A new voice in America’s battle against political corruption
Joe Angione is a former columnist for The Villages Daily Sun, and can be reached by email by clicking HERE
Joe Angione Live Interview on Freedom in America
Latest Edition 2/13/17
Please excuse our absence from the Internet for the past 30 days due to extensive travelling in Europe. Sadly, nothing has changed recently in the way the federal government is forcing us toward the nation’s second civil war. The possibilities for this war remain very good. What a horrible thing to say…that we may very well experience the spiritual and physical devastation that another civil war can bring.
It has become necessary to move the doomsday clock’s hands forward by five minutes, placing them at 15 minutes to the dreaded midnight hour.
The federal government has experienced two shutdowns within just 30 days. This certainly doesn’t bode well for the cooperation in Congress that’s needed to make America great again.
The last of these shutdowns occurred on February 8th, and although it only lasted for about five hours, it was ended by a continuing budget resolution, a stop-gap funding measure, that will keep the government running only until March 23rd when we’ll have to face another possible shutdown.
Perhaps the best to come out of this funding bill signed by the president is that it can finally end the Obama sequestration that has weakened and almost wrecked the U.S. military in recent years.
The new bill signed by Trump separately raises military and domestic spending by almost $300 billion over two years that will be financed through borrowed money. It also extends the federal debt ceiling to March 2019.
Many will say that financing by borrowing many more billions, thus increasing the national debt, is a terrible mistake. But for the first time in a long time this deficit money will be well spent, and not wasted like the trillions in useless debt accumulated by the Obama administration. Most of us will understand that without a strong military, capable of withstanding all of our enemies, we will soon be conquered and have no nation at all.
Vigorously impeding the passage of an adequate, long-term federal budget have been the unrelenting efforts by liberal Democrats to link amnesty for DACA recipients to these funding bills. This ignores the fact that DACA amnesty logically should be considered separately on its own merits. But that’s not how the minds of left-leaning Democrats work when infected with Trump derangement syndrome that locks them in a mood of resisting President Trump’s efforts to do anything that is good for the American people.
What’s to come for U.S. politics? Only more intense and vicious resistance to legislation that gives the nation what it needs to survive and prosper in the years ahead. This is shaping up to be the single most powerful factor that drives America toward another civil war.
The Democrats “Top-Down Plan to Destroy America”
Dave Hodges, founder of the Common Sense Show website, offers a scenario for civil war that is hard to refute. He writes: “We are witnessing Civil War II unfold. The lines of battle have not clearly been drawn and thousands if not millions are not yet dying. But make no mistake about it, the country is polarized and the point of no return has been reached.”
Hodges suggests how a Hillary Clinton presidency would have thoroughly ruined the nation. “The Clinton forces had in mind a ‘Top-Down Plan to Destroy America’ … and it was predicated on the notion that the Democrats would control the presidency. The top-down approach is the most effective in initiating a civil war against America and her traditions [such as] the Constitution.
“Before the election of Donald Trump, the Deep State had grown to such a proportion that government was effectively under the control of many of the Obama appointees that had infected the White House and various cabinet posts for the previous eight years…Before the end of Hillary’s first term as president, the Supreme Court would have been Democrat for decades to come…. The presidency would have come under control of Clinton and America would have never recovered.
“As President, Clinton would have come to control much of the military [severely restricting its size, power and scope of operations].
“She would have given the United Nations peacekeepers access to the country.”
Hodges adds: “Clinton would have continued Obama’s form of socialist economics that was bankrupting the country and its middle class. Chaos would have ensued under a Clinton presidency. People would have predictably taken to the streets and gun confiscation laws would have been enacted. Social media would have completely shut down the independent, [conservative] media. And most importantly, dissidents would have been hauled off to re-education camps to never be heard from again.
“Under a Clinton presidency, the chaos of the country would have reached such a crisis, that we would have seen the UN’s ‘blue helmets’ going house to house to look for guns. Many of the UN soldiers [might] have been Chinese and Russian. Effectively, America would have been conquered and Hillary would have been installed as the puppet leader.”
But, of course, there is no Clinton presidency and none of this misery has happened. But we’re not safe, not until the Clinton, Pelosi, Shumer cabal of resistance is finally defeated. Right now, this appears to likely invite a second civil war, unless we, every patriotic American, does their job to unblock Congress and allow it to restore a government that is “by the people…for the people.”
Donald Trump is right. He knows that there are only two ways to open up the federal government to the interests and needs of the people. One way is to convince Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, to invoke the” nuclear option” on all voting for legislation demanded by the public and vital to our survival. The other way, and the best option, is for the people to ensure that, in this year’s elections, Republicans succeed in gaining control of 60 Senate seats, thereby guarantying the passage of urgently needed new legislation. Please pass the word on to make this happen.
Let’s stop whining about the plight of DACA people
DACA, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, is part of the reason why illegal immigrants in this country cost American taxpayers about $139 billion in unnecessary expense annually. It is an illegal program launched against current U.S. immigration law by an executive order signed in 2012 by former president Barack Obama.
Since then about 800,000 immigrants, who are said to have been children when they arrived in the U.S. illegally, have received protection from deportation, been allowed to legally work, obtain driver's licenses, and go to school in the U.S. The main reason for the program, according to Obama, was that although these young people were brought to this country illegally by their parents, they’re here through no fault of their own.
Applicants for DACA status had to be younger than 31 years old when the program began. They also had to prove they had lived in the United States continuously since June 15, 2007, and that they had arrived in the U.S. before the age of 16. Since there are no records of when their parents actually brought these children into the U.S., and no documentation that they’ve lived here continuously, such proof is hard to provide, making the entire DACA program heavily suspect.
The Trump administration has announced it intends to end the DACA program by March 5th if Congress doesn't find a more permanent solution to legalize their continued residency here in the U.S.
Debate in the Senate on a solution to the DACA problem is set to begin immediately. NumbersUSA , that reports on immigration trends, states several Republicans as well as nearly all Democrats favor passing a massive amnesty for DACA recipients that eventually would allow them to use chain immigration to legalize the entry of their entire families, many of whom would require huge amounts of welfare money to survive here.
To these members of Congress, the plight of DACA people is so perilous that we must eventually give them, undeservedly so, our most precious gift: citizenship.
It’s right to say that DACA people should not be punished for the illegal acts of their parents. But it’s also true that they should not be rewarded for their parents’ illegal actions. What then, should be done to protect their status here in the U.S.?
Have DACA people had anything to complain about? For openers, they’ve already received a lot just by being permitted to be here and not suffer deportation. They are far safer, better educated and more prosperous than they could have been remaining in their birth countries.
In the last decade nearly seven million foreigners, who applied for legal residence here, were granted citizenship through the nation’s lawful naturalization process. Their path to rightful citizenship was long, and required considerable effort and expense. Since our law demanded that they endure naturalization, we can’t in any fairness permit others who were illegally brought into the U.S. to be blessed with citizenship, especially while doing absolutely nothing to merit it. This would be a travesty of justice. It would make a mockery of our immigration law and spread contempt for the naturalization process among those millions who abided by it to become citizens.
Many DACA recipients are now protesting the possible termination of the illegal DACA program. They insist that to remain here and proceed toward citizenship is a right that’s due them even though most have done nothing to earn that right. This is ingratitude of the worst kind.
A president acting without authority created DACA, and nothing was done by our judicial system to rescind his illegal executive order. In essence, our federal government helped create and perpetuate the DACA program, and now, as an honorable nation, we must accept responsibility for allowing foreigners to breach our immigration law. It’s time to make things right, but do it without causing harm to DACA recipients.
John Horvath II, founder of the Return to Order website explains that “falsely framing the debate as one over the welfare of DACA people, liberals have turned them into pawns in a political game…We should never reward those who break the law either directly or indirectly. Respect for the law is one of the foundations of a civilized political order. When the rule of law is disregarded, as in the case of parents who enter illegally with their children, it is a matter that affects the common good. Children are taught [bad] lessons when they see the illegal acts of their parents rewarded with benefits.” A better alternative must be available for dealing with the presence of DACA people.
The case for “Certified Permanent Residency” As a nation that wants to abide by its laws, the best we can do for DACA recipients is to ensure that the most important benefit of their condition here, unobstructed residency, is maintained in the form of Certified Permanent Residency status.
I’ve touched on this before. But the idea needs far more awareness and support than I alone can provide. If what I describe here makes sense to you, please talk it up with everyone you know. With luck, news of it will reach the halls of Congress.
Similar to a “green card,” certified permanent residency would be given as a formal certificate, but one that does not require renewal every ten years.
The benefits of certified permanent residency would be:
Citizenship must always be protected and reserved as the most precious gift we can bestow on those deserving applicants who honor our immigration law. Certified permanent residency is the only way to achieve this in the case of those here illegally, even “through no fault of their own.”
Is Kim Jong-un hi-jacking the South Korean Olympics?
The XXIII Winter Olympic Games in PyeongChang, South Korea began in the brilliant glow of the techno- marvels for which that nation is so well known. Imagine launching 1,200 illuminated mini-drones perfectly synchronized to form the Olympic symbol and the image of doves, the symbol of peace. This served as a brilliant opening heralding global brotherhood and the excitement of 3,000 of the world’s best athletes competing to achieve glory for themselves and for their home countries.
But the PyeongChang Olympics is shaping up to be very different from any other games since 1936 when Hitler tried to use the Olympics to glamourize the Nazi movement in Germany. Hitler failed, but will Kim Jong-un succeed in his attempt to manipulate this year’s Winter Olympics into a wedge that drives South Korea apart from its best friend and greatest benefactor, the United States? This just might happen if South Korean president Moon Jae-in isn’t careful.
At a time when the prospects for war on the Korean Peninsula are greater than in decades, no one wants a bloodbath to begin there…not even the communist North’s Kim Jong-un. In a search for peace, South Korea’s president, Moon Jae-in, responded to the North’s interest in attending the Olympics by inviting it to send a delegation of athletes that would compete as members of a joint Korean Olympic team. In doing so, Moon fell into the Machiavellian hands of the North’s Kim, who is using Moon’s fear of war as a means of cozying up and drawing South Korea away from the U.S. that Kim calls a “vicious aggressor determined to bring devastation to all of Korea.”
Just three days into the PyeongChang games, the South’s president received an invitation to visit the North to meet with Kim supposedly to lessen tensions between the two countries and avert war. At this writing, Moon Jae-in hasn’t accepted the invitation, but it’s pretty certain he will in some way, perhaps not himself, choosing to send a high-level envoy.
Terrific pressure on the South’s leadership. There’s no doubt that Moon is under intense pressure from his people to do everything possible to avoid a war that will kill millions. And so, he’s right to hold the door open to a hoped-for peace initiative.
Unfortunately, shortly after the Olympics end and the South has sent an emissary for talks in Pyongyang, that door will abruptly be slammed in President Moon’s face. The brutal truth is that no good deeds can ever come from the heart of an evil monster like Kim Jong-un. Just like Britain’s Neville Chamberlain, Moon will never receive an honest offer of “peace in our time.”
The U.S. understands the stress that the South’s Moon is under—to do something, anything, to save his nation. And so, we have not attempted to interfere with any talks between the North and South. But it’s clear to President Trump and most of our government that the “olive branch” in Kim’s hand is nothing more than a stalling tactic to give the North a little more time to complete its nuclear program, and hold the South and the whole world for ransom. The Associated Press calls this a “charm offensive” that the North has repeated many times before.
However, should Moon take Kim’s offer seriously, and re-start the South’s failed “Sunshine Policy” of reconciliation that, until 2008, was meant to soften North Korea’s attitude toward the South, then all may be lost for close cooperation between South Korea and the United States. The pact between our nations cannot survive if the South chooses to drift beneath the spell of a ruthless dictator.
To kneel before Kim Jong-un and beg for peace would be a mortal failure and a devastating shame for the South. Worse for us, it would leave the U.S. “hanging in the wind” at the mercy of Kim Jong-un’s vow to deliver a nuclear holocaust to the heart of America.
Something to remember: In the 65 years since the truce between North and South Korea, the North has built a formidable military force with the third largest active army in the world. During this time, the South has built a massive economy and is one of the richest countries in the world. However, it has not done enough militarily to successfully respond to the threat from the North, relying heavily on the U.S. for protection.
South Korea is a typical example of most nations of the free world that spend sparingly on their own defense, choosing mainly to make saving their asses America’s responsibility. Although there are significant economic links between South Korea and the United States, the South needs us in all regards far, far more than we need them. In plain language, should it be necessary, we can do without them very well.
It may soon be time for President Trump to remind Moon Jae-in and his government that unification with a nation led by a militant, remorseless murderer will bring an end to the South’s economic progress, its prosperity and the freedom of its people. Kim Jung-un will remain a monster; his evil is invincible.
We may be forced to consider a future where South Korea sinks or swims on its own, with no help
The Ballad of "Big Bad Don"
Take three minutes for a smile and a few laughs listening to the Ballad of Big Bad Don, who “came down from his tower to save us in our final hour.” Old Tennessee Ernie Ford must be smiling down on us and chuckling too over this reconstruction of his immortal hit “Big Bad John.” It may just become the fight song for all the wonderful “deplorables” who put a no-nonsense guy like Donald Trump in office. He’s a legend in his own time. Enjoy.
Replacing food stamps with food deliveries saves money
As part of his major budget proposal in early February, President Trump suggested that some of the food stamp money given to needy people be replaced by actual deliveries of wholesome, basic food items.
Liberals were outraged with the idea of taking redeemable food stamps away from the poor and substituting real food delivered to their doors. The items to be delivered would be the kind of foods that the original Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) intended to provide to enable poor families to prepare nutritious meals at home from scratch.
Today, it’s the redemption aspect of food stamps that has turned much of this assistance program into scams where food-stamp benefit cards are being abused to buy things such as cigarettes, beer and even gasoline instead of foods needed for a healthy diet. Often unscrupulous retailers will overcharge food stamp recipients’ benefit cards and then gave them back in cash half of what had been overcharged so that recipients could do whatever they want with the government’s money.
It’s reported that currently, food stamps are provided for about 42 million people, 80 percent of whom get food benefits monthly worth at least $90 per person. Trump’s proposal, would distribute to those 80 percent of SNAP recipients about half of their benefits in the form of a USDA Foods package consisting of “shelf-stable milk, ready-to-eat cereals, pasta, peanut butter, beans, rice and canned fruit and vegetables.” The tentative name for the Trump proposal is “America’s Harvest Box.”
The U.S. Department of Agriculture believes state governments will be able to deliver this food at much less cost than SNAP recipients currently pay for food at retail stores. It’s estimated it can cut SNAP costs —by $129 billion over the next 10 years. Additional cost adjustments to the SNAP program, according to the Trump administration, will reduce the SNAP budget by $213 billion over those year, thus cutting the expense of the program by almost 30 percent.
Will liberals support the Trump proposal? Not hardly. National Public Radio has already begun to attack it, saying that it’s unfairly intrusive, reduces recipients’ choices, and allows SNAP administrators to decide what foods are good for America’s families instead of allowing recipients to pick out what’s best for them and their families. This may seem to be logical and right. But it just doesn’t work out that way. Recipients have demonstrated they are terrible at making nutritionally-sound choices, choosing to overspend on “junk foods” unhealthy drinks, including beer and alcohol, and even gambling away their food stamp money.
People have the right to purchase anything that’s legal, but not with money that’s doled out and accepted by them for a specific purpose: healthy nutrition. To spend food-stamp money any other way is a gross abuse of our welfare system and taxpayer money.
Mounting Hispanic support for cuts in legal immigration
Immigration reform is the hottest topic in Washington today. And, according to the Hispolitica@shark-tank.com website, it appears that many Hispanics are not opposed to a conservative sponsored plan to cut legal immigration in half, end chain immigration, cap refugee admissions to 50,000 annually, and end the visa diversity program.
Wow! This is a huge mouthful at a time when conventional wisdom says that Hispanics are entirely opposed to any program that would end the opportunities for more of them to enter the U.S. under any circumstances, including illegal entry.
Hispolitica’s Javier Manjarres writes: “The most recent legislative fix proposed by Republican Senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue, the Trump-supported Reforming American Immigration for Strong Employment (RAISE Act) is being welcomed by Hispanics from all walks of life.”
This flies in the face of all the liberal left’s commentary that the nation’s Hispanic citizens are virtually all against any legislation that works to hold down their numbers in this country. This demeaning lie told so often by liberals and the mainstream media mocks the true integrity, honesty and conscience of America’s Hispanics who firmly believe that abiding by the nation’s immigration law is the only way to achieve a virtuous and dignified life in the United States.
Manjarres added: “In late 2017, a group of Florida-based Hispanic businessmen, activists, pastors, and media personalities penned a letter to Democrat Senator Bill Nelson asking him to support the RAISE Act. The group outlined [its support] for all the points in the Act itself.”
Those who sent the letter highlighted the fact that “It is time for us to prioritize high-skilled immigrants who spur innovation, create jobs, and make America competitive in the global economy. The RAISE Act will do that while stemming the tide of unskilled immigrants [from anywhere] that puts downward pressure on the wages of working Americans.”
It’s too bad that their letter favoring the RAISE Act was sent to the wrong legislator. Nelson is not an enthusiast of the Act, and apparently the letter sent to him has not changed his mind. Democrats rarely, if ever, break ranks to support a “commonsense” conservative bill.