*(WE ARE WAITING FOR YOU HERE IN ILLINOIS YOU TRAITOR)* Senator Mark Kirk is the Only Republican to Vote Against De-Funding Planned Parenthood

Screen Shot 2015-08-04 at 7.50.47 PM


Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois was the only Republican senator today to vote against de-funding the Planned Parenthood abortion business when Senate Democrats filibustered the bill to do so.

Despite four horrific videos showing Planned Parenthood doctors potentially breaking the law to sell the body parts of aborted babies, Kirk stood fast with Democrats to prevent the Senate from taking up the bill. Although pro-abortion Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine also supports abortion and Planned Parenthood and said she would vote against the bill, she voted for cloture so the bill could come up for a vote.

After three shocking videos caught Planned Parenthood doctors discussing and arranging the sale of body parts of aborted babies, a fourth video was released catching a Planned Parenthood vice president discussing how Planned Parenthood how to break or get around the law to sell aborted babies. The video also shows a Planned Parenthood doctor shouting, “Another boy” while she sifts through the body parts of the aborted baby.

But that didn’t persuade Kirk, who has a pro-abortion voting record in the Senate.

Before the vote, Kirk made it clear he would vote to sustain the filibuster because Planned Parenthood doesn’t sell aborted babies in his state.

“In other states tissue donation programs should be investigated but in Illinois there is no similar program,” Kirk said in a statement to The Hill. “I do not plan to cut access to basic health care and contraception for women, the majority of whom have no other resources.”

While Kirk has voted pro-life on Obamacare, he has repeatedly voted for abortion and abortion funding, according to National Right to Life.

Two years ago, Kirk faced criticism from pro-life groups for preventing them from using space for an event.

ACTION: Complain to Senator Kirk by going here or calling (202) 224-2854

USA To Issue More New Green Cards In Next Ten Years Than Populations of IA, NH and SC – COMBINED…


Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) 80%

Breitbart News has exclusively obtained text and a chart from the Senate’s Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, chaired by Alabama Republican

The overwhelming majority of immigration to the United States is the result of our visa policies. Each year, millions of visas are issued to temporary workers, foreign students, refugees, asylees, and permanent immigrants for admission into the United States. The lion’s share of these visas are for lesser-skilled and lower-paid workers and their dependents who, because they are here on work-authorized visas, are added directly to the same labor pool occupied by current unemployed jobseekers. Expressly because they arrive on legal immigrant visas, most will be able to draw a wide range of taxpayer-funded benefits, and corporations will be allowed to directly substitute these workers for Americans. Improved border security would have no effect on the continued arrival of these foreign workers, refugees, and permanent immigrants—because they are all invited here by the federal government.


The most significant of all immigration documents issued by the U.S. is, by far, the “green card.” When a foreign citizen is issued a green card it guarantees them the following benefits inside the United States: lifetime work authorization, access to federal welfare, access to Social Security and Medicare, the ability to obtain citizenship and voting privileges, and the immigration of their family members and elderly relatives.

Under current federal policy, the U.S. issues green cards to approximately 1 million new Legal Permanent Residents (LPRs) every single year. For instance, Department of Homeland Security statistics show that the U.S. issued 5.25 million green cards in the last five years, for an average of 1.05 million new legal permanent immigrants annually.

These ongoing visa issuances are the result of federal law, and their number can be adjusted at any time. However, unlike other autopilot policies—such as tax rates or spending programs—there is virtually no national discussion or media coverage over how many visas we issue, to whom we issue them and on what basis, or how the issuance of these visas to individuals living in foreign countries impacts the interests of people already living in this country.

If Congress does not pass legislation to reduce the number of green cards issued each year, the U.S. will legally add 10 million or more new permanent immigrants over the next 10 years—a bloc of new permanent residents larger than populations of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina combined.

This has substantial economic implications.

The post-World War II boom decades of the 1950s and 1960s averaged together less than 3 million green cards per decade—or about 285,000 annually. Due to lower immigration rates, the total foreign-born population in the United States dropped from about 10.8 million in 1945 to 9.7 million in 1960 and 9.6 million in 1970.  

These lower midcentury immigration levels were the product of a federal policy change: after the last period of large-scale immigration that had begun in roughly 1880, immigration rates were lowered to reduce admissions. The foreign-born share of the U.S. population fell for six consecutive decades, from 1910 through 1960.

Legislation enacted in 1965, among other factors, substantially increased low-skilled immigration. Since 1970, the foreign-born population in the United States has increased more than four-fold—to a record 42.1 million today. The foreign-born share of the population has risen from fewer than 1 in 21 in 1970, to presently approaching 1 in 7. As the supply of available labor has increased, so too has downward pressure on wages.

Georgetown and Hebrew University economics professor Eric Gould has observed that “the last four decades have witnessed a dramatic change in the wage and employment structure in the United States… The overall evidence suggests that the manufacturing and immigration trends have hollowed-out the overall demand for middle-skilled workers in all sectors, while increasing the supply of workers in lower skilled jobs. Both phenomena are producing downward pressure on the relative wages of workers at the low end of the income distribution.”

During the low-immigration period from 1948-1973, real median compensation for U.S. workers increased more than 90 percent. By contrast, real average hourly wages were lower in 2014 than they were in 1973, four decades earlier. Harvard Economist George Borjas also documented the effects of high immigration rates on African-American workers, writing that “a 10 percent immigration-induced increase in the supply of workers in a particular skill group reduced the black wage of that group by 2.5 percent.” Past immigrants are additionally among those most economically impacted by the arrival of large numbers of new workers brought in to compete for the same jobs. In Los Angeles County, for example, 1 in 3 recent immigrants are living below the poverty line.  And this federal policy of new large-scale admissions continues unaltered at a time when automation is reducing hiring, and when a record share of our own workers here in America are not employed.

President Coolidge articulated how a slowing of immigration would benefit both U.S.-born and immigrant-workers: “We want to keep wages and living conditions good for everyone who is now here or who may come here. As a nation, our first duty must be to those who are already our inhabitants, whether native or immigrants. To them we owe an especial and a weighty obligation.”

It is worth observing that the 10 million grants of new permanent residency under current law is not an estimate of total immigration. In fact, the increased distribution of legal immigrant visas tend to correlate with increased flows of immigration illegally: the former helps provide networks and pull factors for the latter. Most of the countries who send the largest numbers of citizens with green cards are also the countries who send the most citizens illegally. The Census Bureau estimates 13 million new immigrants will arrive, on net, between now and 2024—hurtling the U.S. past all recorded figures in terms of the foreign-born share of total population, quickly eclipsing the watermark recorded 105 years ago during the 1880–1920 immigration wave before immigration rates were lowered. Absent new legislation to reduce unprecedented levels of future immigration, the Census Bureau projects immigration as a share of population will continue setting new records each year, for all time.

Yet the immigration “reform” considered by Congress most recently—the 2013 Senate “Gang of Eight” comprehensive immigration bill—would have tripled the number of green cards issued over the next 10 years. Instead of issuing 10 million green cards, the Gang of Eight proposal would have issued at least 30 million green cards during the next decade (or more than 11 times the population of the City of Chicago).

Polling from Gallup and Fox shows that Americans want lawmakers to reduce, not increase, immigration rates by a stark 2:1 margin. Reuters puts it at a 3:1 margin. And polling from GOP pollster Kellyanne Conway shows that by the huge margin of nearly 10:1 people of all backgrounds are united in their belief that U.S. companies seeking workers should raise wages for those already living here—instead of bringing in new labor from abroad.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, Immigration, Green Cards

Undocumented Immigrant Accused Of Murder In Ohio

August 01, 2015 – (CNN)—For the second time in under a month, an undocumented immigrant has been accused of murdering someone after authorities became aware of their status but did not detain or deport them.

Juan Razo pleaded not guilty this week to an attempted murder charge stemming from a violence-filled July 27 that also included a woman’s killing, an attempted rape and a shootout with officers in Painesville, Ohio.

In addition to allegedly shooting and wounding a woman in the arm, police said that Razo, 35, attempted to rape his 14-year-old niece hours before he shot and killed Margaret Kostelnik, a 60-year-old woman who, according to CNN affiliate WEWS, was the secretary for the mayor in nearby Willoughby for nearly three decades



(CNN)For the second time in under a month, an undocumented immigrant has been accused of murdering someone after authorities became aware of their status but did not detain or deport them.

Juan Razo pleaded not guilty this week to an attempted murder charge stemming from a violence-filled July 27 that also included a woman’s killing, an attempted rape and a shootout with officers in Painesville, Ohio.

In addition to allegedly shooting and wounding a woman in the arm, police said that Razo, 35, attempted to rape his 14-year-old niece hours before he shot and killed Margaret Kostelnik, a 60-year-old woman who,according to CNN affiliate WEWS, was the secretary for the mayor in nearby Willoughby for nearly three decades.

He will face those charges at a preliminary hearing Monday, the Lake County prosecutor’s office said.

Through an interpreter and his court-appointed defense attorney, Razo admitted at his bail hearing that he had no license, no identification, no passport and that his birth certificate was in Mexico.

“I have somebody who we don’t know who he is, why he is in this country, why he is here illegally and why he allegedly committed a murder,” fumed Judge Mike Cicconetti.

“I can’t set a bond high enough.”

Kate Steinle: San Francisco shooting victim known for thinking of others first

HOLA, a Latino outreach organization based in Ohio, said it was “distraught and deeply saddened by the (alleged) violent acts committed by Juan Razo,” but it said the real issue was Razo’s mental illness, not the status of his green card.

“Juan Razo was not a random illegal alien. His father is a U.S. citizen who has worked in the fields for 40 years. He filed documents for his children over a decade ago and Juan Razo was a beneficiary with an approved petition who has been ‘standing in line’ for his green card for over 12 years. Thus, this is not an issue about immigration, rather it is about the problems associated with adults with mental illness.”

Similarities to San Francisco case

The episode comes on the heels of a national uproar over the death of Kate Steinle, the 32-year-old San Francisco woman killed at random July 1, allegedly by an undocumented immigrant who had previously been deported five times.

The cases are similar in that authorities in both instances were aware of Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, the repeat felon charged with Steinle’s slaying, and of Razo — as well as each of their immigration statuses; both were allowed to go free.

But unlike San Francisco, a “sanctuary city” where officials refuse to honor federal requests to hold people found to be in the country illegally unless they have allegedly committed a crime, officials in Lake County were quick to explain why they allowed Razo to go free just weeks prior to his alleged crime spree.

It was because they had to, Lake County Sheriff Dan Dunlap said.

Local, federal officials deflect blame

When two Lake County sheriff’s deputies approached Razo on July 7 while responding to a call of a suspicious vehicle parked near a golf course, he “was extremely nervous, sweating profusely, and making every attempt to avoid eye contact,” Dunlap said. “When questioned, he provided a false name, was unable to give any type of identification, and he admitted to being in the United States illegally.”

But because no crime was committed, and Razo had no criminal record, Dunlap said he lacked the authority to detain him, so he said a deputy called the agency that did: U.S. Customs and Border Protection. That’s when Dunlap said Razo became uncooperative.

“As the conversations (between Border agents and Razo) progressed, Razo became less and less communicative, and he would not again admit to the Border Patrol, as he did to the deputies initially, that he was in the United States illegally,” Dunlap said Friday. Because he lacked the legal authority to do so, Dunlap said his office “requested the Border Patrol to issue a detainer/hold authorization to keep Razo in custody… (but) Border Patrol would not issue a detainer.”

“Without legal authority to further detain Razo, he was released.”

But the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees U.S. Customs and Border Protection, said that it was the agency that lacked the authority to detain Razo, and points the finger back at the sheriff.

“Border Patrol agents interviewed this individual via telephone at the request of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office … during that interview, Razo was uncooperative and the agents were unable to determine his immigration status,” the statement read. “Without such a determination, the agents had no legal basis to file a detainer to hold the subject. Although the agents offered to meet with the deputies on site and interview the subject in person, the offer was declined and the subject was released.”

‘Exploiting tragedy’

DHS said that Razo’s lack of a record — and the fact that he had been in the United States so long — meant he wasn’t a top priority.

“The (Obama) Administration has set enforcement priorities to make sure our resources are focused on apprehending and removing convicted criminals, gang members, recent border crossers and the most significant threats to public safety and national security.”

Republican frontrunner Donald Trump used Steinle’s death to push his campaign’s tough stance on immigration, including building a fence along the U.S.-Mexico border. It appears the Razo case would be no different.

“This is a clear indication of why we need a strong wall protecting our border,” read a statement CNN affiliate WEWS obtained from campaign spokesman Corey Lewandowski. “Mr. Trump is an outspoken critic of illegal immigrants coming over our borders. That’s why it’s so important to have a wall that is impenetrable.”

HOLA disagreed.

“We are disappointed to see leaders exploiting this tragedy to promote a political agenda,” it said.

Immigrants and crime: Crunching the numbers

Violence Is SKYROCKETING In This City Controlled By Inept Liberals


Baltimore is one of the most violent cities in the United States. I know that might come as a shock, especially considering that benevolent liberals having been in charge for quite some time. (It hasn’t occurred to them to ask if they’re the ones contributing to the problem, but I repeat myself.)

After Freddie Gray’s death, liberals went positively bonkers. Rioters destroyed their own city, and liberal leaders stood around, scratched their heads, and wondered how the city descended into chaos. After the initial shock, liberal leaders scrambled. Well, scrambled to find someone else to blame. They blamed the racist cops for their problems.

And it’s only getting better in Baltimore. (And by better, I mean worse.) On Friday, the city broke a record. The killings have soared to “levels unseen in 43 years.”

There were 43 homicides in July alone. 

Police reported three deaths — two men shot Thursday and one on Friday. The men died at local hospitals.

With their deaths, this year’s homicides reached 189, far outpacing the 119 killings by July’s end in 2014. Nonfatal shootings have soared to 366, compared to 200 by the same date last year. July’s total was the worst since the city recorded 45 killings in August 1972, according to The Baltimore Sun.

“Too many continue to die on our streets,” Rawlings-Blake said then. “Families are tired of dealing with this pain, and so am I. Recent events have placed an intense focus on our police leadership, distracting many from what needs to be our main focus: the fight against crime.”

Well maybe if she didn’t give criminals “space to destroy…”

Crime experts and residents of Baltimore’s most dangerous neighborhoods cite a confluence of factors: mistrust of the police; generalized anger and hopelessness over a lack of opportunities for young black men; and competition among dealers of illegal drugs, bolstered by the looting of prescription pills from pharmacies during the riot.

While these may be the causes, I think they’re pretty ridiculous. Not trusting the police? Hey- if you don’t commit crimes, you don’t even HAVE to face the police. Next!

Generalized anger and hopelessness? Well, well, well. Why would they have that? Liberals have dumped $1.8 billion into the city to eradicate that. Where’d the money go? Why isn’t it eliminating poverty and assisting the black community the left loves oh so much? We covered this before

On top of that, 29 other ZIP codes in that area received $568,641,684,$5,644,792 went to “promote the economic and social well-being of children, youth, families and communities,” $9.5 million went toward “homelessness prevention” and $26 million went toward rebuilding foreclosed or abandoned homes and properties.

The truth is, people in these cities can’t get ahead because liberalism keeps them down. It discourages independence, breeds hate and creates contempt for anyone who embraces individual responsibility and reaps the benefits of hard work. Liberalism squashes all incentive and propagates the idea that everything is someone else’s fault. The Great Society’s ideas aren’t so great after all, huh?

Between championing the collective over the individual, delivering a less than desirable education system and promoting a lifestyle of total mediocrity, liberal policies have torn these families and cities apart.

You know what would fix all this violence, hate and poverty? Gun control and more stimulus money. #LiberalLogic.

Terrible! Obama Promises to Veto anti-Sanctuary City Legislation

Screen Shot 2015-08-02 at 8.55.24 AM


The Republican-led House of Representatives passed a bill on Thursday that would punish sanctuary cities and Barack Obama has threatened a veto should it end up on his desk.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

WASHINGTON—The Republican-controlled House Thursday passed legislation that would withhold federal law-enforcement grants from cities that shelter illegal immigrants from federal authorities, part of a campaign to punish what are known as sanctuary cities.

The bill, passed 241-179, is the GOP’s answer to the shooting this month of Kathryn Steinle, 32 years old, on a San Francisco pier, allegedly by an illegal immigrant who had been convicted of seven felonies and previously deported to Mexico.

The Associated Press provided the lame excuse from the Obama administration that the bill would “lead to mistrust between local communities and law enforcement agencies” and, therefore, he would veto the bill.

Jim Steinle, Kathryn Steinle’s father, testified before a Senate committee last Tuesday and told them, “Due to disjointed law and basic incompetence on many levels, the U.S. has suffered a self-inflicted wound by the hand of a person who never should have been on the streets of this country.”

Leo Hohmann reported:

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said President Obama relaxed the rules on ICE detainers, making it optional instead of mandatory for cities to comply. This opened the door for the ACLU to file lawsuits on behalf of illegal aliens, he said.

An ICE detainer is a written request that a local jail or other law enforcement agency detain an individual for an additional 48 hours (excluding weekends and holidays) after his or her release date in order to provide ICE agents extra time to decide whether to take the individual into federal custody for removal purposes.

“ICE detainers are not mandatory as a matter of law. So this is not initiated by ICE, they’re reacting to the threat of litigation by the ACLU, and by changing the word ‘shall’ in these detainer orders,” King said. “I think we’ve clearly heard today the effect of that, and we’ve heard it from expert testimony and from very painful experience.”

The painful experience was that of Jim Steinle, father Kate Steinle, 32, who died at the hands of an illegal alien July 1 who had a string of prior arrests. “This will make you cry too, and it happens every day. This story happens every day in the U.S.,” King said.

image: http://cdn1.eaglerising.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/obama-illegal-300×143.jpg

obama illegalKing also said that in 2011 along, 48,000 crimes were committed by illegal aliens against US citizens and that 30,000 were arrested and released in 2014.

The author of the bill, Rep. Duncan D. Hunter (R-CA) said, “The American people have the right to not give their tax dollars to municipalities and states that do not follow federal law. The fact that San Francisco and L.A. and other cities disagree with the politics of federal enforcement does not give them a free pass to subvert the law.”

While Democrats have charged that the measure is “anti-immigrant,” they fail to distinguish between those who come into our country legally and those that don’t. Rep. Mike Coffman (R-CO), whose represents a district that is made up of twenty percent Hispanic, says the bill is neither “anti-immigrant” nor “anti-Hispanic.” Rather it should be seen as “pro-law enforcement.”

While Republicans view the passing of the bill as a victory, Democrats claim that it is pandering to people who agree with the statements of Donald Trump concerning illegal aliens. While one does not know the motives of Republicans in the matter, it seems to have been a push to actually attempt to move in the right direction of dealing with the issue of illegal aliens and sanctuary cities, not to be confused with theBible’s cities of refuge.

This isn’t the only bill that is attempting to deal with the issue of sanctuary cities.

On Saturday, Suzanne Hamner reported on another bill in the Senate to deal with the issue.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) joined forces to initiate the ‘Protecting American Lives Act’ or S. 1842 that would end sanctuary cities and ‘severely punish any illegal aliens who illegally re-enter the United States after previous deportation,’ she wrote. “It sounds great; however, it would require catching the sneaky snakes as they cross the Obama ‘welcome mat‘ on the open southern border.”

And that is the issue, isn’t it? After all, this administration orchestrated the illegal alien invasion in 2014 of tens of thousands of illegals and sought to bring more into the country by airplane at taxpayer expense. This year the administration has brought tens of thousands of Muslims from Syria into the US without proper vetting and colonizing them in US cities. All of this and then the administration continues to release thousands of convicted illegal alien criminals back onto American streets.

He doesn’t follow immigration laws. In fact, Barack Obama doesn’t follow the law at all. Again, it’s not incompetence, it’s purposeful.
Read more at http://eaglerising.com/21619/terrible-obama-promises-to-veto-anti-sanctuary-city-legislation/#sqGozXfh6u8s5wZo.99