Immigration has ‘no positive effect’ on Britain, finds landmark report

The Government’s claims to justify mass immigration was last night demolished by experts who demanded a cap on future arrivals.

The landmark study, the most authoritative ever carried out by a Parliamentary committee, dismissed out of hand the Government’s “preposterous and irrelevant” assertion that migrants boost the economy by £6 billion.

The cross-party panel - which includes ex-Chancellors, economists and captains of industry - said there was “little or no positive impact” on the living standards of the existing UK population.

It’s because, like Canada, the UK has no standards for who they let in. Really. how many cab drivers do we need?

I’m not sure what the certification rules are in the UK, but here in Canada, even if you have a skill, you aren’t allowed to use it. So even doctors are driving taxis.

Tory ex-Cabinet Minister Lord Wakeham, who chaired the inquiry, said: “The Government’s use of impact on overall GDP as the key measure is preposterous and irrelevant because it does not reflect the economic well-being of the existing population.”

The committee said: “There has been little or no positive impact on the living standards of the existing population.

“The biggest beneficiaries of international migration are migrants themselves, as employment in the higher income countries enables them to earn higher wages and incomes than in their home countries.’

Asked if the economic policies pursued by Labour over the last decade had been a mistake, Lord Wakeham replied: “We have made it abundantly clear we do not believe there has been any great economic benefit from the policy it has pursued.”

From the comments on the article:

Do you think that they are finally realising what the ordinary person could have told them years ago?

[Discuss this article with RightGirl...]

| Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Since we write about politics as it impacts our faith, church and apostasy, this post will continue about Obama’s church and preacher.

On the liberal program, The View, Barack Obama said this about his preacher, Jeremiah Wright:

“Had the reverend [Wright] not retired, and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I believe is the greatness of this country, for all its flaws, then I wouldn’t have felt comfortable staying at the church.”

To my knowledge, Wright has never publicly apologized nor acknowledged to America or Christians that his obnoxious, anti-Christian, racist, anti-American, anti-Semitic comments offended anyone.

If someone has a source for Wright’s supposed public apology, please give the source.

Obama is using his lawyerly language to obfuscate and hide the truth of his real feelings about Wright. He loves the guy!.

Someone in the Mainstream Media must hold Obama to account for this misstatement (lie???) on the View.

[Discuss this article with Expreacherman...]

| Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Music to my ears, the latest Rasmussen poll shows that John McCain is leading democrats by a nice margin at a key time when the left eats itself in a fight to secure super delegates.

Monday, March 31, 2008

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows John McCain leading Barack Obama 47% to 42%. He leads Hillary Clinton 49% to 40% (see recent daily results). Among unaffiliated voters, McCain is essentially even with Obama while holding a wide lead over Clinton. When matched against McCain, Clinton earns a bit more support than Obama from Democrats. Obama leads McCain among voters under 40 while McCain has the edge among those 40 and above. McCain leads Clinton among all age groups.

What can you expect? Thanks to the sentiments of pastor Jeremiah Wright it appears that Barack Obama has a “whitey problem” and Hillary Clinton is no less credible on a whole host of issues.

Adding insult to injury is the fact that the Clinton’s are applying fuzzy math to boost their contrived chances of gaining enough delegates to win the party nomination. This is no doubt in part thanks to the efforts of bloggers and Rush Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos strategy that turned the tables on Daily Kos morons who thought they were so cute in trying to create chaos in republican primaries. Recall that Republicans handed the losers on the left a taste of their own medicine by crossing over party lines and voting for Hillary Clinton in Texas and Ohio. Right back at ya, the strategy appears to have worked in the republican’s favor. Turnabout is a beautiful thing.

This doesn’t mean that Republicans have a cake walk. There is much work to be done but trending is moving to the right for the moment.

Among all voters nationwide, McCain is now viewed favorably by 53% of voters nationwide and unfavorably by 44%. Obama’s reviews are 49% favorable and 49% unfavorable. For Clinton, those numbers are 43% favorable, 55% unfavorable (see recent daily results). Among unaffiliated voters, Obama is viewed favorably by 56%, McCain by 52%, and Clinton by 35%.

In the Electoral College, Democrats lead in states with 190 Electoral Votes while the GOP has the advantage in states with 189. When “leaners” are added, the Democrats lead 243 to 240. The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator showed two changes over the weekend–Wisconsin moving from Likely Democratic to Leans Democratic and New Hampshire moving from Leans Democratic to Toss-Up.

In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, it’s Obama 46% Clinton 43% (see recent daily results). Clinton leads by thirteen points among White voters including a twenty-seven point advantage among White Women. Obama leads among White Men, has an overwhelming advantage among African-Americans, and a solid lead among voters under 50. Among Democrats, Clinton leads by seven. Among unaffiliated voters likely to participate in a Democratic Primary, Obama leads by a two-to-one margin.

While the two Democrats continue their battle for the nomination, John McCain has released his first general election campaign commercial.

Thankfully the democrats are doing much of that work themselves with the constant infighting. Let’s hope that Operation Chaos continues!

| Trackback URL | Comments (1 Comment)

Who would have figured that Hollywood would suffer another slap in the face by crapping out another in a series of anti-military movies begging soldiers to turn their backs on their country in a time of war?

Most soldiers don’t buy this crap and neither does middle America. Thus when your target audience is parked outside of recruiting stations in Berkeley or fire bombing them in New York City we probably could have predicted that the much touted (in moron circles) anti-military screed “Stop Loss” would suffer a typical dismal opening; coming in at 8th place at a time when most theaters filled seats on releases from earlier weeks.

Good riddance. The word is out.

Movie Phone’s user community gave it 4/5 stars. Of course only 12 people bothered to review the movie. The “Stop Loss” friendly community of movie goers over at rotten tomatoes only gave it a 60% favorable rating. Good for most movies until you figure out that the only people going to see Stop Loss are the same people still wetting their pants in mourning over Abu Ghraib.

Keep it up Hollywood. With this track record you’ll likely chase newspapers into the dustbin of obscurity until you get a clue and change your tune.

See Also: Libertas

| Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Friday morning HWWOW (He Who Walks on Water) aka Barack Hussein Obama submitted to what promised to be a nauseating slobberfest on ABC’s daily hen party, “The View.” The allegedly “conservative” Elisabeth Hasselbeck has expressed admiration for the crypto-socialist, would-be terrorist coddler Obama on more than one occasion. Of course, this airhead reserves the right to change her mind. Recall this exchange from less than a year ago on Fox’s “Hannity and Colmes”:

COLMES: Have you always been a conservative?
HASSELBECK: You know, I’ve always been — you know, I consider myself a contemplative conservative. And my parents were independent. I never knew who they voted for. They really birthed in us a spirit of freedom of thought and just evaluating individuals. And that’s what I think people really need to do in this election, maybe not so much look at the party color or animal.
COLMES: I think we too often do judge people. Are you liberal or conservative? And then we judge people based on what their political philosophy is and not judge them as human beings.
HASSELBECK: I don’t define myself as conservative personally. I seriously don’t. I would hope that people wouldn’t do that to any of us here at the panel. You know…

There’s a real hard intellect! Is this pinhead really walking around off the leash?

If you enjoyed that laughable exchange, you might want to check out what happened Thursday on this yak fest. You no doubt heard about Chelsea Clinton’s “none of your business” response to a question about whether the way her mom handled the Monica Lewinsky situation hurt Hillary’s credibility.

Here’s the video of Chelsea’s response and the harpies at “The View” talking about it.

Recall that after the disgusting news of her dad’s spending part of the work day braced against the wall in the Oval Office with his pants down around his ankles surfaced, Hillary rode to the rescue on the “Today” show, blaming the sordid episode on the “vast right wing conspiracy.” As a proud member of the VRWC, I’d like to take credit, but I’m afraid that it was all Bubba’s doing, with the enthusiastic cooperation of an intern only a couple of years older than his daughter.

Now, in typical Clinton fashion, Chelsea tries to peddle the same “it was about sex, it’s private, it’s none of your business” garbage that her parents and their supporters have been mouthing for 10 years. What a chip off the old block!

Sadly, this fairy tale, to borrow a phrase, hasn’t gotten any more plausible with age. It was our business what our employee, the president, was doing during the workday. We all had our consciousness raised by feminists in the ’80’s, and so we know he was also engaging in unacceptable sexual harassment, or at least he would have been had he been a corporate CEO or an officer in the military. That aside, and to the point of the subject at hand, Hillary’s response is what we’re talking about, and sorry, Chelsea, nice try, but it IS relevant that your mom tried to sidestep this situation by blaming someone other than the perp (that would be your horn dog old man.)

Now, back to Thursday’s episode of “The View.” I warn you. This video may induce projectile vomiting.

Isn’t that beautiful? Chelsea and Elisabeth are BFF’s! She handled it “with wit?” I guess if you’re a half wit yourself, this is what passes for wit. Could this be the reason she doesn’t see how pathetic Chelsea’s answer to a perfectly legitimate question was? Or is she just stupid? Perhaps both. I think I’ll go with that.

So later Friday, when the man-god appeared on this waste of bandwidth, we didn’t expect these harpies to ask the following questions (and they didn’t disappoint):

• Why has your story regarding the purchase of your mansion and the role of political fixer Tony Rezko changed so many times?
• If you didn’t know that your pastor Jeremiah Wright had blamed America for 9/11 and said things like “God damn America,” why did you dis-invite him from the ceremony when you announced you were running for president?
• What do you think of your wife Michelle’s college thesis in which she pledged to use all her talents to benefit black people?
• What did you mean, specifically, last week when you referred to your grandmother, who raised you, as a “typical white person?”

[Discuss This Topic With Teri O'Brien]

| Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

After nearly four years of hoping, waiting and praying, the family of Sgt. Keith Matthew Maupin (captured by insurgents in April 2004) learned Sunday that their missing son died in Iraq.

A Defense Department official also confirmed the identification, saying Maupin’s remains were found last week but DNA results just came in.Maupin, who was 20 at the time of his capture, and another soldier, Sgt. Elmer Krause, 40, were captured by insurgents April 9, 2004, after their convoy came under attack near Baghdad International Airport. A week later, Maupin was shown on a videotape, surrounded by several armed masked men.

“My name is Keith Matthew Maupin,” he stated in the video. “I am a soldier from the First Division. I am married with a 10-month-old child. I came to liberate Iraq, but I did not come willingly because I wanted to stay with my child.”

Krause’s body was found two weeks later.

Later that summer, Al-Jazeera aired a videotape purportedly showing the execution of Maupin, but U.S. officials haven’t confirmed the identity of the person on the tape.

The U.S. Army continued to promote Maupin, who was a private first class in the Army Reserves at the time of his capture, to sergeant and then staff sergeant as they searched for him.

Three U.S. troops remain missing in the five-year-old Iraq war: Pvt. Byron W. Fouty and Spc. Alex R. Jimenez have been missing since their military convoy was raided west of Mahmoudiya May 12.

Spc. Ahmed K. Altaie disappeared October 23, 2006, and his status was changed to “missing-captured” nearly two months later. (CNN)

Hat tip Texas Fred who expresses my thoughts:

Rest in Peace Matt, you served bravely and you did your duty, you’re coming home now, and your Mom and Dad can have some peace in just knowing your fate, I hate the word closure, but for lack of a better word, maybe they can finally have some closure.All our love and sympathy to the Maupin family, and to ALL the families of our brave troops that have given their lives in the line of duty.

My name is Matt Maupin - Please remember my face

Rest in peace, Sgt. Maupin. Rest in peace.

You are not forgotten.

Sgt. Maupin’s family runs Operation Yellow Ribbon which does have a guest book. (Military Families Voice of Victory)

[Discuss this Topic with Debbie Hamilton]

| Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Of course anyone who’s been paying attention already knows about this, but you can’t help letting out a chuckle as you read one more time about how Hillary supposedly got her name.

If memory serves, and I believe this one time it does, this was old hat long before 2004 when the book was published. My guess is if I bothered to go chasing after tidbits of memorabilia, which I’m not going to do, I’d nail down something from 1996. This is almost like a psychological disorder — what’s this need to toss out lies like this so casually, when they’re so easy to nail down and it seems like there’s nothing to be gained from it?

I remember this from my “salesmen working alongside software developers” days. Things look different when you have a different perspective, and as the reality-man who actually worked with the code I’d get flustered listening to the boss telling customers things. I learned to bite my tongue and keep my reservations to myself, reminding the salesmen of them in private…granting them the benefit of the doubt, presuming that perhaps this had to do with arcane details not commonly appreciated. But on occasion, it looked to me like hostility toward truth. Glittering cliches would be tossed out, when it looked like there was no reason for them to be, beyond some need to say things that could later be determined to be inaccurate.

I’ve always thought this had to do more with perception than with reality. It was just my viewpoint on things. But with the Clintons, the psychosis really does appear to be there. You’re going to throw out this chestnut that Hillary was named after a mountain climber…so easily disproved…to do what? To impress people? People who are already impressed — so where’s the gain?

I’m sure there is treatment available for this somewhere.

[Discuss This Topic with MKFreeberg]

| Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

Every time I read one of these sick stories of “Republican” politicians that support Democrats to the detriment of their own party I literally want to puke. I’m not talking about bi-partisanship here, that’s fine on a case by case basis. I’m talking about straight out back stabbing; especially when it is done at the behest of politically connected liberal activists. (h/t Michelle Malkin)

I ought to know something about Republican Party front men without a rudder; I live in Illinois.

But this story isn’t about Illinois. It is about Hawaii, its RINO governor Linda Lingle, the lying chairman of the GOP Willes Lee and his string puller, liberal activist and Democrat contributor Bruss Keppler.

Get this, Keppler holds an influential seat on the Hawaii GOP’s platform committee despite the fact that he has been outed as a Democratic operative who has been openly contributing money to and endorsing Democrat Senator Daniel K. Akaka while he was being rivaled by GOP competitors.

Akaka is one of those nativists that wants to give people of Hawaiian descent racial preference over other American’s living in the state.

This is a position that GOP turncoat Keppler openly promotes in supporting a movement to give Hawaii independence from the United States and is probably the reason Akaka was being touted and supported in the last election cycle by Keppler over Akaka’s GOP rivals. (i.e. - the people he was supposed to be representing)

Despite these revelations, GOP party chairman Willes Lee defended keeping Keppler by stating that giving money to democrats is essentially no big deal; much less than say, an endorsement.

Not long after making such a profoundly dense defense Dereck DePledge, a reporter and blogger in Hawaii, dug up a Keppler endorsement of Akaka.

“We have the utmost confidence in his ability to support not only Native Hawaiian businesses but Hawaii businesses as well”, stated NHCC Governmental Affairs Chair, H.K. Bruss Keppeler.

In response GOP char Lee has attempted to circle the wagons around Keppler further. As reported by zeroshibai, “Nobody asked the question if it was alright to give money to the Democrats.”

That’s rich. Of course people did ask as that is exactly what has started all the commotion in the first place. Beyond that however is the obvious stupidity in making such a defense in the first place. Nobody should have to ask, Mr. Chariman!! If you are so outrageously stupid and in bed with the supporters of Democrats your ass should be kicked out of the party; along with Keppler and anyone else who hides behind the Republican title while promoting modern day liberalism.

For Lee to say that Keppeler remains an influential party insider today because nobody asked about Republican donations to Democrats is asinine. More asinine is Lee’s expectation that he’d get away with something so absurd and false. Any remaining credibility Willes Lee thought he had with the media is now probably shot for good. Adding to Lee’s credibility problems are that Lee’s ‘investigation’ of the complaint against Keppeler was so shoddy that he was unable to unearth with a single Google search Keppeler’s public endorsement-in-question of Akaka. Clearly the fix was in — the party rules were to be ignored and Lingle’s pro-Akaka chum Mr. Keppeler was to be preserved.

Worse however is the fact that most of this nonsense can be traced back to the republican governor, Linda Lingle.

Willes Lee is expected to keep the wagons circled around Bruss Keppeler because he is reportedly under orders to do so from the party’s patron-in-chief, the nominal Republican Governor Linda Lingle. When you consider the steady losing record of Republicans at the polls, the total control of Hawaii’s Republican Party by Lingle appointees, and the absence of self-promotion by the party during successive legislative sessions and successive election campaigns, you don’t need to wonder why they keep losing at the polls.

I’ve personally had it with these GOP turncoats. I’ve decided that I am on a mission to enlighten as many people that are willing to listen. It’s time to throw the bums out of the GOP.

| Trackback URL | Comments (1 Comment)

Barack Obama

| Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)

‘Taxman’ was when I first realised that even though we had started earning money, we were actually giving most of it away in taxes. It was and still is typical. - George Harrison

The Beatles (a famous musical group for those of you too young) had a song about the Taxman. When George Harrison wrote that song in 1966 he could have been talking about the Democratic Party in general. In retrospect however they must have known that a Barack Obama like figure was going to appear in the future because everything in that song could apply to his specific plans for America.

Barack Obama has already indicated that he would raise the cap on income subject to Social Security; an action that throws good money at a bad problem without addressing the root cause.

Now Obama is saying that he will raise the Capital Gains tax to no more than 28% (nearly double what it is now). Of course Obama wants people to believe that this will only affect the rich because in the world of liberalism only rich people make enough money to have capital gains. However, about half the country owns stock and other items that would be subject to the higher tax. Thus everyone who invests for the future will have that future attacked by Obama, the Taxman.

The rich already know how to shelter their money. Warren Buffet, a man Obama claims to have discussed his tax ideas with, shelters his money. John Kerry’s wife earned 2.54 million dollars in non taxable interest by investing in things she did not have to pay taxes on. The rich know how to avoid taxes. The rest of us will end up paying the 28% to fuel the government. Once again Obama misses the boat because higher taxes stifle investment and they do not address the root cause of the problem.

The real problem is out of control spending. The federal government spends more than it takes in and it continually invents new ways to spend more and more. Little is ever cut and lawmakers fight tooth and nail to keep pork projects and earmarks which waste taxpayer money. This country does not pay too little in taxes, we spend too much. Social programs account for around 70% of the budget. Congress never cuts programs or consolidates, it just makes new programs and adds money to failing ones. Couple this with earmarks and spending spirals out of control. (not like Hillary’s airplane)

Obama wants to add to the tax burden of the people in this country. There is no need for this and it is regressive. An increase in the capital gains tax will stifle investment and add to our economic woes. Increasing taxes on the wealthy will lead to the creation of fewer jobs. Obama claims to be for change and he claims to be progressive with new and progressive ideas but his ideas are the same old worn out tried and failed liberal tax and spend programs that keep people enslaved to the government.

| Trackback URL | Comments (No Comments)