Archive for June, 2009

White House and Senate Democrats Use Theatre to Scam Voters on Illegal Immigration

Thursday, June 25th, 2009

By Elois Zeanah

The stage is set 

The White House is the backdrop for a storied summit with key members of Congress.  The plot is for the President to pledge his support for border security if his amnesty plan passes, and to do what President Bush tried but couldn’t accomplish — convince Congress to pass a comprehensive amnesty plan.  (Never mind that a “secure the border first” bill passed in 2006 and money has already been earmarked to fortify the border.) 

The theatrical prop is provided by “Big Smile” Charles Schumer, who unveils a plan to “overhaul the nation’s immigration laws, including a requirement that all U.S. workers verify their identity through fingerprints or an eye scan.”[1] 

Senate Democrats trumpet the tune that “a national system to verify work documents is necessary because Congress has failed to crack down on unscrupulous employers and illegal immigrants with fake documents.[2]  (Never mind that taxpayers have already paid for an effective federal tool that is in place and would immediately stop outlaw employers and illegal workers, if the President and Congress would stop dragging their feet and renew it.  It is E-Verify and it expires September 30, 2009.)

Playacting is convincing

The theme for this theatrical setting is a visual trick.  Script what the public wants – border security and enforcement of the rule of law – to gain confidence, then tell voters you have the solution and sell the suckers the same solution twice. 

Will the lure of the prestigious White House, a popular president, a minister of propaganda, and a promise to fix immigration flim flam Members of Congress again?  Similar staging happened in 2006.  Republicans and Democrats were actors in the pro-amnesty plot.  Politicians played their character parts exceptionally well.  Working through conflicts and tensions of the plot, and wringing their hands as they reached the story’s end that they had no choice but to make illegal immigrants legal, political actors poised to approve amnesty and take their bows.  But before the final curtain could fall, voters unexpectedly took the stage for a dramatic climax.  Roles reversed: Voters took the lead and a new ending to the story unfolded.

Spectators steal the show

Spectators stormed the stage, ripped the script, and wrote a new ending.  One month before the 2006 election, Congress bowed to voters’ demands for “No amnesty!  Border security first!”  That was the last curtain call, we thought.  But once again, voters were betrayed and politicians have written another Act in their plot.

The truth is hidden behind the curtain

            Once again a seductive stage is set.  Will a new, more likable president, and the same pro-amnesty pols get away with foolery the second time around, using the same plot outline but changing the script slightly?  Or will the curtain be drawn to reveal the truth once again.  The truth is we don’t need to tap more tax dollars to create new programs.  The solution is E-Verify, which the president and Democrats have put on life-support and plan to pull the plug as soon as it is politically convenient.  The new proposal to require fingerprints and eye scans is a diversion so they can.

The President and Congress should breathe new life into E-Verify

            E-Verify is the federal Internet program that was designed to do exactly what the president and Senate Democrats say needs to happen:  “Crack down on unscrupulous employers and illegal immigrants with fake documents.” 

            E-Verify scans Social Security Numbers of proposed workers in 20 seconds, costs dollars, and is 99.8% accurate.  If employers were mandated to use E-Verify, there would be no jobs magnet, no outlaw employers, and no illegal workers.  Illegal immigration would take care of itself through attrition.  This would go far to solve the problem of illegal immigration and plug the drain on federal and tax dollars that illegal immigration consumes. Billions of dollars would be saved annually on enforcement, education, health care costs and welfare.

            The federal government shouldn’t spend more tax dollars on a new scheme.  The President and Congress should stop playing con games and mandate that employers use E-Verify.  

Will voters once again draw the curtain to reveal reality and turn the plot into a revenge/justice story where something bad happens but everything works out in the end?


[2] Ibid. 

OBAMA’S HEALTH CARE GAME: “Pass the Buck” to Young People

Wednesday, June 24th, 2009

By Elois Zeanah

President Obama’s health care reform plan reminds me of the TV game show “Pass the Buck” which premiered in 1978:  It relied on luck, instant decisions under pressure, and players risked losing everything.  “Pass the Buck” lasted only 13 weeks and dissolved into the long-running game show, “The Price is Right”.  Let’s hope Obamacare will do likewise.  Otherwise, the same young voters who put Obama in office will ironically pay for his folly, forfeiting family income that should go to improve their quality of life to burdensome taxes to pay for the past generation’s free ride.   

Will Obama “pass the buck” to kids who were born in 1978-on? 

My daughter was born in 1978 so this parallel is personal.  Here’s one way to view the impact of “pass the buck” on the Young Generation:  A 30-year-old’s parents are retiring.  They’ve worked hard and scrimped all their lives for the basics but want more in their golden years than pensions and savings can afford.  They feel entitled to live the last 20 years of their lives in luxury.  After all they deserve it!  They’ve been fiscally frugal their whole lives and have sacrificed to give their children more than they had growing up.  Their children are now grown and on their own.  The parents have a great credit rating, so they buy their dream life by borrowing. 

The parents die and their children, expecting to inherit the means to a similar luxurious lifestyle, discover to their dismay that alas, their parents left the bills for pleasures past to them.   Alarmed, they wrestle with the reality that not only will they not inherit money and the American Dream their parents promised if they studied and worked hard, they will have to spend every penny they earn to pay off their parents’ debts, leaving nothing for themselves and their children. Their parents had passed the buck.  Horrified, the children wonder how they failed to see through the high-falutin’ illusion while there was time to change the outcome.

Obama’s funding scheme for health care is a fanciful illusion 

Today’s Young Generation will face this dilemma unless enough college students and young professionals who put Obama in office see through his glittering rhetoric and slow down the gathering storms that could overshadow their adult lives.  We, the Older Generation, are the guardians of the American Dream and of our children’s well-being, and it’s our responsibility to provide comparisons and solutions to safeguard our children’s future.  While we need their help, we must provide the leadership.

Even without Obama’s catastrophic nationalized health care plan adding trillions of dollars more, public debt will double over the next ten years and the bill will pass on to today’s young adults.  Americans must not follow the pied piper Obama and rely on luck, make instant decisions under pressure, and risk losing everything.  We must sort through this problem methodically and take the time to do it right.  We simply cannot “Pass the Buck” to our children, but must make sure “The Price is Right” before the best health care in the world becomes inferior and its cost burdensome to the next generation.      

HEALTH CARE “SHOPPING”: Obama Sells “Spending” as “Savings”

Saturday, June 20th, 2009



By Elois Zeanah

President Obama is using tactics of a car salesman to sell his health care plan.  It’s only appropriate that he recently bought a car company.  Surging with success of selling the public “investments” in the insurance, banking, and car industries, Obama is now supremely confident the public will buy his latest pitch to “spend” between one and three trillion dollars in order to “save” money.  The fact that some balk at the argument that a broke nation should count spending deficits as income doesn’t bother Obama.   After all, he is the superman salesman and performs better than most the tricks of the trade. 

Getting a bargain or being fleeced? 

Obama tells the public they shouldn’t worry about deficit-busting spending this year.  Nationalized health care, he says, is a bargain because it will save more than the trillions it will cost long term.  In truth, not only will the cost of government-run health insurance explode with additional taxes and fees that will hurt the middle class, the public will pay more for less.  

Using trust to trick buyers

Obama is counting on his personal popularity and the fact that voters trust him to sell them on his latest idea for yet another government takeover.  Like a good car salesman who gets personal to make friends, then uses the “trust” factor to trick customers to let their guard down, Obama is not telling customers the “drive-out price”.  

Creating a sense of urgency 

Hoping to sell his plan before taxpayers have a chance to understand the financing, Obama plies the “urgency” trick of a “limited time offer” to make a sell. We must reform health care this year, Obama warns, or the opportunity to save the economy will be lost forever.  The urgency to buy right now prevents the public from shopping around to get the best deal possible by making an informed choice.

Guilt trip 

Obama appeals to public compassion with a guilt trip:  We cannot ignore the 46 million uninsured Americans that go without health care, he moralizes.   His dazzling popularity and gift of double talk makes it hard for voters to separate facts from the sales pitch.

Leaving out details 

A salesman doesn’t have to lie to sell an inferior product, he can just forget to mention key details.  This is what’s happening with the push for government-run health insurance.  For example:  Of the 46 million Americans that Obama says need health insurance, the truth is more like 13 million.  Consider these rough estimates given by Bill Frist, a medical doctor and former House Majority Leader on CNBC on June 19:


11 million are entitled to health care insurance and opt not to take it.

11 million are illegal immigrants.

11 million earn $75 thousand or more a year.

This leaves about 13 million uninsured who need health care.   Multiplying the need three times helps, of course, to drive up the price Obama wants taxpayers to pay. 

Shouldn’t there be a debate about these groups who are uninsured and whether government should insure them?  Maybe taxpayers don’t want to pay for people who are here illegally, or for people who have access to insurance but don’t take it; and maybe taxpayers don’t feel it’s right to pay for insurance for those who can afford it.  The public has a choice:  Voters can be tricked by sales pressure tactics before they get key details, or voters can avoid getting swindled on yet another bureaucratic boondoggle, take time to shop around, and buy the best deal possible before choosing a car to drive off the lot.  

Is Obama’s Public Option for Health Care “Competition” or a Trojan Horse?

Tuesday, June 16th, 2009

By Elois Zeanah



President Obama’s health care reform goal, he says, is not a single payer plan, but what he says in 2009 is not what he said in 2003. 

Today, Obama speaks about choices – a public option and a private option.  In 2003, Obama spoke about how government-controlled health care would be possible only after Democrats regained the White House and Senate.   Today from the White House, Obama tells the public that if they like their private health plan, they can keep it.  But for how long? 

Obama says “competition” in the marketplace is good.  Fellow Democrats define what Obama calls “competition” in the market place between a public option and private insurance this way:  “A public option will put the private insurance industry out of business and lead to single payer.” (Rep. Jan Schokowsky, a fellow Illinois U.S. Representative, on April 18, 2009.)

Is a public option really a back door to single payer?  Democrats admit that a public option is a strategy for getting there.  It’s not a Trojan horse, one strategist asserts; it’s easy to see.  “We’re going to get there,” he said.  The government will move away from reliance on employer health insurance – but in a way not to frighten people and in a way to get them to accept government control.  A public option, Rep. Schakowsky says, is “a strategy for getting there.”  

Check the following video to hear the above comments:

HEALTH CARE: A Challenge to Obama

Friday, June 5th, 2009

By Elois Zeanah


Is President Obama willing to lift his pen to help the health care industry cut $2 trillion he requested?  Health industry officials can find potential savings of up to $1.7 trillion, according to the AP on June 2, 2009.  But this is $300 billion short.  If willing, Obama could cover this shortage with the stroke of his pen.  He could sign an executive order to stop wealthy foreigners from flying into the U.S. for operations, then flying home without paying, sticking taxpayers with the bill.  But that’s just one way. 

If the primary purpose for Obama’s health care bill is to cut costs of health care so that all Americans can have health coverage, as Obama says, shouldn’t he first have government set the example for health care professionals?   Certainly changes need to be made in the health care industry to fix problems of drowning costs, but shouldn’t government do its part as well?  Obama could save hundreds of billions of dollars by the following actions: 

End Free Fly-in Operations for Foreigners 

Wealthy foreigners from the Middle East and other places fly into the U.S. for the best health care in the world, check into emergency rooms, get expensive operations – and then fly home without paying one cent.  Some call it “the Medicaid Shuttle”.  Taxpayers pay billions of dollars every year through Medicaid fraud and higher hospital and insurance costs for these fly-in operations for foreigners.  Government lets foreigners forfeit payment for health care, yet government will not let citizens.  Citizens who are not indigent must pay their bills even if it means mortgaging or selling their homes.   If the real reason to change America’s health care is to control costs, shouldn’t Obama  first fix this problem of  fly-in/fly-out foreigners who commit Medicaid fraud?[1]    

Foreigners bilk our medical system by abusing a loophole in federal law.  Congress passed the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTLA) in 1985 to protect public hospitals from going bankrupt; it forced private hospitals to take care of indigents who could not pay to give relief to and help prop up public hospitals.   The 1985 act was interpreted by bureaucrats to mean that anyone from any country could check into any emergency room and get free health care. The cost to taxpayers amounts to hundreds of billions every year.  Hospitals have closed and insurance costs have risen as a direct result.

This loophole can be fixed quickly by clarifying that the intent of the 1985 EMTLA was that only INDIGENT AMERICAN CITIZENS could get free health care.  An easy fix to cut costs and save billions a year!

Reduce TORT Waste

Yet another way to reduce skyrocketing costs in health care to make it more affordable is to reduce the $20 billion waste in lawsuits against medical doctors that have to be defended.  Yet, as with the other wasteful expenditures of tax dollars listed above, Obama doesn’t even consider going after waste or abuse. 

Fix Shortage of Medical Staff

In addition to costs, there seems to be another alarming oversight.   Obama wants to add 47 million of uninsured residents (citizens and illegal immigrants), but he has a problem at the outset with the current shortage of doctors and nurses.  If millions more patients are added, this sharply worsens the staff shortage.  Shouldn’t Obama fix the problem of a woefully insufficient supply of doctors and nurses first?  If he doesn’t, shortage of medical personnel from the beginning will force rationing of health care — even before the issue of cost shortages rears its monstrous head. 


If Obama is serious about cutting costs so all Americans can have affordable health care, I challenge him to first rein in costs and prove that government can manage out-of-control costs and abuses that government caused in the first place.  Transparency, accountability, and problem-solving are needed.  Instead, Obama requests private industry to cut costs while he and the Democrats in Congress threaten to “inventory” the lifestyles of Americans and tax citizens in every way possible to pay for nationalized health care.  

The answer is not more taxes. The answer is fiscal accountability, cutting fraud and waste.   Obama has plenty of budget-busting cuts he can make if he’s serious about cutting health care costs.  He could start by a directive to stop giving foreigners free medical care that citizens who pay for these free services can’t get themselves.   This can be done with an Executive Order by a stroke of a pen to undo a bungled bureaucratic interpretation of EMTLA.  Or if he’d prefer twittering and passing the buck to Congress, he can ask his Democrat Congress to fix these problems with a vote by adding language clarifying that free medical service was intended for indigents only. 

[1] NY Daily News, “Visitors Bleed Health System:  Foreigners Travel Here To Get Free Medical Care & Taxpayers Foot The Bill 8&client=nydn&start=0&site=&q=visitors+bleed+health+system+foreigners+travel

The New York Times:  “Ailing Foreigners Burden Emergency Rooms in U.S.”,

THE TROUBLED U.S. ECONOMY: Are There Stealth Threats?

Tuesday, June 2nd, 2009

 By Elois Zeanah


Worried about the depressed economy?  This could be tame according to some who warn of lurking threats to our capitalistic system that sound like science fiction.  The only problem is that these predictions rise from reality. 

Just when we thought it was bad enough to worry about a crippled economy and all the bailouts of financial institutions, the U.S. automobile industry, and now states that border on bankruptcy – and how much more taxes the government will take from us to pay for the bungled mismanagement of others, now we learn some sharp minds worry about stealth threats to our economy that we don’t see and that most of the mass media isn’t reporting. 

Our economy, based on capitalism, is one of our most precious national assets; and it is one of the building blocks that made America the greatest political experiment in the world.  But, alas, could the most prosperous economy in the world, be threatened from within – without violence, without war, and without a revolution? 

Newsmax Magazine Warns that “America Faces Stealth Jihad” 

A January 2009 Newsmax article by Tom Collie gives a “nightmare scenario of some leading thinkers who believe that America and the West are succumbing slowly to a ‘stealth jihad’ by radical Islamists infiltrating communities, courts, and schools in Europe and the United States.”[1] “Islamic law and finance – dramatic departures from what we traditionally practice in the West – are gaining a foothold” in America”, Collie writes. He quotes Robert Spence, author of the new book, Stealth Jihad:  How Radical Islam is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs:  “The aim is to insinuate Islamic law into the United States where the two conflict.” 

Does this sound too far-fetched?  As unreal as it seems, the U.S. Treasury Department trained government employees on Shariah-compliant finance in 2008.  Why?  Islamic financial services are becoming a larger part of global finance and American financial institutions want to grab a piece of this pie as they expand operations into the Middle East.  (See Washington Post article “Would You Like Sharia With Your Coffee?” link below)


Collie writes that “the practice of ‘Shariah finance’ – banking done according to Islamic tenet” is “worrisome to Spencer and others” and that it “threatens to damage U.S. commercial law.” Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy, states that Shariah finance law is “a sedious program, nothing less than an effort to overthrow democracy….It’s aimed right at the heart of the American economy.”[2]


As if the current crippled economy and the threat of radical Islamic law corrupting our economic framework isn’t bad enough, a

Wall Street Journal Article Predicts the End of the United States 

Does the disintegration of the map of the United States seem more unlikely than the melting of 110 floors of the World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001?   

Based on classified data supplied by the Russian national security agency, Russian academic Igor Panarin, who has studied U.S. economics and has a doctorate in political science, predicts that the United States will disintegrate in 2010.  The causes?  Economic decline, moral degradation, and mass immigration.  Panari called “ U.S. foreign debt ‘a pyramid scheme, and predicted China and Russia would usurp Washington’s role as a global financial regulator.”[3]

The Wall Street Journal article of December 29, 2008, by Andrew Osborn, states that Igor Panarin “predicts that economic, financial and demographic trends will provoke a political and social crisis in the U.S.  When the going gets tough, he says, wealthier states will withhold funds from the federal government and effectively secede from the union.  Social unrest up to and including a civil war will follow.  The U.S. will then split along ethnic lines, and foreign powers will move in.”  Panarin provides a map of the United States dismembered into four parts that he predicts will be grabbed by other countries.  


Some are taking Igor Panarin’s predictions seriously.  Certainly his graphic description of U.S. foreign debt and our knowledge that federal bailouts and stimulus plans explode U.S. indebtedness should give us pause.  As should the costs of mass immigration that snake through entitlement programs, expanding national debt, and the fact that Democrat U.S. Congressional leaders have promised to make these costs permanent through amnesty in the first year of Obama’s presidency. 

Perennial Socialist Party Candidate Says Democratic Party Has Adopted Socialist Platform  

Along with doomsday threats of radical Islamic law, mass immigration, moral degradation, and economic decline destroying the U.S. economy and dismembering the map of the United States, there is also the worry about creeping socialism in and of itself.  


Our capitalistic system is a mixed economy and becomes more socialistic as entitlement programs take root and spread.  As our country becomes more socialist, what happens?  We pay more taxes.  We lose freedom.  We lose individual choices.   


Do U.S. citizens want America to become a socialist country?

The six-time Socialist Party candidate Norman Thomas stated:  The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism.  But, under the name of ‘liberalism,’ they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”  He went on to say, “I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party.  The Democrat Party has adopted our platform.” 

Some argue that the collapse of capitalism in the United States will happen, that it come from within, that it will be gradual as the numbers of voters who are dependent on the government expand into majorities who will vote for welfare and, eventually, the capitalist structure will be so burdened that it will collapse. 



Maybe all of the above doomsday scenarios are stretched.  What is for certain is that our economic crisis will get bigger as more voters become dependent on government for life.  As government takes more money from individuals and families which have practiced fiscal responsibility to give more to businesses and others who have not, deepening the economic crisis and leaving more of the Middle Class in desperate financial straits, could this possibly cause civil unrest?  Should steps be taken to take no chances, regardless of how unlikely such a scenario sounds?

[1] Ibid.

[2] Newsmax, January 2009, “America Faces ‘Stealth Jihad,’” by Tom Collie.

[3] Wall Street Journal, December 29, 2008, “As if Things Weren’t Bad Enough, Russian Professor Pedicts End of  U.S.,” by Andrew Osborn

Washington Times ,June 2, 2009: “Would You Like Sharia With Your Morning Coffee?”


Tuesday, June 2nd, 2009

 By Elois Zeanah  

There are many causes for the economic crisis that federal, state, and local governments face.  But there is one common factor:  the cost for illegal immigration.  A simple exercise will prove this.  Look at states that have budget deficits.  Check what they spend on illegal immigration, specifically education, welfare, and health care.  It will become crystal clear why states like California, which encourage illegal immigration, are going bankrupt.  Should government extend taxpayer bailouts to states like California?  Or should taxpayers send the President and Congress a message:  Cut costs for illegal immigration to cut spending!


Amnesty is an Economic Issue


Illegal immigration costs all of us.  The cost of illegal immigration is the biggest contributor to financial crises in education, entitlement programs, healthcare, and government deficits.  Amnesty would make these costs permanent and entitlement expenses would be exacerbated since new immigrant citizens can bring their extended families living in other countries with them.  The economic crisis for federal, state, or local governments cannot be solved long term unless costs for illegal immigration are cut.  Why, then, are Washington politicians pushing amnesty in this time of economic crisis?  The answer lies in their motive to add illegal immigrants to the bloc of voters who are dependent on government.


Amnesty is Part of the Socialist Agenda


Ronald Reagan told the NAACP in July 1981:  “Many in Washington over the years have been more dedicated to making needy people government dependent, rather than independent.”  Politicians use government subsidies to manipulate rather than liberate.  Socialism is not good for individuals or our country; it is only good for politicians who trade taxpayer dollars for power.


Solutions to Illegal Immigration


Politicians want voters to believe that immigration is so complex that a “comprehensive” solution is needed.  In truth, there are two simple answers that will go far to curb illegal immigration.



(1)      Get rid of the jobs magnet by requiring employers to use E-Verify.  This Internet program is free, fast, and 99.5% accurate.  (Is it any wonder why Washington politicians want to scuttle E-Verify, the best tool for employers and the government against illegal immigration?)



(2)      Stop giving free benefits to families of illegal aliens by passing H.R. 1868 (currently in the U.S. House of Representatives) to end automatic birth citizenship to children born to non-citizens.


Amnesty Imports Poverty Permanently


Amnesty simply changes a name.  Changing names of unpopular titles to deceive voters and to make unsavory programs and/or laws acceptable is in vogue in Washington today.  Amnesty would change the title “illegal” to “legal”.  While amnesty would take away the power of the people to enforce the rule of law against people who entered our country illegally, this name change does nothing to change the math of importing poverty (which violates immigration laws).  And it does nothing to change the problem of skyrocketing entitlement costs (which economic experts tell us must be whittled or the U.S. will be crushed by debt).


Check to read H.R. 140, the Birthright Citizenship Act of 2011; who the sponsor and co-sponsors are; and what the status of the bill is.  If your U.S. Representative has not co-sponsored this legislation, please call his/her office and request that he/she do so.

Amnesty will result in escalating financial costs to all of us. 




If amnesty is granted, how can the Middle Class and the younger generation ever hope to reverse the taxpayer burden and hold onto earnings?  As the National Academy of Science reports, “We simply cannot afford as a nation to bring in millions and millions of low-skill individuals who will eat up government services, but pay virtually nothing in taxes.”



Our economy and capitalism are at stake.  It’s time to send a message to Congress:  No amnesty!  Cut spending by cutting illegal immigration with two simple actions.  (1) Mandate that employers use E-Verify.  (2)  Pass H.R. 140.  Call your Congresstional Representatives today.