Saturday, October 29, 2016

‘The woman is a disaster!’: Camille Paglia on Hillary Clinton

A wide-ranging interview with the iconoclastic professor

29 October 2016
Image result for camille paglia
Talking to Camille Paglia is like approaching a machine gun: madness to stick your head up and ask a question, unless you want your brain blown apart by the answer, but a visceral delight to watch as she obliterates every subject in sight. Most of the time she does this for kicks. It’s only on turning to Hillary Clinton that she perpetrates an actual murder: of Clinton II’s most cherished claim, that her becoming 45th president of the United States would represent a feminist triumph.
‘In order to run for president of the United States, you have to spend two or three years of your life out on the road constantly asking for money and most women find that life too harsh, too draining,’ Paglia argues. ‘That is why we haven’t had a woman president in the United States — not because we haven’t been ready for one, for heaven’s sakes, for a very long time…’
Hillary hasn’t suffered — Paglia continues — because she is a woman. She has shamelessly exploited the fact: ‘It’s an outrage how she’s played the gender card. She is a woman without accomplishment. “I sponsored or co-sponsored 400 bills.” Oh really? These were bills to rename bridges and so forth. And the things she has accomplished have been like the destabilisation of North Africa, causing refugees to flood into Italy… The woman is a disaster!’
Not that Paglia was always opposed to the Clintons. She voted for Bill Clinton twice before becoming revolted by the treatment meted out to Monica Lewinsky: ‘One of the very first interviews I did here — the headline was “Kind of a bitch — why I like Hillary Clinton”. My jaundiced view of her is entirely the result of observing her behaviour. And last election, I voted for Jill Stein’s Green party. So I have already voted for a woman president.’
As far as most feminists are concerned, such a view is unconscionable. Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright made it their business to castigate American girls who wanted Bernie Sanders, while Madonna has promised a blowjob for every Clinton vote. Professor Paglia does not seem to mind much if she makes herself violently unpopular with her contemporaries — she’s an expert at it. Currently professor of the humanities at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, she first shot to fame in 1990 with the publication of Sexual Personae — a manuscript turned down by seven publishers before it became a bestseller.
Paglia’s feminism has always been concerned with issues far beyond her own navel and the Hillary verdict is typical of her attitude — which is more in touch with women in the real world than most feminists’ (a majority of Americans, for example, have an ‘unfavourable view of Hillary Clinton’ according to recent polling).
‘My philosophy of feminism,’ the New York-born 69-year-old explains, ‘I call street-smart Amazon feminism. I’m from an immigrant family. The way I was brought up was: the world is a dangerous place; you must learn to defend yourself. You can’t be a fool. You have to stay alert.’ Today, she suggests, middle-class girls are being reared in a precisely contrary fashion: cosseted, indulged and protected from every evil, they become helpless victims when confronted by adversity. ‘We are rocketing backwards here to the Victorian period with this belief that women are not capable of making decisions on their own. This is not feminism — which is to achieve independent thought and action. There will never be equality of the sexes if we think that women are so handicapped they can’t look after themselves.’
Paglia traces the roots of this belief system to American campus culture and the cult of women’s studies. This ‘poison’ — as she calls it — has spread worldwide. ‘In London, you now have this plague of female journalists… who don’t seem to have made a deep study of anything…’
Paglia does not sleep with men — but she is, very refreshingly, in favour of them. She never moans about ‘the patriarchy’ but freely asserts that manmade capitalism has enabled her to write her books.
As for male/female relations, she says that they are far more complex than most feminists insist. ‘I wrote a date-rape essay in 1991 in which I called for women to stand up for themselves and learn how to handle men. But now you have this shibboleth, “No means no.” Well, no. Sometimes “No” means “Not yet”. Sometimes “No” means “Too soon”. Sometimes “No” means “Keep trying and maybe yes”. You can see it with the pigeons on the grass. The male pursues the female and she turns away, and turns away, and he looks a fool but he keeps on pursuing her. And maybe she’s testing his persistence; the strength of his genes… It’s a pattern in the animal kingdom — a courtship pattern…’ But for pointing such things out, Paglia adds, she has been ‘defamed, attacked and viciously maligned’ — so, no, she is not in the least surprised that wolf-whistling has now been designated a hate crime in Birmingham.
Girls would be far better advised to revert to the brave feminist approach of her generation — when women were encouraged to fight all their battles by themselves, and win. ‘Germaine Greer was once in this famous debate with Norman Mailer at Town Hall. Mailer was formidable, enormously famous — powerful. And she just laid into him: “I was expecting a hard, nuggety sort of man and he was positively blousy…” Now that shows a power of speech that cuts men up. And this is the way women should be dealing with men — finding their weaknesses and susceptibilities… not bringing in an army of pseudo, proxy parents to put them down for you so you can preserve your perfect girliness.’
In an hour’s non-stop talking, Professor Paglia is only lost when asked which younger feminists she would pass the baton to. ‘I would love to inspire dissident young feminists to realise that this brand of feminism is not all feminism…’ she says, before citing Germaine Greer as the woman she admires most alive, and Amelia Earhart and Katharine Hepburn as heroines alas dead.
As with Greer, it is Paglia’s power of speech that utterly devastates. Her collected works read like a dictionary of vicious quotations. (Leaving sex to the feminists? ‘Like letting your dog vacation at the taxidermist.’ Lena Dunham? ‘She’s a big pile of pudding.’) Paglia is pro-liberty, pro–pornography, pro-prostitutes and anti- any and all special treatment when it comes to women in power: ‘I do not believe in quotas of any kind. Scandinavian countries are going in that direction and it’s an insult to women — the idea that you need a quota.’ Which brings us back to Hillary and the so-called victory her re-entering the White House would represent: ‘If Hillary wins, nothing will change. She knows the bureaucracy, all the offices of government and that’s what she likes to do, sit behind the scenes and manipulate the levers of power.’
Paglia says she has absolutely no idea how the election will go: ‘But people want change and they’re sick of the establishment — so you get this great popular surge, like you had one as well… This idea that Trump represents such a threat to western civilisation — it’s often predicted about presidents and nothing ever happens — yet if Trump wins it will be an amazing moment of change because it would destroy the power structure of the Republican party, the power structure of the Democratic party and destroy the power of the media. It would be an incredible release of energy… at a moment of international tension and crisis.’
All of a sudden, the professor seems excited. Perhaps, like all radicals in pursuit of the truth, Paglia is still hoping the revolution will come.
Camille Paglia was a speaker at the Battle of Ideas in London last weekend. Her book Free Women, Free Men: Sex, Gender, Feminism will be published next year.

America Is at Its Most Perilous Crossroads Since World War II

October 28, 2016

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks with senior aide Huma Abedin aboard her campaign plane at Westchester County Airport in White Plains, N.Y., Friday, Oct. 28, 2016, before traveling to Iowa for rallies. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks with senior aide Huma Abedin aboard her campaign plane at Westchester County Airport in White Plains, N.Y., Friday, Oct. 28, 2016, before traveling to Iowa for rallies. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

To say that the USA is at its most dangerous crossroads since World War II might sound overheated, if it were not so obviously true.

Our country is about to (or was about to—we'll see) elect a woman president who, to a great many of us, possibly a majority, is indisputably a criminal and about to draw our federal government into nonstop litigation, more than likely leading to an impeachment trial at the least, weakening our already weakened state, blotting almost everything out and dominating all our attention and the airwaves for the next several years.

We didn't really need this latest round of email allegations emerging from the disgusting marriage and lifestyles of  Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner, what theNY Post calls a "Stroking Gun," to tell us that, but they have added a fillip, a certainje ne sais quoi to the political party formally known as "Democratic."

All this is happening with the Middle East falling apart, radical Islam spreading across all the continents save Antarctica (maybe even there), Russia and China expanding their influence, North Korea and Iran building their militaries and weaponry with impunity and the global economy in tatters (and that's not counting relatively local issues like the disintegration of Obamacare and the execrable condition of our inner cities).

And we have to listen to that appalling witch Hillary Clinton complaining that the FBI isn't being "transparent" enough.  This is the same woman who took her entire business as secretary of State offline and lied about it so many times it would take all the abacuses in China to count it up.

As Joseph Welch famously said to Joseph McCarthy, "Have you no sense of decency, sir?"  Only this time it's worse, because Hillary Clinton makes Joseph McCarthy seem like Mother Teresa.

Get ready, Mr. and Mrs. America, because we are headed for a "winter of our discontent" unlike any we have ever seen.  And there won't be a son of York or Lancaster to save us.  With a president already known to have lied through his teeth about the email server, we don't know where this is all going but we can be sure it's nowhere good.

At this moment the so-called "liberals" (how does that misnomer seem now?) are in a frenzy, lashing out because they are afraid her gangster-ladyship might actually lose.  They yowl on Twitter that Donald Trump or Kellyanne Conway were too gleeful about the sudden emergence of the new emails (who knew that even Julian Assange could be upstaged?), but, as her ladyship herself opined, "What difference at this point could it make?"

None, really.

The situation is clear—and should be even to the #NeverTrump crowd now, if they are honest with themselves (hard to do for all of us, I know, but try). Yes, we are at the crossroads. Whatever you think of Donald Trump is pretty much irrelevant.  Sometimes things get remarkably simple ... you know, those so-called moments of clarity, and we have one now:

If you consider yourself an American citizen who supports this country even a little bit—you don't have to be a flag-waving patriot for this—how do you feel about a criminal sitting in the oval office of the White House as president of the United States?

If that disturbs you,  you know what to do.  If that doesn't disturb you, well, anything goes or as some German once said, "The ends justify the means." Or was that really a German? Maybe it was John Podesta. Or Cheryl Mills. Or Huma Abedin. Or Hillary Clinton.  I'm getting confused here.

No, I guess it was Karl Marx, after all.  They just updated him—in ways that could make them millions of dollars, hundreds of millions.  I mean, who wants to spend the rest of your life scratching lice out of your beard in the British Museum?  Who wants to be a sucker when you can make the rest of us into suckers?

Had enough?  I have.

Let's save ourselves and put an end to it November 8.

Thursday, October 27, 2016

Lessons from the Highway of Death

Elites’ impossible dreams often become dangerous realities for more vulnerable and distant ‘others.’

By Victor Davis Hanson — October 27, 2016
Firefighters and paramedics tend to people who suffered minor injuries in a multiple-car crash on Highway 99 near Bakersfield on Monday, Nov. 2, 2015.
Firefighters and paramedics tend to people who suffered minor injuries in a 20-car crash on Highway 99 near Bakersfield on Monday, Nov. 2, 2015. (Photo courtesy Kern County Fire Department)

California State Route 99 is the north-south highway that cuts through the great Central Valley. And it has changed little since the mid-1960s.

A half-century ago, when the state population was about 18 million — not nearly 40 million as it is today — the 99 used to be a high-speed, four-lane marvel. It was a crown jewel in California’s cutting-edge freeway system.

Not now.

The 99 was recently ranked by ValuePenguin (a private consumer research organization) as the deadliest major highway in the nation. Locals who live along its 400-plus miles often go to bed after seeing lurid TV news reports of nocturnal multi-car accidents. Then they wake up to Central Valley radio accounts of morning carnage on the 99.

The 99 is undergoing a $1 billion, multi-decade upgrade to increase its four lanes to six. Promises have been made to build off- and on-ramps in place of haphazard exits and entries from the old days of cross traffic.

In many of the most dangerous southern portions of the 99, huge semi trucks hog two lanes. Speeders weave in and out of traffic. They still try to drive 70 mph in the manner you could 50 years ago when traffic was less clogged. Text-messaging drivers are now even more dangerous than the intoxicated.

The 99 is emblematic of a state in psychological and material decline.

Running parallel to the southern portion of the 99 is an underused, subsidized Amtrak passenger rail line. Not far away is yet another rail corridor, where the state is plowing up some of its best farmland to build the first link of high-speed rail. That boondoggle’s projected price tag has soared from the original $33 billion to somewhere between $60 and $100 billion — without a single foot of track yet laid.

Californians are apparently too sophisticated to allot $10 billion or so to first ensure that the state has adequate north-south freeways. In addition to the 99, state residents must also contend with the equally primitive coastal Highway 101 and the now-overcrowded Interstate 5.

All societies in decline fixate on impossible postmodern dreams as a way of disguising their inability to address premodern problems.

Ensuring that California’s freeways were all six lanes, well-lit and safe would have been a gargantuan but practical task that could have been completed long ago and would have saved thousands of lives (though it would have required the admission that the mundane modern automobile was here to stay). Instead, cool bureaucrats and hip politicians preferred to blow money on visions of grandiose space-age rail.

The 99 also reminds the nation of California’s unique lessons about how to ruin a paradise: The more taxes are raised, the worse public service often becomes.

Currently, Californians pay among the highest sales, income, and gasoline taxes in the nation. Yet in return, the state’s decrepit transportation system in many national surveys rates nearly last. California public school test scores are likewise near the bottom of national rankings.
The state has become a pharaonic society of two classes. The coastal rich are exempt from financial worries over their high-tax dreams. And the subsidized poor in the state’s interior live out the real-life consequences. Meanwhile, the disrespected middle class, without either high incomes or state entitlements, is leaving the state in droves.

The 99 has become a neglected, poor person’s highway. California has far more residents receiving welfare than any other state, and it has among the highest poverty rates in the nation. Most of the state’s poorest counties are bisected by the 99. About a quarter of California’s inhabitants were not born in the United States. Many are still not U.S. citizens.

The result is a perfect storm that blows in daily over the 99.

The hazardous conditions of stretches of the highway and the 99’s enormous traffic volume are compounded by old and unsafe automobiles and trucks — and by California’s many inexperienced drivers, unfamiliar with U.S. driving etiquette and laws. The drivers of flatbed and pickup trucks on the 99 often do not tie down their loads.

The highway can often resemble a two-lane obstacle course. It takes only a single lost mattress, a bin of overturned peaches, or a motorcyclist failing to navigate between stalled cars to shut down the 99 — and with it the state’s north-south commerce.

The 99 offers a number of banal (and oft-forgotten) lessons handed down from our grandparents, who mapped out what once was the nation’s premier transportation system. 
Highways, along with dams, canals, and bridges, are the lifeblood of a state, a far more important priority than investing in transgendered restrooms or efforts to save the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly. 

Only measured, diverse and legal immigration, coupled with rapid assimilation and integration, can ensure that diversity is a strength.

The rich who can easily pay high taxes should not impose them on those who cannot.
Finally, the dreams of elites become quite dangerous realities when first tried out on more vulnerable and distant “others.”

— Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the author, most recently, of The Savior Generals. You can reach him by © 2016 Tribune Media Services, Inc.​​

Wednesday, October 26, 2016

Remembering Jack Chick: the Christian cartoonist who tried to save us from hell

25 October 2016

Image result for jack chick covers
Jack T. Chick, the cartoonist and evangelist, died on Sunday at the age of 92. It is probably safe to say that there was no one else like him in the world.
Karen Rockney, Chick’s secretary and friend of 45 years, confirmed his death by phone on Monday, saying she had last seen him the previous day. Chick, for weeks in poor health, had known he was close to the end, Rockney said.
“The last time I actually spoke to him was last Thursday,” she said. “We were there in his home. He didn’t have a lot to say; he knew he was going. There were several of us from Chick Publications who were there to share with him. He let us know he loved us all and would see us soon.”
Chick rarely gave interviews; Rockney declined to provide contact information for his widow, Susie Chick, or Fred Carter, Jack’s co-artist since 1972. Carter’s work graced the pages of Chick-written comics during the mid-1970s boom in Christian comics publishing, alongside titles from the former Archie Comics artist Al Hartley’s religious comics company, Spire. Carter also illustrated a line of comics featuring black characters – some of them his own stories, some reworked from previous Chick tracts in order to broaden the comics’ audience and better serve Chick’s all-important mission of evangelism.
To Americans who grew up in or adjacent to evangelical Christian communities in the 1970s and 80s, Chick’s harsh stories about the wages of sin were both inescapable and oddly inviting in the way of very few other methods of proselytizing. Often left in places known to attract sinners – on video games, public transportation or stacks of glossier comics – the little black-and-white books are instantly recognizable: about the size of a dollar bill, each cover with stark white title text over one half, a two-color illustration on the other half.
This format, incidentally, is also the right size for a Tijuana bible, the slang name for the cheaply-produced depression-era pornographic comics starring cartoon characters such as Blondie and Popeye, which would have been in circulation when Chick was a boy. His innovation on the format outlasted the porn version by several decades, which surely pleased him.
Chick was married to his first wife, Lola Lynn, for 50 years; when she died, he married again, to Susie Chick. His only child, a daughter named Carol, died in 1998 after complications from surgery, Rockney said. Chick was not a Christian when he first met Lynn, Rockney told the Guardian, but his future in-laws insisted they listen to Charles E Fuller’s Old Fashioned Revival Hour together, and Chick adopted a charismatic form of Christianity that recast life’s difficulties in terms of a titanic struggle between ultimate good and absolute evil. That perspective would inform his work for the rest of his life.
A lot of people hated Jack Chick. He wrote furious screeds against Dungeons & Dragons, against Catholicism and against rock music; he waged a long and ultimately unsuccessful war on Halloween. If you were Jewish or Muslim or gay, Chick wanted you to be saved from the fires of hell and wrote a comic to tell you so.
At one time or another, Chick’s work was repudiated by his co-religionists, bookseller trade associations, and at least once by the government of Canada, which outlawed the distribution of a few of his comics as hate speech, according to an issue of the critic and New Yorker writer Daniel Raeburn’s magazine the Imp, devoted to Chick.
If Chick was troubled, it wasn’t by insincerity. Asked about Chick’s personal life, Rockney suggested a recent excerpt from the organization’s newsletter, Battle Cry: “He wrote about the witches that were sent to take his family out and how the Lord protected him,” Rockney recalled. “That’s recent. He just wrote that.” Chick befriended at least one of the witches, Rockney said.
The organization would throw parties – “banquets”, in her words – to celebrate milestones. In his last days, as he sat quietly surrounded by friends, Rockney said, they tried to ease his pain by reminding him of his hope of heaven. “I told him the next Chick Publications banquet is going to be with the Lord, and he got a big smile on his face,” she said.
Many underground and alternative comic artists admired him. In an interview last year, the cartoonist Daniel Clowes said that, as far as he was concerned, Chick deserved a place in the comics pantheon. “As a comics aficionado you don’t really think of those as being part of the official canon of effective comics,” he said. “And one day I sort of changed my mind on that. I thought, ‘These are really compelling and interesting and I’d rather read these than pretty much anything else published in 1985.’”
The revelation came after a Chick tracts bender, Clowes said: “[O]ne day I made a long trek out to a Christian bookstore in Queens where they had a rack where they sold them, and I bought every single one, which totaled I think $3. I think they were each 10 cents. And I went home and read them all in one sitting, and it was maybe the most devastating comics-reading experience I’ve ever had. I really felt like he’d almost won me over by the end. There’s really something to be said for that.”
Clowes drew his own parody of a Chick Tract, called Devil Doll, for the first issue of his own indie comics series, Eightball; other cartoonists including Jim Woodring and the celebrated underground cartoonist Robert Crumb mimicked Chick’s blunt storytelling style. At one point, a rumor circulated that Chick was in fact a pseudonym for Robert Crumb. (He wasn’t.)
By financial standards, the Chick Publications enterprise is successful – it has employed its small staff for nearly five decades – but in terms of pure saturation, it is a phenomenon. Raeburn called Chick “the most widely read theologian in human history”; if that is an exaggeration, it is a slight one. Four hundred million Chick tracts, sold in packets of 25 at just above cost, had been distributed in 1998 when Raeburn wrote that.
Rockney put the number closer to 1bn. “He was that very special, special person,” she said. “He sacrificed a lot to give what he gave to the world, and he’s one of the greatest reformers in the world.”

Monday, October 24, 2016


What Clinton's proposed amnesty for illegal aliens would really do.

October 24, 2016
John Podesta is pictured. | Getty
(Getty Images)
Two recurrent claims made by Hillary Clinton are that she will stand with Americans families against powerful interests and corporations and that she will increase spending on educating children to help them succeed.
These populist promises may resonate with many Americans.  However, as my mom used to say, “Actions speak louder than words.
Hillary Clinton's grandiose plans to provide unknown numbers of illegal aliens with lawful status would make her other promises impossible to keep.
During the last debate she stated that she would do whatever she needs to do so that workers will have good jobs with rising incomes.
However, for Hillary and the administration, American workers literally don't count.
Today tens of millions of working-age Americans have left the labor force and are not counted by the Labor Department when it  provides unemployment statistics.  In point of fact each month the United States admits more foreign workers than the number of new jobs that are created.
Legalizing millions of new foreign workers would serve to flood the labor pool with many more authorized workers providing unfair competition for beleaguered American workers, especially within the low income sector.  Under the principle of “Supply & Demand” flooding a market with a commodity drives down the value of that commodity.  Labor is not unlike any other commodity such as petroleum, steel or aluminum.
It is a bit ironic that during the third and final debate Hillary Clinton attacked Trump, alleging that he had used steel and aluminum that had been “dumped” in the United States by China.  Dumping is an economic crime when it involves dumping a large quantity of a commodity into the marketplace in order to artificially reduce the value of that commodity.  This is precisely what the open-border policies of the administration that Clinton promises to not only continue but expand, where the commodity of foreign labor is concerned.
I have written numerous articles about how Clinton's proposed massive amnesty program would undermine national security and the U.S. economy.
What has not been considered or discussed by the media or politicians is the impact that Clinton's immigration policies would have on the ability of schools to teach children in America- the same children Hillary Clinton claims to be so concerned about.
If millions or, more likely, tens of millions of illegal aliens were suddenly granted lawful status, they would immediately have the absolute and unequivocal right to apply to have all of their minor children be lawfully admitted into the United States.  They would then be enrolled in school districts in virtually every state.
Under the hobbled U.S. economy, many cities and states are currently suffering from severe short-falls of revenue and struggling to provide education for the children who within those cities and states.
Families in Third World countries often have many children.  Although a significant number of illegal aliens who would benefit from Clinton's legalization program might not have minor children, it is likely that the number of kids who would ultimately be admitted into the United States because of her legalization program would exceed the number of heretofore aliens who would be placed on the pathway to United States citizenship. 
Additionally, these legalized aliens would likely go on to have more children in the United States, further increasing the school population and burdens placed on struggling schools around the United States.
This would be extremely costly and would result in over-crowded classrooms with many children, who are not fluent in the English language, requiring additional costly educational services.
In December 2007 the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) published an important paper, “The Impact of Unauthorized Immigrants on the Budgets of State and Local Governments.”
The paper, that was published nearly ten years ago, estimated that there were 12 million illegal aliens present in the United States.
Today the news media and various government agencies claim that there are 11 million illegal aliens present in the United States even though, under the Obama administration, we have witnessed a succession of surges of illegal aliens flooding across the U.S./Mexican border and various government reports note that it is believed that each year approximately 500,000 nonimmigrant aliens who are admitted into the United States through ports of entry ultimately overstay their authorized period of admission or otherwise violate their terms of admission.
Prior to the enactment of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) which, for the first time established a law that penalized employers who could be shown to have knowingly hired illegal aliens, also provided a “one time” amnesty program for the officially estimated population of roughly one million illegal aliens who were present in the United States.
Ultimately that amnesty program provided more than 3.5 million illegal aliens with lawful status.
Although the reason behind the extreme disparity between the originally estimated number of aliens who would “emerge from the shadows” was never determined, it is likely the consequence of a combination of two factors, underestimating the actual number of illegal aliens who were present in the United States and many aliens entering the United States long after the cutoff date and successfully defrauding the program by falsely claiming to have entered the United States prior to the established cutoff date.
A succession of GAO reports have found that immigration fraud is rampant within the immigration benefits program.  What is particularly disturbing about this fact is the finding of the 9/11 Commission that visa fraud and immigration benefit fraud were key to the ability of terrorists to enter the United States and embed themselves in the United States as they went about their preparation to launch deadly attacks.
While the report noted that it was difficult to quantify all of the costs attributable to the illegal alien population it did note that, “The tax revenues that unauthorized immigrants generate for state and local governments do not offset the total cost of services provided to those immigrants.”
The CBO paper addressed the issue of the cost of education to cities and states.  Consider this excerpt that began on page 7:
Education is the largest single expenditure in state and local budgets. Because state and local governments bear the primary fiscal and administrative responsibility of providing schooling from kindergarten through grade 12, they incur substantial costs to educate children who are unauthorized immigrants.  In 1982, the Supreme Court ruled that states may not exclude children from public education because of their immigration status.  Current estimates indicate that about 2 million school-age children (5 to 17 years old) in the United States are unauthorized immigrants; an additional 3 million children are U.S. citizens born to unauthorized immigrants.
According to the most recent population data released by the Census Bureau, as of July 2006, there were 53.3 million school-age children in the United States. Thus, children who are unauthorized immigrants represent almost 4 percent of the overall school-age population. Their numbers are growing quickly in some states, adding additional budgetary pressures.
The paper went on to report:
In terms of public education, unauthorized immigrants who are minors increase the overall number of students attending public schools, and they may also require more educational services than do native-born children because of a lack of proficiency in English. Analyses from several states indicate that the costs of educating students who did not speak English fluently were 20 percent to 40 percent higher than the costs incurred for native-born students.
Finally, school districts across the United States have found that the flood of unaccompanied minors from Central America has included within their ranks members of violent gangs such as MS-13.
My article, “President Obama: Accessory to the Crimes Committed By Illegal Aliens? The grim findings unveiled by a House congressional hearing” was predicated on a hearing conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security on April 19, 2016 on the topic, “The Real Victims of a Reckless and Lawless Immigration Policy: Families and Survivors Speak Out on the Real Cost of This Administration’s Policies.”
The prepared testimony of Sheriff Charles A. Jenkins of Frederick County, Maryland included this excerpt:
The criminal alien gang numbers are growing, and the serious crimes being committed are increasing. There is also a nexus between the deferred action on unaccompanied minors and the increases we are seeing in gang crimes. Statistics (2014-2015 stats were provided) and hard facts demonstrate the impact on public safety and the seriousness of the crimes committed by criminal alien gang members:
* There are over 75 active known validated transnational criminal gang members in Frederick County, many more suspected of gang affiliation. We also believe that MS-13 and 18th Street alien gangs are recruiting, locally, in our schools, in the region, and out of country.
The Sheriff went on to detail murders, rapes and assaults committed by these students who should not be present in the United States.  It must be noted that often the victims of the violence are members of the ethnic immigrant communities.
Our immigration laws were enacted to save American lives and American jobs.  Clinton's promise to make a mockery of those laws are anti-American.
 Tags: EducationHillaryLeft
Michael Cutler is a retired Senior Special Agent of the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) whose career spanned some 30 years. He served as an Immigration Inspector, Immigration Adjudications Officer and spent 26 years as an agent who rotated through all of the squads within the Investigations Branch. For half of his career he was assigned to the Drug Task Force. He has testified before well over a dozen congressional hearings, provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission as well as state legislative hearings around the United States and at trials where immigration is at issue. He hosts his radio show, “The Michael Cutler Hour,” on Friday evenings on BlogTalk Radio. His personal website is