Our Lot: How Real Estate Came to Own Us

Steve Sailer writes: Our Lot: How Real Estate Came to Own Us by Alyssa Katz, a liberal journalist and NYU journalism professor who writes for Mother Jones, is the best book yet on how the sacred cause of “diversity” merged with pedal-to-the-metal capitalism to bring us the Great Mortgage Meltdown.

The book hasn’t garnered the attention it deserves—probably because it makes clear the bipartisan responsibility of both her opponents on the Right and her friends on the Left.

Our Lot focuses equally on the misdeeds of both capitalists and leftists. But I won’t give the boiler room boys as much attention in this review because they’re a more familiar tale, while Katz`s reporting on the role of her side is compelling “testimony against interest.”

Katz is remarkably frank about how government programs and political pressure to boost minority homeownership helped blow up the economy. She’s particularly good at explicating how leftist housing activists, such as ACORN and Gale Cincotta, the godmother of the Community Reinvestment Act, worked with Democratic politicians such as Bill Clinton, HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros, and Jim Johnson, CEO of Fannie Mae, to lay the groundwork for the Bubble and Bust.

Katz doesn’t devote quite as much depth to the Bush Administration`s culpability (which, to my mind, is even greater). Perhaps she lacked Republican contacts to give her the kind of inside story she got on her own party’s mistakes.

Still, Our Lot makes clear that on housing policy, the Clinton-Bush years form a single continuum with one overarching plan: boost the minority homeownership rate by lowering credit standards. I call it the Era of Multi-Culti Capitalism.

And there’s little reason to think that its lessons have been learned yet.

Katz begins her book in 1972, in the collapsing Austin neighborhood on Chicago’s Far West side, where Gale Cincotta was a Greek-American housewife.

Fortuitously for me, Our Lot fills in the political backstory of my own in-laws’ lives. My wife grew up in Austin, which had been a peaceful, densely populated working class [actually, middle class] neighborhood where small children could play safely on the crowded sidewalks. Suddenly, in the late 1960s, middle class blacks began buying into the neighborhood.

Friends warned my late father-in-law, a classical musician and union leader, to flee, that underclass blacks would follow. But he and my late mother-in-law, a schoolteacher, resolved to show that integration could work.

After my future wife was mugged twice and her younger brother once, however, my in-laws finally sold in 1970—losing half their life savings. They moved 63 miles out of Chicago, to a dilapidated farm where they lacked running water for their first two years. (And my father-in-law started voting Republican.)

How did this disaster hit Austin? Katz demonstrates that it was the direct result of a 1968 change in the Federal Housing Administration, which set off a bubble and bust in America`s inner cities, like a smaller precursor of this decade. As in 2005,

“In 1972, in Chicago and in every other city in the nation, almost anyone could get a home mortgage, including borrowers who didn’t earn enough to pay them off, on just about any house, for any reason. … And just like the recent adventure in lending beyond any rational limits, the mortgage disaster of the early 1970s was born from a lofty ideological conviction that enabled the basest of crimes and most foolish of gambles under its cover, insulated from almost any scrutiny until the damage was already done.”

Franklin D. Roosevelt had started the Federal Housing Administration to insure home loans, and Fannie Mae to buy loans from lenders. Together, these agencies created the familiar template of 30-year-year fixed rate mortgages with a moderate down payment that underpinned the growth of home-owning suburbanites after WWII.

FDR’s FHA, however, was reluctant to back loans in black neighborhoods—a practice that Cincotta later dubbed “redlining.” Eventually, in 1968, liberal Illinois Republican Senator Charles Percy and the Johnson Administration revamped the FHA in a more politically correct direction. Katz explains:

“The FHA was now, in effect, a front in the War on Poverty. … Under the new regime, homebuyers living in Chicago and other inner cities weren’t just eligible for loans. Lenders who signed up to sell FHA-insured mortgages were asked to do everything they could to make sure the buyers got them.”

Of course, the results of the Federal government`s encouraging mortgages with down payments of never more than $500 were absolutely predictable:

“Across the country, neighborhood destruction became a booming business, financed by the federal government. In Chicago they called it ‘panic peddling.’ In New York, it was ‘blockbusting.’ … The FHA-insured loans threw gasoline on that smoldering fire. … Indeed, the insurance made it profitable to seek out the most impoverished and unreliable borrowers, since the sooner a borrower defaulted on a loan, the more quickly the lender would get paid back in full by FHA.”

In Chicago, Gale Cincotta started a national coalition of “community activists,” who helped pass the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 and the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. Cincotta remains a heroine to the author, although she can’t quite make clear Cincotta’s logic. If the feds encouraging lending to minorities had destroyed Austin, how was more hair of the dog that bit you supposed to fix Austin?

Sadly, Austin remains unfixed. On a visit to Chicago earlier this month, my wife drove by her old house. Her former home had no doorknob, just an empty hole in the front door. But at least it was still standing, unlike two large apartment buildings on her old block, which are now just crabgrass-covered vacant lots.

Cincotta died in 2001—across the municipal border from Austin in Oak Park. In telling contrast to Austin, that prosperous suburb that had succeeded in saving its famous district of Frank Lloyd Wright homes (where my father was born in 1917) by limiting the number of blacks allowed to move in through its notoriously illegal but effective “black-a-block“ quota.

Katz notes that Cincotta`s organization of the left, combined with the invention of mortgage securitizing by investment banker Lewis Ranieri in 1983, made possible the disasters of this decade.

Cincotta began siccing her “pushy capitalist radicals” on Fannie Mae, which remained reluctant to buy the dubious mortgages of likely deadbeats. Still, Katz writes, “The reality was that to meet its growth objectives, Fannie Mae needed these poor people as much as the poor people needed them.”

Looking back from 2009, Katz asks:

“How did Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac … turn into the world`s biggest funders of Wall Street-backed subprime mortgages? … It all started with the best of intentions, with … the activists who demanded bank loans for the poor and urban.”

Posted in Real Estate | Comments Off on Our Lot: How Real Estate Came to Own Us

It’s Hard To Ignore Donald Trump

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Trump is pretty hard to ignore–he’s been a huge media personality for decades. It’s unfortunate that “a calm, rational immigration patriot like Tom Tancredo” is completely ignored, but maybe that’s because his presentation is so hard to refute. It’s similar to the problem with Jared Taylor; he’s so calm and reasonable no one wants to give him any air time. Come to think of it, you never see the most famous white racist, David Duke, on TV either. Wouldn’t you think that with the constant talk about racism on TV they’d want to interview a self-proclaimed white racist? CNN does these Soledad O’Brien hour-long specials on racism in America, and yet we never get to hear from an actual racist. Obviously the media is terrified to allow such people access to the Megaphone.

Posted in Donald Trump, Immigration | Comments Off on It’s Hard To Ignore Donald Trump

Iran vs Israel

David Hazony posts on FB:

Pop quiz: Which of the following is most likely to be true:
(a) The Iranian regime is increasing its hateful rhetoric because, in the event of a historic reconciliation with the West, they want to maximize the drama of their transformation so they can look like forgiving souls.
(b) The Iranian regime has no intention of using the nuclear deal to bring about a historic reconciliation with the West, and therefore is increasing its hateful rhetoric to show that if a deal is finally signed, it is another big victory on its march towards regional dominance. If it’s not signed, it’s because they stuck to their principles.
(c) The Iranian regime is incompetent, so it doesn’t realize that increasing its hateful rhetoric is not consistent with historic reconciliation with the West.
(d) All that hateful rhetoric was never really serious to begin with, and we’ve been misunderstanding them all these years.
The fate of the coming generation might just rest on answering this correctly.

Luke Ford: None of the above. Iran has fundamental conflicts of interests with some other nations and they will get the bomb no matter what the US or Israel does because they have rational reasons for asserting their power and influence.

Is Iran’s rhetoric any more hateful than the Book of Esther and the festival of Purim when we celebrate the slaughter of 70,000 of our enemies, or the Passover when we celebrate the slaughter of Egypt’s first born, or when we pray in the Amidah, “And for slanderers let there be no hope; and may all Your enemies be cut down speedily. May you speedily uproot, smash, cast, down, and humble the wanton sinners — speedily in our days. Blessed are you, HaShem, Who breaks enemies and humbles wanton sinners”, or when at the end of the morning prayers (Shacharit), we Jews say the Six Remembrances, including:

“You shall remember what Amalek did to you on the way, when you went out of Egypt, how he happened upon you on the way and cut off all the stragglers at your rear, when you were faint and weary, and did not fear G‑d. [Therefore,] it will be, when the L‑rd your G-d grants you respite from all your enemies around [you] in the land which the L‑rd, your G‑d, gives to you as an inheritance to possess, that you shall obliterate the remembrance of Amalek from beneath the heavens. You shall not forget!”?

All strongly identifying tribal groups tend towards negative feelings about out-groups. Why would Iran be at peace with its enemy Israel having nuclear weapons? As surely as Esav hates Yaakov, Yaakov hates Esav.

David Hazony: You know, when you have to go back two to three thousand years to find something as bad as what the Iranians are saying, it makes me think, “Yup, let’s lift those sanctions.”

Luke Ford: Along with a million other Jews, I just prayed this morning for the complete destruction of our enemies in the Amidah. Of course, our enemies are G-d’s enemies.

David Hazony: It strikes me that “believe all rhetoric” was not my point, so I’m not sure what question you think you’re answering. Rather: Judge actions first, and then figure out what the words mean after the fact. One set of rhetoric happens to be backed by (a) military expansionism and the explicit attempts to conquer neighboring regimes; (b) support for terror groups that try to take the rhetoric literally; (c) a human rights record befitting an expansionist totalitarian genocidal political regime; and (d) an explicit connection being drawn between the genocidal rhetoric and the building of a nuclear bomb. The other set is kinda sorta lacking in all that. Don’t you think?

Luke Ford: You make good points. Judge actions first. Iran nor Muslims in general have demonstrated much competency beyond sneak attacks. The last time Iran launched an invasion was in the 17th Century. They’re not exactly a formidable power. They’ve had a nuclear program since the 1950s, so they’re losers aka typically incompetent low IQ Muslims, for not being able to build bombs by now. Israel has the only nuclear program in the Middle East and the most powerful military in the region plus the backing of the USA, so Iran has rational reason to want to develop its own nuclear program. Iran has a human rights record that is common to Muslims with an average IQ of 84. Israel does not boast about using nukes to blow up their enemies, so you make good points. It is obviously in Iran’s interests to get nuclear weapons. It must be unbearable for them that the Jewish state has them and they don’t. How can they live with that humiliation?

“The fate of the coming generation might just rest on answering this correctly.” Which generation? The American? The Israeli one? Iran presents little threat to the USA.

Posted in Iran, Islam, Israel | Comments Off on Iran vs Israel

Rabbi Belsky’s Beis Din Issues Siruv AGAINST Aish HaTorah NY and its leaders Greenman and Markowitz

SIRUV ISSUED BY RABBI BELSKYS BEIS DIN AGAINST AISH HATORAH NY (Lefkowitz) SIRUV ISSUED BY RABBI BELSKYS BEIS DIN AGAINST AISH HATORAH NY R Belskys Siruv against Aish

Background. More.

From Wikipedia:

A shtar siruv (also spelled seruv) is a form of contempt of court order issued by a beth din (rabbinical court) in an effort to compel action by an individual.[1]

The siruv has been described as a form of cherem (which combines characteristics of shunning or excommunication) for a party who refuses to appear before a beth din. Under the terms of a siruv, the individual is to be shunned by the community until the terms of the order issued by the beth din are addressed. While most Jewish litigants are adjured from pursuing justice against other Jews in the civil court system, in the case of a siruv, the beth din may permit use of the secular courts by the plaintiff.[2]

Translated:

Relating to the case that Mr. Fetman brought against Aish NY / Greenman / Markowitz

To Whom it may concern,

This Beis Din sent three orders to these individuals and they refused to come to Beis Din. The Beis Din also sent letters to their attorneys compelling them to come to Beis Din in this matter but to our great sorrow they chose not to come to Beis Din, giving excuses that are meaningless and worthless.

All these excuses are deemed nullified and have no value at all.

It is this Beis Din Opinion that these individuals are in Contempt of Beis Din and everything that is written in the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deash 364) is relevant to these individuals and anyone that can pressure them to go back from their evil ways and come to Beis Din should do so and it will be a great merit for them.

Signed

Rabbi Yisroel Belsky

Rabbi Avraham Raataa

Rabbi A. Kirsh

These individuals ignored this Beis Din orders to come to Beis Din and it is shocking that these people who manage such an organization are not following Hallacha and Din Torah.

Signed

R. Yisroel Belsky

R. Yaakov Libman

R. Avraham Raata

UPDATE JULY 22, 2015:

A source emails:

With regards to the allegations against Jacob Fetman, an attorney familiar with the case points out that Justice Demarest in her decision to confirm Rabbi Cohen’s award of $20,000,000 (twenty million dollars), made it clear that she did not review the merits of the case – her focus was to confirm or reject this award. As it is the public policy in NY state to uphold arbitration awards and because of the fact that there were no transcripts of the arbitration sessions (4 sessions totaling 140 minutes) she had no choice but to confirm the award – despite her reservations about Fetman’s allegations of the many violations of his Due Process. For example, in court it was acknowledged that a forensic report, which R’ Cohen bases his award on, was never provided to Fetman and in fact, once the judge ordered Aish to produce it (April 25, 2015 – almost 18 months after the award was issued), it was found to be dated AFTER the last session and on the date of the AWARD. Clearly, there was no chance for Fetman to dispute any of its ‘findings’.

It is note worthy that a criminal complaint which was alleged by Aish against Jacob Fetman is still pending in Brooklyn Supreme court for the alleged theft of $236,000 over five years – Mr. Fetman plead Not Guilty to this allegation and a trial is pending.

While Aish is a wonderful organization, with a very important mission, in court papers it was alleged by Fetman that executive compensation was substantially under reported and disguised as activities. Rabbi Greenman’s compensation over 2012 reported as (aish 990 filing) $101,409 taxable income and an additional $94,000 non taxable income was in fact almost double that. David Markowitz’s taxable compensation of $62,500 with an additional $50,000 non taxable compensation was in fact about $150,000. 2013 reported income for Rabbi Greenman was $118,310 taxable and combined compensation (with non taxable compensation) $216,929. Aish chose not to divulge any other executive compensation.

If the allegation against Fetman is correct – Aish NY, an organization with an internal budget of about $3 million dollars annually could have not “noticed” that $1.2 million annually was being stolen from it?? Why is it that Aish will not submit to examination of the ‘forensic report’ – what was the rush to issue an award when an attorney intervened on behalf of Fetman?

See attached Justice Demarest’s decision that Aish must produce the ‘forensic report’ to Fetman – when it was acknowledged that Fetman never received it. The award was issued 12/17/2013 – This decision by the court is 4/25/2015.

See the attached DA statement – Aish NY used Fetman and Merkaz the Center as a funnel to transfer monies from Project Inspire to Aish NY. Hundreds of thousand of dollars were transferred this way.

Lastly, see Dan Stein’s (Fetman’s original attorney and now the Chief of the Criminal Division at the US attorney General’s Office NY Western District) letter to R’ Cohen right after the award was issued and another letter to Mel Zachter, a noted accountant who agreed to examine the ‘forensic report’ but Aish never agreed.

R. Cohen’s decision states that Fetman took property from Aish which was proven in court that those properties were purchased prior to Fetman even working at Aish. That part of the award was struck out by the judge. The confirmation is pending an appeal.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As a recent article in the Forward states – its well known that Courts rubber stamp arbitration awards. Rabbi Greenman and his excellent attorneys took advantage of this perfectly.

G – Dan Stein letter to R Cohen 12 27 2013 Mel Zachter agreement 5 30 2014 brooklyn DA press release Jacob-Fetman-grand-larceny-indictment decision of judge demarest that aish must get me the report before the beis din session

Posted in Aish HaTorah | Comments Off on Rabbi Belsky’s Beis Din Issues Siruv AGAINST Aish HaTorah NY and its leaders Greenman and Markowitz

Forward: Michigan Jewish Institute Raided by Federal Agents

Forward: Feederal agents raided the offices of a Jewish college that has prospered from millions of dollars in federal aid even though almost all its students live in Israel and hardly any of them graduate.
Federal officials declined to comment on the reason for the July 7 raid at Michigan Jewish Institute, in a suburb of Detroit.
But in 2012, the Forward showed how MJI’s assets soared as the college enrolled thousands of students in distance and online learning courses.
During a five-year period, MJI’s students claimed $25 million under the Federal Pell Grant Program, which is designed for the neediest American students.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on Forward: Michigan Jewish Institute Raided by Federal Agents

Our Government Is Our Enemy – Bring On The Civil War

Michael Scheuer writes: If there ever was a week in our Union’s history demonstrating that the national government must always be suspected of being the enemy of Americans, their liberty, and their social cohesion, this past week surely was the one.

Barack Obama and his party redoubled the national government’s marked preference for Black Americans, and not only by pretending that more Blacks are killed by racist Whites, than Whites by racist Blacks. As troubling, they also encouraged and then unleashed what can only be described as a lynch mob bent on destroying a historical symbol that means — and should mean — something important, tangible, and worth honoring to many more Americans than the number of half-baked but rabid Democratic haters who believe it is their right to destroy any piece of U.S. history with which they disagree or which casts a truthful light on the issues that define their party’s history, namely, slavery, secession, civil war, segregation, and socialism.

Black Americans have been legally free for nearly 150 years, and yet the truth is that they were kept in subjugation by the Democratic Party until the 1960s and have now re-enslaved themselves by their unquestioning allegiance to the same party, one that still keeps them poor and dependent. If the Democratic haters could burn or steal every Army of Northern Virginia battle flag in America, it would not change the fact that Black Americans remain oppressed by a Democratic Party that is, quite ironically, led today by a Black overseer.

In the past week, we also have endured a prize piece of nonsense from Justice Kennedy, who, in his god-like munificence, awarded “dignity” to another group of national government-preferred Americans — those of diverse sexual orientations — and decreed, because it cannot be proven, that the Supreme Court is empowered by the Constitution to define marriage to be whatever the Court says it is, not what even the slightest bit of commonsense would know to be the truth: that marriage can only occur between one man and one woman. Coming soon, one supposes, the dignity-hawking Justice Kennedy and his quartet of aging and addled hangers-on will decree that night is day, hot is cold, short is tall, winter is summer, and 320 million Americans should behave as directed to by judicial diktats concurred in by a judicial gadfly, an empty suit, and three empty dresses.

The idea that the national government or the Supreme Court can give any American “dignity” is a cynical and vote-craving fantasy. All human beings are created with dignity, an attribute which results from the fact that they are made in the image and likeness of God. History, of course, is the story of men and women striving to preserve their innate, God-given dignity against their own flawed and at times depraved human nature, as well as against relentless efforts by those who govern them to destroy their dignity as humans and citizens and then re-create them as unquestioningly obedient and unthinking automatons.

Black Americans may mistakenly think that Obama enhanced their dignity by inciting hatred toward the population of the once-Confederate South and the historically literate, but in fact they were only thrown a bone by their oppressors, men and women who will expect to be repaid with what they most prize, mindless, unanimous voting by Blacks for the Democratic Party. And Gay Americans may well believe their dignity has been elevated by Justice Kennedy’s tyrannical decision, but sooner or later reality will dawn on all but the most deluded and show that no matter how many ways you choose define “marriage” there is only one correct definition.

And what of those who are not and never will be among the national government’s preferred groups? Well, for tens and perhaps hundreds of millions of southern, religious, and commonsensical Americans, the national government’s unconstitutional restraints on free speech — usually called political correctness — are likely to limit truth-speaking for a time. But those who Obama and Kennedy incited hatred against are unlikely to forgive and forget that they were ostracized, ridiculed, and defamed by a national government that increasingly rules to please what it deems to be noble minorities, while those who work hard, raise families, educate children, and pay taxes are left to take the hindmost. This method of ruling in any country, if prolonged, knowingly courts civil war.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Our Government Is Our Enemy – Bring On The Civil War

Is Your Church Abetting Sanctuary Nation?

Michelle Malkin writes: The random, heartless murder of a young tourist on San Francisco’s Pier 14 by a five-time illegal alien deportee who benefited from the “progressive” city’s sanctuary policy has law-abiding Americans, law enforcement officials and political opportunists of all stripes up in arms.

But for decades, feckless government leaders ignored the pleas of families who suffered the bloody consequences of open borders.

For every Kate Steinle who died at the hands of an illegal alien sanctuary beneficiary, there is a Tony, Michael and Matthew Bologna in San Francisco.

A Jamiel Shaw (age 17) or Xinran Ji (age 24) in Los Angeles.

A Marten Kudlis (age 3) in Denver.

An Iofemi Hightower, Dashon Harvey, Terrance Aeriel, or Natasha Aeriel in Newark.

A Zina Linnik (age 12) in Tacoma.

A Vanessa Pham (age 19) in Fairfax County, Va.

Below, illegal alien Guatemalan Julio Miguel Blanco-Garcia (left) killed 19-year-old Vanessa Pham in 2010.

As I’ve reported time and again, liberal “sanctuary” programs in these metropolitan areas have protected, harbored and enabled criminal illegal aliens who disappeared into the deportation abyss. Both Democrats and Republicans, goaded by Big Government and Big Business interests, collaborated to turn America into a collective sanctuary nation. Non-enforcement is the rule, deportation evasion is the game, and the country is a safe haven—for law-breakers from around the world.

Yet, even as born-again tough-on-borders grandstanders now race in front of cameras to condemn these dangerous policies, churches across the country are brazenly thumbing their noses at our immigration laws. And political phonies are doing nothing to stop them.

In Northeast Portland, Ore., the Augustana Lutheran Church is shielding illegal alien Francisco Aguirre-Velasquez after he committed drunk driving and drug crimes and violated deportation rules.

In Tucson, Ariz., illegal alien Daniel Neyoy Ruiz took open, public refuge at Southside Presbyterian Church and then First Christian Church to avoid deportation. Fellow illegal alien Rosa Robles Loreto has been living at First Christian for nearly a year.

In Austin, Texas, First Unitarian Universalist church is harboring illegal alien Sulma Franco after the feds denied her deportation appeal.

In Denver, illegal alien Arturo Armando Hernandez Garcia has taken up long-term residence at First Unitarian Society of Denver church.

In Chicago, illegal alien Elvira Arellano settled at the United Methodist Church of Adalberto for a year before finally being ejected back to Mexico. Last year, the serial law-breaker somehow returned to the Windy City to protest her status “in the shadows.”

The Catholic Church has been at the forefront of the 1960s-era sanctuary movement, with top officials openly promoting immigration anarchy and lawlessness among their flock in the name of “humanity” and “compassion.”

As I’ve long noted, it’s one thing to show compassion to legal immigrants, legitimate refugees and asylees, and those abused and mistreated by smugglers. It’s quite another to conspire against an orderly immigration and entrance system that imposes common-sense limits, eligibility requirements, criminal background checks, medical screening and a commitment to assimilation. Catholic groups have contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to building shelters for illegal aliens from Central America and way stations in southern Mexico.

The unholy alliance between church leaders and the open-borders lobby extends from the Vatican to Rev. Jim Wallis’ Faith in Public Life (FPL) network, the Los Angeles-based Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice (CLUE) and the George Soros-tied Interfaith Worker Justice (IWJ). It’s a web of nearly 100 interfaith committees, campus agitators and “workers centers” steeped in the organizing tactics of Saul Alinsky on behalf of millions of illegal aliens filling the pews and coffers of their abettors.

Capitol Hill’s abdication of its duties to protect and defend our borders is bad enough. But if people of faith choose to sit silently as a “new sanctuary movement” of tax-exempt houses of worship defiantly and recklessly undermines our immigration laws, our national sovereignty doesn’t have a prayer.

Posted in Immigration | Comments Off on Is Your Church Abetting Sanctuary Nation?

Knowing What We Know Now, Mrs. Clinton, Would You Still Support Sanctuary Cities?

Mark Krikorian writes:

In the wake of the murder of Kate Steinle by a five-times-deported illegal-alien felon, news organizations worthy of the name would be all over the Democratic candidates asking if they regret their past, repeated, emphatic support for sanctuary cities. After all, every Republican was asked about the Confederate battle flag, which had nothing whatever to do with the Charleston murders. And yet San Francisco’s refusal to turn over illegal aliens for the feds until they’ve been convicted of violent felonies (and the Obama administration’s support for, and even promotion of such policies) is the only reason this poor woman was killed.

Heck, even the Republicans haven’t jumped on this — other than Trump, whose widely mocked warnings of this very danger have been vindicated. This was the perfect opportunity for Walker or Rubio or Cruz (¡Jeb! is hopeless, of course) to steal some of Trump’s thunder by offering a sober but scathing critique of the Obama-Clinton policy of dismantling our immigration-enforcement infrastructure — but so far it’s crickets. And this despite the fact that deporting illegal-alien criminals is probably a 95 percent issue among Republican primary voters and a 75 percent issue among voters in general. This incident simply reinforces the Evil Party/Stupid Party narrative.

Just last month, the Senate Judiciary Committee received a report that in just four years, 121 illegal aliens who had been released by ICE went on to murder Americans. This spring, the new director of ICE actually asked Congress for legislation cracking down on sanctuary cities, but within hours was forced by the White House to recant.

This isn’t even the first time this has happened in San Francisco; in 2008, a gang member who was shielded by the city’s sanctuary policies murdered an American father and his two sons. Near Sacramento last year, a previously deported illegal alien who had repeatedly come in contact with police murdered two sheriff’s deputies. (At least in this instance, Republicans in Congress have responded with immigration-enforcement legislation, though it hasn’t yet been passed by either house.) Also in 2008, high school football star Jamiel Shaw was murdered by a DREAMer a day after Los Angeles released the illegal alien (rather than turning him over to ICE) after serving four months for assault with a deadly weapon and battery on a police officer. The Remembrance Project documents those murdered by illegal aliens.

These outrages underline the reason “comprehensive immigration reform” has repeatedly failed, despite massive amounts of money and despite backing by all the commanding heights of the economy and society: No one believes supporters of amnesty and increased immigration will enforce tomorrow’s laws any better than they do today’s. Kate Steinle’s pointless, tragic death is yet more evidence of our rulers’ utter indifference to immigration law.

Posted in Immigration | Comments Off on Knowing What We Know Now, Mrs. Clinton, Would You Still Support Sanctuary Cities?

Deconstructing A Pro-Immigration Essay

Comment on The Atlantic:

How do you prevent crimes committed by undocumented immigrants?

Proper terminology please, you are, after all a journalist. Immigration involves being invited to join a society, so undocumented immigrant is an oxymoron. Now that illegal alien is a term which is frowned upon, the polite term to use is infiltrator.

To answer your question, you deport all the infiltrators and thus you have no crimes to prevent. See how simple that is?

But what if immigration reform is actually the solution?

I see the genius of your liberal ways, The way to prevent crimes by infiltrators is to make them citizens and then the blame can fall squarely on citizens. Brilliant. I see how the Caitlyn Jenner principle applies, a man is a woman, an infiltrator is a citizen.

The current system has left many Latinos—immigrant and native born alike—alienated from law enforcement.

You’re chock full of weird liberal principles, aren’t you? Here is the Rahm Emmanuel, “Never let a good crisis go to waste” principle. Why not use this murder as an excuse to push the line that Hispanics are afraid to talk to the police when this issue has no damn bearing on this case at all? See, a principled journalist would stay focused on the issue, not use a tragedy to push a liberal agenda, but what would you know about that?

“They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists,” he said. “And some, I assume, are good people.” If that were accurate, then building a bigger, badder fence might be a rational response.

Wow, you are a pushover. That is accurate, so thanks for lending your support to a border wall. That was easy,

Thousands of children were then arriving at the border fleeing violence in Honduras and El Salvador. Children. But even then, many on the right felt threatened, and endorsed greater force and more security as the sole solution.

Honduras and El Salvador do NOT border the US. UN Refugee law requires refugees to claim refugee status in the first safe country though which they transit. That country would be Mexico. Those kids are not our problem, they’re Mexico’s problem.

Obama has also deported more undocumented immigrants than any of his predecessors, of either party.

This is outrageous bullsh*t. Are you merely ignorant or purposely lying? Returns versus Removals:

“Since 2011, the Obama administration has included numbers from a Border Patrol program that returns illegal immigrants to Mexico right after they cross the Southwest border in their year-end deportation statistics. It is dishonest to count illegal immigrants apprehended by the Border Patrol along the border as ICE removals. And these ‘removals’ from the Border Patrol program do not subject the illegal immigrant to any penalties or bars for returning to the U.S. This means a single illegal immigrant can show up at the border and be removed numerous times in a single year – and counted each time as a removal. When the numbers from this Border Patrol program are removed from this year’s deportation data, it shows that removals are actually down nearly 20% from 2009. Another 40,000 removals are also included in the final deportation count but it is unclear where these removals came from.

With Removals down, this means that there are more infiltrators awaiting court dates in the US and it appears that Obama is playing a game of running out the clock hoping that he can amnesty these infiltrators if they are still physically present in the US.

Meanwhile, San Francisco, a “sanctuary city” that tries to protect undocumented immigrants from deportation, may have declined to turn this particular man over to federal immigration authorities, and action that would have prevented his crime.

May have declined? Now you become judicious with your language? The whole point of sanctuary policies is to stop turning these infiltrators over to ICE. There’s no may have involved. They DID NOT turn over this man because to do so would violate their sanctuary policy.

It’s interesting how liberal cities feel that they can choose to not enforce federal law. I wonder if conservatives cities are going to try this liberal innovation with respect to homosexual “marriage” licenses.

That sort of obstruction would be less likely to happen if the vast majority of immigrants no longer had to worry about deportation.

There would be no need for sanctuary policies if we simply followed the damn law and deported all of these infiltrators. See how simple it all becomes when you follow the law.

Perhaps the irony in all of this is that if Donald Trump were right, policing and immigration reform would be easy. We’d just round up all the immigrants, ship them away, and crime would disappear.

Of course Trump is right. No infiltrators, no crime committed by infiltrators. Americans can once again follow the law.

But most immigrants, like most native-born Americans, are simply hardworking people trying to feed their families and help their kids succeed.

There’s nothing stopping these infiltrators from working hard and feeding their families in Mexico or points further south. They’re a financial and cultural and governmental burden on the people of the US. We counsel our own children to finish school, to not drop out of high school, because HS drop-outs impose huge tax burdens on other citizens, so the last thing we need to be doing is importing and coddling 20 million infiltrators, 70% of whom are HS drop-outs with Spanish as their first, and in many cases only, language. They put a millstone around our neck at a time when we have record numbers of our own citizens out of the labor force and this in an environment where ALL of the job gains since 2000 have gone to immigrants and infiltrators:

Government data show that since 2000 all of the net gain in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job has gone to immigrants (legal and illegal). This is remarkable given that native-born Americans accounted for two-thirds of the growth in the total working-age population. Though there has been some recovery from the Great Recession, there were still fewer working-age natives holding a job in the first quarter of 2014 than in 2000, while the number of immigrants with a job was 5.7 million above the 2000 level.

Contempt for the “journalist” needs to be expressed alongside dissent. No one likes being targeted with blatant propaganda.

I’m still waiting for the Atlantic to review Coulter’s book. That’ll be a fantastic event. Maybe they’ll have to offer hazard pay to one of their editors to subject themselves to such crimethink.

But the establishment on BOTH sides likes it.

Hence Trump’s rise. People are also not overlooking the burned bridges here. Props to the guy. All the other politicians can be bought, Trump has enough wealth to be immune. Romney did too, but his heart was with the elite.

The solution to so, so many of our problems lies with ridding ourselves of the deadweight of these infiltrators:

A new study of black male employment trends has come up with the following extremely depressing finding: “By 2002, one of every four black men in the U.S. was idle all year long. This idleness rate was twice as high as that of white and Hispanic males.”

It’s possible the rate of idleness is even higher, said the lead author of the study, Andrew Sum, who is director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University in Boston.

“That was a conservative count,” he said. The study did not consider homeless men or those in jail or prison. It is believed that up to 10 percent of the black male population under age 40 is incarcerated.

While some of the men not working undoubtedly were ill or disabled, the 25 percent figure is still staggeringly high. And for some segments of the black male population, the situation is even worse.

Among black male dropouts, for example, 44 percent were idle year-round, as were nearly 42 of every 100 black men aged 55 to 64.

“I was surprised by the magnitude of the population that was idle all year-round,” said Professor Sum. “Typically, some groups will find work part of the year, but not the other part, and you end up with a high joblessness rate. But here we’ve got a growing number of men just not working at all.”

* My father in law oversaw some of the construction at the ’96 Olympics. This event explains some – or much – of the Hispanic immigration into the greater Atlanta area. He said – and I have no reason to think he was lying – that they tried and tried and tried to lure the thousands of unemployed young black men to take these jobs. They failed and had to import labor from Mexico.

Posted in Immigration | Comments Off on Deconstructing A Pro-Immigration Essay

WHITE WOMAN SHOT, KILLED IN HOLLYWOOD WITH NO APPARENT MOTIVE; SEARCH UNDERWAY FOR BLACK GUNMAN

HOLLYWOOD, LOS ANGELES (KABC) — A woman walking with her boyfriend in Hollywood was shot and killed, and police are looking for the gunman.

The shooting was reported shortly after 10 p.m. Sunday. Police said the victim, identified as Carrie Jean Melvin, 30, of Hollywood was found on Sunset Boulevard and McCadden Place near Hollywood High School.

According to investigators, the suspect approached the woman from behind and shot her. The woman’s boyfriend, who was with her at the time, was not shot. Police said Melvin lived nearby and the two were walking to get something to eat.

Melvin was pronounced dead at the scene. Her boyfriend was not injured. His identity has not been released.

Authorities said there is no known motive at this time.

“We’ve interviewed the boyfriend, there’s no indication that they had any idea there were enemies, that she would be targeted, so at this point we just don’t know,” said Detective John Skaggs.

Witnesses said the suspect ran to a car, described as a black four-door vehicle, and drove off.

Police described the suspect as a black male wearing dark clothing and a hoodie.

Posted in Blacks, Crime, Los Angeles | Comments Off on WHITE WOMAN SHOT, KILLED IN HOLLYWOOD WITH NO APPARENT MOTIVE; SEARCH UNDERWAY FOR BLACK GUNMAN