Patriotic Federalist

Full Article here, in case you didn’t read the article that cost the General his career.  I don’t read Rolling Stone, but I did read the article since they were firing a man over it. Yes, I know he submitted his resignation, but I can assure you he was given a choice of getting fired or submitting that.

First and foremost, I think it was a stupid move to even talk to Rolling Stone magazine.  IF you were going to do that, do it without your aides and preferably have them submit their questions in writing first so you can draft a response that won’t offend your thin-skinned boss.  Then you can answer any followup questions and be done with it.  It seems most of the bad quotes are from his aides.  I don’t really care for this man because he voted for Obama.  That alone tells me he is probably more of a politician than a soldier.  It also tells me he does not have a firm grasp on which presidential candidate would have followed the path of our founding fathers versus the path of hype, anti-gun pursuits,  and socialism.  So I am glad to see him go.

That all aside, I think he got a bad deal and was the scapegoat for Obama to make it look like he was tough leader.  Hussein stated “the conduct represented in the recently published article does not meet the standard that should be set by a commanding general. It undermines the civilian control of the military that is at the core of our democratic system. And it erodes the trust that’s necessary for our team to work together to achieve our objectives in Afghanistan.”

I can tell you that almost EVERY veteran and active duty member I know can’t stand the sight of this President or the top 5 civilian leaders and much of Congress.  Primarily because they are the enemy within that is taking this country down a path of self destruction and ignoring the wishes of the people.  They see the wars going back to politicians running the war and setting unrealistic rules up so there will be failure (see Vietnam reasons for failure).

I think the aides should have kept their mouth shut around the media (like we all do) to give the appearance of support of this poor leader.  Even though Hussein sucks as a leader, you can’t openly be against him or you might get fired.  In this case you got your boss fired.

I wouldn’t want  to be the Generals replacement.  The cards are stacked against him.  I hope for our troops sake, that the mid-term elections in 180 days makes REAL change for the country.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

This should have been a no-brainer that WE THE PEOPLE have a RIGHT to bear arms.  It really was a no-brainer until the last 3 decades or so.  People have had decreasing amounts of brain capacity and common sense when it comes to the Second Amendment and politics in general.  This is easy to see just by noticing almost half of America doesn’t even bother to vote in one of the most meaningful elections in the last 60 years and probably the next 60 years.  Because of that, we now have an idiot socialist for President and a majority of idiots controlling congress.  We will also get another left wing radical judge shoved down our throats because of the growing ignorance of America.  What really scary about this ruling is how close it was.  The radicals have succeeded in getting a near majority in the highest court in the country.  VERY scary.  Lets hope we take back Washington in the fall and in 2012.  We will need to repeal some socialist laws that were past and with luck, a liberal Supreme Court idiot will die off or quit while a patriot is in office, unlike now.

OK, on to the ruling.  The most important part is below.  Read the actual ruling if you want all their citings or want to read the dissenting idiots  views (again, very scary).

“Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554

U. S. ___ (2008), we held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense, and we struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the possession of handguns in the home.The city of Chicago (City) and the village of Oak Park, a Chicago suburb, have laws that are similar to the District of Columbia’s, but Chicago and Oak Park argue that their laws are constitutional because the Second Amendment has no application to the States. We have previously held that most of the provisions of the Bill of Rights apply with full force to both the Federal Government and the States. Applying the standard that is well established in our caselaw, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States.”

This post is in regard to the actual Overton Window concept, not Glenn Beck’s book that was released this month. I did post a link regarding the book here.

To explain what the Overton Window is, lets go right to the source. Mr Joe Overton (left) died in a plane crash on June 30th, 2003 but continues to be a source of inspiration.  He worked in a “Think Tank” at the Mackinac Center.  Mr Overton thought the Think Tank should focus on education of the people and lawmakers to evoke change in politics.  At this point, I should note this Think Tank is labeled as “Far right” by the “Far Left.”  This should come as no surprise but, in fact, they are “a nonpartisan research and educational institute dedicated to improving the quality of life for all Michigan citizens by promoting sound solutions to state and local policy questions.”

The Mackinac Center explains the window as Joseph Overton’s observation that “in a given public policy area, such as education, only a relatively narrow range of potential policies will be considered politically acceptable. This “window” of politically acceptable options is primarily defined not by what politicians prefer, but rather by what they believe they can support and still win re-election. In general, then, the window shifts to include different policy options not when ideas change among politicians, but when ideas change in the society that elects them.”  Mr. Overton’s theory has some basis in complex public choice economics yet it’s very easy to grasp.

The window slides up and down, NOT left and right. This was done on purpose so it would not confuse people.  Most of us think in terms of left and right politics.  A blog here, wrongly shows the window as moving left and right. It also attempts to show that the window is way over to the right.  I have to digress some so please bare with me.

Assuming it even worked this way, it has never been on the “right” unless you were actually a person with far left beliefs.  This diagram was made under President Bush Jr so I can see a liberal, socialist, or just radical extremist thinking it was way over to the right.  For example, if you were an anti-war idiot that thinks nothing is worth fighting for, then the window would appear to you as shifted way to the right.  Again, this is NOT the Overton Window, but a modified use of his window.  If this same graph reflected reality in the current political environment of 2010, it would actually look like this:

My views are based on our Founding Fathers ideas for our country.  It is also based on documents critical to keeping the correct course for the United States.  This includes, but not limited to; The United States Constitution, The Federalist Papers, Thomas Paine’s Common Sense, and any similar documents I could read that would let me peer into the minds of some of the greatest men to ever walk this earth.  These views will undoubtedly get labeled as “Far Right” thinking to people with ideas of government that have never worked anywhere. Ideas that the Founding Fathers seemed to go out of their way to avoid.  These Socialists, Communists, Liberals, progressives, (insert radical, anti-American ideology here), all seem to think of the U.S. Constitution as some sort of Wikipedia for them to mold on the whims and wants of a small portion of the populous.  When it becomes the U.S. ConstiWiki, our country will fall shortly after and rightly so.  Digression’s over.

Now, a little more on the ACTUAL Overton Window.  This interactive illustration explains it best.  Basically Mr. Overton put a range of policies in a vertical column or axis.  Overton’s Window covers a range of policies considered to be politically acceptable at a given point in time.

If it’s acceptable in the eyes of the public, then the window brackets or covers it.  Political decisions inside this window can be made without fear of losing public office.  He also placed Most Freedom (i.e. less government control) at the top and Least Freedom (i.e. more government control) at the bottom.  The example above is from the Mackinac Center.  I placed the window where I think it currently is in regards to gun ownership in the USA.  Yes, it could shift down a bit more, but this is just an example.  This is on a federal, not local level.  As a side note, gun ownership is guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but several states and cities defy this document and our federal government in an attempt to shift the Overton Window down.  If this can be done, Americans might look the other way as a constitutional right is taken away.  More likely some extremist Supreme Court Justice will change the definitions of the Constitution and pretend you never had a right in the first place.

If you can move the window, then ideas that are currently considered outside the window can become acceptable.   Mr. Overton gave degrees of acceptance:

-Unthinkable
-Radical
-Acceptable
-Sensible
-Popular
-Policy

The Overton Window can be applied on smaller scales like city, state, or personal.  It is generally used in reference to policies of the United States federal government.   The Overton Window of a state may be well out of sync with the nation. California, for example, has put gay marriage inside their Overton Window, but the national Overton Window still considers it in the Radical range.

The window is moved by the people, not the politicians.  Joseph Lehman, President of the Mackinac Center, wrote “many believe that politicians move the window, but that’s actually rare. In our understanding, politicians typically don’t determine what is politically acceptable; more often they react to it and validate it. Generally speaking, policy change follows political change, which itself follows social change. The most durable policy changes are those that are undergirded by strong social movements.”  Mr. Lehman further stated “lawmakers who support policies outside the window are one of two kinds — true leaders [Ronald Reagan perhaps?] who have the rare ability to shift the window by themselves, or politicians who risk electoral defeat because they are perceived as out of touch [Obama, Reed, Biden?].”

So with the Overton Window explained, I’d like to make some comparisons to the current political environment.  The current administration feels that because they won the election, they have a good handle on where the Overton Window currently sits.  The Obama administration and Congress continues to pass legislation that is clearly unpopular with the majority of Americans.  This leads me to believe he sees himself as a “true leader.”  When in fact, I think he easily falls in the “out of touch” category.  I think most of Congress falls in that category now.  The rise and growth of the Tea Party is good evidence of the backlash from action after action taken outside the Overton Window.  Instead of reversing their course, the Obama Administration and Congress has increased its radical actions.  The socialization of medical care, spending increases that dwarf  any administration in the history of the U.S., H.R. 5175 attacks on grassroots efforts and free speech, and numerous other acts of idiocy [many mentioned on this blog in other topics].

The Obama administration won an election where only 56.8% of the voting population turned out. That number is nothing unusual.  Irresponsibly, about half of America doesn’t even care to vote.  So anyway, they convinced approximately 27% of American voters to vote for them.  Much of this was done with the help of the media to convince the “ignorant masses” to vote for “change” and “hope.”  I don’t mean the people are ignorant per se, just that many American’s are ignorant of politics and history.

Those that don’t vote are the most ineffectual of citizenry.  These individuals are ignorant of history and what a privilege it is to vote.  They are also unaware of how remarkably important every vote is, even in our electoral system.  They wrongly assume the right decisions will be made for them by others.  The other piece to the ignorant masses is the portion of the population that was taken it by what even I have to admit was an excellent marketing campaign.  The problem is, NO ONE that researched the candidates should have even considered voting for him.  Many of these people (or sheeple) only watched CNN and others who gave 80% of their coverage to Obama. They let the media influence their vote rather than research it themselves.  The only votes Obama SHOULD have received would have been from the fringes of society. Those with racial prejudices (a “black” man is running so I have to vote for him because I’m black too), the far left, and those with extremist ideology.  That is not all the vote he captured.  Many self proclaimed Independents voted for him because they fell into being influenced by the media.  Luckily, many recognize their mistake now.  Some got swept up in the hype of logos and slogans for “change.”

Several others said they were “Blue Nose Democrats” so they felt obligated to vote that way.  Even a few (not all) of my black friends voted for him.  Conservative, military guys!  One guy is so caught up in the hype that he is actually still defending Obama, trying to justify socializing medicine,  justifying spending trillions, and justifying redistribution of wealth.  If President Bush had done these things they would be ready to fight over it.  One asked me if I was racist! I explained I hate Obama’s white half as much as his black half, so no.  Seriously though, I hate his beliefs and traitorous behavior.  I could care less about his skin.

The Obama administration and supporting liberal congressmen are aware of the Overton Window.  They continue to enjoy the aid of most major news stations to keep pumping the ignorant masses with propaganda.  They know the only way to “shift the window”  is to influence enough people.  This can be done if the people stay part of the ignorant masses.  If the people don’t read history, historical documents, and compare where we were supposed to be going with where we are now, then we are doomed to stay on the same destructive path.  The Obama administration sugar coats reality with words that camouflage the truth.  Like calling illegal immigrants undocumented workers or it’s no longer a War On Terrorism its whatever the politically correct word is for that now.   They chocolate coat fecal matter and tell you its a chocolate bar.

I am hopeful that Obama and the radical left congressmen have awakened the sleeping giant again.  I’ve talked to Independants that admit they made a mistake voting for Obama or some other liberal.  I see and attend the Tea Parties and witness patriots with similar values, not the monsters portrayed on what seems to be state run media.  I’ve also talked to and read about some Americans that have finally woken up to the fact they need to vote.  Better late than never.

The bottom line is all of these anti-American radicals must be defeated in this fall election and up through 2012.  Preferably not replaced with fresh patriotic faces, not the dirty politician that changes sides just for votes.  If not, that means we are left with a divided country.  I don’t just mean a difference of opinion, I mean the differences that start civil wars.  I mean a government that no longer represents you or your beliefs and that forces their values of socialism on you.  I mean destroying the military by forcing them to openly accept homosexual behavior as normal.  I mean destroying the rights, beliefs, and vision initially given to us by the Founding Fathers!

I am not advocating a civil war, but I am noting that if we can’t get the radicals under control, then all the elements are there for some dark days ahead for our country.  After we get our country back and under control, we should be able to repeal most of the damages caused by the radicals.  Perhaps we can convince the socialists and other radicals to move to a country that practices what they believe in.  Most patriots can’t leave this country as this is the last truly free Republic in the world.  Once its light is extinguished, there is nowhere else to go.

I hope the explanation of the Overton Window was helpful.  I also hope my opinion was well received.  If not, get access to your own blog and influence the ignorant masses.  After all, what do I know? I’m just a guy that would actually read a bill before signing it.  I’m also the kind of guy that would actually read about history and our republic before I changed it.

copyright 2010 K-ROD

No liberals were water-boarded in creating this post.

Opinions are that of the posters, not necessarily TPF’s

Catalog link

The new Rossi Wizard’s revolutionary stock design allows the user to shoot with every popular caliber imaginable, plus all shotgun gauges, two muzzleloaders, .22 rimfire and .22 rimfire magnum. This ingenious system allows the shooter to transfer any barrel quickly and easily without tools. It is like having 18 rifles and shotguns in one. The Wizard is the year round solution for every hunting and shooting application – truly a gun for all seasons.

To start a Wizard collection simply choose a Wizard rifle, offered in .22-250, .223, .243, .270, .30-06 or .308 and then add other popular caliber barrels to the collection as desired. Rifle barrel options include .17 HMR, .22LR, .22 Mag., .22-250 Rem, .270 Win., .30-06 SPRG, .308 Win., .38-357 Mag., .44 Mag., .45-70 Gov. and 7.62×39. Muzzleloader barrel options include .45 and .50. Shotgun barrel options include .410 bore, 20 gauge and 12 gauge. The Wizard’s barrel measures 23 inches with an overall length of 38.5 inches and weighs seven pounds.

The Wizard is also offered in a youth version with starter model available in .223, .243 or .308. The youth model barrel length measures 22 inches long, with an overall length of 36.5 inches and weighs 6.25 pounds.

Features for standard and youth models include cushioned recoil pad with spacer for reduced recoil, uniquely contoured Monte Carlo stock with curved cheek rest and fiber optic front sight for fast, easy target acquisition. Available in blued finish in either an attractive hardwood or camouflage stock with carbon steel barrel and receiver.

The Rossi revolution of firearm design and manufacture started with the founding of the company in 1889 by Amadeo Rossi. For the past 120 years, the tradition of innovation grew along with the company and the Rossi family. The Rossi name represents a piece of firearms history and a tradition of excellence.

In 2008, Rossi production was acquired by Forjas Taurus S.A. Rossi is the industry-leading manufacturer of single-shot, matched pairs, muzzleloaders, rifles and shotguns. The acquisition integrates perfectly with the quality of firearms currently produced by Taurus International and will expand the ability to produce quality firearms at reasonable prices as well as dedication to creating new and exciting Rossi products. Today, a Rossi firearm still features the same dedication and innovation in every firearm. Now, as part of Taurus International, Rossi looks forward to providing you with the next generation of great firearms.

The complete line of Rossi firearms features the exclusive Taurus Security System, which utilizes a key to lock the firearm and offers additional safety for youth. All Rossi firearms also incorporate a transfer bar mechanism and a manual safety on a single shot, break-open design in which the breech cannot be closed or opened if the hammer is cocked.

Rossi is proud to offer a free One-year NRA Junior Membership with the purchase of any Rossi youth model. It is recommended that children always be accompanied by an adult when shooting. For more information about Rossi Firearms, a Division of BrazTech International, visit www.rossiusa.com.

People walking the streets armed with guns must be dangerous, right? A newly revised study by the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center found that even those individuals who have legally obtained permits to carry concealed handguns are extremely dangerous. With millions of Americans already having been issued such permits from the various states, this is an important issue.

The gun control organizations have frequently made these claims in the press, and Dennis Henigan, the vice president of the Brady Campaign, will likely make these claims again when he and I appear on John Stossel’s FoxBusiness show today. But the gun control advocates inaccurately describe many shooting cases, choosing to ignore that the majority of incidents involve people properly defending themselves.

Over the past three years, the number of active permit holders in the United States has gone from about 5 million to more than 6.2 million today. The numbers issued by the state regulatory agencies show time after time that these permit holders abide by the law.

Take Florida, which currently has the most concealed handgun permit holders in the country and is one of the two most populous states with right-to-carry laws. Between Oct. 1, 1987, and May 31 this year, permits had been issued to 1.8 million people. On average, the permits had been held for quite a long time, well over 10 years. For all those individuals across the more than 22 years of legal carry, there were only 167 cases where the permit was revoked for a firearms related violation, or about 0.01 percent of permit holders. While the state doesn’t provide a precise breakdown of the reason for those revocations, the vast majority were apparently for people who accidentally carried their concealed handgun into a gun-free zone, such as an airport or school.

Throughout the past 29 months, beginning January 2008, only three additional permit holders have had their permit revoked for a firearms-related violation. With more than 729,000 active permit holders, that is an annual revocation rate of 0.00017 percent.

In sharp contrast, the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center portray Florida as Ground Zero for problems with concealed handgun permit holders. They boldly assert that 17 Florida permit holders have “killed” people with their guns over the past three years and that this one state by itself accounts for 17 of the 96 “killer” permit holders nationwide. The other 79 cases are scattered across 26 other states, with no other state accounting for more than 10 cases. Florida is also said to account for 2 of the 7 cases where permit holders are said to have killed law enforcement officers.

The Associated Press articles by Erik Schelzig and by Jim Abrams have given extensive, uncritical coverage to these claims. Members of the gun control organizations have made these claims unchallenged on such places as Fox News and on the Huffington Post (e.g., here and here).

So what is the evidence? The gun control groups don’t actually point to actual court cases. They look at news stories and selectively report what is reported in those stories. For Florida, there are eleven “pending cases.” The gun control groups assume that anyone involved in a shooting will be convicted. Indeed, in 7 of the 11 cases no one was even charged with a crime. Three cases involved suicides, and three had convictions for some type of offense. (See this link for a detailed presentation of sources.)

But there is something that the gun control advocates conveniently omit: When a permit holder uses a gun defensively and kills an attacker in a public place, the police often arrest them. Typically, he will later be released, but the police must first investigate what happened. The police can’t just take the shooter’s word for it that they used the gun defensively.

Take the four pending cases where charges were filed, two of which involved the “killing” of law enforcement.

— Humberto Delgado, Jr. was charged with the death of a police officer. Delgado obviously engaged in a horrible crime, but there is one major problem with the stories as presented by the gun control groups. He also was charged with carrying a concealed firearm. If he had a concealed handgun permit, he obviously couldn’t have been charged with this crime. Delgado was just your typical criminal, who didn’t have a permit, who killed a police officer.

— James Wonder was charged with the death of an off-duty Customs and Border Protection Agent Donald Pettit. Pettit is said to have engaged in road rage against Wonder and then followed Wonder’s car into a Post Office parking lot solely to continue harassing Wonder. Pettit had over shot the parking lot and had to circle back to go into it. He had no intention to do business with either the Post Office or any other nearby business. Pettit was clearly the aggressor in the situation. The Sun-Sentinel newspaper wrote on August 29, 2008: “local lawyers said [Wonder] may be able to make a strong claim under Florida law that he was within his rights to shoot Pettit.” One measure of the severity of the case is that Wonder was released on a very minimal bond of $10,000. Neither the Brady Campaign nor the Violence Policy Center noted these points in their discussion of the case.

— Gabriel Mobley shot two people outside a bar, and the gun control groups’ discussions fail to mention the defensive nature of Mobley’s actions. A friend of Mobley’s had an argument with two other men in a bar. Mr. Mobley separated the men, but the two waited outside and Mobley’s lawyer, Richard Della Ferra, told me that they pounced on Mobley and his friend as soon as they left the bar. Witnesses saw one of the two attackers throw a punch that shattered the friend’s eye socket. Mobley says that he shot when he thought one of the two men was reaching for a weapon, and police found the DNA of one of the men on a steak knife at the scene.

— On January 7, 2008, Adam Hill was accused of accidentally firing his gun, the bullet fatally striking a friend while the friend had visited Hill to use his washing machine. Since the case has yet to go to trial, the law office that is representing Hill was unwilling to discuss the case, but they did say that the news articles did not accurately represent what had happened in the case. The law office representing Hill in his legal case emphasized to me in a telephone discussion that news articles on these cases can be quite misleading because defense lawyers warn their clients not to talk to others about their case, including the press.

Two of the three convictions in Florida are quite different than what gun control groups represent. One involved a boyfriend who accidentally shot his girlfriend when he was showing her how to use a gun in her home. There was no evidence of arguing or any disagreement. In another case, the issue was whether the permit holder had done enough to avoid the confrontation. A convicted felon confronted the permit holder. According to newspaper accounts, even the prosecutor acknowledged: “Kallenbach was in some way defending himself during an escalating altercation between the men caught on the security video” and that “People can look at that tape and interpret it two or three different ways.”

While this discussion focuses on Florida, the just released third edition of More Guns, Less Crime provides a detailed analysis for all states from 1990 to July 1, 2008. In state after state, permit holders are extremely law-abiding. In Arizona, there were 99,370 active permits as of December 1, 2007. During 2007, 33 permits were revoked for any reason — a 0.03 percent rate. In Texas, there were 288,909 active permit holders. Of these, 160 were convicted of either a misdemeanor or a felony, a rate of 0.05 percent. That is about one-seventh the conviction rate in the general adult population, and the convictions among permit holders are for much less serious offenses.

I went to some other cases from the gun control groups after July 1, 2008. In two of the other five killings involving law-enforcement, it also appears as if the person who fired a gun didn’t have a concealed handgun permit. In one case, in Pennsylvania, Christina Korbe fired a shot killing a police officer when police raided her home. The police were serving an arrest warrant on her husband, and she didn’t know it was the police who were breaking into her home, and she was concerned about the safety of her two children, ages 4 and 10.

The Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center evaluate the benefits of concealed handgun laws based solely on the claimed costs — they don’t compare the cases where defensive uses occurred to the bad things that happen, but only count what they claim are the bad cases. They ignore lots of amazing defensive gun use cases. But even more bizarrely, they count legitimate self-defense cases as bad events even when no charges are filed or the permit holder is later exonerated.

John R. Lott, Jr. is a FOXNews.com contributor. He is an economist and author of More Guns, Less Crime (University of Chicago Press, May 2010).
If you want to leave comments, leave them on the original article site.

This ad uses your tax dollars to air commercials ensuring illegals have no reason to leave or to enter the country legally. This also encourages MORE illegal entry into this country. I’m sure illegals hope Hussein will get them naturalized without doing a thing to earn it. No wonder we have an issue with people entering the country.

Here’s a thought, the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act states that it is a “violation of law for any person to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection in any place” and defines harboring as “ANY CONDUCT THAT TENDS TO SUBSTANTIALLY FACILITATE AN ALIEN TO REMAIN IN THE U.S. ILLEGALLY.” So, Ms Solis is openly violating federal law by facilitating illegal aliens to remain in the US. This commercial screams of left wing antics doesn’t it?  Also under this section is states “Section 274 felonies under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, INA 274A(a)(1)(A):

A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or local government) commits a federal felony when she or he:

* assists an alien s/he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or

* encourages that alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or her to an employer or by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or

* knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions. [most liberals want illegals here, so this applies as well].

Section 8 USC 1324 it is ‘illegal’ to both knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions and * assists an alien s/he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization.

Lastly, it states “A person or entity having knowledge of a violation or potential violation of employer sanctions provisions may submit a signed written complaint to the INS office with jurisdiction over the business or residence of the potential violator, whether an employer, employee, or agent. The complaint must include the names and addresses of both the complainant and the violator, and detailed factual allegations, including date, time, and place of the potential violation, and the specific conduct alleged to be a violation of employer sanctions. By regulation, the INS will only investigate third-party complaints that have a reasonable probability of validity.” Hmmm, it sounds like anyone seeing this commercial should be reporting it to the INS. What will the INS puppet do with this information? Possibly nothing, but it is worth a try. At least call that number and voice your anger over spending your tax dollars to encourage illegals to stay in this country.