Moral Instruction From the Opposition Media

How accurate is a poll based on a set of facts that don’t exist?

The WaPost’s Greg Sargent is excited about a new CNN poll claiming a vast majority of Americans essentially support open borders. But before we decide to delete the 4th of July from the calendar and add Cinco de Mayo, it’s crucial to know the entire question, so as to judge the accuracy of the result.

It reads:

Now, thinking about how the U.S. government should treat illegal immigrants who have been in this country for a number of years, hold a job, speak English and are willing to pay any back taxes that they owe.

Would you favor or oppose a bill that allowed those immigrants to stay in this country rather than being deported and eventually allow them to apply for U.S. citizenship?”

CNN may as well have asked respondents their view on the commercial viability of unicorn ranching. A more accurate question would have included the qualifier “and meet only one of the following four conditions.

An accurate question is both longer and more truthful:

Estimates of the number of illegal or undocumented immigrants currently living in the US range from 9 million to 19 million. One approach to dealing with those who have lived here a number of years is to offer amnesty or a path to citizenship. [Rotate description]. Supporters say it’s morally right that illegal or undocumented immigrants who have a job, speak English and are willing to pay back taxes should have the opportunity to become productive and legal. Opponents say the jobs illegal or undocumented immigrants hold are taken from citizens, bi–lingual ballots prove the requirement to speak English is not enforced now and depending on immigrants to admit to owing taxes is unrealistic and back taxes won’t be paid. [Rotate arguments]

Knowing this do you favor or oppose a bill that allowed those immigrants to stay in the country rather than be deported and eventually be offered amnesty or a path to citizenship?

That balanced question reflects reality and produces an answer that would merit news coverage and analysis, rather than the 90 percent approval CNN’s fantasy question got.

So what did the media make of these results and how were they wrong? You guessed it, click on the link below and go to my complete Newsmax column:

https://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/bannon-california-cnn/2017/04/27/id/786847/

 

 

Gullible Republican Voters Fooled Again

When Republican voters went to the polls last November, electing Trump meant seizing the last branch of government in Washington. Trump would join the existing Republican House and Senate. These optimistic voters looked forward to ushering in a new era of unchallenged conservative government. Trump’s election would be a stunning repudiation of Obama’s eight years of big government, soft socialism,

Instead, what Trump voters got was Vichy France.

Although in fairness to the French, when President Albert Lebrun surrendered to the Germans in 1940 Hitler was at the height of his power.

Republicans in Washington — led by Curator of the Senate, Mitch McConnell —surrendered to Chuck Schumer after Hillary lost the presidential election and Schumer failed to capture the Senate. But Democrats don’t have to actually win to defeat Republicans.

Democrats just have to exist.

I’m sure the explanation for this rout has something to do with the 2018 mid–term election.

In the run up to the 2016 vote, Republicans were warned not to expect too much in the way of conservative legislation from the GOP–controlled Senate and House. The GOP was defending more incumbent Senate seats than Democrats and McConnell had to protect the vulnerable.

In 2018 it looks like Republican voters can’t expect a return to conservative government this time because the Democrats are defending more incumbent Senate seats.

How does this budget bill betray the base who keeps electing Republicans and the new voters Trump added? You’ll see for yourself when you click the link below to the rest of the column on Newsmax.

https://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/congress-goals-legislation/2017/05/02/id/787714/

 

Helping Chuck Schumer Commit Political Suicide

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is preparing to offer Majority Leader Mitch McConnell the gift of a lifetime, but I don’t know if McConnell is astute enough to accept it. Mitch McClellan’s career has been defined by a gopher–like reluctance to risk anything that causes him to stray too far from the safety of his den. (To learn how McConnell earned the nickname “Mitch McClellan,” click here.)

Accepting Schumer’s gift will require Mitch to go head–to–head in the arena of public opinion, which he is evidently reluctant to do since, like most of the Republican leadership in Congress, he doesn’t believe enough in conservative principles to make a compelling case in public.

This is why Trump is president and McConnell isn’t, but that’s another column entirely, which can be found here.

So let me explain another missed opportunity for Republicans to show the American public just how far out of the mainstream Democrats are.

AP reports Schumer “has concluded that denying President Trump his wall is perhaps the surest major defeat Democrats can hand the President in his first year.” And he plans to do it by filibustering the wall.

This is the biggest tactical error Schumer has made since he didn’t object to Fauxcahontas being sworn in.

If only McClellan would exploit Schumer’s gift.

So what can the Curator of the Senate do to exploit Schumer’s gift? All the exciting details can be yours by clicking on the link below and being whisked to my Newsmax.com column. Thanks.

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/mitch-mcconnell-chuck-schumer-border-wall-filibuster/2017/03/07/id/777474/

 

Ordering Dinner With a Side of Sanctimony

A nationwide group of restaurants is now offering diners a chance to stick it to the man while simultaneously putting the fork to their tofu. Those of you who’ve wanted to join a great moral crusade, but never got around to cleaning up the basement and inviting a Syrian “refugee” to move in, can now eat locally and be served globally.

Restaurant Opportunities Centers United has launched a “Sanctuary Restaurant” movement for eatery owners who want to stay current with the latest moral–posturing on illegal immigration.

Now diners in New York, Minneapolis, Detroit, Boston, Oakland, California and Ann Arbor, MN may encounter a sign in their local bistro that reads, “Sanctuary Restaurant: A place at the table for everyone.”

I suppose if the establishment adheres to a dining policy that’s anything like Obama’s immigration policy, the sign means when an illegal sits down at your table for lunch, you’ll be picking up the tab.

This is why I like eating at Red Robin. Management doesn’t spend time trying to demonstrate its empathy and there’s an E–Verify sign on the front door that means everyone working in the restaurant is legally in the US.

That certainly isn’t the case even in non–“sanctuary restaurants.” A diner at a Virginia Chipotle would have a better chance of sharing a meal with Hillary Clinton than being served by a citizen.

According to WNYW, “Roughly 80 restaurants are participating” in this low–level criminal conspiracy to harbor lawbreakers and obstruct justice. The idea is to publically position management as social justice warriors, while privately protecting their profit margin by keeping their illegals working for wages citizens won’t accept.

At least 1.3 million illegals are working in the restaurant industry and the wage exploiters hiring them tell Washington they need a “robust pool of workers,” which really means a cheap pool of workers. Just like Georgia plantation owners, whoops, make that commercial farmers warn that fruit will rot in the fields if they can’t pay Juarez wages to Juan, restaurant owners predict food will sit uncooked and unserved if diners expect to be attended by citizens.

Naturally, that’s not how participants describe the conspiracy. Oh–so–compassionate backers want Trump to “alleviate the fear of deportation and other harassment” for illegals. The goal is to “protect” the illegals, but from what? Heartburn? E.coli? Paying for Trump’s wall? Their authority to write policy ends with the menu.

Instead they come off sounding like the prayer in Luke 18:11 where the Pharisee loudly proclaims: “God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers or deportation supporters.”

I wonder if dining–while–smug patrons have thought their choice though. Patronizing a business harboring criminals has a potential downside. Management may draw the line at breaking immigration law, but there’s no evidence the staff won’t be tempted to branch out. Once they’ve violated the border, what’s a little identity theft or trafficking in stolen credit card numbers?

And if management opposes sending the help back to their home countries, what’s the policy on sending a bad meal back to the kitchen?

One thing is different in “sanctuary restaurants.” Instead of giving patrons a signaling device that glows and vibrates when their table is ready, the staff carries the black box and the premises clear out if an ICE agent enters

“Sanctuary restaurants” give the staff “know your rights training” and webinars on how to demand the feds produce some paperwork before a raid. The conspirators are also supposed to adopt “anti–discrimination policies” that I suppose mean if a Trump supporter mistakenly wanders in and orders in English he has a 50–50 chance of being served.

The fact that an organization supporting millions of illegal aliens, who continue to defy the law, can describe enforcing immigration law as “harassment” and publically recruit other businesses to join the conspiracy, without any fear of legal repercussion, is a stark indication of how official support for the rule of law has collapsed in favor of the rule of feelings.

Illegal immigration may be the hope for the future of the Democrat party and the secret shame of RINO Republicans, but I can guarantee you his promise to enforce the law is one of the main reasons Trump won.

Aside from waiting for food that’s never served, the other bugaboo of the anti–deportation crowd is higher prices. They claim if xenophobes insist on forcing restaurants to hire citizens, then prices are going up, because those sorts of people won’t work for Karjackistan wages.

For me, that’s no deterrent at all. If the choice is between paying a buck more for a hamburger or doing away with press one for English,” well, here’s your dollar.

Trump’s Wall Can Be a Memorial, Too

There’s been a great deal of controversy regarding who is going to pay for Trump’s border wall. The option that’s most popular is sending Mexico a bill. This would require the man Mark Steyn calls “President Piñata” to bring a big check to the groundbreaking ceremony or possibly pay on the installment plan — like rent–to–own furniture in an illegal’s crash pad.

trump-wall-if-you-build-it-they-wont-comeShould the Mexican check not materialize or if it bounces like a jumping bean there are alternatives. Oklahoma has a remittance tax that puts a one percent fee on all wire transfers sent out–of–state. According to the Center for Immigration Studies a similar US tax would mainly fall on illegals and could bring in between one a two billion dollars a year.

More than enough to pay for the wall with some left over for environmental stalling studies.

Or there’s always the even more controversial tariff on imported Mexican goods.

Frankly, I don’t care who pays as long as the wall is built, but my wife did have an innovative idea to provide seed funding while details on the larger payments are worked out. It has the dual advantage of not requiring tax dollars and proving to the opposition media there is broad–based support for Trump’s wall.

She wants Trump to sell individual bricks or cinder blocks to Americans who want a part of the wall for themselves. The American public made it possible to tear down the Berlin Wall that kept Germans in; why not let them make it possible to build the border wall to keep illegals out?

This is an ideal solution for a capitalist entrepreneur like the president. Each commemorative block could contain a message from the donor. It could be something as simple as “Thank you President Trump” or pointed as “Why Isn’t Ted Kennedy Buried Under this Wall?”

Her original idea was more specific regarding sales. She thought victims of crimes committed by illegal aliens would be happy to buy a brick. I like this, too, although I would have a sliding price scale for each brick depending upon the crime involved. I think the two bricks I buy for friends killed by drunken illegals should get a discount, while the man who wants to immortalize “I was frightened by illegals in the 7/11 parking lot” should pay full freight.

The brick commemorating my daughter’s car that was totaled by an illegal would fit somewhere between the two extremes.

Trump could save on construction expenses by requiring all illegals in federal detention be put to work building the wall inspired by their law breaking. The symmetry certainly has its appeal. Currently there is no real penalty to being repeatedly caught violating our border, other than processing delays before Obama holdovers send you north.

A few months operating a shovel for free might serve as a real deterrent.

If the brick idea doesn’t appeal to the White House, how about taking the money Trump doesn’t send to Sanctuary Cities and spend that on the wall? The solution is a twofer: Financing and poetic justice.

Until recently I’ve been stumped trying to understand the motivation behind declaring one’s city a safe haven for lawbreakers. Why should the Mexican who steals privileges that don’t belong to him get a free pass and the citizen who steals a cellphone be arrested?

What possible benefit is it to law–abiding residents for elected officials to encourage the in–migration of a criminal underclass? Unless the underclass is all in the backyard, celebrating Cinco de Mayo with the rest of the family.

California State Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De Leon introduced a bill to make the entire state of California a Sanctuary, because “half of my family would be eligible for deportation under [Trump’s] executive order.”

De Leon is more than willing to risk forfeiting millions of dollars in federal money if it means he won’t have to travel to Matamoros to enjoy grandma’s tamales.

It’s also De Leon’s belief that if Americans can donate half their insurance premiums to pay for Obamacare coverage for someone else, they should have no problem splitting their identity with a “hard working” illegal. After all De Leon contends identity theft is “…what you need to survive, to work in this country.”

Personally I wouldn’t want to dine in a restaurant that wouldn’t let you send back a bad entre and I wouldn’t want to live in a state that won’t send back a bad hombre.

De Leon and the rest of the illegal enablers participating in a conspiracy to obstruct federal law are not only importing members of their tribe at the expense of citizens, they also appear to be importing the corrupt Mexican politics the “refugees” are supposedly fleeing.

NFL Advertisers Open Re–Education Camp for Fans

When I made political commercials I was often asked what the difference was between political ads and commercial ads. There are many similarities: Exaggerated benefits, bait and switch promises and sleazy, egomaniacal clients; but the main difference is political ads must make all the sales on a single day.

It’s Black Friday, After Christmas, White Sale, Tech Monday and Fire–Blazing Prices all taking place in a compressed 14–hour day with an unalterable deadline.

super-bowl-gagaSo you can imagine my surprise as I watched Super Bowl LI and saw millions of dollars of in–kind advertising for Hillary three months after the election!

I thought the left wanted to overturn Citizens United and get corporate money out of politics. Yet there was on corporate Super PAC ad after another. The only difference being instead of a brief title card at the end with “Paid for by Committee to Crush Republicans” the identification was for Audi, Budweiser, 84 Lumber and KIA, among others.

None of the subject matter had much to do with the products marketed by the companies footing the bill, although the Audi spot did have wheels. Instead the ads were what marketers call “borrowed interest.” Only in this instance they were borrowing the interest of topics that appeal to only half the country and insult the other.

Celebrity endorsement ads are all borrowed interest and potentially risky, particularly if RGIII was your celebrity. But when your borrowed interest ad involves borrowing Chuck Schumer’s thumb to stick in the eye of potential customers, it’s time to re–think your marketing strategy.

Or better yet, the customer’s buying philosophy.

You can discover the three ads I thought were by far the worst, along with my play–by–play when you click on the Newsmax.com link below:

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/super-bowl-reeducation-camp-commercial-84-lumber/2017/02/08/id/772562/

 

Shortest Letter in the Bible Solves Illegal Immigration Problem

The New York Times found a vaguely Christian church that merits approval. This is harder than it seems. While the Times sets a low bar for approving mosques — no exploding members in the last six months — standards for Christian approval are much more stringent.

Happily Philadelphia’s Arch Street United Methodist Church is a “reconciling” church, which evidently means reconciling the Bible to embrace leftist cultural fads, rather than changing culture to reconcile with the Bible.

pay-american-maidArch Street is an eager participant in the left wing conspiracy to subvert immigration law. It has joined the “Sanctuary Movement” that harbors illegal aliens on church property. Arch Street’s sanctuary program is starting small. It’s getting its feet wet — is that a slur when writing about Mexicans? — by hosting one illegal: Javier Flores who’s been sleeping on a cot in the basement for the last six weeks.

Secular journalists like nothing better than using the Bible against believers and when pastors are enthusiastic helpers, so much the better.

Rev. Robin Hynicka justifies his rebellion by citing Matthew 25: 34 – 36 and explaining “Jesus said we are to provide hospitality to the stranger.” But Flores has evidently made himself quite at home since he arrived in 1997. He’s been arrested nine times, served a felony prison sentence and was wearing an ankle bracelet when Hynicka offered asylum. Evidently the good reverend offers a no–fault, no–judgment, no–salvation ministry, because Flores’ family isn’t burdened by any marriage obligations.

Immigration? Fornication? It’s all fine with Rev. Hynicka.

Hynicka’s politically motivated reading of the Bible makes perfect sense to ignorant reporters, but it’s important Christians know how wrong he is. Hynicka is a heretic for three important reasons:

  1. The Lord does not reward a criminal class for breaking the law. Eventually judgment always comes.
  2. In the Old Testament when Jews took in strangers they had to obey to all Torah law or they had to leave.
  3. Most important, Hynicka ignores the one book in the New Testament that applies most directly to illegal immigration, because Paul’s solution doesn’t conform to trendy leftist politics.

Cultural Christians like Hynicka and the media both suffer from Mistaken Lazarus Syndrome. The only Lazarus in the Bible was a friend of Jesus that He raised from the dead. Emma Lazarus is not found in the New Testament, although she is frequently disinterred to support obstructing immigration law.

Even that isn’t relevant since “Give me your tired, your poor” was written in reference to a statue not a statute and has no bearing on case law or Commandments.

Paul’s Letter to Philemon makes Hynicka uncomfortable because Paul demonstrates Christians are required to follow the path of truth. The letter concerns Onesimus; a runaway slave who stole from his master and fled to Rome while Paul was imprisoned there.

In contrast to Hynicka’s “come and sin some more” philosophy, Paul converted Onesimus. He repented under Paul’s guidance and became a new man. Then came the hard part. Paul loved Onesimus and, like the freelance landscapers in the 7/11 parking lot, he was useful around the house.

Paul recognized that like all Christians he has personal and public obligations. He fulfilled his personal obligation to Onesimus by introducing him to Christ, changing his life and making him part of his household. Paul’s public obligation was harder. He was required to “render unto Caesar” and obey the law.

Instead of offering Onesimus sanctuary, Paul sent him back to his master, Philemon, with the letter that forms the book. Onesimus faced a penalty much worse than an ankle bracelet and a bus ride. Under Roman law both theft by a slave and running away merited the death penalty. Fortunately, Philemon was a friend and fellow Christian.

The letter acknowledges the violation of the law and the consequent requirement for restitution or recompense. Paul personally offers to pay any damages or compensation owed by Onesimus. Then he asks Philemon as a fellow Christian to greet the returning slave as a brother and to free him.

The request for freedom adheres to God’s law and the decision to grant or not grant it is in accordance with Caesar’s law.

Hynicka’s publicity–seeking solution is true to neither.

The Christian approach to illegal aliens is to personally care for immediate physical needs and then help the illegal to return to their country or put them in contact with immigration authorities. Christians who disagree with immigration law are free to petition the government and vote for politicians who share their views. They are not free to contribute to a growing disrespect for the rule of law.

It’s a course of action that won’t get a fawning profile in the New York Times, but it will put you in accord with the Bible.

Another Way Citizen’s Pay for Illegal Aliens

The Shannon family’s latest unexpected encounter with federal immigration policy couldn’t have come at a more inconvenient time. Here it is almost tax day and my daughter is hit with an unexpected HOLA! bill. That’s HOLA as in Hidden Outlay for Left’s Amnesty.

illegal-alien-path-to-citizenshipMy daughter is driving along in Dallas and as she proceeds through an intersection, her car is T–boned by a red–light–running illegal alien who’s here to cause the car crashes Americans don’t want to cause.

Jessica instantly finds herself wrapped in a soft cushion of government mandates and protection as every airbag on the driver’s side explodes. Once the balloons deflate, she calls 9–1–1.

Dallas is a Sanctuary City and investigating citizen Vs. illegal car crashes is no problemo. Since the INS won’t be involved this time the automovilista doesn’t choose to flee the scene. No driver’s license or other form of legal identification means the officer takes down whatever alias the illegal is using that day and issues Jose two tickets. (Que lastima! More government paperwork!) Those are tickets that will never be paid, but that’s not the officer’s concern.

No need for the tedious exchange of insurance information and arguments over penmanship because the Mexican export not only has an aversion to government documentation, he also eschews insurance company certificates. Leaving the officer free to answer the next call.

The paying begins as Jessica experiences first hand the hidden cost of undermining the rule of law. Here is a brief rundown of some of the expenses imposed on a citizen, first–year school teacher by the Democrat’s plan to change the electorate and the RINO conspiracy to import Central America’s wages.

First, Jessica’s car is totaled. If she’d won the locomotion lottery and been hit by a citizen, their insurance would have paid her deductible. But in a no papers, no policy situation she’s out the entire amount. Next she’ll be spending hours negotiating a deal on a new car. The longer that takes, the more she pays for the rental car she driving in the interim.

Once she makes the deal, it’s time to pay sales and property taxes on her new ride. Taxes Jessica assumed were years away, with a car less than three years old, until she had a personal encounter with Obama’s border policy.

Long term, the accident will be costing her every month in the form of higher insurance rates for a crash she didn’t cause.

This isn’t our family’s first head–on with illegals on wheels. A drunk Mexican illegal killed my dear friend and cycling coach, while she was on her bicycle training a client. After we moved to Virginia another acquaintance from our gym was — you guessed it — killed by a drunk–driving illegal. And a little over a year ago I was rear ended by an anchor baby with no insurance.

My car survived and my daughter did, too, so I’m counting my blessings.

Increased transportation costs aren’t the only HOLA charges. At a nearby elementary school there’s no money for a math specialist, but there are four English as a second language teachers with a fifth on the way.

Residents without children are paying higher property taxes to fund soaring school budgets as our classrooms educate and often feed Honduras’ best.

All this is invisible to Washington and ignored by ethnic enablers already in office because they simply could care less. Citizens who play by the rules are bearing the brunt of the elites’ open border policy.

John “The Apostle” Kasich tells us you can’t deport illegals because “it would break up families.” Marco Amnesty claims “law abiding” illegals will have a chance for permanent residency.

What none of the amnesty supporters tell you is Jessica’s collision buddy qualifies for amnesty under that framework. The two traffic tickets he won’t pay are driving infractions and not criminal violations. As far as Obama and the RINOs are concerned he has the same claim on citizenship as Jessica does.

I’m tired of all the hand–wringing over illegal’s families. How about some outrage over the damage this slow–motion erosion of our American culture is doing? Illegals choose to come here and they can bear the consequences. Citizens certainly have.

As far as I’m concerned if Uncle Sam put a man on the moon, he can return a Mexican to Mexico.

Resistance to Tolerance Is Futile

The legions of “tolerance” have crushed another dissenter.

Ron Schneider, owner of Leon’s Frozen Custard in Milwaukee, has been forced to surrender his English–only ordering policy after complaints from ethnic agitators. It started Tuesday, May 17th, when a customer in front of a prickly Hispanic tried to order his custard in Spanish.

Leon’s may have to do something about that flag, too.

The server replied, “I’m not allowed to speak Spanish to you.”

This exchange prompts a number of questions, beginning with why did the customer speak Spanish in the first place? Unless I’m in the Home Depot parking lot, strangers never come up to me speaking Spanish. A gutless Congress may not have ruled English as the nation’s official language, but the citizens certainly have.

One can only conclude the server appeared to be Hispanic and the customer assumed she spoke Spanish, too. This is certainly ethnic stereotyping, but we’ll let it pass.

Next the customer evidently re–ordered in English, was served and went on about his business exiting this column forever.

That would have been the end of the encounter, if Mr. Prickly hadn’t been there. Normally he orders in English, but evidently he prefers his frozen treats with a sprinkling of outrage. So Mr. Prickly makes a big production of ordering in Spanish, only to get the same response.

After getting his custard, the next stop wasn’t the napkin dispenser. It was Social Media: The home of manufactured outrage provided by the ignorant and easily offended.

Naturally Schneider and his operating policy were characterized as “racist.”

As the term is currently used, “racist” has no intrinsic meaning. As the great historian Paul Johnson wrote in his excellent “Modern Times.” The word was changed irretrievably in March 1975. An effort to expel Israel from the UN was blocked. As an alternative those midgets of diplomacy passed a resolution condemning Israel as “racist.”

Johnson writes, “As the American delegate Leonard Garment pointed out, the resolution was ‘ominous’ because it used ‘racism’ not as the word ‘for a very real and concrete set off injustices but merely as an epithet to be flung at whoever happens to be one’s adversary.’ It turned ‘an idea with a vivid and obnoxious meaning’ into ‘nothing more than an ideological tool.”

A tool limited to the Left and used most recently on custard impresario Schneider.

In a society that hadn’t completely lost it’s moorings, a trivial and foolish complaint like this would be ignored. Schneider’s wife is Hispanic and his kids are Hispanic making it tough to be a racist if he wants to eat dinner at home.

Second, English–only has been Leon’s policy for the past decade.

But facts didn’t matter to fulltime ethnic chauvinist and part–time legislator JoCasta Zamarripa. Interviewed by the Daily Mail, she says Schneider’s policy is illegal and he “owes the community an apology.”

No. He owes the community a good product at a good price and that’s it.

A variety of more Hispanic–than–thou organizations jumped into the manufactured controversy, united in their belief that someone should sic the government on Schneider before he started putting Trump signs in the parking lot.

Distraught Anglos considered dieting, rather than eat frozen custard tainted by the stain of nationalism. #BOYCOTTLEONS gained a bit of social justice momentum as protestors began gathering. A competing business, Bounce Milwaukee, had an inspired response and offered free ice cream to anyone who ordered in a foreign language.

English–speakers, as is customary here, had to pay full freight.

Trump can wait these ethnic popinjays out. He can also afford lawsuits. But Schneider can’t. He subsequently announced his employees would be allowed to speak other languages, “If you can help the customer, just help them any way you can,” he told a local broadcast outlet.

Zamarripa’s contribution to the controversy is employees are now expected to conduct business in multiple languages for the previously English–only pay.

Unfortunately, Leon’s isn’t off the hook. The wheels of government social justice grind slowly and are designed to grind you to powder. This time next year Leon’s may be under new ownership and called León’s.

This incident only proves Pancho Villa invaded the United States 100 years too early. In 1916 after he crossed the border and attacked Columbus, NM, Uncle Sam sent Gen. John J. Pershing (and my grandfather’s field artillery) to chase Villa down and bring him to justice.

Today Barack Obama would send social workers bearing vouchers.

Marco Rubio Purges US Tech Workers from STEM to Stern

Rubio milk cartonMarco Rubio (R–Amnesty) claims to be the one GOP candidate who can “bring us together.” Unfortunately, for many of us the meeting is going to be in the unemployment line.

Rubio’s slavish support of H1–B visas mean that more hard–working citizens will be out of work and replaced by cheaper foreign labor hired by law–breaking employers.

Complete details on this blood–boiling scandal are in my Newsmax.com column this week. Please click on the link below BEFORE you vote on Super Tuesday. Thanks.

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/Outsourcing/2016/02/26/id/716346/