SIGN THE INHOFE SECURE BORDERS PETITION!
SIGN THE INHOFE SECURE BORDERS PETITION!
Arizona Republicans,
As the U.S. Senate reintroduces the immigration bill that was defeated last week, Oklahoma Senator Inhofe is leading the charge to ensure that our borders are secure and no amnesty is granted to illegal immigrants. As a part of his effort to show his fellow Senators how concerned the American people are about the issue, he announced an online petition at www.SecureBordersNow.com to send a message to the Senate.
Please click here to visit Secure Borders Now and sign the petition to support Senator Inhofe and all Republicans who agree: secure the border and no amnesty.
The petition reads:
Members of the United State Senate,
I am one of the millions of Americans who believes our first priority as a nation should be to secure our borders by enforcing existing laws. Amnesty is not the solution.
I urge you to vote against the immigration reform bill currently being considered in the Senate and to oppose any future effort that undermines our national security or grants amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.
Click here to sign the petition now and show your support. We need to gather signatures as quickly as possible before the debate begins early next week, so please pass the link along to your friends and family who agree on this important issue.
Below is the full release from Senator Inhofe's office:
INHOFE ANNOUNCES ONLINE PETITION FOR AMERICANS TO SUPPORT
BORDER SECURITY AND NO-AMNESTY IMMIGRATION REFORM
(JUNE 15, 2007) - U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.) today announced “Secure Borders Now” (www.securebordersnow.com), a new website for Americans to urge the Senate to consider immigration reform that focuses on enforcing existing border security laws and opposition to amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants.
“Unfortunately it appears many in the Senate remain deaf to the voices of the American people, as yet another backroom deal has emerged designed to revive the fatally flawed immigration bill and its immediate path to amnesty. The ‘Secure Borders Now’ petition gives Americans an opportunity to voice their opposition. I hope my constituents and citizens from all across our country will take action, sign the petition and show how many Americans are strongly opposed to this bill.”
“Despite the promise of increased funding for border security and additional votes on a handful of amendments, the proposed legislation will continue to shortcut the current naturalization process and grant amnesty to 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants currently in our country. That is a trade off that I simply cannot support.
“The first step in any significant immigration legislation must be securing our borders and enforcing existing laws. It is unconscionable to make border security conditional on the guarantee of amnesty. Even with the promise of additional funding for border security, the Senate bill focuses far too much on controversial and irresponsible programs such as the ‘Z-visa’ (which I voted to eliminate), and far too little on ensuring that our borders are no longer porous.
“I have stated from the outset of this immigration debate that I will vehemently oppose any legislation that guarantees amnesty for illegal immigrants, unfairly burdens taxpayers or fails to secure our borders.
“It is time that we deal with real immigration reform beginning with border security. This is the best way to restore trust with the American people and facilitate future improvement of our immigration policy.”
On Tuesday, Senator Inhofe joined eight Senators in writing a letter to President Bush urging him to fulfill the border security provisions listed in the Senate immigration bill whether the legislation passes or not. Each border security trigger in the bill can be implemented under current law without any need for new legislation from Congress.
A Rasmussen Reports national phone survey conducted June 11 and 12, found that only 20 percent of voters wanted Congress to try and pass the Senate bill that failed last week. Sixty-nine percent favored an approach that focused “exclusively on securing the border and reducing illegal immigration.”
Thursday, June 21, 2007
HILLARY CLINTON DEFENDS USE OF CORPORATE JET FOR FAMILY VACATIONS
HILLARY CLINTON DEFENDS USE OF CORPORATE JET FOR FAMILY VACATIONS
Jun 4 2007 Email This Article | Category: Dick's Articles | Leave a Comment Published on FoxNews.com on June 1, 2007.
On Wednesday, Hillary Clinton was challenged by the press about the Clinton family’s acceptance of more than $900,000 in free private travel from Infousa, a company linked to scamming the elderly.
Her reply? She said that she had complied with all Senate ethics rules and reimbursed the company for the amount of a first class air ticket usually about 1 percent of the cost of the luxurious private jet travel. According to Hillary, Those were the rules. You’ll have to ask someone else if it’s good policy.
In other words, get lost.
Is there anyone out there who would say it’s good policy for a U.S. senator and presidential candidate to accept apparently tax-free gifts of almost a million dollars from a corporation especially a corporation involved in providing lists of vulnerable elderly people to scam artists?
And it’s not like the Clintons couldn’t afford to buy an air ticket the family income since 2001 has been more than $63 million! So why do they have to freeload from rich friends?
Well, evidently Hillary doesn’t think that she should be the one to consider whether it makes ethical sense to have rich pals pay for a U.S. senator’s family vacations.
That’s up to someone else…
But, Hillary has decided it is up to her and not someone else to determine whether corporate policies that allow huge payments and perks to CEOs make good policy. And her answer is a resounding, NO … unless, it seems, if she’s benefiting from the perks.
When Senator Clinton condemns corporate greed and attacks over-the-top CEO compensation, she’s not talking about her close friends in the business world. No, to her, they’re different. In the Clintons’ case, it’s OK to use corporate assets to fly her and her husband to jet-set vacation spots all over the world, including a $146,000 plane ride to Acapulco for a Clinton family holiday in January of 2002.
It’s the other corporations and CEOs out there that she’s targeting. They’re the greedy ones that have to be regulated.
Last week, we revealed that former president Bill Clinton was on the payroll of Infousa, the Nebraska company that supplied lists of vulnerable elderly people to con artists who then defrauded the unsuspecting victims. Internal e-mails suggest that employees of Infousa were aware that some of their clients were under investigation for these revolting predatory practices.
Since 2001, Infousa has paid Bill Clinton $3.3 million, although it’s not at all clear what he was supposed to do for the money other than fly on the company’s jet for vacations and golf games with Infousa’s CEO. Infousa CEO, Vin Gupta, has made the Infousa corporate jet available for the Clintons to travel in style to Hawaii, Switzerland and Jamaica at a cost of more that $900,000.
Some of the shareholders of the company agree wholeheartedly with Hillary’s public position about overpaid CEO’s. Here’s what the Senator had to say:
We need to open up CEO compensation to public scrutiny and public challenge and ensure that boards of directors are independent when determining CEO pay.
In a lawsuit filed earlier this year, shareholders of Infousa claimed that the payments to Bill Clinton and the use of the corporate jet by the Clintons were a waste of corporate assets and were not business related. Infousa actually claims that all of the Clinton trips even the vacation excursions were business related.
Of course.
Hillary Clinton has no words of criticism for the man who contributed at least $1 million to the Clinton Library and $2 million towards her incredible $16 million millenium New Year’s Eve party, and hundreds of thousands to her campaigns and the Democratic Party.
Clinton’s financial disclosure forms never mention the trips provided by Infousa and until the lawsuit was filed, the Clintons released no information about how much Bill was paid only declaring that it was more than $1000.
A lot more!
Hillary just doesn’t get it and never will.
Just yesterday, she actually lectured about the need to control corporate pay to executives unless, of course, they’re providing freebies to her and her family.
from see www.dickmorris.com
www.mccainalert.com
Jun 4 2007 Email This Article | Category: Dick's Articles | Leave a Comment Published on FoxNews.com on June 1, 2007.
On Wednesday, Hillary Clinton was challenged by the press about the Clinton family’s acceptance of more than $900,000 in free private travel from Infousa, a company linked to scamming the elderly.
Her reply? She said that she had complied with all Senate ethics rules and reimbursed the company for the amount of a first class air ticket usually about 1 percent of the cost of the luxurious private jet travel. According to Hillary, Those were the rules. You’ll have to ask someone else if it’s good policy.
In other words, get lost.
Is there anyone out there who would say it’s good policy for a U.S. senator and presidential candidate to accept apparently tax-free gifts of almost a million dollars from a corporation especially a corporation involved in providing lists of vulnerable elderly people to scam artists?
And it’s not like the Clintons couldn’t afford to buy an air ticket the family income since 2001 has been more than $63 million! So why do they have to freeload from rich friends?
Well, evidently Hillary doesn’t think that she should be the one to consider whether it makes ethical sense to have rich pals pay for a U.S. senator’s family vacations.
That’s up to someone else…
But, Hillary has decided it is up to her and not someone else to determine whether corporate policies that allow huge payments and perks to CEOs make good policy. And her answer is a resounding, NO … unless, it seems, if she’s benefiting from the perks.
When Senator Clinton condemns corporate greed and attacks over-the-top CEO compensation, she’s not talking about her close friends in the business world. No, to her, they’re different. In the Clintons’ case, it’s OK to use corporate assets to fly her and her husband to jet-set vacation spots all over the world, including a $146,000 plane ride to Acapulco for a Clinton family holiday in January of 2002.
It’s the other corporations and CEOs out there that she’s targeting. They’re the greedy ones that have to be regulated.
Last week, we revealed that former president Bill Clinton was on the payroll of Infousa, the Nebraska company that supplied lists of vulnerable elderly people to con artists who then defrauded the unsuspecting victims. Internal e-mails suggest that employees of Infousa were aware that some of their clients were under investigation for these revolting predatory practices.
Since 2001, Infousa has paid Bill Clinton $3.3 million, although it’s not at all clear what he was supposed to do for the money other than fly on the company’s jet for vacations and golf games with Infousa’s CEO. Infousa CEO, Vin Gupta, has made the Infousa corporate jet available for the Clintons to travel in style to Hawaii, Switzerland and Jamaica at a cost of more that $900,000.
Some of the shareholders of the company agree wholeheartedly with Hillary’s public position about overpaid CEO’s. Here’s what the Senator had to say:
We need to open up CEO compensation to public scrutiny and public challenge and ensure that boards of directors are independent when determining CEO pay.
In a lawsuit filed earlier this year, shareholders of Infousa claimed that the payments to Bill Clinton and the use of the corporate jet by the Clintons were a waste of corporate assets and were not business related. Infousa actually claims that all of the Clinton trips even the vacation excursions were business related.
Of course.
Hillary Clinton has no words of criticism for the man who contributed at least $1 million to the Clinton Library and $2 million towards her incredible $16 million millenium New Year’s Eve party, and hundreds of thousands to her campaigns and the Democratic Party.
Clinton’s financial disclosure forms never mention the trips provided by Infousa and until the lawsuit was filed, the Clintons released no information about how much Bill was paid only declaring that it was more than $1000.
A lot more!
Hillary just doesn’t get it and never will.
Just yesterday, she actually lectured about the need to control corporate pay to executives unless, of course, they’re providing freebies to her and her family.
from see www.dickmorris.com
www.mccainalert.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)