Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    We have officially reached 3rd world political status with release of ICE prisoners

    We have officially reached 3rd world political status with release of ICE prisoners

    How low will this administration go on the sequester political jockeying?

    This low, As sequester nears, immigration detainees are released:

    The Obama administration announced Tuesday that it had released hundreds of illegal immigrants held in detention facilities, saying it could no longer afford to house them because of across-the-board cuts that are set to start taking effect Friday.

    Federal authorities said that the detainees continue to face immigration charges, that they are being monitored and that violent offenders will not be let go.

    This pre-release is completely contrived.

    And violent offenders are being let go, including the person highlighted in a NY Times article about the prisoner release, Mass Release of Immigrants Is Tied to Impending Cuts (emphasis mine):

    Among those released in the past week was Anthony Orlando Williams, 52, a Jamaican immigrant who spent nearly three years in a detention center in Georgia. “I’m good, man,” he said. “I’m free.”

    Mr. Williams, in a telephone interview from Stone Mountain, Ga., said he became an illegal immigrant when he overstayed a visa in 1991. He was detained in 2010 by a sheriff’s deputy in Gwinnett County, Ga., when it was discovered that he had violated probation for a conviction in 2005 of simple assault, simple battery and child abuse, charges that sprung from a domestic dispute with his wife at the time. He was transferred to ICE custody and has been fighting a deportation order with the help of Families for Freedom, an immigrant support group in New York.

    The Obama administration loudly announced these releases to scare the voters into pressuring Republicans, much like the threats of airport delays.

    We expect an emptying of the prisons to intimidate the population to take place in 3rd world countries undergoing violent revolution, like Egypt 2011.

    If only Obama were only Nixonian and not so much worse, Bob Woodward Tears Into Obama With Veiled Nixonian Criticism: ‘Madness That I Haven’t Seen In A Long Time’:

    As I mentioned the other day, Obama controls the sequester pain meter, and apparently he intends on dialing it up.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    Henry Hawkins | February 27, 2013 at 3:57 pm

    Bob Woodward says Obama is as power mad as was Nixon. Hmmm. Watch Woodward’s NBC/ABC/CBS/CNN/MSLSD appearance fees dwindle to nothing. And he’s probably too conservative, too harsh in tone, for the new FOX News.

    It’ll be interesting to see if Woodward stands up to the coming onslaught of carpet bombing from the Obama Air Force (aka “MSM”), or if we’ll soon see a Woodward rehabilitative piece lauding Mr. Wonderful.

    Hey Professor, LI could do a lot of good by leading the conservative blogosphere to look closely at the actual agency budgets (they’re online) and mounting detailed pushback against Obama’s disaster claims. As anyone who has worked in government knows, budgets are a mixture of guesses (always on the high side), BS and hidden padding. Still, a lot can be learned from the public documents. And we need it. The GOP argument is largely generalities — spending out if control, deficits killing us, etc. — all true but pretty abstract stuff compared to Obama’s threat to take away your stuff.

    To illustrate, I grabbed one typical agency budget — that of the US Department of Agriculture for 2013:

    — The new USDA budget calls for a total of about $139 billion. Most of that is for “mandatory expenditures. About $23 billion is for “discretionary” spending. I’m not sure if the 2% “cut” is supposed to apply to the former or the latter, so it’s either $1.4 billion or $460 million, which does not matter much for our purposes.

    — The discretionary portion includes $7.5 billion for SNAP (food stamps), WIC and various other nutrition assistance programs for the poor. Naturally, this is a sympathetic clientele, and the Obama administration has already warned that such programs as Meals on Wheels for low-income seniors might have to be cut, resulting in four million fewer meals for old folks this year alone to save $10 million.

    — But the discretionary portion also includes $6.1 billion for “renewable and clean energy and environmental improvements.” However desirable these improvements may or may not be, why not take the $10 million out of that? For that matter, why not postpone or reconfigure this $6.1 billion to account for USDA’s entire $460 million or $1.4 billion “cuts”? Environmentalists will have fits, but average voters will understand.

    — But wait…what if you don’t have to “cut” anything real at all to get that 2% reduction from the numbers in this document?

    — USDA claims its $139 billion already includes a 3% “cut” — or about $700 million. But this is a reduction from 2012 “enacted levels” which is an accounting fiction, enacted levels having ceased to be meaningful once enacted. The real change is an increase of $300 million from estimated 2012 expenditures (yes, they’re still estimating) or more to the point, an increase of $900 million over actual 2011 spending.

    — Recall that $7.5 billion for nutrition assistance programs for 2013. That’s up from $6.6 billion in actual spending in 2011, a $900 million increase all by itself, accounting for the entire $900 million rise in discretionary USDA spending! 

    — Why would we see spending for food stamps, etc. rise close to 15% in that period, way more than inflation? The economy may not be improving much but it has not been getting worse since 2011, and programs like these are sensitive to unemployment and under-employmentZ.

    — There are two possible answers: 1) The $7.5 billion for 2013 is a padded estimate — all such numbers are projections, after all, which can easily be manipulated by those who make them (if they really expect it ti be $7.25 billion, that’s a $250 million cushion in just one budget line). Or 2) more people are applying for food stamps and other such programs, notwithstanding the economy, due to…wait for it…the USDA’s aggressive and expensive marketing program!

    — We’ve all seen and heard the USDA ads pushing food stamps. The agency’s marketing and regulatory programs are budgeted for 2013 for $1.9 billion — yes, billion! That’s down a bit from 2012 and 2011, but only a little, and no doubt it includes a lot of essential stuff. But I’d bet my house that the food stamp promotion alone is in for far more than the $10 million the administration says it will have no choice but to cut from Meals on Wheels.

    — Not incidentally, I don’t believe for a moment that the 2013 “mandatory” budget items are any more solid than than the discretionary items. It’s all projections, and trust me, they never project on the low side.

    There is much, much more that a little research could uncover to call BS on the USDA budget alone. And then there are a lot of agencies.

    Someone with the means to get this kind of analysis out around the blogosphere in a way that helps make the argument. Why not LI.  

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend