Buying American: It’s more difficult than you think

May 26, 2015

…and will only get worse

We’ve all felt the bone-deep frustration of wanting to buy American made items and being met with a sea of foreign produced goods. Whether we’re looking for the latest in technology, a wrench or a new pair of running shoes, the dearth of American products is not only apparent, but often the manufacturing  origin is stealthily concealed.  The words “distributed by” assure consumers of a distribution address in New York. A magnifier is needed to read the much smaller print “Made in China” or PRC (People’s Republic of China).

Eighty-four percent of American consumers say they would rather buy an American-made product, believing them to be more reliable than imported ones, according to a recent survey. Respondents said they were even willing to pay more for U.S. made goods.

Consumer Reports, the longtime rating and recommendations company, gives the lowdown on the issue and provides a sampling of companies that make or assemble at least some of their products in the United States. Trying to sort it out becomes even more confusing, since some primarily American companies may have manufacturing facilities in more than one country.

Food products are not immune from the garbled presentations. They give the example of brands of salmon that are labeled both “wild-caught Alaskan” and “Product of Thailand.” The fish was caught in U.S. waters but took a detour to Asia to be skinned and boned (to take advantage of cheaper labor) before making its return voyage. Under the law, that side trip must be noted.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, American manufacturing lost almost 6 million jobs between 2000 and 2010. “Offshoring” became a buzzword with the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994. But the more recent hemorrhaging of jobs was due in large part to China’s entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001. A decade of BLS data reveals heavy job losses across more than a dozen manufacturing sectors, including apparel and textiles, electrical equipment, iron and steel production, computers, glass, and leather tanning and finishing.

Last Tuesday we wrote that Congressional Republicans are foolishly poised to give Barack Obama irreversible fast track authority on Trans Pacific Partnership, an 11-nation trade agreement that provides an unrestricted flow of workers into the United States. This is particularly dangerous since treaties supersede statutes under the U.S. Constitution.  If you missed the post and accompanying video, take time to acquaint yourself with the facts.

The previous day the post “GOP establishment conspires with Obama on trade deal” reveals the depth of the putrid deception being flung by Republicrats who claim to representative us.


GOP aids Obama’s stealth immigration, climate change power grab & UPDATE

May 19, 2015

Republicans foolishly poised to give Obama fast track on Trans Pacific Partnership, providing irreversible authority, since treaties supersede statutes under U.S. Constitution

This is huge,” Dick Morris tells America‘s Forum host J.D. Hayworth as he discusses Obama’s attempt to fast track Trans Pacific Partnership.*  (video under link)

“I hope that everybody listening takes action, call your senator about it.  If he‘s a Republican. he‘s voting wrong.  I don’t think the people understand that in this deal, which is a trade agreement among Australia, Malaysia, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan, Canada, United States, Mexico, Peru and Chili, there is a provision for free flow of workers, just like in the European Union.

What that means is unrestricted immigration.  It means literally that Congress would not have the authority to restrict immigration, because a treaty supersedes a statute under our constitution.”

Morris continues, “Obama is going to try to circumvent the legislative process and use the treaty-making authority do stuff that Congress can’t repeal, and a future president can’t change. As he enters the seventh year of his presidency, that’s what he’s focused on.  Under the guise of a NAFTA-like trade agreement it provides for unrestricted immigration within these eleven countries, which means any Mexican can come here to the United States legally, stay here, be naturalized, become a citizen and vote — and Congress can’t do anything about it. The Constitution enumerates the powers of Congress. One of them is Immigration and Naturalization.  This supersedes that and it does so for all time. Because you can’t repeal a treaty unless the other signatories agree.’

“It also could become the way to get Climate Change in,” Morris warns.  “He’s taking the whole legislative agenda and putting it in a treaty and getting it ratified and then it becomes as good as a Constitutional Amendment.

In this case Obama is putting it in a treaty and asking congress to approve fast track authority.  The idea that with all the power this president has grabbed, the Republicans are about to give him fast track, which means he can do  any trade agreement he wants and ratification is almost automatic, and the Democrats are opposing this. It is entirely Republican votes that are pushing it and they just don’t understand what’s in the damn bill.”

“This is not amnesty,“ Morris tells Hayworth. “Amnesty is for people who are already here.”

Watch this vitally important interview beginning at 5:52.

 * Besides the United States there are 11 other countries involved in  the TPP: :Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

Update-tag

On Thurs. May 21, 2015, by a roll call vote of 62 to 38, this is the Senate vote on HR 1314. This measure is expected to be the vehicle in the Senate guaranteeing Obama’s trade promotion authority. Check out the votes of Arizona’s Senators.


Stephanopoulos acted disreputably…but “for the best reasons”

May 16, 2015

The unbridled arrogance of the left exposed once again

George Stephanopoulos, chief political correspondent and anchor for ABC News, as well as the co-anchor of ABC’s “Good Morning America” and host of the Sunday show, “This Week,” has been exposed as a high dollar donor to the increasingly questionable Clinton Foundation. 

Among the myriad revelations to emerge regarding the donor list is the relationship between the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One, a former Canadian mining company that was taken over by Russia in 2013 with U.S. government approval. From 2009 through 2013, Uranium One’s chairman donated a whopping $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. Hillary Clinton claims that there is “not an inherent conflict of interest” between the foundation donations and her decisions at the State Department. Foreign governments with much to gain also contributed. 

Stephanopoulos, who had not previously disclosed his own donations, has now admitted he has given a total of $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation. That figure represents contributions of $25,000 each in three consecutive years. ABC News initially said that Stephanopoulos had given a total of $50,000 to the foundation —- which has raised nearly $2 billion since it was founded in 2001

Clinton Cash” author Peter Schweizer rightly refers to Stephanopoulos’ donations as a “massive ethical breach.” After Sens. Rand Paul and Mike Lee joined the chorus for him recuse himself from all 2016 coverage, he has finally acquiesced and will step aside.

This man is not a political novice. Prior to joining the network, Stephanopoulos was communications director and senior adviser for policy and strategy to President Clinton. He was also communications director on Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign. 

This video montage shows Stephanopoulos shamelessly acting as Clinton Defender-In Chief.

Stephanopoulos apologized for not making the contributions public knowledge. The left-of-center network issued a statement saying he was wrong not to disclose the contribution though calling it “an honest mistake.’ 

In an interview Stephanopoulos acknowledged that while he made the donations “for the best reasons,” he now realizes he “probably shouldn’t have” done so, even as he nobly characterized his “substantial donations” as given to “stop the spread of AIDS, help children and protect the environment in poor counties.” 

Would this newly selfless and benevolent, longtime Clinton political strategist, have come to that conclusion had he not gotten caught?


Scott Walker separates from Pres. Pack on amnesty

May 12, 2015

Consulting with Sen. Jeff Sessions pushes Gov. Walker ahead in Iowa

There’s a lot to admire about two-term Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. A solid conservative, in his 2010 race for governor, Walker soundly defeated a popular Democrat Milwaukee mayor. After being sworn into office in 2011, Walker introduced Wisconsin Act 10 to address the state’s projected $3.6 billion budget deficit. The Act limited many unsustainable union protections for public employees.

Declaring, “We’re broke,“ the new governor wanted public employees to pay more for their health insurance and toward their pensions. Massive protests erupted at the state capitol culminating in a recall against Walker. Ultimately he emerged victorious —- the only governor in U.S. history to win a gubernatorial recall election. 

At 47, he brings youthful vigor to the largely uninspiring GOP candidate list, rife with retreads. This recent Quinnipiac Poll shows still undeclared candidate Walker leading the Iowa Republican caucus pack, with establishment favorite Jeb Bush at a distant seventh.

National Review reports that Walker has met with Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions* and is adopting a firmer stance on illegal immigration —- separating himself from the politically correct, open border, squish pack, even moderating his own former position. National Review refers to Walker’s position as “hard line.” We call it rational.

As border state front-liners, Arizonans have endured the amnesty duplicity of Sens. John McCain,  Jeff Flake, and previously, Jon Kyl. Gov. Scott Walker breathes new life into the political landscape on this crucial subject.   

“The next president and the next Congress need to make decisions about a legal-immigration system that’s based on, first and foremost, on protecting American workers and American wages,” Walker told Glenn Beck. “It is a fundamentally lost issue by many in elected positions today, is what is this doing for American workers looking for jobs, what is this doing to wages, and we need to have that be at the forefront of our discussion going forward,” he said, citing Sessions by name as someone with whom he’d discussed the issue.

This Gallup Poll reports that 60% of Americans say they are dissatisfied with the level of immigration into the country today.  Only 7% want more. To the larger plurality of Americans, Scott Walker’s position makes sense.

* Sen. Jeff Sessions is the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest.


AZ Regents grant illegals in-state university tuition

May 8, 2015

ABOR and Superior Court judge reward illegality in Arizona

With this May 7 announcement, the Arizona Board of Regents reversed previous policy and will now allow illegal alien students to pay lower in-state tuition rates instead of  non-resident rates.

There was not a single voice raised in dissent. The Regents’ vote was unanimous.

This new policy, granting foreign nationals lower tuition than your Arizona-born niece who has grown up in California and wants to attend Arizona State University, is a farce.

On April 21 we posted AZ Board of Regents: Double talk on tuition, noting in-state tuition for illegals provided another costly incentive for the illegal hordes invading the U.S. Just days ago, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Arthur Anderson unilaterally ruled in direct contradiction of Arizona voters* that students in possession of work visas under Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order, are eligible for the lower in-state rate.

“Federal law, not state law, determines who is lawfully present in the U.S. The circumstance under which a person enters the U.S. does not determine that person’s lawful presence here,” Anderson haughtily opined. Judge Anderson’s decision will save the illegals thousands of dollars a year. ASU in-state basic tuition rates are $10,157 this year. Out-of-state students pay $24,503.  (Full cost schedule here).

By executive order in 2012, Barack Obama provided illegal aliens work authorization and other benefits if they qualified for “deferred action” as “childhood arrivals” (DACA) under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012. An additional executive order announced on Nov. 20, 2014, extended deferred action benefits to “childhood arrivals” regardless of age, and to illegal parents of U.S. citizens or legal permanent resident children (DAPA). Implementation of the second executive order has been temporarily enjoined by Federal judge Andrew Hanen of the Southern District of Texas.

Obviously, there is no way to substantiate age at entry claims, which is why forged and counterfeit birth certificates constitute a big business.

According to a report in the daily, Regent’s Chairman Mark Killian was quoted as breezily saying, “Let’s move forward and get our kids educated in Arizona.” The “kids” Killian so warmly describes as “our(s)” are actually the responsibility of their foreign national parents. 

This decision comes on the heels of Killian‘s April 10, statement that included a condemnation of the “reality of $100 million in budget cuts that went far beyond expectations has made it considerably harder to balance university budgets. While we will focus on efficiency and realigning our strategic plan for long-term sustainability, these cuts have real impact on our students, and result in $1,000 less per student from the state. We must take into account the harsh reality of the magnitude of these cuts that may result in reductions in positions, programming and services as well as increased costs for students. “

Arizona taxpayers will ultimately be on the hook to ante up those increased costs, while our actual children will be forced to compete for college placement with those Mark Killian has foolishly concluded are also “ours.”

 

*In 2006, Arizona voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 300, 71 to 29 percent. Among its provisions was the prohibition of those without proof of legal residency being classified as in-state students and receiving state and federal financial aid or in-state tuition.


Baltimore an example of decades of liberal control

April 29, 2015

Law abiding citizens gasp once again as chaos reigns in yet another American city. This time it’s Baltimore, where lawlessness, rioting, looting, arson and the injuring of 15 police officers rolls over into yet another day. It’s a repeat, on larger scale, of the anti-law enforcement mentality that rocked the black majority small town of Ferguson, Missouri in the heat of last August following the police shooting of a black youth. The per capita income of $21,000 is indicative of too little education resulting in too little opportunity. Setting the town on fire and looting stores is strangely regarded as a catharsis.

Now it’s Baltimore. Another death, this time a man in police custody, leads to more rioting, seemingly condoned by those who are supposed to be in charge.  Baltimore’s Democrat  Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake said she instructed police officers to allow protestors to express themselves saying, “we also gave those who wished to destroy, space to do that as well.”

These reckless words were spoken as stores were looted and set ablaze, police cars torched and a flaming metal garbage can was hurled toward a line of police officers in riot gear as they tried to push back the violent crowd. Some officers were hit with bricks.

Later the mayor denied ever saying the words that were captured by news cameras. She unashamedly blamed the media for twisting her words and misleading viewers.

The actual misleading message was the one that echoed in the months preceding the 2008 election of Barack Obama. We were told electing the first black U.S. President would be historic. That it would be a balm for race relations.  In fact, they haven’t been worse since the days of the 1965 Watts riots which left 34 dead, more than 1000 injured and caused over $40 million in property damage in the predominately black section of Los Angeles. Over 2,000 National Guardsmen joined the police trying to maintain order on the streets at the time.

According to 2013 Census figures, Baltimore has a 63.3% black population. with 23.8 % living below the poverty level. It’s long been reported that well over half of the high school students in Baltimore City Public Schools are “chronically absent.” The connection is clear.

Race relations in America under Barack Obama have descended to levels most of us never lived through. Rather than healing, he has inflamed. Yet after four years of his failed policies, he was reelected by a stunning 87.4 % of the Baltimore City vote. In nearly 60 years, there have only been only been two Republican governors in the state of Maryland. 

Democrat policies are the root cause of the unrest. Liberalism fosters toxic government dependence. Cronyism, union corruption and the tragically failed schools (video) that follow in their wake, have run amok in Baltimore for over a half-century. 

Fifty-three percent of Americans polled by Bloomberg say race relations have worsened under the man who was supposed to usher in a golden era of “post-racial” relations.

Read Arnold Ahlert‘s “How Obama Poisoned Race Relations in America.” Though written in 2013, it remains relevant.


McCain urged IRS to target conservatives

April 12, 2015

And you thought McCain had confined himself to purging conservative elected Precinct Committeemen from the Arizona Republican Party *

The Washington Examiner headlines, “Sens. McCain and Levin urged IRS to target Tea Party, conservative groups,”  and follows up with this blockbuster report. It’s doubtful you’ll find this revelation in the pages of the Arizona Republic newspaper.

Excerpted from the report:

According to Judicial Watch officials who obtained the latest batch of documents after a federal judge issued a court order in one of the Judicial Watch’s lawsuits about the IRS’ abuses, “A May 1, 2013, email exchange between Lois Lerner and other top IRS staffers revealed that 11 days prior to Lerner’s admission that the IRS had “inappropriately” targeted conservative groups, she met with select top staffers from the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee in a “marathon” meeting to discuss concerns raised by both Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) that the IRS was not reining in political advocacy groups in response to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision. Senator McCain had been the chief sponsor of the McCain-Feingold Act and called the Citizens United decision, which overturned portions of the Act, one of the ‘worst decisions I have ever seen.'”

 * McCain operatives have worked to eradicate conservative PC’s in a concerted effort to replace them with mavericky moderates after McCain was embarrassingly censured by elected Republican state committeemen in 2014. This year many committeeman booed McCain and others turned their backs to him as he addressed the gathering.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 365 other followers