Failing USPS Demonstrates Government Waste

 The struggling US Postal Service (USPS) demonstrates, yet again, what happens when you mix both the government and unions with a business model. the woes and evident failures continue to aggregate.

For years, the USPS has been struggling. The government-run mail and package delivery service attempts to blame modern electronic communications systems (such as email and the internet) and the sluggish economy for their woes. In the mid-20th Century, the USPS used the more proliferated telephone system as its excuse to necessitate raises in stamp prices, claiming that the telephone replaced written communications. However, the total number of mail traffic actually increased.

In contrast, however, UPS and FEDEX are doing quite well. The internet and email have actually led to increases in their businesses as people are purchasing items more and more through the internet. The private package delivery services have used this trend to their advantage. Yet the "public business" run by the federal government is, for all intents and purposes, bankrupt.

The main reasons individuals and online businesses are choosing FEDEX and UPS over the USPS is simple -- reliability and price. UPS's maximum package size is much larger than the USPS's maximum. UPS will deliver to the door of a physical address. The USPS has, in many neighborhoods, gone to community mailboxes located as far as 1/2 mile away from a residence, with small lock boxes for letters and packages. Anything larger will require the recipient to travel to the post office to pick up the package. Some times, that drive to the post office is farther away from the originator's address.

US Postal workers are unionized. That is the root of many of their problems. The US Military is not allowed to unionize. It makes sense that to not be allowed. If unionized, the lower ranking could go on strike, or legally commit mutiny, over contract disputes and pay re-negotiations. It would completely undermine the US Constitution and the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). That same theory applies to all government bureaucracy workers. Government workers should not be permitted to unionize.

The USPS (we, the taxpayers) just defaulted on a $5,500,000,00.00 payment it owed to the federal government. That bill was for medical benefit payments to union retirement benefit accounts. There is another payment, this one will be $100 million higher at $5.6 Billion, due on September 30, 2012 (just in time for the end of the fiscal year). The USPS gave notice they will be defaulting on that bill as well. That will be $11.1 BILLION in defaulted debt. That is bankruptcy from any direction you look at it.

Then the USPS invests in a debacle. They paid over $1.2 million to print approximately 1,000,000,000 (1 Billion) stamps depicting Matt Groenig's iconic Homer Simpson. The USPS sold only about 318 million. That leaves the USPS with  over 682,000,000 stamps unsold with an inventory cost of over $300 million. They are also defaulting on the bills for the printing services provided by the companies contracted to produce the stamps. A proper market study before investing in this endeavor may have prevented the waste. However, this poor decision aggravates the $5.2 Billion Dollar quarterly operating deficit for 3rd quarter FY12. The net overall loss for the business is projected to be over $15 Billion for the FY12, which ends on September 30, 2012.

If the enterprise operated more like a private industry, the owners would take a serious look at operating in an effort to lose money. Operating in a manner that leaves a business $15.2 Billion more in debt at the end of a fiscal year is not considered a lucrative business. In fact, it is an abject failure.

The Postmaster General directed his Postal Inspector General to audit the Atlanta Distribution and Processing Center. The Atlanta facility's primary purpose was to increase efficiency especially in regards to commercial and business mailings. The results of the audit proved that the facility does anything but increase efficiency. The audit estimates that the center wasted over 8,000 man-hours and a half-million dollars. The main contributors to the waste were identified in lackadaisical loading, unloading, and sorting of parcels combined with wasteful and unnecessary shell-game moving of "spotting trucks".

Union drivers move the trucks around unnecessarily, creating additional hours of work and wasting resources (fuel). The other workers are not doing the minimum projected amount of labor necessary to justify operations. The union mandated breaks and production rates impede the facility's mission. The 24/7 facility appears to be mismanaged. The audit prompts questions concerning similar sorting and distribution centers around the country. If just one such facility in each state is wasting at a similar rate, the USPS could cut $25 Million of its deficit just by forcing union workers to operate according to current  USPS standards. Those additional 400,000 man-hours would save taxpayers a huge chunk of cash as well. At just minimum wage (and postal workers make well over minimum wage), those wasted man-hours would equate another $2.9 in human capital operational waste, if one facility in each state is at the same level as the Atlanta facility.

All of the above are indicative of a necessity for a complete restructuring of the USPS. The enterprise is not supposed to be a burden upon taxpayers. It is supposed to provide a service that patrons pay for as they use it. The costs are designed to be incurred by the senders. The enterprise is supposed to break even if not turn a small profit. They are not. They are failing.  

The USPS lists itself, by charter, as a "self-sufficient government enterprise". Given the example of "self-sufficiency" the USPS demonstrates, there is no wonder about why members of Occupy believe "self-sufficiency" means "living in my mom's basement, eating her food, and having her pay at least half of my bills, though I am 25 years old". If the USPS were truly self-sufficient, they would restructure their operating model. They would eliminate mandatory union membership. They provide competitive services at competitive rates in order to compete with FEDEX and UPS. They are not self-sufficient. They are increasingly dependent upon taxpayers being forced at the barrel of a gun to pay for their failing business model.  

CBO FY13 Assessment -- Cut Or Worse Recession

The direction our current tax and spend, spend, spend government it taking us... (Courtesy of Texas GOP Vote)

In May 2012, the CBO adjusted its January 2012 study on what effects the FY13 budget will have on calendar year 2013, if current trends are maintained. The result was, simply stated, not good.

Recently, they updated that study and found that their analysis to be most likely correct, however the results will likely be even more extreme. If taxes are increased and federal spending are not restrained, reduced, cut, or made reasonably responsible; then we are headed towards another deep-dip recession.

This is the "fiscal cliff" that Obama and his Keynesian-theory-loving advisers are driving us towards. It seems he is not interested in playing a game of chicken, either. He does not intend to speed towards that edge only to attempt to stop short. the direction Obama's proposed budgets, tax plans, and executive-invoked regulatory fees (such as EPA fees, USDA fees, increased regulatory fees on fossil fuels, etc.) amount to kicking in the NO2, putting on a blindfold, and disconnecting the brakes.

The CBO predicts that the current course will lead to shrinking the economy even further, as much as reducing GDP by another 0.5%. Our country cannot take any reduction in GDP. We need a 2-3% increase, not a decrease. In addition, unemployment will jump several points as businesses will reduce in order to preserve necessary capital in efforts to weather out the storm. That will mean some cuts in production, not taking risks in expanding product lines or services, and cutting payroll expenses. Those payroll expenses will mean anything from reductions in benefit packages to reductions in starting pay to layoffs.

The CBO already calculated the nightmare the PPACA will present to businesses, especially small businesses. Adding in those mandatory taxes and fees Obamacare forces upon those businesses, healthcare packages are not cuts that can be made without laying people off. So, that may be the policy of choice should this recession strike.

Legislators (and voters) on both sides of the aisle need to take some deep breaths and read economic studies written by Steve Moore and Art Laffer. They need to pay attention to the supply-side of the economy. It has been ignored too long. Raising taxes on those working will decrease the national marginal propensity to invest, to save, and to spend. There will simply be less disposable income. The supply curves will also adjust, making even necessities such as milk, bread, and corn more expensive. Those are the results of raising taxes. With fewer people working, the tax base will also be reduced and the overall revenue will be lower.

On the "demand side", the government needs to act responsibly. If your teenager maxed out three credit cards and spent every cent he made at his part-time job (without saving for college), you'd cut him off (and probably ground him until he paid back every penny). Well, the budgets Obama proposed (and were defeated outright even in the left-dominated Senate) wanted to max out not only his parents' cards, but those of every adult living in your neighborhood.

Proposing a reduction in spending increases is a start. However, real cuts need to be made, and soon. The FY13 budget starts on October 1, 2012. Cuts that impede national defense, national security, and intelligence gathering are not responsible. Cutting funding to the thousands of other wasteful programs are responsible.

Items the FY13 budget needs to spend money on, other than intelligence and defense, are paying down our nation's debts to foreign powers. In addition, those who have already paid into Social Security (especially those living off of the dividends) need to, at least, not lose what they have already invested.

With the elections coming up this November, voters need to consider the financial security and potential prosperity of themselves and their families. They need to do so on the municipal, state, and federal levels. The question is: do you vote for responsibility and accountability or do you vote for fiscal ruin, unemployment, and a dismal future. It's time to vote out those who want to start up more programs, increase taxes, and increase government spending, regardless of which party they claim membership.

Principles and Guts? Akin Stays In Race

It is now international news that US Senate candidate from Missouri believes that fallopian tubes tie themselves in cases of legitimate rape. If the trauma occurs before ovulation, the stress may, indeed, throw a woman's cycle off its normal rhythm. However, is not some mechanism a woman has to prevent pregnancy in the case of "legitimate rape".

Then there was Mr. Akin's qualifier "legitimate". It was a serious gaffe demonstrating a belief in "illegitimate rape". If such exists, I'd like to know what one is. If an "illegitimate" rape is one where a lady says yes at night, wakes up with "coyote ugly" and changed her mind after the fact, I could accept that term. However, that is not a rape by any definition of the term. It is regret. Rape is rape.

The debate over abortion in cases of rape and incest will continue for decades, if not centuries. There are plenty of valid points on both sides.

Through that misunderstanding of basic biology, Akin stood upon his principles. He continues to do so. Americans love underdogs who pull through, despite overwhelming odds. Akin has made himself just such a candidate with his remarks. His tenacity is admirable. What conservatives need in office is more than just somebody who stands upon principles. We need somebody who stands on principles and can accurately articulate those principles. We need somebody who will prioritize what this country needs most instead of trying to legislate morality, an endeavor that fails 999 times out of 1000 and tends to alienate independent and moderate voters.

Akin further demonstrates his fortitude. Many conservative and libertarian pundits have stated Akin should drop out of the race. Even Gov. Mitt Romney asked him to drop out of the race. The deadline came and went and Akin is still in the race. Now the Republican National Committee has cut-off funding to Akin's campaign. If Akin wants to continue his fight, he will be doing so through the fundraising efforts of his own local campaign. If he is able to raise the funds to win a national level campaign, as Senate races tend to become, it will be a remarkable feat. The odds and common sense are against Akin at this time.

Akin may not be the ideal conservative, constitution-loving candidate, but he has guts. He is not afraid to stand on his principles. He may do so to the detriment of the rest of the conservative candidates around the country. This may not be the wisest or smartest decision he's ever made. However, it is a "gutsy call", at least more "gutsy" than Obama giving the go-ahead to the SEALs.  It is about as selfish as Obama was in claiming all the accolades, though. If Akin stood on all of his conservative principles, he'd do what is necessary in order to assure socialists, progressives, and liberals lose their respective races. His fortitude may be admirable, but he lacks the wisdom this country needs in our legislative branch.

I'm just glad he's not a candidate in my state of residence.

SATX Council and Mayors Seek To Fleece Taxpayers Through Pre-K Scam

Over the past several months, politicians in Georgia publicly lobbied voting taxpayers for support for a rise in taxes to support a complete waste of money called TSPLOST. TSPLOST was a poorly designed plan to increase public transportation using old and failing technology, among other services. The proposed means to cover the costs was through an increase in sales taxes. The research demonstrated that the project would never bring in enough revenue to cover the maintenance costs, much less the daily labor costs and the initial construction costs. By and large, the citizens of Georgia voted against the TSPLOST Referendum.

The city council of San Antonio, TX should have paid attention to the outcome of that referendum. The Mayor of San Antonio should have followed that whole debacle in Georgia. The seven former mayors of San Antonio who have endorsed a current proposal to raise city sales taxes to support a program that may (and probably will not) assist a small demographic should have followed Georgia's TSPLOST political drama. Those in the above named current or former public offices are seeking to do the same in San Antonio, TX.

San Antonio's latest proposal, due to go to the election polls in referendum for ratification, has one point of heart-string-pulling emotive argumentation supporting it that the TSPLOST debacle didn't. The pending San Antonio proposed fleecing has the argument "It's For The Kids!".

Like most proposals done by politicians and teachers' unions in the past two decades, the "For The Kids" argument actually translates to "For the Unions" and "Let's Fleece The Taxpayers to Line Our Pockets".

The proposal is to raise the city's sales taxes what appears to be a meager 1/8th of a percent. While that doesn't seem like much, it adds up over the course of the year just in paying utility bills and purchasing sundry items. It creates a greater tax burden on those making just enough to not qualify for state and federal handouts. It will also induce a greater propensity to save among those who make more, therefore actually retarding or stagnating the local economy. Obviously, these local politicians need to go back and repeat Economics 101 and 102.

The detractors enumerated so far are before the intended purpose for the tax hike is even discussed.

"It's For The Kids!"

No it isn't. However, that is the argument that will be presented.

The tax hike is an effort to increase local funding in order to expand the city's pre-kindergarten program. Currently, according to the City of San Antonio, there are about 5,700 3 and 4 year old kids that are eligible for pre-k programs that are not engaged in them full-time. About 3,400 of those attend half-day programs.

The city assumes that the lack of participation in their early government-sponsored socialist indoctrination programs is that parents cannot afford to send their kids to the schools that already provide those programs. The kids that are not enrolled are not enrolled by parental choice. Increasing the funding and bumping the average wages for what amount to government provided daycare services to $70,000 a year will not increase participation.

You have not misread that figure. The proposal is to provide additional pre-k babysitters to cover that 5,700 estimated number of kids at an average annual salary and benefits package of approximately $70,000 per year. Currently, the average elementary (K-8) teacher's salary is $48,863 a year, not counting benefits, which bumps the whole package to $70,477 funded by taxpayers. (Starting pay is approximately $34,000 salary for an entry level position, not counting the $21,585 in benefits, making the starting entry-level teacher's FULL salary and compensation over $55,000 a year for a simple Bachelor of Arts degree). 

The city's study failed to look into why many of these children are not enrolled. First, it does not take into account the number of them that are here illegally or are "anchor-babies".  Parents have to prove citizenship (or resident alien status) in order to register their children. So, if either the parents or the kids are here illegally, they cannot be enrolled in the first place (without committing ID theft and defrauding the government).

Another demographic the study fails to consider is the number of children that enrolled in some form of private, free-enterprise program. I was unable to find those numbers or statistics. However, the city's study does not even address that demographic. It automatically assumes that parents would prefer the taxpayer provided services.

Given the current employment market and economic conditions, more and more families are choosing to have one of the parents home-school the children to some degree. This can be anywhere from supplementing education with classes and activities done at home to full-home-school programs. The city's study fails to include that demographic.

While those schools that provide half-day programs may claim they cannot afford to provide full-day programs under the current budget, the question concerning how much of their retirement and health insurance they are willing to pay out of pocket comes to mind. If they truly wanted to provide these services "For The Kids", why not do so budgeting the pay and benefits packages at $35k-$40k a year with the taxpayer employees matching their retirement and benefit funds? No, they don't care about the kids.

The city's fact-sheet for the proposal even states that the whole program is fascist in nature. There will be a "corporation" established or appointed by the city council, under the direction of the city council, that will administrate and oversee the program. For those who failed basic civics, that is the very definition of fascism. Fascism is a form of socialism. If you failed history as well, you are reminded that Hitler and Mussolini employed national socialism and fascism. Is that the type of oligarchic tyranny the citizens of San Antonio want? Think about this. Who stands to gain from this corporation? The city council members, the  socialist Mayor, and the former mayors that endorse this program (as well as the teachers' union administrators).   

2,300 kids who need 100% plus 3,400 kids who need 50%, according to the study, equates to 4,000 full time scholarships. $31M equates $7,750 per student that could be vouchers towards parental school-choice options for these kids, per year, instead of lining the pockets of politicians, unions and their cronies. Or, in other words, that's $7,750 per new child enrolled in a full-time program that these oligarchs wish to steal from tax-payers.

Another argument against the tax-hike revolves around the federal "Head Start" funds. This is one area where I will support the tax hike. Constitutionally, federal money and federal authority does not cover local education. Those "Head Start" funds already violate the 10th Amendment. It is a state and municipal responsibility to cover public education. However, those funds are already being illegally distributed, already fleecing US Taxpayers.

The 14th Amendment of the US Constitution comes to mind concerning this tax. It will tax those who do not have children eligible for pre-K programs in order to support that extremely small demographic. It brings up questions of "fair and equal treatment". Why should a 40 year old with no children pay for somebody's 4 year old to attend an indoctrination program?

Within the city's study, on their "fact sheet" is a blatant lie. The lie is that "enrollment will be free of charge". No it will not. It will be paid for by taxpayers. While those within an enumerated list of alleged "underprivileged" qualifiers may be exempt from paying enrollment fees, somebody is covering the costs -- the working, self-sustaining, self-providing average tax-paying citizen will be paying for what is, legally, an optional program. (Next the city will pass a truancy law making attendance mandatory in order to justify the necessity for the $31,000,000 tax bill).

In the cases of those parents that prefer private schooling or home-schooling, will they get a rebate or refund for their "fair share" of the funds? How about those parents whose kids are beyond pre-K age? Will they get a rebate, since they don't qualify for the program? What about taxpayers with no kids?

Basic home economics teaches high school kids the common sense lesson that paying for something you do not use is a waste of money. That is what this increased sales tax for 2,300 kids amounts to -- paying for something that most likely will not be used.  It is just like Georgia's TSPLOST referendum.  

National Security Should Trump Politics

Recently, a group of retired Special Operations and Intelligence professionals banded together as a self-proclaimed watchdog group called OPSEC. They released a trailer, then a full 22 minute-long documentary about the dangers of exposing national security secrets for political gain.

In response, another alleged watchdog group, Media Matters for America (MMfA), and their "Senior Fellow" called those former special operators as well as the current ones, "gutless".

MMfA is anything but a "watchdog" group. If they were, their primary job would be to expose any falsehoods reported by any media outlet instead of being a socialist propaganda tool that attempts to obfuscate facts and deny those biases that are exposed by Breitbart.com, FOX News, and other media outlets. In his statement, MMfA's "Senior Fellow" did nothing to expose any bias or untruth. He expressed a biased opinion that was based upon no facts and no empirical data. It was emotive rhetoric, not a reasonable assessment.

Members of OPSEC responded accordingly to MMfA's claims. In addition, I issued two challenges to that individual.

The full documentary from OPSEC is linked below. It is 22 minutes well spent regardless of which side of the political aisle your personal ideology may reside.

National Security Policy is a political issue. Debates on the subject let citizens know how each candidate intends to keep our country free and secure. However, keeping our great republic free, secure, and prosperous is NOT a political issue. It is a mandate to all federal elected officials. That is must be done is not an opinion. It is a constant, a fact, hard reality.

The facts demonstrate that Obama, or those within his administration such as Valerie Jarrett, have violated OPSEC. They have violated national security. If those in uniform had done the same, they would face court martial or worse. The names Aldrich Ames and Robert Hansen come to mind when considering leaks done by the current administration. Both of those men were convicted of espionage and treason against the US.

Speakers in the video make several key points. I admit my political ideology lends to a level of bias in my articles. However, on the subjects of national security and national defense, my views are largely apolitical. the views I express are based upon my real life experiences in that real world where there are people who want to destroy America. the threats are real. I have seen them. I have seen the face of hate up close and personal, with just a desk between us. This is not politics. It is reality.

Any news release, speech, or casual conversation needs to be guarded. Those of us "in the know" learn how to avoid telling those without proper clearance and access, and "need to know" those mission critical bits of information. Even peripheral details that seem insignificant can be put together, tipping our hand, exposing our assets, and putting our people and their families at risk. For those who doubt that there are those capable of doing so, I must advise you that I not only did just that for 15 years, I taught others how to do it. If there are those in our forces whose job it is to do so, you can bet that our enemies have those who do (or aspire to do) the same.

In explaining security levels and impacts to my younger soldiers, I used an atomic bomb analogy. If For Official Use Only or Confidential information is accidentally (or worse, intentionally) leaked, it can be the same as a 500 KT bomb dropped on your mom's home town. A Secret level bit of info is a 1 MT bomb dropped on her block. A leak of TS level info is a 5 MT bomb on your mother's house. What is the difference? In all three cases, your mother is most likely vaporized. In the first case, she may survive the initial bomb, but will die of radiation poisoning within a week (and ti will be even more painful).

Some of the information leaked over the past three years amounts to drafting death warrants on some of our SPECOPs personnel, our Intelligence personnel, their families, our sources around the world, and their families. In fact, information leaked by the current administration led to actions taken against one of those who assisted our Special Operators in that eventual operation against bin Laden.

Obama did not kill Usama. In fact, in giving his "OK" on the mission, he set it up so he could take credit if it went well, but could claim ignorance if it was botched. Obama never worked in the intelligence field. Obama never served in the US Military. Obama was not involved in any form of operational, strategic, or tactical planning. In fact, Valerie Jarrett advised him to not use personnel, but to do a surgical strike instead. The truth is that US Military Intelligence and CIA personnel have been tracking bin Laden since the late 90s. Given bin Laden's random nature and previous leaks during the Clinton Administration, it took that long to pin HVI #1 down long enough to take action. On VJ's advice (it's obvious she has no international relations of intelligence background), that sort of a strike a few blocks away from a Pakistani Army camp would have been an international incident of epic proportions that could have put us into yet another war.

"Loose Lips Sink Ships". Al-Qaeda Reads the NEW YORK TIMES, too. 17% of the illegals entering Arizona from Mexico come from the Middle East, with at least one in ten of those aligned with Al-Qaeda or some other terrorist group that wants to destroy the US. They sit at Starbucks and listen to people talk. This is the reality of the world we live in.

The security of our nation and protecting the families of those who serve to guard and defend it are not issues for political maneuvering. They are not props for political juggling acts and campaign stunts. They are precious things that must be guarded and protected. Regardless of political affiliation, like the members of OPSEC, I will openly chastise anybody who uses these things as political props thus placing our country in jeopardy.  

Gauntlet Thown Down -- MMfA Claims SEALs 'Gutless'

Billboard on I-35 in Texas Courtesy of San Antonio TEA Party

Some US Navy SEALs and former members of NSWTU-6 ("SEAL Team 6") have recently come forward with some criticisms over the Obama Administration's handling of several operations, especially the mission to capture/kill Usama bin Laden. The current administration, in their view, was a little too open with the so-called news media concerning the Team as well as other Special Forces Operational Units and their tactics. Some former operators have created a group called "OPSEC", after the US Department of Defense acronym for Operational Security.

For those of us who have served in the military and conducted real-world operations in hostile areas, OPSEC is not a new concept. We know how vital it is to mission success as well as the protection of our forces in harm's way. During World War II, even every day civilians were cautioned that "Loose Lips Sink Ships", cautioning that enemy spies could be anywhere, listening to gossip from the front lines.

When it comes to our more clandestine forces such as NSWTU-6 and 1st SFOD-D ("Delta Force"), OPSEC is even more important. Even the smallest details can lead to information our nation's enemies can piece together to determine the names and locations of family members of those special commandos. Should that happen, our nation loses their capabilities and become largely ineffective until better protective measures can be enacted.

When these heroes spoke out over their concerns, Media Matters For America "Senior Fellow" responded, on Twitter, by calling them "gutless". Yes, he called American Special Commandos "gutless".

Members of OPSEC have responded to the "Senior Fellow"'s statement.

I also responded.

I issued two challenges to that individual.

The first was I challenged him to display his DD Form 214. That form is a record of military service, including all pertinent awards, units assigned, conflicts fought in, and military schooling completed. I am still waiting for a response. My best guess, based upon the data available at this time, is that Mr. Boehlert never served in the military. He must have less guts than those SEALs he called "gutless".

So, I made an easier challenge for the brave Mr. Boehlert. I am not a SEAL or a former SEAL. I am not a current of former operator from any of those units. I am a former Military Intelligence Geek. So, I should be a pushover for Eric. Thus, I challenged him to meet me on the mat. I will wear my gloves and foot-pads for his protection. I even gave him the choice between Gi or No-Gi.

My challenge is for just a friendly sparring match. I have no desire to harm him. For those not familiar with sparring in martial arts, partners have a high level of trust between them. To be willing to spar with an unknown partner requires a high level of courage and confidence in that person. It takes guts.

Just as with the DD214 challenge, I am still waiting for a response. So, now we know where those "gutless" fingers are really pointing.

Arizona Enforcing Laws Obama Disregards/Defers

Miller Canyon, 15 miles north of AZ-Mex border. Photo Copyright P-G Matuszak 2012

 
Arizona is one of four states that directly border Mexico. The mountainous border area in Arizona makes border enforcement difficult and nearly impossible in some regions of the state. The topography of the Arizona border area and the numerous national forest regions stretching throughout the state enable illegal border activity.

Some facts concerning border crossings that many open-borders advocates don't want people to know include the other illegal activities involved with the crossings. Yes, there are those who cross the Arizona border just seeking better employment opportunities and income. Those activities alone include additional felonies. However, there are also the "hidden" activities.

Your "vanilla" illegal border jumper not only breaks US and International laws by crossing the border in an unauthorized manner. Once in the US, they also are involved in identity theft, fraud, and forgery. While they may not falsify documentation or steal identifying information themselves, they are an end-user. They are the demand curve. That documentation is then used to steal US taxpayer money through government handouts, medical costs, and government school enrollments.

However, many of those crossing the borders also bring other contraband. Many "earn" their crossing by paying "coyotes" in trade. The "trade" can be any of multiple activities. The majority carry illegal drugs across the border. Several are even extorted with threats to their families if they fail to do so. Some traffic unregistered and unmarked weapons. These are ones used by other criminals, usually sold on the black market. These are the guns that criminals will still have access to after the anti-second amendment tyrants strip US citizens of their right to bear arms.

A "rape tree" in Southern Arizona (Courtesy of TucsonCitizen.com)

Then you have one of the most disturbing "trades" the illegals use to pay for their crossing:  slavery. Yes, slavery still exists. Some illegals end up in "sweat shops", working for less than minimum wage by "employers" who seek cheap labor while dodging taxes. Others end up as sex-slaves. Along the border, in Arizona, there are "rape trees" where young boys and girls are "broken in". Others are drugged. Others are extorted. However, they end up as prostitutes around the US. The scary fact is that the sex-slavery and human trafficking for that purpose is a two-way road. US Citizens are carted out of the US along these same ratlines, then shipped overseas to be sold into slavery. Some of the illegals brought into the US pay off their passage by aiding in the trafficking of Americans out for this very purpose. It's estimated that at least 30% of the missing US children (many listed as runaways), mostly those 12-16, are victims of this illicit activity. 80% of the victims in the US are female. 50% are pre-teens. The FBI averages 23 arrests of sex-slavers and international human traffickers (for purposes of slavery) a year.



On August 15, 2012, Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his deputies conducted their 64th major raid since 2008. the raid included arresting four suspected professional identity thieves directly connected to illegal immigration and human trafficking. The business, Sonoran Doors, located at 21002 N. 19th Ave, Suite 130 in Phoenix, AZ employed several suspected illegal immigrants. A search and audit of their employee records determined many of them were employed on forged documentation and stolen identification information that the four identity thieves assisted the illegal employees in attaining, including helping forge documentation. In Arizona, 80% of illegal immigrants detained have been found involved in identity theft, a felony.

Given the connections between illegal immigration and identity theft, Sheriff Joe cautions that Obama's recent announcement to "defer action" on "child and young" illegals is nothing less than an invitation for increased identity theft. Many of these kids will require stolen identity information and forged documentation such as Social Security cards and Drivers' Licenses in order to attend schools and work in sweat shops (including food service businesses such as smaller fast food franchises). It appears that Obama is not only soft on illegal immigration, but willfully complacent (if not indirectly complicit) in identity theft.

After Obama's announcement that the Federal Executive Branch, responsible for implementation and enforcement of laws passed by Congress, will "defer and delay actions against minors crossing the border", Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed her own executive order. Arizona will not play along with the irresponsible complacency. In fact, Governor Brewer ordered increased enforcement of identity theft and other activities directly linked to illegal immigration. Furthermore, this recent EO reaffirms that illegals will not receive any "public benefits". That includes drivers licenses, food stamps, housing assistance, education benefits, or any other form of benefit. The EO could lead to self-deportation. The only detractor is that illegals can just leave the state of Arizona for a state that is softer on illegal aliens, such as California, Oregon, or Illinois. 

Russian Akula Class Sub Stalks US Undetected

Russian Akula-Class Submarine Hunting Submarine (Courtesy of FAS)

For several weeks, a Russian Akula-Class nuclear submarine stalked US Sovereign waters with impunity.

The Akula-class submarine is designed as a submarine-hunter. Their primary missions are to stalk US Navy ballistic missile submarines and destroy them before they can launch in the case of war. The fact that one could patrol, undetected, for weeks along the US Gulf Coast, within striking distance of Jacksonville, FL and King's Bay, GA, both cities that house large US Naval bases. Among the armament routinely carried by the Akulas are long-range cruise missiles that could have easily created numerous casualties at both these Naval bases from the Gulf.

Meanwhile, nuclear capable Russian bombers (aircraft) crossed into US sovereign airspace near Alaska and California over the Forth of July weekend. There is little doubt that these were planned probes of our national defense capabilities.

Let's recall a few short months ago when Obama told Medevev that he would have more latitude to expose our national defense secrets after his re-election. Obama made his statement believing that the microphone was off. Instead, the world heard his statement and the outgoing Russian president's response: . "I will transmit this information to Vladamir" (Spawning great T-shirts and Bumper Stickers).

These events come not long after the UN's failed attempt to strip the US of our Second Amendment through a treaty. They come as Obama attempts to campaign on reducing federal spending by starting with cuts to national defense. The first cuts usually go to training funds and intelligence programs. For those who weren't paying attention in the late 1990s, intelligence programs were cut back by the Clinton administration. Cross-agency communications became muddled and encumbered. Then on September 11, 2001, Al-Qaeda initiated their forth major attack against the US, this time attacking the World Trade Center and the Pentagon rather than a couple of embassies and a US Naval vessel.

We knew that Obama was willing to play soft with the Russians. However, this latest breach of national security demonstrates he is more than just willing to play soft -- he is willing to let other countries use the US as a punching bag and a tackle-dummy.

Yes, our federal government needs to cut out wasteful spending. They need to trim back on the unnecessary bureaucratic offices. They need to quit spending money in areas in which the federal government has no authority nor responsibility to waste our tax money. They need to stop spending money taking care of criminals who illegally entered our country. They need to stop throwing money to those who would rather live off of the fruits of others' labors. The last place the government needs to cut spending is in the area of national defense. Our intelligence personnel are our first line of defense, since they are the ones looking for any possible threats. Pearl Harbor taught us that we cannot fight a threat we do not know to be there. (In the case of Pearl Harbor, it was the threat nobody high in FDR's administration would listen to the intelligence personnel who detected the pending attack).

These latest incursions and Obama's lack of response is demonstrative of the fact he wants the US militarily weak and ripe for attack by our enemies. Like Jimmy Carter did as a Naval Officer, Obama is running our Naval capabilities to ground. However, he is also grounding our Air Force and arming our Army and Marines with Nerf Reactor Ball Blasters.

This leaves me, a former intelligence analyst, with one question to my compatriots still in the fight:  Who is jumping up in down in their SCIF right now screaming "I Told You So!"?  I want to buy you a beer.

Joey Biden Thinks Deregulation Equals Slavery

"Keep cheering me on, my useful idiots"

In a recent speech, Joe Biden decided to once again infect his tongue with athlete's foot fungus. The feat was attempted with a further feat of gymnastic prowess as he did so while in a state of rectal-cranial inversion. This is just the latest of Biden's gaffes that demonstrates the desperation in the socialist party salons -- forcing them to reveal their complete lack of reason. 

In the speech in Danville, VA, a town that is approximately 50% black, he stated that those individuals, allegedly like Mitt Romney, who wish to reduce government intervention into private enterprises do so with the intent of enslaving special tribal collectives of stereotyped people. Biden went further to state that freeing people and businesses from the shackles of prosperity-killing over-taxation would result in those same shackles having to go someplace.

President Lincoln would strongly disagree. So would have Moses. Moses didn't tell Pharaoh to put the chains onto somebody else. Lincoln in signing the Emancipation Proclamation didn't order others be enslaved to replace those freed. So why does Joey Biden want his useful idiots to believe that shackles need  to be on anybody? 

Those on the left do not see people as individuals who can succeed, or fail, on their own merits. They see people as groups categorized by some identifying characteristic such as skin color or ancestral language. Joe Biden's illogical, unreasonable, and ludicrous claim just demonstrates even more how ignorant the left believes individual Americans are. Those who believe his statement just prove him right; not in the truth of his statement but in his belief in your ignorance.

The truth is that deregulation is the removal of shackles placed upon individuals by a tyrannic government seeking to restrict, confine, subjugate, and  enslave. Perhaps that is what the lazy, less educated, handout junkies want. Perhaps they want those who produce, succeed, invest, and seek prosperity to be enslaved.

Another truth is should Romney and other capitalist-minded US Constitution followers seek some level of deregulation, it will never be a complete deregulation. Some restrictions may be lifted, yes. That will enable opportunity and growth for those who wish to take the risks. However, a complete deregulation would lead to unethical and dangerous activities. The necessary regulations and government involvement will still remain. For example, the government and its judicial branch will continue to enforce lawful contracts and prosecute fraud. They will also keep regulations and laws against insider trading, to keep the market fair and from being artificially inflated. Doing so is more than reasonable. It is necessary to protect individuals' investments and retirement accounts, to include those of the very legislators. It also protects those 401k and 403b pension accounts most Americans accrue.

When looking at deregulation, look towards Ronald Reagan. President Reagan pushed for several deregulation programs as well as the busting of several unions. Among those unions was the Air Traffic Controllers' union. However, one of the most successful deregulation programs also busted up the monopoly AT&T held on telecommunications. Because of that deregulation, we now have choices for cell phone service, DSL services, internet providers,  Android Tablets with 3G or 4G, Kindles, Nooks, Kindle Fires, etc. Because of that deregulation, you now have a choice between an iPhone or an Android. Because of that deregulation, you can choose between Sprint, Verizon, AT&T, Cricket, and several smaller cellular service providers. Had Reagan not deregulated telecommunications, we'd all be stuck with AT&T's crappy service.

More choice is liberty. It is options for personal accountability and responsibility. It is opportunity. Deregulation means more choice, more options. It is the exact opposite of slavery. It is a removal of those invisible shackles. However, Joey Biden is either too ignorant to know the facts, or he believes you are too ignorant to pay attention to reason and logic. Then again, he believes that his voter base consists of a few elites and whole collectives of "lesser, lower, little people". In reality, he wants Americans  enslaved and dependent upon the government.

No thank you. I'm a big boy. My parents raised me correctly. I can take care of myself. How about you?

Left Reveals Insanity After Ryan VP Announcement

Saturday morning Willard "Mitt" Romney announced his running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan.

Since the announcement, the ludicrous and ridiculous (not to mention unfounded) attacks against Ryan have come in a constant deluge. The claims, most intended as serious, have devolved into days of unintended self-deprecating parody conducted by the left.

Among those making a mockery of themselves is DNC Chairperson Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. DWS has gone head to head against Ryan over the PPACA and budget plans numerous times over the past three years. Each time, Ryan has used what the left considers an illegal WMD:  facts. Ryan used the actual numbers crunched by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and other non-partisan government bureaucracy bean counters. Again, Debbie has come out against Ryan and demonstrated she didn't bother to read any studies.

Then you had the unfounded allegations that Ryan participated in insider trading like Nancy Pelosi did taking IPOs from lobbyists. Not only did these allegations from devout leftist propagandists such as Matthew Yglesias prove unfounded, they proved to be more tied to Sheldon Whitehouse. 

Now the "grandma-tossers" are coming out of the woodwork, trying to re-engage that failed meme. In various social media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter, the uneducated are at it again. In fact, the deluge of those who obviously have not read the legislation or paid attention to any actual numbers have brought allegations that, like Neal Rauhauser's Beandogs, these people are being paid to do so. Among the hard facts concerning Ryan's budget, the only thing the leftist demagogues feel (they don't think) they can attack, is that the Medicare portion does not affect anybody currently over 55.

Andrew Biggs wrote a comprehensive study of the Ryan legislation. Extracting from that study, James Pethokoukis gives a great 100-word bomb that destroys all the left's inaccurate talking points concerning Ryan's budget plans.

Ryan's plan does have problems. One of them is that it will take a projected 30 years to balance the budget. The second is that it does not cut spending, just retards spending increases. Libertarians and many TEA Party activists would rather a more aggressive plan that cuts actual government spending and reduces the bloated bureaucracy. However, the Ryan Plan is a start. It is far better than anything else that has been proposed in recent years. In addition, it stands to gain more votes in congress than Obama's abysmal attempts at a budget, which received zero votes in congress. 

Meanwhile, the truth is that it is Obama and his socialist sycophants that want to toss grandma off a cliff and under a speeding freight train:




It has become more and more apparent that the leftist demagogues and their useful idiots need to head to the local library. The library has books for Second through Sixth grades that teach basic math skills. The library also has books to assist in learning how to read. Then again, we know that they don't read. If they did, how many of them would have still voted for the PPACA if they had read it?