Video: “Suppressed” EPA Scientist Breaks Silence!

A case of inconvenient truth that the EPA did not want released at an inconvenient time – the day before the House was to vote on a controversial energy bill destined to be the largest tax hike in American history:

Via Mark Tapscott at The Examiner:

[…] Alan Carlin, the senior EPA research analyst who authored a study critical of global warming that was suppressed by agency officials, has broken his silence and spoken on Fox News about his situation. Carlin told “Fox & Friends” Steve Ducy and Gretchen Carlson that his most important conclusion in the study was that the U.S. should not rely upon recommendations of the UN in making policy decisions regarding global warming.

“The most important conclusion, in my view, was that EPA needed to look at the science behind global warming and not depend upon reports issued by the United Nations, which is what they were thinking of doing and in fact have done,” Carlin said.

Asked what happened to his study once it was completed, Carlin said “my supervisors decided not to forward it to the group within EPA who had the responsibility for preparing an overall report which would guide EPA on whether to find that the emission of global warming gases would be something that EPA should regulate.”

… Carlin has been at EPA for 38 years and until the Fox interview was telling reporters seeking interviews that he was instructed by EPA officials not to speak with them. He almost certainly risks retalitation by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and other Obama appointees within the agency.

The must-read censored report that the Obama administration and the Democrats don’t want you to see can be found here:

Click to access DOC062509-004.pdf

The Illustrated Results of Obama’s “Community Organizing”…Obama Was Not Even A Decent Community Organizer

If I didn’t know better, I’d think this was Beirut in the nineteen seventies. But, in reality, it’s the current state of the housing for which Barack Obama claims responsibility as a “community organizer.” It turns out the developers enriched by his government-funded subsidies did a heck of a lot better than the folks who once lived here.

I say “once”, because the Boston Globe (“Grim Proving Ground for Obama’s Housing Policy”) calls many of the units “uninhabitable”.

As a state senator, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee coauthored an Illinois law creating a new pool of tax credits for developers. As a US senator, he pressed for increased federal subsidies. And as a presidential candidate, he has campaigned on a promise to create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund that could give developers an estimated $500 million a year.

But a Globe review found that thousands of apartments across Chicago that had been built with local, state, and federal subsidies – including several hundred in Obama’s former district – deteriorated so completely that they were no longer habitable.

Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama’s close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama’s constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted.

In terms of concrete accomplishments, Obama and “hundreds of other organizers” were not able to transform the South Side neighborhoods or bring in new industries to provide jobs…

Obama’s most commonly cited achievement was in forcing the city to begin testing for asbestos in all city apartments.

…critics claim Obama, now 46, exaggerates his accomplishments, particularly in spearheading asbestos cleanup at a low-income housing project. He omits from his account of that fight a longtime community activist who many people say played a significant role.

And for all his emphasis on the value of grassroots organizing, Obama eventually decided he also needed a law degree to enact lasting change, attending Harvard University… Further blurring the picture are his descriptions of community organizing in his youthful memoir, “Dreams From My Father,” in which he admits he disguises names, creates composite characters, switches some chronologies and uses “approximations” of dialogue.

I can see why.

Look at this beautiful playground, with all of children frolicking; they’re so care-free and so delighted that Barack Obama’s community-organizing has helped them at the expense of his developer friends.

The squat brick buildings of Grove Parc Plaza, in a dense neighborhood that Barack Obama represented for eight years as a state senator, hold 504 apartments subsidized by the federal government for people who can’t afford to live anywhere else.

But it’s not safe to live here.

About 99 of the units are vacant, many rendered uninhabitable by unfixed problems, such as collapsed roofs and fire damage. Mice scamper through the halls. Battered mailboxes hang open. Sewage backs up into kitchen sinks. In 2006, federal inspectors graded the condition of the complex an 11 on a 100-point scale – a score so bad the buildings now face demolition.

Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama’s close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama’s constituents suffered…

As a community organizer, Obama’s a hell of a public speaker.

The poor people living here have gotten the shaft from Obama and his developer buddies. And the mainstream media couldn’t care less.

Drenched In Blood Of Slavery..You Guessed It..The Democratic Party Is Where It All Started

The U.S. Senate voted unanimously last week to adopt a resolution apologizing for slavery.

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, lead sponsor of the resolution, said, “You wonder why we didn’t do it 100 years ago. It is important to have a collective response to a collective injustice.”

Only after decades of public education
ignoring and distorting U.S. history can such a huge lie be said with a straight face.

Senator, you didn’t do it 100 years ago because 100 years ago you Democrats were enforcing Jim Crow segregation laws, poll taxes to keep blacks from voting, and riding around in sheets and pointy hats just in case blacks didn’t get the message.

You say “It’s important to have a collective response” because you want to bury the origins, purposes, and historical practices of your own party.

The worst part is, Republicans in the Senate let you get away with it.

Principled Republicans knowing their history would have authored a resolution reciting the facts that the Republican Party was formed, among other reasons, to oppose slavery and that the Republican Party and its first President Abraham Lincoln responded to Southern, Democrat-led secession with a successful war that preserved the union and freed the slaves.

After Lincoln’s assassination (by a Democrat), the Republican-led Congress (over the objections of the Democratic Party minority) amended the Constitution to confirm the liberation of the slaves (13th Amendment: slavery abolished), and the 14th Amendment (freed slaves are citizens equal to all citizens) and the 15th Amendment (right to vote guaranteed to freed slaves).

Southern Democrats spent the next 100 years trying to keep freed slaves down with segregation laws, poll taxes to deny the right to vote, and lynching to enforce the social order. The KKK was formed by a Democrat; no Republican has ever been a member of the KKK. This is the heritage of the Democratic Party.

In fact, the Democratic Party was formed in the first place to defend and expand slavery.

In 1840, the very first national nominating convention of the Democratic Party adopted a platform which read in part:

Resolved, That Congress has no power … to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several states … that all efforts by abolitionists … made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery … are calculated … to diminish the happiness of the people, and endanger the stability and permanency of the union.

Got that, Sen. Harkin? Your party was born defending slavery as necessary for the happiness of the people and threatening secession and war if slavery were challenged.

The same party platform language was used in 1844, 1848, 1852 and 1856. In 1860, the Democrat commitment to slavery took a harsher tone.

The Fugitive Slave Law was passed by Congress in 1850. This monstrous law provided that, since slaves were the personal property of their masters, runaway slaves must be returned to their owners. The law required all law enforcement officers to assist in the recapture of runaway slaves or risk a fine of $1,000 (about $100,000 in today’s dollars)!

The Republican Party was formed in the 1850s in part as a political reaction to this unjust law.

In their national convention of 1860, Democrats harshly responded to certain Northern (Republican) states that were passing state laws to evade the Fugitive Slave Law by adopting a plank in the Democratic Party Platform which read:

Resolved, That the enactments of the State Legislatures to defeat the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, are hostile in character, subversive of the Constitution, and revolutionary in their effect.

Senator, your Democratic Party has much to be apologetic about on the slavery issue.

During the civil war, the Southern Democrats led the Confederacy out of the Union; Northern Democrats formed a separate party which opposed the war. The 1864 (Northern) Democratic Party platform adopted a “peace” plank which read in part:

… after four years of failure to restore the union by the experiment of war … justice, humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand … a cessation of hostilities … to the end that … peace may be restored …

Here is the origin of today’s Democratic Party “Peace at any Price, Better Red than Dead, Why Can’t we all just get Along” foreign policy.

The war was started by Democrat secessionists, and just as President Lincoln was on the verge of victory, the Northern Democrats wanted to save the South and slavery with “peace talks”! Voters knew better in 1864 and re-elected Lincoln.

But the Democrats weren’t through. In 1868, Sen. Harkin’s party condemned the Republican Party in its party platform as the “Radical Party,” and condemned Reconstruction in these unforgettable words:

Instead of restoring the Union, it (the Radical Party) has dissolved it, and subjected ten states (the former Confederate states) … to military despotism and negro supremacy.

And, senator, don’t tell me this is all ancient history in a lame attempt to evade the true origins of your party.

As recently as 1964, when the Senate debated the Civil Rights Act, Southern Democrats (including Al Gore’s father) voted no. While Northern Democrats voted yes, their votes were not enough. The deciding votes to pass this landmark bill were provided by Sen. Everett Dirksen, R-Ill., and the Republicans.

Republicans should be proud of their heritage of liberation of the slaves and civil rights voting record.

It’s Harkin and the Democrats who should apologize and pay reparations.

You Have Got To Be Kidding Me!..U.S. Will Pay $2.6 Million to Train Chinese Prostitutes to Drink Responsibly on the Job

Here are some more of OUR hard earned tax dollars being wasted on people who are not even United States Citizens!…Tell me people…How much more will the tax paying americasn really take from Washington DC corrupt politicians???

By Edwin Mora

The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAA), a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), will pay $2.6 million in U.S. tax dollars to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly on the job.

Dr. Xiaoming Li, the researcher conducting the program, is director of the Prevention Research Center at Wayne State University School of Medicine in Detroit.

The grant, made last November, refers to prostitutes as “female sex workers”–or FSW–and their handlers as “gatekeepers.”

“Previous studies in Asia and Africa and our own data from FSWs [female sex workers] in China suggest that the social norms and institutional policy within commercial sex venues as well as agents overseeing the FSWs (i.e., the ‘gatekeepers’, defined as persons who manage the establishments and/or sex workers) are potentially of great importance in influencing alcohol use and sexual behavior among establishment-based FSWs,” says the NIH grant abstract submitted by Dr. Li.

“Therefore, in this application, we propose to develop, implement, and evaluate a venue-based alcohol use and HIV risk reduction intervention focusing on both environmental and individual factors among venue-based FSWs in China,” says the abstract.

The research will take place in the southern Chinese province of Guangxi.

Guangxi is ranked third in HIV rate among Chna’s provinces–and is a place where the sex business is pervasive, Li said.

“The purpose of the project is to try and develop an intervention program targeting HIV risk and alcohol use,” Li told CNSNews.com. “So basically, it’s an alcohol and HIV risk reduction intervention project.”

The researcher outlined three components of the intervention program in the abstract for the project:

“(1) gatekeeper training with a focus on changing or enhancing the protective social norms and policy/practice at the establishment level; (2) FSW (female sex workers) training with a focus on the acquisition of communication skills (negotiating, limit setting) and behavioral skills (e.g., condom use skills, consistent condom use); and (3) semi-annual boosters to reinforce both social norms within establishments and individual skills,” wrote Li.

The doctor said the heart of the study involves “a community-based cluster randomized controlled trial among 100 commercial sex venues in Beihai, a costal tourist city in Guangxi.”

“We anticipate that the venue-based intervention program will be culturally appropriate, feasible, effective and sustainable in alcohol use and sexual risk reduction among FSWs,” says the NIH grant abstract.

Li said his study is being done in China rather than the U.S. because prostitution occurs with alcohol use in the United States like it does in China, Americans will be able to benefit from the project’s findings.

“We want to get some understanding of the fundamental role of alcohol use and HIV risk,” he said. “We use the population in China as our targeted population to look at the basic issues. I think the findings will benefit the American people, too.”

Li said minimal research has been conducted on the link between alcohol use and prostitution as it relates to HIV.

“Alcohol has been a part of the commerce of sex for many, many years. Unfortunately, both global-wise (and) in the United States, very few researchers are looking at the complex issue of the inter play between alcohol and the commerce of sex,” he told CNSNews.com.

The grant is one of several “international initiatives” sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.

Ralph Hingson, director of epidemiology and prevention research at NIAA, told CNSNews.com, “There are many Americans who travel to China each year and they should be made aware of the HIV problem.”

Hingson said that Americans will be able to apply the studies findings to the American situation because 1.2 million Americans are currently living with HIV.

Li’s research includes exploration, development, implementation and evaluation. Currently, the project stands at the exploration stage, which the doctor expects to last 18 months.

“The first phase is kind of an exploratory study just trying to get a good understanding of the phenomena in the population of female sex workers in China. The second phase is the program development,” the professor told CNSNews.com.

Phase two will be based on the first year of the study and on “field observations,” he added. The third phase will be the implementation and evaluation of the program.

“Prostitution is illegal in China but it exists in China,” Li told CNSNews.com, “but the Chinese government and the society’s attitude towards prostitution is complicated.”

According to Li, there may be as many as 10 million female prostitutes in China with the majority raging from teenagers to those in their 20s.

“We see a lot of governmental initiatives in China, like 100 percent condom distribution promotion programs, so they deliver condoms in those (prostitution) venues,” he added.

“The global literature indicates an important role of alcohol use in facilitating HIV/AIDS transmission risk in commercial sex venues where elevated alcohol use/abuse and sexual risk behaviors frequently co-occur,” Li wrote when introducing the project last November.

“We expect that the intervention will improve protective normative beliefs and institutional support regarding alcohol use and HIV protection,” he added.

The NIH proposal hypothesizes that the program will decrease “problem drinking and alcohol-related sexual risk” among prostitutes that participate.

“We hypothesize that the venue-based intervention will change and enhance the protective social norms and institutional policies at the establishment level and such enhancement, accompanied by individual skill training among FSWs, will demonstrate a sustainable effect within commercial sex establishments in decreasing problem drinking and alcohol-related sexual risk, increasing consistent and correct condom use, and reducing rates of HIV/STD infection among FSWs,” says the NIH abstract.

Dodd Calls for Prosecuting Bush Officials

Lets look at who is talking here…Chris Dodd..One of the most corrupt morons in congress…who is in the pockets of every company he has come in contact with and he is calling for prosecutions?? I think Dodd needs a few readers to call his office and let him know how much of a hypocrit and liar he is!..Only a democrat would have the audacity to do this.

By: Jim Meyers Sen. Christopher Dodd is pushing ahead with a call for prosecuting Bush administration officials over the use of waterboarding terrorist detainees. The Connecticut Democrat told home-state bloggers over the weekend that the Obama administration’s release of memos detailing interrogation techniques used on detainees creates a “moral imperative” for a congressional investigation — or a criminal probe that could involve former Vice President Dick Cheney’s staff, Politico.com reported. When asked if a probe should go “as high as Cheney’s office,” Dodd replied: “You gotta go where you gotta go.” Dodd cited his father’s experience as a prosecutor at the Nuremberg war crimes trials. Attorney Thomas Joseph Dodd, who was later elected to the Senate, held a leading position on the Allied prosecution team in 1945 and 1946. Referring to the Nazi defendants, Dodd said “even these thugs got a lawyer; even these thugs got a trial.” He added: “In a sense, not to prosecute people or pursue them when these acts have occurred is . . . to invite it again in some future administration.” The New York Times reported on Tuesday that an internal Justice Department inquiry had found that Bush administration lawyers who authorized harsh interrogations committed no crimes warranting prosecution.

Hostile Bloggers Facing Fines, Jail?

Proposal ‘comes close to making it federal offense to log onto Internet’

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A new proposal in Congress is threatening fines and jail time for what it calls “cyberbullying” – communications that include e-mails and text messages that “cause substantial emotional distress.”

The vague generalities are included in H.R. 1966 by California Democrat Linda Sanchez and about a dozen co-sponsors.

But it already is being condemned as unconstitutional, unrealistic and probably ineffectual.

At Wired.com, in a report labeled “Threat Level,” writer David Kravets criticized the plan to demand “up to two years in prison for those whose electronic speech is meant to ‘coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress.'”

“Instead of prison, perhaps we should say gulag,” he wrote.

Such limits never would pass First Amendment muster, “unless the U.S. Constitution was altered without us knowing,” he wrote. “So Sanchez, and the 14 other lawmakers who signed on to the proposal are grandstanding to show the public they care about children and are opposed to cyberbullying.”

The plan is labeled the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act, after the 13-year-old Meier, whose suicide last year reportedly was prompted by a woman who utilized the MySpace social networking site to send the teen critical messages.

The defendant in the case, Lori Drew, was accused under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

“Sanchez’s bill goes way beyond cyberbullying and comes close to making it a federal offense to log onto the Internet or use the telephone,” Kravets wrote. “The methods of communication where hostile speech is banned include e-mail, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones and text messages.”

“We can’t say what we think of Sanchez’s proposal,” he said. “Doing so would clearly get us two years in solitary confinement.”

Wrote a contributor to the Wired forum page, “If passed, this legislation could be easily abused with the effect of criminalizing all criticism. You probably [couldn’t] even criticize the legislation itself because it would cause Sen. Sanchez emotional distress or possibly be considered a form of intimidation.”

The bill, which has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, states, “Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

It states: “Cyberbullying can cause psychological harm, including depression; negatively impact academic performance
, safety, and the well-being of children in school; force children to change schools; and in some cases lead to extreme violent behavior, including murder and suicide.”

Obama and his homeland security think of most americans

This video is not suprizing at all…This is what Obama and his thugs think of most of americans!
I wonder if Obama knows what most americans think of him?..Let me touch on that for just a bit.

Lets see..Obama and his thugs in his cabinet and most of congress are:

1. Criminals
2. Socialists
3. Traitors
4. Unsurpers Of Our Constitution ( See Number 1
5. Terrorist sympathizers ( See Number 3
6. Thugs
7. Tax Cheats
8. Liars
9. Corrupt
10. Leftwing Extremists

Look at this video and see for yourself what he thinks of americans

Bernanke: Economy Should Grow Again Later In 2009..He Doesn’t Have A Clue

Read this story below here and tell me if this is not double talk!
This is the chairman of the federal reserve talking here…He does not have a clue as to what he is talking about or what he is doing….The federal reserve has got to go…Write..email..and call your congressmen and senators and tell them to end the FED!

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told Congress Tuesday that the economy should pull out of a recession and start growing again later this year.

But in prepared testimony to Congress’ Joint Economic Committee, Bernanke warned that even after a recovery gets under way, economic activity is likely to be subpar. That means businesses will stay cautious about hiring, driving up the nation’s unemployment rate and causing “further sizable job losses” in the coming months, he said.

The recession, which started in December 2007, already has snatched a net total 5.1 million jobs.

The unemployment rate “could remain high for a time,

even after economic growth resumes,” Bernanke said.

Even with all the cautionary notes, the Fed chief offered a far less dour assessment of the economy.

“We continue to expect economic activity to bottom out, then to turn up later this year,” he told lawmakers.

Recent data suggest the recession may be loosening its firm grip on the country, Bernanke said.

“The pace of contraction may be slowing,” he said. It was similar to an observation the Fed made last week in deciding not to take any additional steps to shore up the economy.

The housing market, which has been in a slump for three years, has shown some signs of bottoming, he said. Consumer spending, which collapsed in the second half of last year, came back to life in the first quarter.

In the months ahead, consumer spending should be lifted by tax cuts contained in President Barack Obama’s larger $787 billion stimulus package. Still, rising unemployment, sinking home values and cracked nest eggs will still weigh on consumers willingness to spend freely, Bernanke said.

Obama to Secured Creditors: Drop Dead..Obama Working For The UAW

By Bill Frezza

Are you following the disembowelment of Chrysler’s secured creditors with an eye not just toward what it means for the moribund car company but for what it could do to the very concept of secured debt? Has it dawned on you what the consequences will be if the President gets his way and consideration is given to creditors not according to contracts, rules, and established legal precedents but according to which group is most politically favored? And do you believe the President advanced the cause of economic recovery by publicly excoriating “speculators” who once hoped to profit by lending money against hard assets to an ailing company?

Profit? There’s no profit to incentivize risk taking in this country, only sacrifice!

Law? There’s no law to protect the politically unfavored in this country, only derision!

According to U.S. bankruptcy code, secured creditors – that is lenders who have a contractual security interest or claim to specific collateral – have to be paid before unsecured creditors. Unsecured creditors’ claims are prioritized according to explicit rules defined by law. With the exception of short-term payments approved by a bankruptcy judge to keep a company running during the reorganization process, each priority level has a right to be paid in full before creditors with the next lowest priority get a dime. That is why secured debt can be had at a lower interest rate than unsecured debt. In fact, that is why troubled companies have any ability at all to raise money. Credit flows because everyone knows the rules of the game, even in bankruptcy.

Well, at least they used to.

The system is not supposed to deliver equal outcomes or demand equal sacrifice. If it did money could only be borrowed at the highest rates of interest, if at all. Under the law, payment priorities can only be modified if all debtors agree. The ability to hold out and force a company into bankruptcy court is baked into the price of a loan or the discount at which bonds trade.

In Chrysler’s case the TARP-backed lenders – that is, banks-too-big-to-fail now living on the dole – chose to kowtow to the executive branch. What they “sacrificed” was the economic interests of their shareholders in favor of the political interests of their management. The non TARP-backed lenders, in this case a handful of hedge funds trying to protect the pension funds, university endowments, and insurance companies that invested in them, balked at getting lower consideration for their secured debt than the UAW is getting for its unsecured obligations. Hence, a trip to court and a tongue lashing by the president.

Forget about the law for a moment. Forget about right and wrong. This exercise should be getting easier now that pragmatism is the basis of government policy, right? So think for a moment only about the pragmatic consequences of the administration’s reorganization plan.

Why would anyone lend money to heavily unionized companies knowing that if things went wrong, the president and his men could trash their security interests by executive decree, hold them up to public vilification, and subject them to future retribution by regulators?

Why would anyone buy the shares of TARP-backed banks or invest alongside them knowing that their executives have proven their willingness to sacrifice shareholders’ interests and throw co-investors under the bus any time the president snaps his fingers?

Why would foreigners buy the distressed debt of American companies knowing that this debt cannot be secured by law but only by political clout?

How is the Federal Government supposed to unwind its ownership in the growing number of companies it has nationalized if prospective buyers know that should things ever take a turn for the worse, Uncle Sam will be back demanding extralegal “sacrifice” in the name of “saving” jobs?

How is private credit supposed to “start flowing again” if the United States of America morphs into a caudillo-run kleptocracy whose explicit policy is to “empower the workers,” chasing ever higher poll numbers by demonizing the very people whose job it is to provide credit?

The fate of Chrysler and its workers pale in comparison to the wrecking ball that would be taken to economic order if bankruptcy judge Arthur Gonzalez approves the administration’s plan to give Chrysler’s secured creditors the shaft. And what prize will we-the-people get in return? A doomed third-rate car company majority owned by its militant union run by Italian management building congressionally designed “green” cars no one wants to buy financed by taxpayers into perpetuity because no private investor in their right mind will touch the company with a ten foot pole. Is this supposed to be economic policy or comic opera?

How many more billions do you think will be flushed down this rat hole before the fat lady is allowed to sing?

Schumer Promises Sweeping Immigration Law…More Corruption

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer is predicting that sweeping immigration reform will become law before the year is over.

Schumer, a Democrat and chairman of the Senate’s immigration subcommittee, spoke at the New York Daily News/Citizenship Now! headquarters. He said he expected Senate hearings to lead to a major change in U.S. policy, the Daily News reported.

“I believe that this year, we can pass comprehensive, strong, fair immigration reform,” Schumer said.

Schumer’s comments came on the heels of President Barack Obama saying America can’t continue with a “broken” immigration system.

Obama has stated that he supports comprehensive immigration reform that includes an eventual path to citizenship for millions of foreigners illegally in the United States. During his presidential campaign, he promised to make the issue a “top priority” during his first year in office.

Last week, Obama said immigration reform is necessary because the current system is “not good for American workers. It’s dangerous for Mexican would-be workers who are trying to cross a dangerous border. It is putting a strain on border communities … And it keeps those undocumented workers in the shadows, which means they can be exploited at the same time as they’re depressing U.S. wages.”

Obama said his administration would first work to secure America’s borders before trying to reform U.S. immigration policy.

“If the American people don’t feel like you can secure the borders, then it’s hard to strike a deal that would get people out of the shadows and on a pathway to citizenship who are already here, because the attitude of the average American is going to be, well, you’re just going to have hundreds of thousands of more coming in each year,” he said.

“On the other hand, showing that there is a more thoughtful approach than just raids of a handful of workers as opposed to, for example, taking seriously the violation of companies that sometimes are actively recruiting these workers to come in. That’s again something we can start doing administratively.”

© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.