious leader. Since 1984, he has been a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church). He is a former professor of law at the University of Chicago Law School, a former president of Brigham Young University, and a former justice of the Utah Supreme Court. In the 1970s and 1980s, Republican U.S. presidential administrations considered him as a potential nominee to the United States Supreme Court. Currently, he is the fifth most senior apostle among the ranks of the Church.

My dear young friends, I am pleased to speak to this BYU-Idaho audience. I am conscious that I am also speaking to many in other places. In this time of the Internet, what we say in one place is instantly put before a wider audience, including many to whom we do not intend to speak. That complicates my task, so I ask your understanding as I speak to a very diverse audience.

In choosing my subject I have relied on an old military maxim that when there is a battle underway, persons who desire to join the fray should “march to the sound of the guns.”[i] So it is that I invite you to march with me as I speak about religious freedom under the United States Constitution. There is a battle over the meaning of that freedom. The contest is of eternal importance, and it is your generation that must understand the issues and make the efforts to prevail.

I. An 1833 revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith declared that the Lord established the United States Constitution by wise men whom he raised up for that very purpose (Doctrine and Covenants 101:80). The Lord also declared that this constitution “should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:77; emphasis added).

In 1833, when almost all people in the world were still ruled by kings or tyrants, few could see how the infant United States Constitution could be divinely designed “for the rights and protection of all flesh.” Today, 176 years after that revelation, almost every nation in the world has adopted a written constitution, and the United States Constitution profoundly influenced all of them. Truly, this nation’s most important export is its constitution, whose great principles stand as a model “for the rights and protection of all flesh.” On the vital human right of religious freedom, however, many constitutions fall short of the protections that are needed, so we are grateful that the United States government seeks to encourage religious freedom all over the world.[ii]

II. To illustrate the importance of basic human rights in other countries, I refer to some recent history in Mongolia, which shows that the religious freedom we have taken for granted in the United States must be won by dangerous sacrifice in some other nations.

Following the perestroika movement in the Soviet Union, popular demonstrations in Mongolia forced the Communist government to resign in March 1990. Other political parties were legalized, but the first Mongolian elections gave the Communists a majority in the new parliament, and the old repressive attitudes persisted in all government departments. The full functioning of a democratic process and the full enjoyment of the people’s needed freedoms do not occur without a struggle. In Mongolia, the freedoms of speech, press and religion — a principal feature of the inspired United States Constitution — remained unfulfilled.

In that precarious environment, a 42-year-old married woman, Oyun Altangerel, a department head in the state library, courageously took some actions that would prove historic. Acting against official pressure, she organized a “Democratic Association Branch Council.” This 12-member group, the first of its kind, spoke out for democracy and proposed that state employees have the freedoms of worship, belief and expression, including the right to belong to a political party of their choice.

When Oyun and others were fired from their state employment, Oyun began a hunger strike in the state library. Within three hours she was joined by 20 others, mostly women, and their hunger strike, which continued for five days, became a public demonstration that took their grievances to the people of Mongolia. This demonstration, backed by major democratic movement leaders, encouraged other government employees to organize similar democratic councils. These dangerous actions expanded into a national anti-government movement that voiced powerful support for the basic human freedoms of speech, press and religion. Eventually the government accepted the demands, and in the adoption of a democratic constitution two years later Mongolia took a major step toward a free society.

For Latter-day Saints, this birth of constitutional government in Mongolia has special interest. Less than two years after the historic hunger strike, we sent our first missionaries to Mongolia. In 1992 these couples began their meetings in the state library, where Oyun was working. The following year, she showed her courage again by being baptized into this newly arrived Christian church. Her only child, a 22-year-old son, was baptized two years later. Today, the Mongolian members of our Church number 9,000, reportedly the largest group of Christians in the country. A few months ago we organized our first stake in Mongolia. Called as the stake president was Sister Oyun’s son, Odgerel. He had studied for a year at BYU-Hawaii, and his wife, Ariuna, a former missionary in Utah, graduated there.[iii]

III. One of the great fundamentals of our inspired constitution, relied on by Oyun of Mongolia and countless others struggling for freedom in many countries in the world, is the principle that the people are the source of government power. This principle of popular sovereignty was first written and applied on the American continent over 200 years ago. A group of colonies won independence from a king, and their representatives had the unique opportunity of establishing a new government. They did this by creating the first written constitution that has survived to govern a modern nation. The United States Constitution declared the source of government power, delegated that power to a government, and regulated its exercise.

Along with many other religious people, we affirm that God is the ultimate source of power and that, under Him, it is the people’s inherent right to decide their form of government. Sovereign power is not inherent in a state or nation just because its leaders have the power that comes from force of arms. And sovereign power does not come from the divine right of a king, who grants his subjects such power as he pleases or is forced to concede, as in Magna Carta. As the preamble to our constitution states: “We the People of the United States . . . do ordain and establish this Constitution.”

This principle of sovereignty in the people explains the meaning of God’s revelation that He established the Constitution of the United States “that every man may act . . . according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:78). In other words, the most desirable condition for the effective exercise of God-given moral agency is a condition of maximum freedom and responsibility — the opposite of slavery or political oppression. With freedom we can be accountable for our own actions and cannot blame our conditions on our bondage to another. This is the condition the Lord praised in the Book of Mormon, where the people — not a king — established the laws and were governed by them (see Mosiah 29:23–26). This popular sovereignty necessarily implies popular responsibility. Instead of blaming their troubles on a king or tyrant, all citizens are responsible to share the burdens of governing, “that every man might bear his part” (Mosiah 29:34).

IV. “For the rights and protection of all flesh” the United State Constitution includes in its First Amendment the guarantees of free exercise of religion and free speech and press. Without these great fundamentals of the Constitution, America could not have served as the host nation for the restoration of the gospel, which began just three decades after the Bill of Rights was ratified.

The First Amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The prohibition against “an establishment of religion” was intended to separate churches and government, to prevent a national church of the kind still found in Europe. In the interest of time I will say no more about the establishment of religion, but only concentrate on the direction that the United States shall have no law “prohibiting the free exercise” of religion.

The guarantee of the free exercise of religion, which I will call religious freedom, is the first expression in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. As noted by many, this “pre-eminent place” identifies freedom of religion as “a cornerstone of American democracy.”[iv] The American colonies were originally settled by people who, for the most part, had come to this continent to be able to practice their religious faith without persecution, and their successors deliberately placed religious freedom first in the nation’s Bill of Rights. So it is that our national law formally declares: “The right to freedom of religion undergirds the very origin and existence of the United States.”[v]

The free “exercise” of religion obviously involves both the right to choose religious beliefs and affiliations and the right to “exercise” or practice those beliefs. But in a nation with citizens of many different religious beliefs, the right of some to act upon their religious principles must be qualified by the government’s responsibility to protect the health and safety of all. Otherwise, for example, the government could not protect its citizens’ person or property from neighbors whose intentions include taking human life or stealing in circumstances rationalized on the basis of their religious beliefs.

The inherent conflict between the precious religious freedom of the people and the legitimate regulatory responsibilities of the government is the central issue of religious freedom. Here are just a few examples of current controversial public issues that involve this conflict: laws governing marriage and adoption; laws regulating the activities of church-related organizations like BYU-Idaho in furtherance of their religious missions — activities such as who they will serve or employ; and laws prohibiting discrimination in employment or work conditions against persons with unpopular religious beliefs or practices.

The problems are not simple, and over the years the United States Supreme Court, which has the ultimate responsibility of interpreting the meaning of the lofty and general provisions of the Constitution, has struggled to identify principles that can guide its decisions when government action is claimed to violate someone’s free exercise of religion. As would be expected, most of the battles over the extent of religious freedom have involved government efforts to impose upon the practices of small groups like Mormons. Not surprisingly, government officials sometimes seem more tolerant toward the religious practices of large groups of voters.

Unpopular minority religions are especially dependent upon a constitutional guarantee of free exercise of religion. We are fortunate to have such a guarantee in the United States, but many nations do not. The importance of that guarantee in the United States should make us ever diligent to defend it. And it is in need of being defended. During my lifetime I have seen a significant deterioration in the respect accorded to religion in our public life, and I believe that the vitality of religious freedom is in danger of being weakened accordingly.

Religious belief is obviously protected against government action. The practice of that belief must have some limits, as I suggested earlier. But unless the guarantee of free exercise of religion gives a religious actor greater protection against government prohibitions than are already guaranteed to all actors by other provisions of the constitution (like freedom of speech), what is the special value of religious freedom? Surely the First Amendment guarantee of free exercise of religion was intended to grant more freedom to religious action than to other kinds of action. Treating actions based on religious belief the same as actions based on other systems of belief should not be enough to satisfy the special place of religion in the United States Constitution.

V. Religious freedom has always been at risk. It was repression of religious belief and practice that drove the Pilgrim fathers and other dissenters to the shores of this continent. Even today, leaders in all too many nations use state power to repress religious believers.

The greatest infringements of religious freedom occur when the exercise of religion collides with other powerful forces in society. Among the most threatening collisions in the United States today are (1) the rising strength of those who seek to silence religious voices in public debates, and (2) perceived conflicts between religious freedom and the popular appeal of newly alleged civil rights.

As I address this audience of young adults, I invite your careful attention to what I say on these subjects, because I am describing conditions you will face and challenges you must confront.

Silencing Religious Voices in the Public Square

A writer for The Christian Science Monitor predicts that the coming century will be “very secular and religiously antagonistic,” with intolerance of Christianity “ris[ing] to levels many of us have not believed possible in our lifetimes.”[vi] Other wise observers have noted the ever-growing, relentless attack on the Christian religion by forces who reject the existence or authority of God.[vii] The extent and nature of religious devotion in this nation is changing. The tide of public opinion in favor of religion is receding, and this probably portends public pressures for laws that will impinge on religious freedom.

Atheism has always been hostile to religion, such as in its arguments that freedom of or for religion should include freedom from religion. Atheism’s threat rises as its proponents grow in numbers and aggressiveness. “By some counts,” a recent article in The Economist declares, “there are at least 500 [million] declared non-believers in the world — enough to make atheism the fourth-biggest religion.”[viii] And atheism’s spokesmen are aggressive, as recent publications show.[ix] As noted by John A. Howard of the Howard Center for Family, Religion, and Society, these voices “have developed great skills in demonizing those who disagree with them, turning their opponents into objects of fear, hatred and scorn.”[x]

Such forces — atheists and others — would intimidate persons with religious-based points of view from influencing or making the laws of their state or nation. Noted author and legal commentator Hugh Hewitt described the current circumstance this way:

“There is a growing anti-religious bigotry in the United States. . . .

“For three decades people of faith have watched a systematic and very effective effort waged in the courts and the media to drive them from the public square and to delegitimize their participation in politics as somehow threatening.”[xi]

For example, a prominent gay-rights spokesman gave this explanation for his objection to our Church’s position on California’s Proposition 8:

“I’m not intending it to harm the religion. I think they do wonderful things. Nicest people. . . . My single goal is to get them out of the same-sex marriage business and back to helping hurricane victims.”[xii]

Aside from the obvious fact that this objection would deny free speech as well as religious freedom to members of our Church and its coalition partners, there are other reasons why the public square must be open to religious ideas and religious persons. As Richard John Neuhaus said many years ago, “In a democracy that is free and robust, an opinion is no more disqualified for being ‘religious’ than for being atheistic, or psychoanalytic, or Marxist, or just plain dumb.”[xiii]

Religious Freedom Diluted by Other “Civil Rights”

A second threat to religious freedom is from those who perceive it to be in conflict with the newly alleged “civil right” of same-gender couples to enjoy the privileges of marriage.

We have endured a wave of media-reported charges that the Mormons are trying to “deny” people or “strip” people of their “rights.” After a significant majority of California voters (seven million — over 52 percent) approved Proposition 8’s limiting marriage to a man and a woman, some opponents characterized the vote as denying people their civil rights. In fact, the Proposition 8 battle was not about civil rights, but about what equal rights demand and what religious rights protect. At no time did anyone question or jeopardize the civil right of Proposition 8 opponents to vote or speak their views.

The real issue in the Proposition 8 debate — an issue that will not go away in years to come and for whose resolution it is critical that we protect everyone’s freedom of speech and the equally important freedom to stand for religious beliefs — is whether the opponents of Proposition 8 should be allowed to change the vital institution of marriage itself.

The marriage union of a man and a woman has been the teaching of the Judeo-Christian scriptures and the core legal definition and practice of marriage in Western culture for thousands of years. Those who seek to change the foundation of marriage should not be allowed to pretend that those who defend the ancient order are trampling on civil rights. The supporters of Proposition 8 were exercising their constitutional right to defend the institution of marriage — an institution of transcendent importance that they, along with countless others of many persuasions, feel conscientiously obliged to protect.

Religious freedom needs defending against the claims of newly asserted human rights. The so-called “Yogyakarta Principles,” published by an international human rights group, call for governments to assure that all persons have the right to practice their religious beliefs regardless of sexual orientation or identity.[xiv] This apparently proposes that governments require church practices and their doctrines to ignore gender differences. Any such effort to have governments invade religion to override religious doctrines or practices should be resisted by all believers. At the same time, all who conduct such resistance should frame their advocacy and their personal relations so that they are never seen as being doctrinaire opponents of the very real civil rights (such as free speech) of their adversaries or any other disadvantaged group.

VI. And now, in conclusion, I offer five points of counsel on how Latter-day Saints should conduct themselves to enhance religious freedom in this period of turmoil and challenge.

First, we must speak with love, always showing patience, understanding and compassion toward our adversaries. We are under command to love our neighbor (Luke 10:27), to forgive all men (Doctrine and Covenants 64:10), to do good to them who despitefully use us (Matthew 5:44) and to conduct our teaching in mildness and meekness (Doctrine and Covenants 38:41).

Even as we seek to speak with love, we must not be surprised when our positions are ridiculed and we are persecuted and reviled. As the Savior said, “so persecuted they the prophets which were before you” (Matthew 5:12). And modern revelation commands us not to revile against revilers (Doctrine and Covenants 19:30).

Second, we must not be deterred or coerced into silence by the kinds of intimidation I have described. We must insist on our constitutional right and duty to exercise our religion, to vote our consciences on public issues and to participate in elections and debates in the public square and the halls of justice. These are the rights of all citizens and they are also the rights of religious leaders. While our church rarely speaks on public issues, it does so by exception on what the First Presidency defines as significant moral issues, which could surely include laws affecting the fundamental legal/cultural/moral environment of our communities and nations.

We must also insist on this companion condition of democratic government: when churches and their members or any other group act or speak out on public issues, win or lose, they have a right to expect freedom from retaliation.

Along with many others, we were disappointed with what we experienced in the aftermath of California’s adoption of Proposition 8, including vandalism of church facilities and harassment of church members by firings and boycotts of member businesses and by retaliation against donors. Mormons were the targets of most of this, but it also hit other churches in the pro-8 coalition and other persons who could be identified as supporters. Fortunately, some recognized such retaliation for what it was. A full-page ad in the New York Times branded this “violence and intimidation” against religious organizations and individual believers “simply because they supported Proposition 8 [as] an outrage that must stop.” [xv] The fact that this ad was signed by some leaders who had no history of friendship for our faith only added to its force.

It is important to note that while this aggressive intimidation in connection with the Proposition 8 election was primarily directed at religious persons and symbols, it was not anti-religious as such. These incidents were expressions of outrage against those who disagreed with the gay-rights position and had prevailed in a public contest. As such, these incidents of “violence and intimidation” are not so much anti-religious as anti-democratic. In their effect they are like the well-known and widely condemned voter-intimidation of blacks in the South that produced corrective federal civil-rights legislation.

Third, we must insist on our freedom to preach the doctrines of our faith. Why do I make this obvious point? Religious people who share our moral convictions feel some intimidation. Fortunately, our leaders do not refrain from stating and explaining our position that homosexual behavior is sinful. Last summer Elder M. Russell Ballard spoke these words to a BYU audience:

“We follow Jesus Christ by living the law of chastity. God gave this commandment, and He has never revoked or changed it. This law is clear and simple. No one is to engage in sexual relationships outside the bounds the Lord has set. This applies to homosexual behavior of any kind and to heterosexual relationships outside marriage. It is a sin to violate the law of chastity.

“We follow Jesus Christ by adhering to God’s law of marriage, which is marriage between one man and one woman. This commandment has been in place from the very beginning.”[xvi]

We will continue to teach what our Heavenly Father has commanded us to teach, and trust that the precious free exercise of religion remains strong enough to guarantee our right to exercise this most basic freedom.

Fourth, as advocates of the obvious truth that persons with religious positions or motivations have the right to express their religious views in public, we must nevertheless be wise in our political participation. Preachers have been prime movers in the civil rights movement from the earliest advocates of abolition, but even the civil rights of religionists must be exercised legally and wisely.

As Latter-day Saints, we should never be reticent to declare and act upon the sure foundations of our faith. The call of conscience — whether religious or otherwise — requires no secular justification. At the same time, religious persons will often be most persuasive in political discourse by framing arguments and positions in ways that are respectful of those who do not share their religious beliefs and that contribute to the reasoned discussion and compromise that is essential in a pluralistic society.[xvii]

Fifth and finally, Latter-day Saints must be careful never to support or act upon the idea that a person must subscribe to some particular set of religious beliefs in order to qualify for a public office. The framers of our constitution included a provision that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States” (Article VI). That constitutional principle forbids a religious test as a legal requirement, but it of course leaves citizens free to cast their votes on the basis of any preference they choose. But wise religious leaders and members will never advocate religious tests for public office.

Fragile freedoms are best preserved when not employed beyond their intended purpose. If a candidate is seen to be rejected at the ballot box primarily because of religious belief or affiliation, the precious free exercise of religion is weakened at its foundation, especially when this reason for rejection has been advocated by other religionists. Such advocacy suggests that if religionists prevail in electing their preferred candidate this will lead to the use of government power in support of their religious beliefs and practices. The religion of a candidate should not be an issue in a political campaign.

Conclusion

It was the Christian principles of human worth and dignity that made possible the formation of the United States Constitution over 200 years ago, and only those principles in the hearts of a majority of our diverse population can sustain that constitution today. Our constitution’s revolutionary concepts of sovereignty in the people and significant guarantees of personal rights were, as John A. Howard has written,

“generated by a people for whom Christianity had been for a century and a half the compelling feature of their lives. It was Jesus who first stated that all men are created equal [and] that every person . . . is valued and loved by God.”[xviii]

Professor Dinesh D’Souza reminds us:

“The attempt to ground respect for equality on a purely secular basis ignores the vital contribution by Christianity to its spread. It is folly to believe that it could survive without the continuing aid of religious belief.”[xix]

Religious values and political realities are so interlinked in the origin and perpetuation of this nation that we cannot lose the influence of Christianity in the public square without seriously jeopardizing our freedoms. I maintain that this is a political fact, well qualified for argument in the public square by religious people whose freedom to believe and act must always be protected by what is properly called our “First Freedom,” the free exercise of religion.

Notes

[i] Robert Debs Heinl Jr., Dictionary of Military and Naval Quotations (U.S. Naval Institute Press, 1978), 141.

[ii] Final Report of the Advisory Committee on Religious Freedom Abroad to the Secretary of State and to the President of the United States, 17 May 1999, 6–7, 30–65. The International Religious Freedom Act, adopted in 1998, 22 USC 6401 et seq., established an office of international religious affairs in the U.S. State Department headed by an Ambassador at Large and the U.S. Commission for International Religious Freedom. Both of these bodies submit annual reports that assess the status of religious freedom under international standards worldwide and help encourage better implementation of commitments countries around the world have made to respect this fundamental right.

[iii] The information about events in Mongolia was obtained from correspondence with President Odgerel and from Mary N. Cook, former senior missionary and wife of Richard E. Cook, the first mission president in Mongolia.

[iv] Final Report of the Advisory Committee, 6.

[v] 22 USC 6401(a).

[vi] Michael Spencer, “The Coming Evangelical Collapse,” The Christian Science Monitor, 10 Mar. 2009.

[vii] E.g., John A. Howard, “Liberty: America’s Creative Power,” Howard Center, 22 June 2009, 6.

[viii] “In God’s Name: A Special Report on Religion and Public Life,” The Economist, 3 Nov. 2007, 10.

[ix] E.g., The Six Ways of Atheism, which was advertised “to absolutely disprove the existence of God, logically and simply,” was sent free to leading universities and public libraries in all major English-speaking countries in the world. Press release, 26 May 2009.

[x] Howard, “Liberty: America’s Creative Power,” 6.

[xi] Hugh Hewitt, A Mormon in the White House? (Washington DC: Regnery, 2007), 242–43.

[xii] Karl Vick, “Gay Groups Targeting Mormons,” Salt Lake Tribune, 30 May 2009, A8 (Washington Post story).

[xiii] “A New Order of Religious Freedom,” First Things, Feb. 1992, 2; also see Neuhaus, The Naked Public Square (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1983).

[xiv] The Yogyakarta Principles, Principle 21 (Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 2006).

[xv] “No Mob Veto,” New York Times, 5 Dec. 2008.

[xvi] M. Russell Ballard, “Engaging Without Being Defensive,” BYU Commencement Address, 13 August 2009.

[xvii] Among the advocates of this position are Kevin Seamus Hasson, The Right to be Wrong (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2005); Douglas Laycock, Anthony Picarello Jr. and Robin Fretwell Wilson, Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts (Rowman and Littlefield, 2008); and Michael J. Perry, “Liberal Democracy and Religious Morality,” 48 DePaul Law Rev. 1, 20–41 (1998). For examples of this kind of advocacy, see What’s the Harm? ed. Lynn D. Wardle (University Press of America, 2008); and Monte Neil Stewart, “Marriage Facts,” 31 Harv. J. of Law & Pub. Policy 313 (2008).

[xviii] John A. Howard, Christianity: Lifeblood of America’s Free Society (1620–1945) (Monitou Springs, Ohio: Summit Press, 2008), 57.

[xix] “How Christianity Shaped the West,” Hillsdale College, Nov. 2008, Vol. 37, No. 11, p. 5.

Dalia Mogahed Appointed to Promote Sharia Law in America

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:00:00 +0000

Before reading this post, recall the blog I did yesterday about Noni Darwish's book Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Implications of Islamic Law and dangerous and vicious Sharia Law really is. Barack Obama appointed Dalia Mogahed to promote Sharia Law in America. Here is a fantastic article about her on Atlas Shrugs:

posted on Atlas Shrugs
8 October 2009

Obama First Female Veiled Islamist Appointee, Dalia Mogahed, Promotes Sharia, Says it's "Misunderstood"

Earlier this year, in April, I ran this post: Obama's Three Degrees of Anti-Semitic Separation, warning Americans of Obama's first female 'Islamist' appointee, Egyptian born Dalia Mogahed. She had conducted her first interview with Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi's extremist Islamic website, Islam Online. I posted the whole thing here. The taqiyya interview is irony-rife with claims of victimhood and subjugation.

This latest taqiyya (lies to advance Islam) whitewashes the horror, the cruelty, the barbarism, the misogyny, the gender apartheid of shariah (Islamic) law. Is anyone still wondering where all this is going?

Barack Obama adviser says Sharia Law is misunderstood Telegraph (hat tip Andrew Bostom)

President Barack Obama's adviser on Muslim affairs, Dalia Mogahed, has provoked controversy by appearing on a British television show hosted by a member of an extremist group to talk about Sharia Law.

Miss Mogahed, appointed to the President's Council on Faith-Based and Neighbourhood Partnerships, said the Western view of Sharia was "oversimplified" and the majority of women around the world associate it with "gender justice". Dalia Mogahed

The White House adviser made the remarks on a London-based TV discussion programme hosted by Ibtihal Bsis, a member of the extremist Hizb ut Tahrir party.

The group believes in the non-violent destruction of Western democracy and the creation of an Islamic state under Sharia Law across the world.

She said: "I think the reason so many women support Sharia is because they have a very different understanding of sharia than the common perception in Western media.

"The majority of women around the world associate gender justice, or justice for women, with sharia compliance.

"The portrayal of Sharia has been oversimplified in many cases."

Sharia in its broadest sense is a religious code for living, which decrees such matters as fasting and dressing modestly. However, it has also been interpreted as requiring the separation of men and women.

It also includes the controversial "Hadd offences", crimes with specific penalties set by the Koran and the sayings of the prophet Mohammed. These include death by stoning for adultery and homosexuality and the removal of a hand for theft.

Miss Mogahed admitted that even many Muslims associated Sharia with "maximum criminal punishments" and "laws that... to many people seem unequal to women," but added: "Part of the reason that there is this perception of Sharia is because Sharia is not well understood and Islam as a faith is not well understood."

The video of the broadcast has now been prominently posted on the front page of Hizb ut Tahrir's website.

Miss Mogahed, who was born in Egypt and moved to America at the age of five, is the first veiled Muslim woman to serve in the White House. Her appointment was seen as a sign of the Obama administration's determination to reach out to the Muslim world.

She is also the executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, a project which aims to scientifically sample public opinion in the Muslim world.

During this week's broadcast, she described her White House role as "to convey... to the President and other public officials what it is Muslims want."

Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, said Miss Mogahed was “downplaying” Sharia Law.

“There is a reason sharia has got a bad name and it is how it has been exercised. Regrettably in the US there have been acts of injustice perpetrated against women that are driven by the Sharia-type mindset that women are objects not human beings,” she said.

She cited the example of Muzzammil Hassan, a Buffalo man who ran a cable channel aimed at countering Muslim stereotypes and was charged earlier this year with beheading his wife after she filed for divorce.

“Americans understand by example, it’s not as if we are an ignorant mass of people. Just as we don’t broad brush all Muslims, so should Dalia not downplay the serious nature of sharia law.”

UPDATE: Here's today's call to kill Jews from Dalia's spiritual soul mate, Yusuf Al Qaradawi. The leading Muslim voice is urging Egyptians to turn this Friday into a nationwide day of anger against the "Israeli practices at the Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem."

The Qatar-based cleric flew to Egypt from Doha on Monday to deliver a speech at the Egyptian Journalists' Syndicate in Cairo, where he condemned the Arab governments' silence towards the "violation of Al Aqsa's holiness" by Israeli settlers and occupation forces.

# # #

Sharia Law is one of the vile, foul set of laws ever to grace the earth. It is misogynistic, vicious and calls for Muslims to lie, cheat and steal in order to insure Sharia Law becomes the supreme law of every nation. It is authored by Satan and Satan alone, for no one who believes in goodness, humanity, courage, strength, love, repentance, forgiveness, faith, hope, charity...all that resides within the teachings of Jesus Christ, could possibly write, indulge in, promote or enforce the rules within Sharia Law.

This is America and here we do not believe in the circumcision of women, the subjugation of women, the complete degradation of women, the murdering of those who choose to leave their religion, the murdering of their family members, the murdering of women who are raped so that the family might restore their honor, the cutting of hands for thieves, etc. Sharia Law is something NEVER, NEVER SHOULD NEVER, exist within the borders of the United States of America.

We are fighting so many battles, but I ask you take this one up as well. Contact your congressmen and Senators, your local legislators and demand that Sharia Law be eradicated from our nation. Detroit and Dearborne, Michigan are two cities where Sharia Law is now being practiced. I call for the arrest and deportation of every single person living Sharia Law in America. There is no room for you in the United States of America.

Review: Cruel & Unusual Punishment:: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:00:00 +0000

I first became aware of Islam when I met my Uncle Mike as an adult. By then, he had left Christianity behind, much to my immense sorrow, and converted to Islam. I had long conversations with him about it because I love him so, and he finally went and talked to his Imam and got a couple of book recommendations to "help me feel better about my Uncle Mike converting to Islam."

I read the books. I wasn't comforted. I began to dig deeper: Learning the history of Islam, where the conflict and hatred began between Muslim, Jews and everyone else and why. What I learned wasn't confidence inspiring, I didn't like, at all, the rules by Muslims lived.

Now, I'm a Mormon. I don't drink alcoholic drinks. I don't smoke. I believe in chastity, virtue and integrity. I have remained faithful to my husband and will continue to do so throughout eternity. I believe strongly in my Father in Heaven and my Savior and Redeemer, Jesus Christ. I believe in the golden rule of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" and "Love your neighbor as yourself." I am a devout Christian with a complete sense of where I came from, who I am and where I am headed.

One of the book's my uncle gave me had a terrifying chapter 6, Islam's United World Order. In essence, the chapter spoke of every non-Muslim being forced to convert or die. They intend to take over every single nation and instill Sharia Law across the world. Nope, I wasn't comforted by this at all. All it did was make me mad.

I believe strongly in America's First Amendment Rights of freedom of religion, in other words, that we are able and allowed to worship according to dictates according to our consciences, within the bounds of the law. Meaning, you can't go out and commit an honor killing in American with having your butt thrown in jail for first degree murder.

Because of my beliefs, I abhor cruel, vicious and senseless violence toward anyone and yet, Islamic law seems to be the greatest proponent of the greatest cruelty toward women, children and those they deem to be apostates or infidels.

And now we come to Nonie Darwish's best-selling book, Cruel & Unusual Punishment: The Terrifying Implications of Islamic Law.

Having been born into and raised in a Muslim family, Noni shares with her readers her first hand experiences of being forced to live under Sharia Law and inner workings and machinations of Muslim faith. She does not do so out of anger or vengeance, but merely out of a desire to warn the rest of the world of what Islam has in store for us.

When Nonie Darwish was a girl of eight, her father died while leading covert attacks on Israel. A high-ranking Egyptian military officer stationed with his family in Gaza, he was considered a “shahid,” a martyr for jihad.

Yet at an early age, Darwish developed a skeptical eye about her own Muslim culture and upbringing. Why the love of violence and hatred of Jews and Christians? Why the tolerance of glaring social injustices? Why blame America and Israel for everything?

Today Darwish thrives as an American citizen, a Christian, a conservative Republican, and an advocate for Israel. To many, she is now an infidel. But she is risking her comfort and her safety to reveal the many politically incorrect truths about Muslim culture that she knows firsthand.

Cruel & Unusual Punishment: The Terrifying Implications of Islamic Law is a wake up call to the free world:

Nonie Darwish presents an insider's look at Sharia and examines how radical Muslim laws are destroying the Western world from within. Living under Sharia law for the first thirty years of her life,a virtual slave to Islamic law, Darwish never questioned or challenged her rights--or dared to even think about the validity of Sharia laws. She didn't try to examine what Sharia was, how it came about or why she followed it. "This is Allah's law," she was told, and she knew what awaited those who questioned Allah's law.

But she doesn't believe the lies anymore, and now she wants to share her experiences with the Western world. Cruel and Usual Punishment is an insider's look at how Muslims sacrifice their basic human rights to obey the archaic and brutal laws handed down to their prophet centuries ago.

Heed this warning: Sharia Law is attempting to infiltrate Western culture and destroy democracy.

Sharia Law is about the most evil form of government which exists on the face of the earth. It surpasses all communist dictators and despots and seats itself squarely in the number one of spot of further the work of Satan.

This book, is by far, the best book I have read. Nonie Darwish goes into Mohammed's history, and that was one seriously whacked out man, as well as every aspect of Sharia Law and how it came to fruition. She explains the history of Islam, and how the laws were established for the benefit of a few wealthy men and to the detriment of all women and the poor.

Here are some of the things I learned from Nonie:

1. "Even those [Muslims] who live in Western democracies must be careful not to say a word that might make them appear as apostates. For them, facts must not stand in the way." Nonie Darwish

2. Mohammed was cast from his town, Medina, and he sought refuge with a Jewish tribe. They took care of him and kept him safe, allowing him to live amongst them safely. During that time he manufactured the Koran and made up its origins. He eventually traveled back to Medina. When he was not accepted as a prophet, he gathered his armies and attacked Medina. Killing, raping and pillaging until they accepted him as a prophet of his fabricated Allah and the Koran as a book of scripture. He then headed back to the Jewish tribe, who had kept him safe, and demanded they turn their backs on Jehovah, accept Allah and himself as Allah's chosen prophet. They refused. He beheaded the almost 800 men and took the women and children into sexual slavery and slavery. He then issued an fatwa, ordering the eradication of all Jews from the face of the earth. Then he made sure it would happen by insisting the resurrection would not occur until every last Jew was dead.

So while they are those who believe the conflict between Jews and Muslims began with Isaac and Ishmael, I believe it began when they rejected him, and rightfully so. It is nothing but rage and spite which drove that fatwa and continues to drive it today.

3. Interesting, the 8 imams who wrote sharia law all met horrible ends. Sounds about the right end to men who authored such evil. The things you can learn are truly amazing when you read what those who had to live under sharia law are willing to share.

4. "If you choose to live here in America...you have the responsibility to deliver the message of Islam...Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominate...the Koran should be the highest authority in America, and... Islam the only accepted religion on earth." Omar Ahmad

My response to this: Oh hell no, not in my country. Judeo-Christian we began, and Judeo-Christian we shall remain.

I invite every single American to purchase Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Implications of Islamic Law. It is a must buy for everyone who believes in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which includes the God-given right to worship according to the dictates of your own conscience. Once reading this book you will come to understand the Muslim mind better and why they do what they do. Satan is the author of Sharia Law, for no other could have dream up such evil perpetrated on their fellowman.

Nonie Darwish has carefully laid out how America can stop and drive out Sharia Law from our shores. She has done a fantastic job and I give her a serious 5 stars for this book. And she is right to warn us.

Barack Obama has appointed an Egyptian woman, Dalia Mogahed, to be a proponent of Sharia Law in America. Our outrage must race to the heavens as we demand this appointment be eradicated and a full and complete return to the U.S. Constitution as the rule of law. Sharia Law must NEVER be accepted in America. Remember what you read above, this must never be allowed in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

I thank Nonie Darwish, who now has a target on her forehead waiting for some Muslim to fulfill their duty to Sharia Law, for being courageous enough to share with America the true story of living under Sharia Law and Islam's intentions for the world, especially America.

I call on all law enforcement agencies across America to arrest all those in America practicing any aspects of Sharia law which violate U.S. law, which is everything. I demand the arrest and deportation of all those wishing the enforcement of Sharia Law in America. You are to defend and protect. Do so.

Hardcover: 288 pages
Publisher: Thomas Nelson (January 6, 2009)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1595551611
ISBN-13: 978-1595551610
Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.4 x 1.2 inches
Shipping Weight: 1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars See all reviews (29 customer reviews)
Amazon.com Sales Rank: #4,626 in Books

Purchase Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Implications of Islamic Law.

The Sapphire Flute, Book 1 of the Wolfchild Saga

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:18:00 +0000

Valor Publishing Group is so delighted to announce the first of six books to be released in March of 2010.

The Sapphire Flute, Book 1 of 7 in the Wolfchild Saga is the debut novel of author, Karen Hoover.

It has been 3,000 years since a white mage has been seen upon Rasann.

In the midst of a volcanic eruption miles outside of her village, Ember discovers she can see magic and change the appearance of things at will. Against her mother's wishes, she leaves for the mage trials only to be kidnapped before arriving. In trying to escape,she discovers she has inherited her father's secret--a secret that places her in direct conflict with her father's greatest enemy.

At the same time, Kayla is given guardianship of the sapphire flute and told not to play it. The evil mage C'Tan has been searching for it for decades and the sound alone is enough to call her. For the flute to be truly safe, Kayla must find its birthplace in the mountains high above Javak. The girls' paths are set on a collision course ... a course that C'Tan is determined to prevent at all costs.

The Sapphire Flute is one of the best-written YA Fantasy books the Selection Board at Valor has seen in a long time, in both their professional and personal lives. It is our belief, that Karen is the American answer to J.K. Rowling. Brandon Mull, J. Scott Savage, James Dashner and others can just move right on over. Karen Hoover has arrived.

Karen E. Hoover has loved the written word for as long as she can remember. Her favorite memory of her dad is the time he spent with Karen in his lap, telling her stories for hours on end. Her dad promised he would have Karen reading on her own by the time she was four years old ... and he did it.

Karen took the gift of words her dad gave her and ran with it. Since then, she's written two novels and reams of poetry. Her head is fairly popping with ideas, so she plans to write until she's ninety-four or maybe even a hundred and four.

Inspiration is found everywhere, but Karen's heart is fueled by her husband and two sons, the Rocky Mountains, her chronic addiction to pens and paper, and the smell of her laser printer in the morning.

Email Karen
Karen's Blog: A Writer's Ramblings
Karen's Website: Under Construction

Price: $24.95
Publisher: Valor Publishing Group, LLC (March 16, 2010)
Fiction: Young Adult Fantasy
Binding: Hardbound
Language: English
ISBN-13: Pending
Product Dimensions: 6 x 9 inches

We will begin taking pre-orders 16 January 2010.

Call for Mass Resignation of U.S. Government Officials

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 12:00:00 +0000

Release Date: September 29, 2009
Limited Distribution: By Stand Up America US and Save Our Democracy
Contact: standupamerica1@gmail.com

By Gerald Molen and Paul Vallely MG, US Army (Ret)

Elected and Appointed U.S. Government Officials Who Violate Their Oath of Office and The Constitution Must Resign.

Call for Mass Resignation.

The Declaration of Independence states in part:

“…That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness...”

The arrogance of power in the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government has reached epic and intolerable proportions and generated significant dissent and protest in Town-hall meetings and Tea Parties across the nation.

The U.S. President, Vice-President, cabinet members and senior appointed officials, members of Congress, and members of the Supreme Court take the following sacred oath of office:

“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

Sadly, we have seen most of them violate their oath. Fraud and corruption is rampant in the institutions of government, and some have engaged in treasonous activities. They know who they are, as do the people.

Some of the main offenses are:

• Berated and condemned the actions of the United States before the United Nations in New York City and overseas.

• Acted outside the boundaries of our nation’s founding principles by nationalizing significant segments of the U.S. automobile, banking, housing, and (if they get their way) healthcare industries.

• Appointed more than 30 czars to important policy positions in the executive branch and immune from congressional advice and consent and oversight requirements.

• Passed and signed the $787 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) Bill without thoroughly reading and adequately debating the bill’s merits.

• Engage in judicial activism which may grant captured terrorists the same constitutional due process rights as American citizens.

In 1789, Thomas Jefferson was overheard saying to James Madison, “Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves therefore are its only safe depositories.”

In 1861, Abraham Lincoln’s issued this warning in his inaugural address, “Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and form a new one. This is a most valuable and sacred right – a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world.”

The U.S. Constitution, Article One, Section Five, Clause II and the 10th Amendment to the Constitution provide the constitutional authority of the President, Vice-President, cabinet appointees, members of Congress and members of the Supreme Court to be removed from office for failure to properly discharge their constitutional duties and responsibilities.

The U.S. Constitution allows the citizens of their country to freely elect their government leaders. Americans elect the president and vice-president every four years, members of the House of Representatives every two years, members of the Senate every six years. Members of the Supreme Court are nominated by the president and receive lifetime appointments if confirmed by the Senate. And political appointees in the executive branch serve at the pleasure of the president if confirmed by the Senate.

“We, the People” have had enough of this current government. They, not the American People, are on a socialist and treasonous death march and bankrupting the country. We have watched the President and members of his Cabinet, Vice-President, members of Congress, and members of the Supreme Court, defile our nation’s founding documents and sacred principles – and violate their sacred oath of office.

These are extraordinary times. “We, the People” cannot wait for the next round of elections because of the urgent and deteriorating national security and economic conditions. The time has come to call on these public servants to put the interests of “We, the People” above their own self-interests by resigning from their government positions immediately.

Gerald Molen is a world famous film Producer and winner of the Oscar for Schindler’s List.

Paul Vallely is a retired MG, US Army and is Chairman of Stand Up America USA, and common FoxNews Contributor
http://www.standupamericaus.com and Save Our Democracy
http://www.SaveOurDemocracy.org

The SUA Blog—Stand Up America US
Source: http://www.standupamericaus.com
political, military, blog

# # #

I concur, completely. I join my voice with those of other Americans and demand the mass resignation of Congress, the Obama Administration. You have violated your oath of office, and with your continued and unceasing attacks on the U.S. Constitution and the Republic have committed no less than treason. Resign and slink back to your homes and we will not charge you criminally. Continue to fight the American people and you will be charged to the fullest extend of the law.

Hey Israel! Let's Make an Exchange! from Rocky Mountain Straight Talk

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:00:00 +0000

From Rocky Mountain Straight Talk
posted by Muriel Sluyter
29 September 2009

Dear Israeli Citizens:

We have a deal to offer that we trust you will find attractive. We propose a straight-across swap, your Prime Minister for our President.

We would venture a guess that our President is in better physical condition than your Prime Minister. Not only is he younger, he is almost unused, while your Prime Minister has been through hell on earth. Nonetheless, though your man is considerably older and has had very rough use, we are willing to accept him in what we are sure you will consider a very fair swap.

We are sure our man would please your citizens. He is charming, and, if he has a Teleprompter, is absolutely unexcelled in public communication.

Now, if you have reservations considering the comparative value of these two leaders, we are prepared to sweeten the deal by offering you 34 Czars. We cannot guarantee their honesty and/or integrity, but we are confident you will find some use for them (we have none).

If you are not ready to jump at this fantastic offer (and we are confident you are champing at the bit at the very thought), we could throw about 100 or so Senators into the deal. Actually, we have a goodly number of House members we could spare (possibly as many as 435) if you are still hesitant.

All in all, Gentlemen and Ladies of Israel, we are prepared to begin negotiations at your earliest convenience.

We anxiously await your response.

Most cordially, responsible citizens of the United States

Muriel Sluyter

Immigration, Illegal Immigration and the Poverty Level

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:23:00 +0000

From The Heritage Foundation:

Importing Poverty: Immigration and Poverty in the United States: A Book of Charts
by Robert Rector
Special Report #9

Introduction

In 1963, President Lyndon Johnson launched the War on Poverty with the goal of eliminating poverty in the United States. Since that time, the U.S. has spent over $11 trillion on anti-poverty programs, providing cash, food, housing, medical care, and services to the poor and near poor. Today, government provides a generous system of benefits and services to both the working and non-working poor. While government continues its massive efforts to reduce poverty, immigration policy in the U.S. has come to operate in the opposite direction, increasing rather than decreasing poverty. Immigrants with low skill levels have a high probability of both poverty and receipt of welfare benefits and services.[1]

Since the immigration reforms of the 1960s, the U.S. has imported poverty through immigration policies that permitted and encouraged the entry and residence of millions of low-skill immigrants into the nation. Low-skill immigrants tend to be poor and to have children who, in turn, add to America’s poverty problem, driving up governmental welfare, social service, and education costs.

Today’s immigrants differ greatly from historic immigrant populations. Prior to 1960, immigrants to the U.S. had education levels that were similar to those of the non-immigrant workforce and earned wages that were, on average, higher than those of non-immigrant workers. Since the mid-1960s, however, the education levels of new immigrants have plunged relative to non-immigrants; consequently, the average wages of immigrants are now well below those of the non-immigrant population. Recent immigrants increasingly occupy the low end of the U.S. socio-economic spectrum.[2]

The current influx of poorly educated immigrants is the result of two factors: first, a legal immigration system that favors kinship ties over skills and education; and second, a permissive attitude toward illegal immigration that has led to lax border enforcement and non-enforcement of the laws that prohibit the employment of illegal immigrants. In recent years, these factors have produced an inflow of some ten and a half million immigrants who lack a high school education. In terms of increased poverty and expanded government expenditure, this importation of poorly educated immigrants has had roughly the same effect as the addition of ten and a half million native-born high school drop-outs.

As a result of this dramatic inflow of low-skill immigrants,

* One-third of all immigrants live in families in which the head of the household lacks a high school education; and
* First-generation immigrants and their families, who are one-sixth of the U.S. population, comprise one-fourth of all poor persons in the U.S.

Immigration also plays a large role in child poverty:

* Some 38 percent of immigrant children live in families headed by persons who lack a high school education;
* Minor children of first-generation immigrants comprise 26 percent of poor children in the U.S.; and
* One out of six poor children in the U.S. is the offspring of first-generation immigrant parents who lack a high school diploma.

Hispanic immigrants (both legal and illegal) comprise half of all first-generation immigrants and their families. Poverty is especially prevalent among this group. Hispanic immigrants have particularly low levels of education; more than half live in families headed by persons who lack a high school diploma. Family formation is also weak among Hispanic immigrants; fully 42 percent of the children of Hispanic immigrants are born out of wedlock. Hispanic immigrants thus make up a disproportionate share of the nation’s poor:

* First-generation Hispanic immigrants and their families now comprise 9 percent of the U.S. population but 17 percent of all poor persons in the U.S.; and
* Children in Hispanic immigrant families now comprise 11.7 percent of all children in the U.S. but 22 percent of all poor children in the U.S.

Massive low-skill immigration works to counteract government anti-poverty efforts. While government works to reduce the number of poor persons, low-skill immigration pushes the poverty numbers up. In addition, low-skill immigration siphons off government anti-poverty funding and makes government efforts to shrink poverty less effective.

Low-skill immigrants pay little in taxes and receive high levels of government benefits and services. The National Academy of Sciences has estimated that each immigrant without a high school degree will cost U.S. taxpayers, on average, $89,000 over the course of his or her lifetime.[3] This is a net cost above the value of any taxes the immigrant will pay and does not include the cost of educating the immigrant’s children, which U.S. taxpayers would also heavily subsidize.

In this way, the roughly six million legal immigrants without a high school diploma will impose a net cost of around a half-trillion dollars on U.S. taxpayers over their lifetimes. The roughly five million illegal immigrants without a high school diploma will cost taxpayers somewhat less because illegal immigrants are eligible for fewer government benefits. However, if these illegal immigrants were granted amnesty and citizenship, as proposed by the Bush Administration and legislated in a recent Senate-passed immigration bill (S. 2611), they could cost taxpayers an additional half-trillion dollars. In total, all immigrants without a high school education could impose a net cost on U.S. taxpayers of around one trillion dollars or more. If the cost of educating the immigrants’ children is included, that figure could reach two trillion dollars.[4]

The poverty and other problems associated with mass low-skill immigration would be of less concern if they could be expected to quickly vanish in the next generation. Unfortunately, the evidence indicates that this will not occur. For example, the low levels of education, high levels of poverty, and high levels of out-of-wedlock childbearing found among Hispanic immigrants since 1970 persist among native-born Hispanics in the U.S. to a considerable degree.[5]

These data indicate that the current influx of low-skill immigrants will raise poverty in the U.S. not merely at the present time, but for generations to come. Current low-skill immigrants will raise both the absolute number of poor persons and the poverty rate in the U.S. for the foreseeable future. The greater the inflow of low-skill immigrants, the greater the long-term increase in poverty will be.

Immigration and Census Data

This paper uses data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) of the U.S. Census Bureau covering the year 2004 to assess the impact of immigration on poverty in the United States.[6] The Current Population Survey is the principal instrument used in measuring poverty in the U.S. The CPS contains a representative sample of permanent U.S. residents, both native-born and foreign-born persons .

The foreign-born population represented in the CPS includes both legal immigrants and a substantial number of illegal immigrants. The most widely accepted analysis concluded that some 10.3 million illegal immigrants lived in the U.S. in 2004.[7] Of these, some 90 percent are believed to be represented in the CPS.[8]

This paper assesses the contribution of immigration to poverty as reported by official U.S. government statistics. This analysis is therefore limited to the population represented in the CPS sample. To the extent that the CPS under-reports the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S., both the real level of poverty and the role of immigration in poverty will be under-counted by CPS data. Therefore, this paper will also, to a degree, understate the role of immigration in poverty.

The impact of this undercounting of illegal immigrants is probably small. If the real number of illegal immigrants in 2004 was around 10 million, only one million illegal immigrants would not be represented in the CPS. An undercount of this magnitude would not greatly affect the figures presented in this paper.

However, it is possible the illegal immigrant population was much larger than 10 million in 2004. In that case, the undercount of illegal immigrants in the CPS would be proportionately greater. In these circumstances, the role of illegal immigration in generating de facto poverty in the U.S. would almost certainly be significantly greater than the figures in this paper suggest.

Defining the Immigrant Population

One basic issue in measuring immigrant poverty relates to the treatment of minor children born to immigrant parents in the U.S. For example, consider the case of a woman who comes to the U.S. from a foreign country and gives birth to a child in the U.S. without being married. Because the child was born on U.S. soil, he or she is automatically a U.S. citizen. Further, assume that the mother and the child live together and are poor.

The mother and child both add to the ranks of poor persons in the U.S. Conceivably, one might count the mother’s poverty as part of immigrant poverty and the child’s poverty as part of non-immigrant poverty. In reality, the expansion of U.S. poverty is, in both cases, a consequence of the mother’s immigration to the U.S. The number of poor persons would be two fewer if the immigration had not occurred. Thus, it seems reasonable to count both poor immigrants and poor minor children born in the U.S. to immigrant parents as components of immigrant poverty. This paper will follow that procedure.

Methodology

To assess the role of immigrants in U.S. poverty, this paper begins by dividing the U.S. population represented in the CPS into two complementary categories: 1) first-generation immigrants and their family members and 2) non-immigrant citizens.[9]

The first-generation immigrants and their family members category contains three sub-groups:

1. foreign-born adults and children,[10]
2. minor children born in the U.S. who live with their first-generation immigrant parents,[11] and
3. other members of families headed by first-generation immigrants.

The last sub-group consists of native-born adult dependents who live in families headed by first-generation immigrants. These individuals are primarily spouses or young adult children still living with their immigrant parents. These individuals are included in the “first-generation immigrants and their family members” category because their financial status is largely determined by the financial status of the immigrant head of the family. This sub-group is small, consisting of about one percent of the U.S. population; its inclusion in the overall category of first-generation immigrants and their family members has very little effect on the overall poverty numbers presented in this paper.

The non-immigrants category includes all adults and children born in the United States except those who reside in households headed by first-generation immigrants. This group consists of every individual not included in the “first-generation immigrants and their family members” category.

Throughout the paper, “immigrant” and “immigrant families” refer to members of the first-generation immigrants and their family members category defined above. The term “immigrant children” refers to the children in this category. The term “non-immigrant” refers to all persons in the non-immigrant category described above. Except where noted otherwise, figures in this paper were derived from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey for 2004.

The Size of the Immigrant Population

Overall, 49.3 million first-generation immigrants and their family members lived in the U.S. in 2004; some 13.9 million were children. First-generation immigrants and their family members comprised 16.9 percent of the population. The non-immigrant population numbered 241.8 million, or 83.1 percent of the population. Of these, 59.7 million were children.

Among first-generation immigrants and their families living in the U.S. in 2004, Hispanics and Asians predominated. Half of first-generation immigrants and family members lived in Hispanic-headed households, and 20 percent lived in Asian-headed households. Some 21 percent lived in households with white non-Hispanic heads, and 8 percent lived in households headed by blacks.

Measuring Poverty

Throughout this paper, persons are defined as poor if they lived in households with incomes less that the official government poverty income thresholds. In 2004, the poverty income threshold was $19,157 for a four person family, $15,219 for a three person family, and $9,827 for a single person household. [12]

Two terms used throughout this analysis are “poverty rate” and “poverty share.” The poverty rate measures the percentage of a given group (such as immigrants) that is poor. The denominator in this case is the total number of people in the group. For example, if there were 1,000 immigrants in a community and 200 of them were poor, the poverty rate for immigrants would be 20 percent. The “poverty share,” by contrast, measures the number of poor persons of a particular type as a share or percentage of all persons in poverty. In this calculation, the numerator is number of poor persons of a particular group (such as immigrants) and the denominator is all poor persons. For example, if there are 100 poor persons in a community and 30 of these poor persons are immigrants, then the immigrant share of poverty would be 30 percent. Click to view Chart.

Immigration and Poverty

In 2004, some 35.7 million persons lived in poverty in the United States. Among these poor persons, 8.7 million were first-generation immigrants and their family members. Thus, roughly one in four poor persons was an immigrant or member of an immigrant’s family.

Immigrants in the U.S. are disproportionately likely to be poor, which means that their share of the poverty population is greater than their share of the general population. While first-generation immigrants and their families comprise one out of four poor persons in the U.S., they are only one out six persons in the general population. Click to view Chart.

Immigration and Poverty Rates

A poverty rate measures the percentage of a group that is poor. Among the 49.3 million first-generation immigrants and their family members living in the United States in 2004, 8.7 million, or 17.7 percent, were poor. By contrast, 11.7 percent of persons living in non-immigrant households were poor, and only 8.6 percent of persons living in households headed by non-immigrant white non-Hispanics were poor. The poverty rate for immigrants was thus twice the rate for non-immigrant non-Hispanic whites.

The high poverty rate for immigrants pushes up the poverty rate for the U.S. population as a whole. Excluding immigrants, the poverty rate in the U.S. would be 11.7 percent. Including immigrants raises the national poverty rate to 12.7 percent. Click to view Chart.

Poverty, Education, and Immigration

Households headed by persons with low education levels are far more likely to be poor. Some 30 percent of persons in households with heads who lack a high school education are poor. By contrast, 4 percent of persons in households with heads who have a college degree are poor. The poverty rates of immigrants and non-immigrants with comparable levels of education are similar. However, the education level of first-generation immigrants is far lower than that of non-immigrants, and so the immigrant poverty rate is higher. Click to view Chart.

Educational Attainment of First-Generation Immigrants and Non-Immigrants

Both immigrants and non-immigrant households with low levels of education are more likely to be poor. The high level of poverty among first-generation immigrants stems, in part, from their poor education compared to U.S. natives. One-third of all immigrant families are headed by individuals without a high school degree. By contrast, 11.8 percent of non-immigrant families are headed by persons without a high school degree. Among non-immigrant non-Hispanic whites, only 9.4 percent lack a high school degree. Click to view Chart.

Ethnicity and Education

Ethnic groups in the U.S. differ greatly in their education levels. Hispanics, both immigrants and native-born, have low levels of education compared to the rest of the U.S. population. Some 55 percent of first-generation Hispanic immigrants and family members live in households headed by persons without a high school diploma; among non-immigrant Hispanics, the figure is 27 percent. By contrast, only 11.4 percent of Asian immigrants live in households headed by high school drop-outs; among non-immigrant Asian-Americans, the figure is 10.2 percent. Hispanics’ low levels of education contribute to their high level of poverty. Click to view Chart.

Poverty, Immigration, and Ethnicity

Differences in education levels lead to large differences in poverty between ethnic groups. In 2004, persons in first-generation immigrant families were more than half again as likely to be poor than persons in non-immigrant households (17.8 percent compared to 11.7 percent).

Poverty among immigrants varied dramatically by ethnicity. The poverty rate among Asian immigrants was 9.6 percent, only slightly higher than the non-immigrant white non-Hispanic rate of 8.6 percent. The poverty rate among Hispanics immigrants, by contrast, was 24.5 percent. The Hispanic immigrant poverty rate rivals that of non-immigrant blacks in the U.S. and is nearly three times the rate of non-immigrant non-Hispanic whites.

The poverty rate for Hispanic immigrants is very high and remains high even for second- and third-generation Hispanics. The poverty rate for persons in non-immigrant Hispanic households is 18.9 percent, more than twice the rate for white non-Hispanic non-immigrants. Click to view Chart.

Immigration and Child Poverty Shares

Children in first-generation immigrant families are disproportionately likely to be poor. Overall, some 12.9 million children (persons under age 18) lived in poverty in the United States in 2004. Of these, 3.4 million were immigrants or native-born children of first-generation immigrant parents. Children in immigrant families represent 18.9 percent of all children but 26.0 percent of all poor children. Click to view Chart.

Immigration and Child Poverty Rates

Poverty rates among immigrant children are far higher than those among children with non-immigrant parents. Nearly one-fourth of all children in immigrant families were poor in 2004. By contrast, 16.2 percent of children in non-immigrant families were poor. The poverty rate among immigrant children is 50 percent higher than the rate among non-immigrant children.

The child poverty rate among non-immigrant families is inflated by high child poverty rates among non-immigrant Hispanic and black families. A clearer sense of the impact of immigration on child poverty can be seen by comparing the poverty rate among immigrant children (24.4 percent) with the poverty rate among non-immigrant, non-Hispanic white children (10.5 percent). Immigrant children are thus more than twice as likely to live in poverty as non-immigrant, non-Hispanic white children. Click to view Chart.

Child Poverty and Parental Education

Child poverty is to a great degree driven by the education level of the parent. The lower the level of parental education the higher the probability of child poverty. Chart 9 shows the poverty rates for children in first-generation immigrant and non-immigrant families based on the education level of the head of the family.

Poverty rates among immigrant and non-immigrant children are similar for children whose parents have similar levels of education. Obviously, the poverty rates among children whose parents have low levels of education are far higher than the rates among children of well-educated parents. For example, the poverty rate among immigrant children whose parents lack a high school diploma (at 40.6 percent) is more than six times higher than the poverty rate among immigrant children with college-educated parents (6.3 percent). Click to view Chart.

Immigration and Parental Education

Immigrant children are far more likely to have poorly educated parents. Among the 13.7 million immigrant children in the U.S., 5.2 million, or 38 percent, live in families headed by persons without a high school diploma. By contrast 10.8 percent of non-immigrant children live in families headed by persons without a high school diploma. Click to view Chart.

Child Poverty, Immigration, and Ethnicity

Because their parents have lower levels of education, Hispanic immigrant children are more likely to be poor. In 2004, the poverty rate for children from Hispanic immigrant families was 32.9 percent. This is higher than the poverty rates for children in black immigrant families (22.1 percent), Asian immigrant families (7.6 percent), and white non-Hispanic immigrant families (12.4 percent.)

High child poverty rates persist among non-immigrant Hispanic families. More than one quarter of children in non-immigrant Hispanic families are poor. This rate is lower than among black non-immigrant households but is far higher than the rates among whites and Asians. Click to view Chart.

Hispanic Immigrants and Child Poverty Shares

There were 7.9 million children in first-generation Hispanic immigrant families in the U.S. in 2004. These children comprise a large and disproportionate share of poor children in the U.S. Though children in first-generation Hispanic immigrant families comprised 11.0 percent of all children in the U.S., they were 20.4 percent of all poor children. Click to view Chart.

Illegal Immigration and Poverty

According to the Pew Hispanic Center, 4.7 million children with illegal immigrant parents currently live in the U.S.[13] Some 37 percent of these children are poor.[14] While children of illegal immigrant parents comprise around 6 percent of all children in the U.S., they are 11.8 percent of all poor children. Click to view Chart.

Immigration, Ethnicity, and Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing

In addition to the low levels of education among Hispanic parents, a second major factor contributing to Hispanic immigrant child poverty is the high level of family disintegration among Hispanics, both immigrants and non-immigrants. Out-of-wedlock childbearing is more common among first-generation Hispanic immigrants than among any other immigrant group. In the U.S. in 2003, some 42 percent of children of first-generation immigrant Hispanic mothers were born outside marriage. Among black immigrant mothers, the rate was 39.5 percent; among Asian immigrants, 11.6 percent; and among white non-Hispanic immigrants, 11.2 percent. Among native-born Hispanic women, the out-of-wedlock childbearing rate is even higher at 49.6 percent.

In general, children born and raised outside marriage are seven times more likely to live in poverty than are children born and raised by married couples. Children born out of wedlock are also more likely to be on welfare, to fail in school, to have emotional problems, to abuse drugs and alcohol, and to become involved in crime.[15] Click to view Chart.

Ethnicity and Teen Birth Rates

Teen birth rates can be measured by births per 1,000 girls aged 15 to 17 years. Hispanics have the highest teen birth rates of all ethnic groups. Among Hispanics, there were 49.7 births per 1,000 teenage girls. This is higher than the black teen birth rate (38.7 births) and far higher than the Asian rate (8.8 births). The Hispanic teen birth rate is four times higher than the rate among non-Hispanic whites. Click to view Chart.

Ethnicity and Single-Parent Families

Similar patterns are found in the percentage of single-parent families among various ethnic groups. More than a third of all Hispanic children (including those with immigrant and non-immigrant parents) live in single-parent homes. This is far lower than the rate among blacks (65 percent) but higher than the rates among non-Hispanic whites (23.2 percent) and Asians (18.2 percent). Click to view Chart.

Ethnicity and the Immigrant Population

The low levels of education among Hispanic immigrant parents and their high rate of out-of-wedlock childbearing are of particular concern because Hispanics (both legal and illegal) represent a very large portion of the current inflow of immigrants into the U.S.

There were 49.3 million first-generation immigrants and family members living in the U.S. in 2004. Of these, 50 percent were in Hispanic families; 20 percent were in Asian families; 21 percent in white non-Hispanic families and 7.5 percent in black families.

The ethnic distribution of current immigrants differs widely from that of the non-immigrant U.S. population. There were 241.8 million non-immigrants in the U.S. in 2004. Of these: 7 percent were in Hispanic families; 1 percent in Asian families; 13 percent in black families and 78 percent in white non-Hispanic families. Click to view Chart.

Ethnicity and Education Among First-Generation Immigrant Families

Chart 19 gives additional data on the education levels of various immigrant groups. Among household heads, Hispanic immigrants have the highest percentage of high school drop-outs and the lowest level of college graduates. Some 54.6 percent of first-generation Hispanic immigrant families are headed by individuals who lack a high school degree; among Asian immigrant families, the number is 11.4 percent.

Only 8.2 percent of first-generation Hispanic immigrant families are headed by college graduates. By contrast, 51.3 percent of first-generation Asian immigrant families are headed by college graduates. Click to view Chart.

Ethnicity and Education Among the Non-Immigrant Population

Concern over the low levels of education and high levels of poverty among first-generation immigrants might be mitigated if these problems quickly vanished in future generations. However, the evidence indicates that, to a considerable degree, these problems will persist far into the future. Among the heads of non-immigrant families, Hispanics still have the highest level of high school drop-outs and the lowest level of college graduation. Some 27 percent of non-immigrant Hispanic heads lack a high school degree, compared to 10.2 percent among non-immigrant Asians. Only 12.3 percent of non-immigrant Hispanic heads have a college degree; the rate among non-immigrant Asians is 49.1 percent.

While second-generation Hispanics do show improvements in education and wages relative to first-generation Hispanic immigrants, these improvements plateau in the third and subsequent generations. These subsequent generations do not show improvements relative to second-generation Hispanics; education, in particular, stagnates at a comparatively low level. Continuing low levels of education mean that the descendants of Hispanic immigrants are on a “slow assimilation trajectory” relative to the rest of society.[16] Low education levels contribute to high levels of persistent poverty among non-immigrant Hispanics, as shown in the next chart. Click to view Chart.

The Persistence of Poverty

Given the low levels of education and the high levels of out-of-wedlock childbearing among native-born Hispanics in the U.S., it is not surprising that poverty persists among this group. Although the poverty rate among non-immigrant Hispanics is lower than the rate among first-generation Hispanic immigrants, it is still quite high compared to the rates of other ethnic groups.

The poverty rate among first-generation Hispanic immigrants and their families is 24.5 percent. Among families headed by non-immigrant Hispanics, the poverty rate falls somewhat but remains at a relatively high 18.9 percent. This rate is exceeded among non-immigrants only by the poverty rate among non-immigrant blacks (25.5 percent). By contrast, the poverty rate among Asian immigrants starts out at a much lower level (9.6 percent) and remains low among non-immigrant Asians (10.2 percent).[17]

These data indicate that the current rapid influx of low-skill immigrants will raise poverty in the U.S., not merely at the present time, but for generations to come. Current low-skill immigrants will raise both the absolute number of poor persons and the poverty rate in the U.S. for the foreseeable future. The greater the inflow of low-skill immigrants, the greater the long-term increase in poverty will be. Click to view Chart.

Welfare Spending and Education

The United States has a very extensive means-tested welfare system. Means-tested welfare programs provide aid to persons and families below certain income thresholds. For example, Foods Stamps is a means-tested aid program; Social Security and Medicare, which provide benefits to eligible persons irrespective of other income, are not. Generally means-tested programs target aid to poor and near poor Americans.

The federal government operates over 80 means-tested welfare programs. Major means-tested aid programs include Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, the Earned Income Tax Credit, Supplemental Security Income, Food Stamps, the nutrition program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), public housing, Head Start, and Medicaid. Total spending by federal and state governments on means-tested welfare aid came to $583 billion in 2004.[18] The total population of the U.S. in that year was around 291 million. Dividing total means-tested expenditure ($583 billion) by the population (291 million) yields an average welfare spending figure of $2,003 per capita on means-tested welfare benefits. This is, of course, an artificial figure because most Americans do not receive means-tested benefits.

The lower the education of a family head, the more means-tested welfare aid a family is likely to receive. For example, in the whole U.S. population, families headed by persons without a high school diploma, on average, receive $4,461 in means-tested assistance per family member per year. By contrast, families headed by college graduates, on average, receive $638 per person.[19]

Because immigrants have comparatively low education levels, they have a high propensity to be poor and thus to receive welfare benefits. The fiscal impact of this is somewhat offset by the fact that illegal immigrants, who constitute around a third of all immigrants, are ineligible for most welfare programs.

Welfare benefits are only part of the costs that low-skill immigrants impose on government. The National Academy of Sciences estimated that, on average, each immigrant without a high school education creates a net cost to government (i.e., benefits received minus taxes paid) of $89,000 over the course of his or her lifetime. The net cost to government of low-skill immigrants is so large that even when the projected taxes and benefits of the immigrant’s descendents over the next 300 years are added into the calculation, the long-term net present value to the government of immigrants without a high school education remains negative.[20]

Discussion

America is in the midst of a massive social and demographic transformation. Immigration levels now nearly rival those of the “great migration” at the beginning of the 20th century. As a result, first-generation immigrants and their immediate families comprise one out of seven Americans.

In earlier periods, immigrants to the U.S. had education levels similar to those of the non-immigrant population and the wage levels of immigrants were, on average, higher than those of non-immigrants.[21] As a result, in part, of legislative changes starting in the mid-1960s, the pattern of immigration has shifted dramatically. Today’s immigrants, on average, have very low skill and education levels compared to the non-immigrant work force.[22] In recent years, the U.S. has imported some 10.5 million immigrants who lack a high school diploma. Among current immigrants, one in three does not have a high school education.

The current mass influx of low-skill immigration stems from two factors. The first is a legal immigration system that emphasizes kinship ties over immigrant skills and education. The second is the failure to enforce existing laws against hiring illegal immigrants and lax border enforcement, which together have encouraged massive illegal low-skilled immigration over the U.S.-Mexican border. Of the 10.5 million immigrants lacking a high school education in the U.S., roughly half have entered the country illegally.

Poorly educated immigrants impose large costs on U.S. taxpayers. Any taxes they pay are greatly outweighed by the costs of the government benefits they consume. The National Academy of Sciences has estimated that the average immigrant without a high school degree will impose a net cost of nearly $100,000 on U.S. taxpayers over the course of his or her life. This cost is in excess of any taxes paid and does not include the cost of educating the immigrant’s children.

This means that the six million immigrants lacking a high school diploma and legally residing in the U.S. today will cost taxpayers more than a half trillion dollars over their lifetimes. Moreover, if the five million illegal immigrants who lack a high school education are granted amnesty and citizenship, as proposed by the Bush Administration and legislated in a Senate-passed immigration bill (S. 2611), overall costs would rise considerably; the overall net cost to government of immigrants without a high school diploma could reach one trillion dollars or more. If the cost of educating immigrants’ children is included, the figure could reach two trillion dollars.

Similarly, a draft immigration plan outlined by Congressman Mike Pence (R–IN) could be criticized as a de facto amnesty program and would permit an unlimited inflow of immigrants in future years, all of whom would be put on a path to eventual citizenship. Like the Senate immigration bill, the Pence plan could greatly increase low-skill immigration, leading to increased poverty and substantially increased costs for the U.S. taxpayer.

Low skill immigration increases poverty in America

Immigrants and their families now comprise one out of four poor Americans. Poor immigrants pay little in taxes and consume large levels of government services including medical care, welfare, and public education. The increase in poverty due to immigration can impose costs well beyond the immediate cost of current welfare benefits for immigrants. By magnifying the public perception of poverty, immigration can create political leverage for new anti-poverty programs. Immigration-induced poverty can easily have spillover effects resulting in new government entitlements for all poor Americans.

Conclusion

The U.S. offers enormous economic opportunities and societal benefits. Hundreds of millions more people would immigrate to the U.S. if they had the opportunity. Given this context, the U.S. must be selective in its immigration policy. Policymakers must ensure that the interaction of welfare and immigration does not expand the welfare-dependent population, thereby hindering rather than helping immigrants and imposing large costs on American society.

U.S. immigration policy should encourage high-skill immigration and strictly limit low-skill immigration. In general, government policy should limit immigration to those who will be net fiscal contributors, avoiding those who will increase poverty and impose new costs on overburdened U.S. taxpayers.

It is sometimes argued that since higher-skill immigrants are a net fiscal plus for the U.S. taxpayers while low-skill immigrants are a net loss, the two cancel each other out and therefore no problem exists. This is like a stock broker advising a client to buy two stocks, one which will make money and another that will lose money. Obviously, it would be better to purchase only the stock that will be profitable and avoid the money losing stock entirely. Similarly, low-skill immigrants increase poverty in the U.S. and impose a burden on taxpayers that should be avoided.

Current legislative proposals that would grant amnesty to illegal immigrants and increase future low-skill immigration would represent the largest expansion of the welfare state in 30 years. Such proposals would increase poverty in the U.S. in the short and long term and dramatically increase the burden on U.S. taxpayers.

Robert Rector is Senior Research Fellow in Domestic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

[1] For a discussion of the policy concerns related to immigration and the welfare state, see Edwin Meese III and Matthew Spalding, Ph.D., “The Principles of Immigration,”Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 1807, October 19, 2004, at www.heritage.org/ Research/GovernmentReform/bg1807.cfm, pp. 3–4.

[2] In 1960, immigrants were slightly more likely to lack a high school education than were non-immigrant Americans. By 1998, immigrants were three to four times more likely to lack a high school education than were non-immigrants. See George J. Borjas, Heaven’s Door: Immigration Policy and the American Economy (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1999), pp. 20–29.

[3] National Research Council, The New Americans: Economic, Demographic and Fiscal Effects of Immigration (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1997), p. 334. The $89,000 figure refers to the net present value of net government outlays with respect to the immigrant. See also Robert Rector, “Amnesty and Low Skill Immigration Will Substantially Raise Welfare Costs and Poverty,”Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 1936, May 16, 2006, at www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/bg1936.cfm.

[4] The estimate of education costs assumes an average of one child per low-skilled immigrant. Education costs in grade school average around $9,000 per pupil per year; total costs for grades one through twelve would be around $108,000 per student.

[5] In general, U.S. families headed by second-generation immigrants are no more likely to be poor than the overall non-immigrant population, but current second-generation family heads are likely to be descendants of the higher-skilled immigrants who arrived in the U.S. prior to 1970. Since that time, immigration flows have changed dramatically; the economic outcomes of the descendants of immigrants who arrived before 1970 will be very different from the outcomes of the descendants of the low-skill immigrants who have entered the U.S. over the last two decades.

[6] Data are taken from the Current Population Survey conducted in March 2005, which provides information relating to the prior year. All data refer to persons at the family level of analysis and include both single-person and multi-person families.

[7] Jeffrey S. Passel, Unauthorized Migrants: Numbers and Characteristics (Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center, June 14, 2005).

[8] Ibid., p. 4.

[9] First-generation immigrants are individuals who were born in foreign countries, were initially citizens of those foreign countries, and have subsequently immigrated to the U.S. First-generation immigrants residing in the U.S. may be either legal or illegal immigrants. Over half of first-generation legal immigrants in the U.S. will eventually naturalize and become U.S. citizens.

[10] For the purposes of this paper, children born abroad to non-immigrant U.S. citizens are considered native-born rather than foreign-born.

[11] Technically, this category is defined as minor children residing in families headed by an adult immigrant.

[12] U.S. Census Bureau, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2004, Current Population Report P60-229, August 2005, p. 45. The general public conventionally assumes the term “poverty”to imply substantial material deprivation. In reality most persons in the U.S. living in “poverty”as defined by the government do not experience significant material deprivation; nonetheless, the official poverty income thresholds and poverty data provided by Census do provide a useful and generally reliable means for assessing the comparative economic conditions of different groups in U.S. society. See, Robert Rector and Kirk A. Johnson, Ph.D. “Understanding Poverty in America,”Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 1713, January 5, 2004, at www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm.

[13] Passel, Unauthorized Migrants, p. 20.

[14] Information provided by Jeffrey Passel of the Pew Hispanic Center.

[15] Patrick F. Fagan, Robert Rector, Kirk A. Johnson, Ph.D., and America Peterson, The Positive Effects of Marriage: A Book of Charts, The Heritage Foundation, Washington, D.C. April 2002, at www.heritage.org/Research/Features/Marriage/.

[16] Richard Fry and B. Lindsay Lowell, Work or Study: Different Fortunes of U.S. Latino Generations (Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center, 2002). This study finds that the descendents of Hispanic immigrants appear to be on a “slow assimilation trajectory”(p. 19).

[17] Among both Hispanics and Asians, a large portion of those counted as non-immigrants are second-generation immigrants. The poverty rates of non-immigrant Asians and Hispanics thus reflect the education levels of recent immigrant cohorts to a considerable degree.

[18] Congressional Research Service, Cash and Noncash Benefits for Persons of Limited Income: Eligibility Rules, Recipient and Expenditure Data, FY2002-FY2004, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., March 27, 2006.

[19] The figures in Chart 21 are calculated from the Current Population Survey (CPS). The welfare benefit receipt levels for each education category have been increased pro rata to compensate for the under-reporting of means-tested expenditures in the CPS.

[20] National Research Council, The New Americans, p. 334. Table 7.5 shows that the net present value to the government of low-skill immigrants and their descendants remains negative even with a three hundred year projection of the earnings of the immigrants’ descendants. Moreover, the projected future tax payments of the descendants of low-skill immigrants in the study are actually too high because the study 1) assumes unreasonably high levels of future upward social mobility, and 2) and makes unfounded assumptions concerning tax increases and benefit cuts in future years. For a discussion of this study see Rector, “Amnesty and Continued Low-Skill Immigration Will Substantially Raise Welfare Costs and Poverty.”

[21] Borjas, Heaven’s Door, p. 20–24.

[22] Rector, “Amnesty and Continued Low-Skill Immigration Will Substantially Raise Welfare Costs and Poverty,”pp. 2, 3.

Heritage In Focus
Congress Should Raise the Cap on H-1B Immigrants
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1452232326

Recent Heritage Studies

Congress Should Stop Playing Politics with E-Verify by Jena Baker McNeill
September 22, 2009

Controlling Illegal Immigration: What Ohio and Every Other State Can Do by Matt A. Mayer
September 03, 2009

Controlling Illegal Immigration: State and Local Governments Must Do More by Matt A. Mayer
August 25, 2009

Contact An Expert

MEDIA INFORMATION LINE:
Phone: 202.675.1761
Fax: 202.544.6979

Print Interview Requests:
Jim Weidman
Director, Editorial Services
202.608.6145
Jim.Weidman@heritage.org

Opinion Editorial Requests:
Paul Gallagher
Manager, Editorial Services
202.608.6151
Paul.Gallagher@heritage.org

Radio/TV Interview Requests:
Matt Streit
Director
202.608.6156
Matt.Streit@heritage.org

Elizabeth F. Lincicome
Senior Media Associate
202.608.6157
Elizabeth.Lincicome@heritage.org

Israel Ortega
Senior Media Associate
202.608.6176
Israel.Ortega@heritage.org

Audrey Jones
Media Associate
202.608.6159
Audrey.Jones@heritage.org

Asia-Pacific Media Requests:
Nick Zahn
Asia Communications Associate
202.608.6150
Nick.Zahn@heritage.org

Benjamin Netanyahu, Barack Obama and Glenn Beck

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 00:11:00 +0000

So much has happened over the last few days I decided to just do snippets of each news story:

On Healthcare: So Barack Obama doesn't want Americans to be able to read any healthcare legislation before it comes up for a vote. Treasonous bastard. So much for a transparent government ... Obama's has been anything but that. He's a liar. He's always been a liar. And he always will be a liar. And so, with this decree from the White House I have contacted my congressman (Jason Chaffetz) and my senators (Orrin Hatch and Bob Bennett) and let them know that unless I can read the legislation coming forth I vote NO on any and all healthcare bills being presented by Barack Obama and the Democrats. They have proven themselves to be nothing but untrustworthy, and ignorant, since they took power.

So contact your politicians and let them know that you do not support any legislation going through Congress right now, especially the healthcare legislation. I could only find one link to healthcare legislation in the Senate. The House is listing nothing at all, so they have chosen to remove the monstrous healthcare legislation that had America up in arms, and hide it from us. Nice try. We're not that stupid. Now we won't support anything at all you come up with. Good job.

On Tim DeChristopher: So DeChristopher is the idiot environmentalist who fraudulently and with malice aforethought bid millions of dollars he didn't have, against legitimate businesses who were bidding to utilize Utah's natural resources in safe and environmentally efficient ways. Had DeChristopher not committed this crime, Utah would be on its way to having huge amounts of monies flowing into the state while protecting our beautiful lands.

The judge in DeChristopher's case has put the kibosh on turning it into a trial on global warming and environmental issues. It's a criminal case, plain and simple. DeChristopher is whining about that and thinks he needs to be able to bring it before a jury of his peers and get a ruling on global warming. Moron. (Source: KUTV Channel 2, Utah)

On Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the UN: Benjamin Netanyahu proved himself to be a true leader and defender of truth in his speech to the U.N. on Thursday, 25 September 2009. This speech was truly one of the best I have ever heard. On my blog yesterday, I included the video and the text of BB Netanyahu calling out the U.N. And it is about time someone told the U.N. what was what, backing it up with fact and history, and served notice. Are they animals promoting terrorism or are they leaders of nations determined to make the world a better and safe place?

It is my opinion, BB Netanyahu has become the leader of the free world while our president is determined to destroy the nation that gave him the opportunity to become president. He can't even face his own people as he turned tail and ran away from Washington, D.C. on September 12th. He's a coward, plain and simple. Barack Obama is nothing to admire and worship, he is a fraudulent American bent on the destruction of our beloved nation. As I have firmly stated before, I stand with Israel at all times and in all places. I will never turn my back on the Lord's chosen people. It will be to America's ultimate destruction if we do not stand with our ally, Israel.

On Glenn Beck: The liberal left, in other words the communists pretending to be Americans, (including Barack Obama) have taken aim at Glenn Beck and are throwing everything they have at him. Nevertheless, he continues to scoop the mainstream media (otherwise known as the MSM) on stories they should be covering but refuse to because it will anger their master, Barack Obama. For example: Glenn broke the story on Van Jones. Beck researched for months about Jones, one of Obama's czars, and found that he was a rabid conspiracy theorist and communist. He broke that story and cost Jones his post. Didn't see the MSM covering that!

And let us not forget the ACORN scandal. It was Beck who showed the fake prostitute/pimp videos as they were counseled by ACORN members on multiple ways to break the law, including one mentally unbalanced ACORN employee in San Diego who confessed to setting up her husband and then murdering him. It was Glenn Beck who played video after video on his FoxNews talk show, not the MSM. Because he did not relent, the U.S. Census and the Federal government cut off funding to ACORN and investigations are cropping up against the nation against them. It's about time! Thanks, Glenn.

Of course, they continue to funnel money into the ACORN fronts, but we'll take them all down because we have Glenn Beck on our side. The likes of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingrahm, Mark Levin and others will not let this federal government continue to rape the American people. So support them. Watch and listen to their television and radio shows. FoxNews is the ONLY place where you will find the truth. No other news station or MSM news will reveal the truth of the deep corruption of the American government, only FoxNews.

And so I close with simply this:

I pledge to always stand between America and her foes, both foreign and domestic.

I pledge to always speak truth as I defend the Republic from those who would destroy her.

I pledge to defend the U.S. Constitution at all times, even unto death.

I pledge to speak at gatherings, organizations and political meetings to teach the truth of the founding of America and the circumstances and writing of the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

I pledge to be ever vigilant of Barack Obama, his administration, the Senate and the Congress until America is back in the hands of her people once again.

I refuse to let America fall. The Republic will rise again and communism will fall in America. November 2010 will be when we take America back. Do not let your courage falter. This is our time and our mission: Restore America to Reagan's shining city on a hill and the founding father's glorious Republic.

Benjamin Netanyahu Calls the U.N. Out

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 22:01:00 +0000

Today, when I listened to Benjamin Netanyahu speak to the U.N., in a fashion far overdue, I was deeply impressed. As he spoke, he put me in mind of Ronald Reagan and I longed for a leader such as Benjamin Netanyahu here in America. He fiercely defended Israel with fact and history. Here is his speech, in its entirety:

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

I have found the entire text of the speech, which I am including below. But I want to listen to the words of a true leader, not what we have masquerading as leaders in Washington, D.C.

Benjamin Netanyahu's Speech to the United Nations (24 September 2009)

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland.

I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people.

The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events.

Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth. Yesterday the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie.

Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee. There, on January 20, 1942, after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people. The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments. Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews. Is this a lie?

A day before I was in Wannsee, I was given in Berlin the original construction plans for the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Those plans are signed by Hitler’s deputy, Heinrich Himmler himself. Here is a copy of the plans for Auschwitz-Birkenau, where one million Jews were murdered. Is this too a lie?

This June, President Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp. Did President Obama pay tribute to a lie?

And what of the Auschwitz survivors whose arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them by the Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie? One-third of all Jews perished in the conflagration. Nearly every Jewish family was affected, including my own. My wife's grandparents, her father’s two sisters and three brothers, and all the aunts, uncles and cousins were all murdered by the Nazis. Is that also a lie?

Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries.

But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency?

A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state.

What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations! Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You're wrong.

History has shown us time and again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing many others.

This Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries. In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims. It has callously slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times.

Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated. The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization.

It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death.

The primitivism of the 9th century ought to be no match for the progress of the 21st century. The allure of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day. Ultimately, the past cannot triumph over the future. And the future offers all nations magnificent bounties of hope. The pace of progress is growing exponentially.

It took us centuries to get from the printing press to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to the personal computer, and only a few years to get from the personal computer to the internet.

What seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated, and we can scarcely fathom the changes that are yet to come. We will crack the genetic code. We will cure the incurable. We will lengthen our lives. We will find a cheap alternative to fossil fuels and clean up the planet.

I am proud that my country Israel is at the forefront of these advances – by leading innovations in science and technology, medicine and biology, agriculture and water, energy and the environment. These innovations the world over offer humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise.

But if the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be reversed for a time. And like the belated victory over the azis, the forces of progress and freedom will prevail only after an horrific toll of blood and fortune has been exacted from mankind. That is why the greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass destruction.

The most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Are the member states of the United Nations up to that challenge? Will the international community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom?

Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and gunned down Iranian protesters who died in the streets choking in their own blood? Will the international community thwart the world's most pernicious sponsors and practitioners of terrorism?

Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world?

The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime. People of goodwill around the world stand with them, as do the thousands who have been protesting outside this hall. Will the United Nations stand by their side?

Ladies and Gentlemen, the jury is still out on the United Nations, and recent signs are not encouraging. Rather than condemning the terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here have condemned their victims. That is exactly what a recent UN report on Gaza did, falsely equating the terrorists with those they targeted.

For eight long years, Hamas fired from Gaza thousands of missiles, mortars and rockets on nearby Israeli cities. Year after year, as these missiles were deliberately hurled at our civilians, not a single UN resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks. We heard nothing – absolutely nothing – from the UN Human Rights Council, a misnamed institution if there ever was one.

In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza.

It dismantled 21 settlements and uprooted over 8,000 Israelis. We didn't get peace. Instead we got an Iranian backed terror base fifty miles from Tel Aviv. Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare. You see, the Hamas rocket attacks not only continued, they increased tenfold. Again, the UN was silent.

Finally, after eight years of this unremitting assault, Israel was finally forced to respond.

But how should we have responded? Well, there is only one example in history of thousands of rockets being fired on a country's civilian population. It happened when the Nazis rocketed British cities during World War II. During that war, the allies leveled German cities, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. Israel chose to respond differently. Faced with an enemy committing a double war crime of firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians – Israel sought to conduct surgical strikes against the rocket launchers.

That was no easy task because the terrorists were firing missiles from homes and schools, using mosques as weapons depots and ferreting explosives in ambulances. Israel, by contrast, tried to minimize casualties by urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted areas.

We dropped countless flyers over their homes, sent thousands of text messages and called thousands of cell phones asking people to leave. Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy's civilian population from harm's way.

Yet faced with such a clear case of aggressor and victim, who did the UN Human Rights Council decide to condemn? Israel. A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged, drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot.

By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill to the dock as war criminals. What a perversion of truth. What a perversion of justice.

Delegates of the United Nations, will you accept this farce?

Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding democracies, when Zionism was equated with racism and when an automatic majority could declare that the earth is flat.

If this body does not reject this report, it would send a message to terrorists everywhere: Terror pays; if you launch your attacks from densely populated areas, you will win immunity. And in condemning Israel, this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace.

Here's why.

When Israel left Gaza, many hoped that the missile attacks would stop. Others believed that at the very least, Israel would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-defense. What legitimacy? What self-defense?

The same UN that cheered Israel as it left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-defense now accuses us–my people, my country - of war crimes? And for what? For acting responsibly in self-defense. What a travesty!

Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists?

We must know the answer to that question now. Now and not later. Because if Israel is again asked to take more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace.

Ladies and Gentlemen, all of Israel wants peace.

Any time an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with us, we made peace. We made peace with Egypt led by Anwar Sadat. We made peace with Jordan led by King Hussein.

And if the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government, and the people of Israel, will make peace. But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace. In 1947, this body voted to establish two states for two peoples – a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted that resolution. The Arabs rejected it.

We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they have refused to do for 62 years: Say yes to a Jewish state. Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked to recognize the nation state of the Jewish people.

The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land of Israel. This is the land of our forefathers.

Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the great Biblical vision of peace: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation. They shall learn war no more." These words were spoken by the Jewish prophet Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in my city, in the hills of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem.

We are not strangers to this land. It is our homeland. As deeply connected as we are to this land, we recognize that the Palestinians also live there and want a home of their own.

We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, prosperity and dignity.

But we must have security. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves except those handful of powers that could endanger Israel.

That is why a Palestinian state must be effectively demilitarized. We don't want another Gaza, another Iranian backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv.

We want peace.

I believe such a peace can be achieved. But only if we roll back the forces of terror, led by Iran, that seek to destroy peace, eliminate Israel and overthrow the world order. The question facing the international community is whether it is prepared to confront those forces or accommodate them.

Over seventy years ago, Winston Churchill lamented what he called the "confirmed unteachability of mankind," the unfortunate habit of civilized societies to sleep until danger nearly overtakes them.

Churchill bemoaned what he called the "want of foresight, the unwillingness to act when action will be simple and effective, the lack of clear thinking, the confusion of counsel until emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong.”

I speak here today in the hope that Churchill's assessment of the "unteachability of mankind" is for once proven wrong.

I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history -- that we can prevent danger in time.

In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come.

God will bless us all in peace. God will give us strength. God will give us strength for peace.

# # #

Lloyd Marcus Under Attack

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 00:12:00 +0000

Last week I posted a video of American Lloyd Marcus singing an anthem I agreed with wholeheartedly. He traveled on the Tea Party Bus which wound its way across America ending in Washington, D.C. on September 12th to join millions of Americans (Source: Washington D.C. Police) marching on the U.S. Capitol to see if Obama, his minions and the 111th Congress could "hear them now".

Of course, Barack Obama turned tail and ran out of town. The 111th Congress largely stuck their fingers in their ears and chanted, "La, la, la...I can't hear you." But there are millions of American energized in the efforts to restore America as a Republic and the U.S. Constitution as the rule of law. And for our troubles, the Democrats can't do anything but spout the pathetic response of "racism".

I give you Lloyd Marcus:

IN HIS OWN WORDS

The racial trashing of entertainment Lloyd Marcus
September 19, 2009

My name is Lloyd Marcus. I traveled on the Tea Party Express bus tour as an entertainer and spokesman; 16 states, 34 rallies in two weeks. Unfortunately, I was the object of vicious racial animus along the way, but not from the tea party protesters. All of the racial hatred expressed against me came from the left, from people who support President Obama.

My delete-emails box is littered with numerous messages such as this one: "You are the dumbest self-hating f****** n***** I have ever seen!" The liberal racists who verbally attacked me are outraged by the opening lines that I boldly proclaim at each tea party rally. "Hello, fellow patriots! I am NOT an African-American! I am Lloyd Marcus, AMERICAN!"

I rejected hyphenating years ago when one day I woke up and heard I was no longer black, but African-American. Any black person rejecting the new politically-correct term was called an Uncle Tom. I believe that hyphenating divides us, and I will have no part of it.

I am a singer, songwriter, entertainer and columnist using my talents to spread the message that conservatism is best for all Americans. The left's response to my independent thinking has been racist, venomous and hate-filled. With unbelievable arrogance, they vilify me for loving my country and not viewing myself as a victim of white America. As a black man, they tell me I must support President Obama regardless of his policies. I must resent white America. I must feel entitled to the earnings of others. My belief that my success -- or failure -- is totally in the hands of myself and my God is an anathema to them.

As for the claim that tea party protesters are racist, I assure you they are not. At every rally the black man whose words you are reading was showered with respect and affection for standing up for America. No, the protesters in this incredible tea party movement are not racists. They are decent, hard-working people who strongly disapprove of what President Obama is doing to the country they love. Even though skin color is a non-issue with them, the president's supporters attempt to silence them by calling them racists.

As a black American, I'm offended that the man who said he would be a post-racial president looks the other way as his supporters seek to divide us by race. But, as I said to audiences along the Tea Party Express bus tour, "I love you. Stay strong. Do not allow their calling you a racist to shut you up! Stand for America. God bless you. And God bless America!"

To see the moving story of how Lloyd Marcus escape the welfare trap set for urban minorities by the politicians they vote for, click here.

www.teapartywarrior.com

Hear Lloyd's "American Tea Party Anthem" here.
Hear Lloyd's most recent song "Twenty Ten" here.
Visit Lloyd Marcus' website here.

I find being called a racist to be absolutely ridiculous wrapped in startlingly strong irony. The left has reduced themselves to name-calling because they have no solid ground to stand on. Americans across the nation are reading the legislation they, including Obama and the 11th Congress, refuse to read. Americans across the nation have studied the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights and KNOW that they are being violated at every level. Americans across the nation understand the simple mechanics of a budget, the basic rules of which cannot be violated, and yet are watching Obama and his 111th Congress, dominated by Democrats, plunging this country into a debt that cannot be paid back in one, two or possibly three generations. Americans across the nation know the inherent and insidious dangers of socialism, which according to former Secretary of Agriculture - Ezra Taft Benson, is the physical practice of communism. I stand by the definition, regardless of what education's elitists feel it may be.

When liberals are faced with these indisputable facts they respond, not with facts, figures or historical proof, but with name-calling and all they have besides profanity is "racist".

It is laughable in the extreme. Bravo Lloyd Marcus...an American patriot.

But Did You Get a Pony?

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 02:39:00 +0000

This commercial, from the moment I saw it, made me laugh and also made me think of my big brother, Cash. Every time I call him with great news he says, "Yeah, but did you get a pony?"

Absolutely hysterical.

Obama is Everywhere

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 12:00:00 +0000

Obama is taking all that was good and right about America and attempting to replace it with...himself. He is more dangerous than any president we've had, any enemy we've ever faced. Don't believe me, take a look at how he has brainwashed you.

Check this out:

Are you ready to stand up and say "ENOUGH" yet?

Are you ready to stand up and say, "This is my America and you can't have it."

Are you ready to stand up and say, "NO to communism?"

Are you ready to stand up in November of 2010 and fire Washington, D.C.?

I am. I have. I will.

Thankful to be an American

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 12:00:00 +0000

I am so grateful to Jesus Christ for loving us enough to pay the price for our sins, sorrows, illnesses and grief. I don't know how I would fight the battles I fight, write the books I write, love the people I love and strive to be a better person each day without the bone deep knowledge of my Savior's love.

I look at this beautiful, beloved nation I was blessed to born in and thank God every single day that I am an American who still knows what really happened in her history. My knowledge of America hasn't been tainted by the communists who infiltrated our education system. Actually, the communists quit trying to infiltrate for the Democratic party had taken up their cause. Stunning any real American would be stupid enough to fall for that, but there you have it.

Many people tell me Barack Obama is just trying to help people. And yet, as I look at how he has decided to "fundamentally change America" I see the very thing the prophets and apostles have warned us of...a wolf in sheep's clothing. As I see him trying, daily, to dismantle the Constitution and the Republic, another day brings another czar, another day brings another freedom lost and still, I look around at my fellow Americans and I still feel hope.

On Saturday, I saw Americans, anywhere from 2.2 to 4 million strong (Washington, D.C. Metro Police), march on the Capitol as Obama turned tail and ran for Minneapolis. At every capitol across the nation, those who could not join our fellow American patriots in Washington, D.C., marched on our own capitols. A thousand here, three thousand there, ten thousand there ... any way you look at it, America spoke up IN SPADES and Washington, D.C. remained deaf to the desires of the American people.

We don't want socialism. Washington, D.C. persists in trying to push it on us.

We don't want socialized medicine, we want TRUE healthcare reform. Washington, D.C. ignores us.

We want the U.S. Constitution restored as the rule of law. Washington, D.C. wants to destroy the Constitution.

We don't want Washington, D.C. to continue at full speed throttle toward communism. We want our democratic republic.

We don't want to be spent into bankruptcy. Washington, D.C.--under control of the Democratic party--is bankrupting us as quickly as they possible can, passing legislation after legislation.

We DO NOT want our 2nd Amendment rights to stripped from us. Washington, D.C. is doing all it can to strip us of our weapons. But we, the American people, recall the words of one of our founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson: "The great defense against a rogue government is an armed populace." And he added to that: "The beauty of the second amendment is it will not be needed until they try to take it." Take note D.C., taking our weapons will not be an easy task.

I could go on and on, but there is no need. All one has to do to see the host of attacks on our U.S. Constitution is scroll back through this blog.

But September 12th gave me such unbelievable hope. This fight I fight--for the preservation of America--is being fought with millions upon millions of citizens on the side of America. I can safely say that for every American patriot who marched on the U.S. Capitol as well as every state capitol, there were 10 to 20 of us who couldn't be there for one reason or another. That puts us at 20 to 40 million vehemently opposed to the course of Washington, D.C.'s actions. We were asleep before ... we are no longer.

So with the firm knowledge that our Lord and Savior has entrusted America to her citizens, we will not allow her to fall. Come 2010 every single member of Congress better kiss their congressional offices goodbye ... you will never return. America has had it with being ignored. We have never embraced communism and we are not going to start now. You will stand up for America now or you will be replaced in November of 2010. There is no negotiating. You will defend the Constitution or you will go.

Here in Utah we have Senators Hatch and Bennett. They have been in Washington, D.C. so long they have become the enemy. Their votes in favor of the radical Cass Sunstein were the final nails in their political coffins. I have thrown my support, completely and 100% by Mark Shurtleff in his bid to take Bob Bennett's senatorial seat. I have looked at the other candidates in that race and found them wanting in one way or another. Mark Shurtleff has my vote come November 2010. Orrin Hatch isn't up for re-election until 2012. Candidates wishing to run against him, please contact me. I'm interested in speaking with you.

I would like to see Congressman Chaffetz show some spine and seriously take on Washington, D.C. as he promised to do. Yes, he is outnumbered. Doesn't mean the fight should be surrendered before its begun.

Congressman Jim Matheson needs to be replaced. He is in favor of far too many socialist policies. It is time a true conservative represent the 2nd Congressional District.

And I close this day with a quote from the Doctrine & Covenants and the U.S. Constitution I will fight to the death to defend:

77) According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles;

78) That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.

79) Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another.

80) And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood.

As our Constitution inspired over 80 others in as many nations across the world, it shall never become antiquated for it is a divine document established for the protection of America's people. In it, the founding fathers gave us recourse to overthrow rogue governments.

The question I ask you now: Has the American government gone rogue?

With one more question: Will you allow these congressmen and senators to continue holding their offices in 2010?

A Washington DC Airport Ticket Agent's Tales

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 12:00:00 +0000

I received these in an email from my brother, whom I love very much. I don't know if they are real but I somehow have no trouble believing they are. It sure would explain a lot wouldn't it!

A Washington DC airport ticket agent offers some examples of 'Why' our country is in trouble!

1. I had a New Hampshire Congresswoman (Carol Shea-Porter) ask for an aisle seat so that her hair wouldn't get messed up by being near the window. (On an airplane!)

2. I got a call from a Kansas Congressman's (Moore) staffer (Howard Bauleke), who wanted to go to Capetown. I started to explain the length of the flight and the passport information, and then he interrupted me with, ''I'm not trying to make you look stupid, but Capetown is in Massachusetts .''

Without trying to make him look stupid, I calmly explained, ''Cape Cod is in Massachusetts , Capetown is in Africa ''

His response -- click.

3. A senior Vermont Congressman (Bernie Sanders) called, furious about a Florida package we did. I asked what was wrong with the vacation in Orlando . He said he was expecting an ocean-view room. I tried to explain that's not possible, since Orlando is in the middle of the state.

He replied, 'Don't lie to me, I looked on the map and Florida is a very thin state!'' (OMG) [That would be Oh My Goodness!]

4. I got a call from a lawmaker's wife (Landra Reid) who asked, ''Is it possible to see England from Canada ?''

I said, ''No.''

She said, ''But they look so close on the map.'' (OMG, again!) [Repeat]

5. An aide for a cabinet member (Janet Napolitano) once called and asked if he could rent a car in Dallas. I pulled up the reservation and noticed he had only a 1-hour layover in Dallas . When I asked him why he wanted to rent a car, he said, ''I heard Dallas was a big airport, and we will need a car to drive between gates to save time.'' (Aghhhh)

6. An Illinois Congresswoman (Jan Schakowsky) called last week. She needed to know how it was possible that her flight from Detroit left at 8:30 a.m., and got to Chicago at 8:33 a.m.

I explained that Michigan was an hour ahead of Illinois, but she couldn't understand the concept of time zones. Finally, I told her the plane went fast, and she bought that.

7. A New York lawmaker, (Jerrold Nadler) called and asked, ''Do airlines put your physical description on your bag so they know whose luggage belongs to whom?''

I said, "No, why do you ask?"

He replied, ''Well, when I checked in with the airline, they put a tag on my luggage that said (FAT), and I'm overweight. I think that's very rude!''

After putting him on hold for a minute, while I looked into it. (I was dying laughing.) I came back and explained the city code for Fresno , CA is (FAT - Fresno Air Terminal), and the airline was just putting a destination tag on his luggage.

8. A Senator John Kerry aide (Lindsay Ross) called to inquire about a trip package to Hawaii. After going over all the cost info, she asked, ''Would it be cheaper to fly to California and then take the train to Hawaii ?''

9. I just got off the phone with a freshman Congressman, Bobby Bright (D) from Ala who asked, ''How do I know which plane to get on?''

I asked him what exactly he meant, to which he replied, ''I was told my flight number is 823, but none of these planes have numbers on them.''

10. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D) called and said, ''I need to fly to Pepsi-Cola , Florida . Do I have to get on one of those little computer planes?''

I asked if she meant fly to Pensacola , FL on a commuter plane.

She said, ''Yeah, whatever, smarty!''

11. Mary Landrieu (D) LA Senator called and had a question about the documents she needed in order to fly to China . After a lengthy discussion about passports, I reminded her that she needed a visa. "Oh, no I don't. I've been to China many times and never had to have one of those.''

I double checked and sure enough, her stay required a visa. When I told her this she said, ''Look, I've been to China four times and every time they have accepted my American Express!''

12. A New Jersey Congressman (John Adler) called to make reservations, ''I want to go from Chicago to Rhino, New York .'' I was at a loss for words.

Finally, I said, ''Are you sure that's the name of the town?''

"Yes, what flights do you have?'' replied the man. After some searching, I came back with, ''I'm sorry, sir, I've looked up every airport code in the country and can't find a Rhino anywhere."

''The man retorted, ''Oh, don't be silly! Everyone knows where it is. Check your map!''

So I scoured a map of the state of New York and finally offered, ''You don't mean Buffalo , do you?''

The reply? ''Whatever! I knew it was a big animal.''

Now you know why the Government is in the shape that it's in!

YES, THEY WALK AMONG US, ARE IN POLITICS, AND THEY CONTINUE TO BREED.

Taking Back America in 2010

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 12:00:00 +0000

Without question, my Obama blues are fading away because millions of Americans are standing up and saying, "NO!" to Obama, Reid and Pelosi. Keep your eye on 2010. Let's do a sweep of Congress and vote in men and women of integrity, courage and ethics...in other words, let's vote in true Americans.

In Memory of September 11th

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 03:08:00 +0000

September 11, 2001 was a dark, tragic day in America. We were attacked by cowards who hijacked planes and flew them into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and would have hit the White House had the passengers of United flight 93 hadn't taken matters into their own hands and brought that plane down in Pennsylvania.

I know there are those out there who entertain insane theories that America attacked itself. How Osama and his cowardly crew of pathetic jihadists must laugh hysterically to themselves that anyone could be so mistaken.

What I remember of that day is over 3,000 people died on American soil. I remember heroes racing into those burning buildings to save as many as they could. I remember some of those heroes dying in the process of performing their jobs. I recall a nation who wept and firmly resolved to hunt those responsible and bring them to justice. I recall a president, but a scant nine months in office, who stood at Ground Zero and promised that this would not stand.

President Bush warned Americans, as we called for justice, that it would be a long, hard fight because were not fighting a common enemy. We were not fighting another nation, but cowards gathering under the umbrella of a the radical wing of a religion. As such, our enemy would come from many nations. President Bush made the decision to move that battle to the Middle East and keep it off American soil. He and his administration worked hard to keep us safe. If you knew how many attacks have been foiled you would be stunned. There used to be a website that kept track of terrorist attacks worldwide, whether they were successful or not, but I can no longer find it. The URL I had is no longer active and that is a shame. It kept me aware of all times how blessed we were to live in this great nation.

Now liberals want to take this tragic day in our history which also celebrated the strength and courage of the American spirit, and turn into a yearly celebration of the Green movement. I am horrified, beyond all belief, that anyone would entertain this.

And so, a movement has swept across the nation. September 11, 2001 will be a national day of fasting and prayer. This is not without precedent in America.

During the Revolutionary War, Congress appointed a Day of Fasting & Prayer to call upon God, and plead for His Providential aid. The fasting and prayers of three million Americans were answered as the power of God enabled them to win battles they otherwise shouldn't have won and gave them strength to defeat their enemy.

Today, we too are in need of miracles for this great nation. We invite you to join us as we call upon God again through Fasting & Prayer on September 11, 2009, to help us secure and preserve our Faith, Family, Freedom, and for guidance to know what WE can do to protect our Nation and its inspired Constitution. Please join us. (Brian Halladay)

And so, on this day I will dedicate my family and home, in fasting and prayer, to the preservation of this nation in deep and abiding gratitude for this great nation built on the sacrifices of so many Americans. I plead with my Father in Heaven for the preservation of America, the preservation of the Republic and the preservation of the U.S. Constitution. I pray for the softening of the hearts of Barack Obama, his administration and the 111th Congress. I pray they come to understand the error of their ways and to truly began to understand the dangerous path which they have chosen. I pray that America may be fully restored without a single drop of blood shed. I pray that we may all unite in one purpose, with one heart: To restore the Constitution and the Republic and may do so with the full support of the American people.

And last, but in no way least, I pray for the loved ones left behind that they may find peace, happiness and be blessed abundantly.

Steven Diamond Running for Orem City Council

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 15:27:00 +0000

I know I usually write about politics at the federal and state levels. But I live in a charming community that I also pay very close attention to: Orem, Utah is my hometown and we're in dire need of some new leadership. We need some forward thinking people with strong conservative values who understand free enterprise and not taxing businesses into oblivion.

So I've looked at the field and the one candidate I can strongly stand behind is someone I've had my eye on for quite awhile. I've watched him in the political scene and I like what I see.

I'm throwing my support completely behind Steven C. Diamond for Orem City Council. Here's a little message from Steve, it was the 2nd of 3 I received from him. I really like what I've seen so far. This particular message struck a chord with me.

# # #

It’s Tuesday, and I hope you've had some time to review yesterday’s first of three email messages I'm sending to you before next week's Primary Election. They contain SPECIFICS about what I will do if elected to the Orem City Council. I am running for office as a practical man with practical, specific solutions to problems and challenges we face in our city’s future.

Yesterday’s message talked about the specifics of dealing with Orem City’s increasing gang problem.

Today’s message is about my specific plans for fixing Orem ’s anemic business climate.

Please read on…

Repairing Orem’s Business Climate

The City of Orem’s current business climate is a key issue for our future. Have you noticed the number of businesses closing or moving out of Orem? You know when we loose our tax base our personal property taxes go up. Many of our current leaders have had years to address this challenge, and yet the businesses continue to shut down or leave.

As a member of the Orem City Council, I will work aggressively to reverse this trend.

You may well ask: “How can we do this?”

Specifically, this is what I propose: Creating and building a distinct BRAND for the City of Orem ! Let me explain by asking a few questions:

When you think of Spanish Fork what comes to mind? (most will answer “Rodeo”)

What about when you think of Midway? (most will answer “Swiss Days”)

And when you think of Provo ? (most will answer “The Freedom Festival” or “BYU”)

Now, ask yourself the question: “What is Orem ’s Brand?”

When I have asked people this question, not one person has given me clear, concise answer. Today's Orem is not a destination city with an identity; rather, it is a passage way for people going someplace else. We need to promote Orem's brand as a destination city and a place that is open for and welcoming to business.

Just look at how Cedar City has created a brand around the Shakespearean Festival. The result is that their brand identity brings in people (and money) from all over the world. A tiny town in the middle of nowhere has built an incredible global brand. Can you imagine what Orem can do with all that we have to offer? We can build on our city's Summerfest and Timpanogos Storytelling Festival as part of our brand, but to succeed it must be even bigger and more inspiring. We can do this!

The City of Orem’s brand should be "Family City USA."

The recipe for creating this brand for the City of Orem should have the following ingredients:

Setting up a committee of Orem business owners and working with a group of local marketers to come up with the campaign to promote our "Family City USA " brand.

Establishing a web presence on the Internet to help create awareness and entice tourists and other Utahans to the different venues in our city.

Developing the area of Orem City around Utah Lake. We do not have a "family friendly" presence on the lake. I will encourage the development of beach areas and recreation facilities that will rival any similar destination in California. I know people who would develop the land if they were confident the city would eagerly support development of the water front. We can do this right now and with very little up-front cost--and it can all be done with private funds. Orem City would only need to give usage permits. We do not have to wait for the rest of the cities in the valley to act to take the leadership role in this!

Using several of Orem’s empty buildings to promote this and other forms of recreation (including the community dance hall concept mentioned above).

Helping promote the great sports teams and venues we already have in Orem. We have great sports venues at UVU. We have fun teams whose games are reasonably priced. To help these teams stay here, we need to work to stop loosing the “Thunder” indoor football team to the E-Center. With Orem City’s support and promotion as part of building the “Family City USA brand” people inside and outside of Utah Valley will help our teams flourish.

Finally, I will work to give the business community direct access to city hall with an online forum. This forum will give business owners a place and the opportunity to talk with each other, with their customers the citizens, and with city hall. Business networking will improve the business climate. Business-to-business marketing will increase. We can also create and encourage a “Buy Local” campaign in the city’s marketing plan. We'll do this by creating a searchable listing all of the businesses and services in the city on the Orem City website. The city website can become the center of information for business activities and happenings in Orem.

As a business man with thirty-five years of real-world business experience, I have the ability to bring our community together to build a vibrant business climate and tax base for Orem City.

Please consider voting for me for Orem City Council in the upcoming Primary Election on Tuesday, September 15, 2009.

Sincerely,

Steven Diamond
Candidate for Orem City Council
Cell phone: 801-830-2400
Email: steve@stevencdiamond.com
Website: www.stevencdiamond.com

P.S. Tomorrow’s last message will discuss HOW I will govern—so you can know what to expect of me as new issues and challenges come before our city. Meantime, if you would like more information on my plans for the City of Orem, please call me (801-830-2400), email me (steve@stevencdiamond.com) or visit my website at www.stevencdiamond.com. Please feel free to forward on this message to your friends and neighbors in Orem.

# # #

So please, if you live in the Orem area and you are a reader of my blog, support Steven C. Diamond in his bid to win a seat on the Orem City Council. If he wins, Valor Publishing Group will apply to sit on the committee he is forming to revitalize Orem.

Obama Speaks to the Children of America

ces@candacesalima.com (Candace E. Salima) — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 12:00:00 +0000

Every action from Barack Obama is highly suspect given his agenda of destroying the Constitution and the Republic, but I've gone over his speech and it seems to be okay. Meaning, there was nothing wrong with the advice he's giving the children today, which is now K-12, rather than just K-6. The only problem I can see, is that this speech with well-meaning advice could lull children into thinking that everything Barack Obama says is okay. That, we know, is dead wrong. But judge for yourselves. Here is the speech the White House posted on its site today to try and counter the attacks from parents across the nation:

* * *

Prepared Remarks of President Barack Obama
Back to School Event

Arlington, Virginia
September 8, 2009

The President: Hello everyone – how’s everybody doing today? I’m here with students at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. And we’ve got students tuning in from all across America, kindergarten through twelfth grade. I’m glad you all could join us today.

I know that for many of you, today is the first day of school. And for those of you in kindergarten, or starting middle or high school, it’s your first day in a new school, so it’s understandable if you’re a little nervous. I imagine there are some seniors out there who are feeling pretty good right now, with just one more year to go. And no matter what grade you’re in, some of you are probably wishing it were still summer, and you could’ve stayed in bed just a little longer this morning.

I know that feeling. When I was young, my family lived in Indonesia for a few years, and my mother didn’t have the money to send me where all the American kids went to school. So she decided to teach me extra lessons herself, Monday through Friday – at 4:30 in the morning.

Now I wasn’t too happy about getting up that early. A lot of times, I’d fall asleep right there at the kitchen table. But whenever I’d complain, my mother would just give me one of those looks and say, "This is no picnic for me either, buster."

So I know some of you are still adjusting to being back at school. But I’m here today because I have something important to discuss with you. I’m here because I want to talk with you about your education and what’s expected of all of you in this new school year.

Now I’ve given a lot of speeches about education. And I’ve talked a lot about responsibility.

I’ve talked about your teachers’ responsibility for inspiring you, and pushing you to learn.

I’ve talked about your parents’ responsibility for making sure you stay on track, and get your homework done, and don’t spend every waking hour in front of the TV or with that Xbox.

I’ve talked a lot about your government’s responsibility for setting high standards, supporting teachers and principals, and turning around schools that aren’t working where students aren’t getting the opportunities they deserve.

But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world – and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.

And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.

Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.

Maybe you could be a good writer – maybe even good enough to write a book or articles in a newspaper – but you might not know it until you write a paper for your English class. Maybe you could be an innovator or an inventor – maybe even good enough to come up with the next iPhone or a new medicine or vaccine – but you might not know it until you do a project for your science class. Maybe you could be a mayor or a Senator or a Supreme Court Justice, but you might not know that until you join student government or the debate team.

And no matter what you want to do with your life – I guarantee that you’ll need an education to do it. You want to be a doctor, or a teacher, or a police officer? You want to be a nurse or an architect, a lawyer or a member of our military? You’re going to need a good education for every single one of those careers. You can’t drop out of school and just drop into a good job. You’ve got to work for it and train for it and learn for it.

And this isn’t just important for your own life and your own future. What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country. What you’re learning in school today will determine whether we as a nation can meet our greatest challenges in the future.

You’ll need the knowledge and problem-solving skills you learn in science and math to cure diseases like cancer and AIDS, and to develop new energy technologies and protect our environment. You’ll need the insights and critical thinking skills you gain in history and social studies to fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free. You’ll need the creativity and ingenuity you develop in all your classes to build new companies that will create new jobs and boost our economy.

We need every single one of you to develop your talents, skills and intellect so you can help solve our most difficult problems. If you don’t do that – if you quit on school – you’re not just quitting on yourself, you’re quitting on your country.

Now I know it’s not always easy to do well in school. I know a lot of you have challenges in your lives right now that can make it hard to focus on your schoolwork.

I get it. I know what that’s like. My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother who struggled at times to pay the bills and wasn’t always able to give us things the other kids had. There were times when I missed having a father in my life. There were times when I was lonely and felt like I didn’t fit in.

So I wasn’t always as focused as I should have been. I did some things I’m not proud of, and got in more trouble than I should have. And my life could have easily taken a turn for the worse.

But I was fortunate. I got a lot of second chances and had the opportunity to go to college, and law school, and follow my dreams. My wife, our First Lady Michelle Obama, has a similar story. Neither of her parents had gone to college, and they didn’t have much. But they worked hard, and she worked hard, so that she could go to the best schools in this country.

Some of you might not have those advantages. Maybe you don’t have adults in your life who give you the support that you need. Maybe someone in your family has lost their job, and there’s not enough money to go around. Maybe you live in a neighborhood where you don’t feel safe, or have friends who are pressuring you to do things you know aren’t right.

But at the end of the day, the circumstances of your life – what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you’ve got going on at home – that’s no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude. That’s no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. That’s no excuse for not trying.

Where you are right now doesn’t have to determine where you’ll end up. No one’s written your destiny for you. Here in America, you write your own destiny. You make your own future.

That’s what young people like you are doing every day, all across America.

Young people like Jazmin Perez, from Roma, Texas. Jazmin didn’t speak English when she first started school. Hardly anyone in her hometown went to college, and neither of her parents had gone either. But she worked hard, earned good grades, got a scholarship to Brown University, and is now in graduate school, studying public health, on her way to being Dr. Jazmin Perez.

I’m thinking about Andoni Schultz, from Los Altos, California, who’s fought brain cancer since he was three. He’s endured all sorts of treatments and surgeries, one of which affected his memory, so it took him much longer – hundreds of extra hours – to do his schoolwork. But he never fell behind, and he’s headed to college this fall.

And then there’s Shantell Steve, from my hometown of Chicago, Illinois. Even when bouncing from foster home to foster home in the toughest neighborhoods, she managed to get a job at a local health center; start a program to keep young people out of gangs; and she’s on track to graduate high school with honors and go on to college.

Jazmin, Andoni and Shantell aren’t any different from any of you. They faced challenges in their lives just like you do. But they refused to give up. They chose to take responsibility for their education and set goals for themselves. And I expect all of you to do the same.

That’s why today, I’m calling on each of you to set your own goals for your education – and to do everything you can to meet them. Your goal can be something as simple as doing all your homework, paying attention in class, or spending time each day reading a book. Maybe you’ll decide to get involved in an extracurricular activity, or volunteer in your community. Maybe you’ll decide to stand up for kids who are being teased or bullied because of who they are or how they look, because you believe, like I do, that all kids deserve a safe environment to study and learn. Maybe you’ll decide to take better care of yourself so you can be more ready to learn. And along those lines, I hope you’ll all wash your hands a lot, and stay home from school when you don’t feel well, so we can keep people from getting the flu this fall and winter.

Whatever you resolve to do, I want you to commit to it. I want you to really work at it.

I know that sometimes, you get the sense from TV that you can be rich and successful without any hard work -- that your ticket to success is through rapping or basketball or being a reality TV star, when chances are, you’re not going to be any of those things.

But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won’t love every subject you study. You won’t click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won’t necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try.

That’s OK. Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who’ve had the most failures. JK Rowling’s first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career. But he once said, "I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."

These people succeeded because they understand that you can’t let your failures define you – you have to let them teach you. You have to let them show you what to do differently next time. If you get in trouble, that doesn’t mean you’re a troublemaker, it means you need to try harder to behave. If you get a bad grade, that doesn’t mean you’re stupid, it just means you need to spend more time studying.

No one’s born being good at things, you become good at things through hard work. You’re not a varsity athlete the first time you play a new sport. You don’t hit every note the first time you sing a song. You’ve got to practice. It’s the same with your schoolwork. You might have to do a math problem a few times before you get it right, or read something a few times before you understand it, or do a few drafts of a paper before it’s good enough to hand in.

Don’t be afraid to ask questions. Don’t be afraid to ask for help when you need it. I do that every day. Asking for help isn’t a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of strength. It shows you have the courage to admit when you don’t know something, and to learn something new. So find an adult you trust – a parent, grandparent or teacher; a coach or counselor – and ask them to help you stay on track to meet your goals.

And even when you’re struggling, even when you’re discouraged, and you feel like other people have given up on you – don’t ever give up on yourself. Because when you give up on yourself, you give up on your country.

The story of America isn’t about people who quit when things got tough. It’s about people who kept going, who tried harder, who loved their country too much to do anything less than their best.

It’s the story of students who sat where you sit 250 years ago, and went on to wage a revolution and found this nation. Students who sat where you sit 75 years ago who overcame a Depression and won a world war; who fought for civil rights and put a man on the moon. Students who sat where you sit 20 years ago who founded Google, Twitter and Facebook and changed the way we communicate with each other.

So today, I want to ask you, what’s your contribution going to be? What problems are you going to solve? What discoveries will you make? What will a president who comes here in twenty or fifty or one hundred years say about what all of you did for this country?

Your families, your teachers, and I are doing everything we can to make sure you have the education you need to answer these questions. I’m working hard to fix up your classrooms and get you the books, equipment and computers you need to learn. But you’ve got to do your part too. So I expect you to get serious this year. I expect you to put your best effort into everything you do. I expect great things from each of you. So don’t let us down – don’t let your family or your country or yourself down. Make us all proud. I know you can do it.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.

# # #

What are your thoughts?