"Your Family Came from Someplace Else"

Mr. Obama made one of the most hopelessly inane statements that I've ever encountered, stating
 "If You're not Native American, your family came from someplace else." 
Obviously he did this in an attempt to trash "anti-immigrant" sentiment (I prefer "anti-illegal", since I'm very much for legal immigrants).

This is highly amusing, given that even the "Native Americans" aren't really native to this continent, unless you allow for people born here to be "native". If you're going to exclude people whose ancestors came from somewhere else, you'll find that there's really only one place in the world where anyone really counts as "native" - Africa, the birthplace of humanity.

"Native Americans", for the most part, came over the Bering land bridge to America from Asia. There were multiple groups of such migrants until the Bering land bridge became the Bering Strait - and even then, it wouldn't surprise me if a few people still got across by boat.

If you must include the "Native Americans" (more properly referred to as "American Aboriginals" using definition one) then you've got to include everyone else born here, unless you want to place an arbitrary date, past which no one counts as "native".
Mr. President, unless you are a native African (and since Africa's a pretty big place, sometimes not even then) your family came from somewhere else.


As for illegal immigration, it is a definite problem. Our porous border allows far more than just Jose who just wants a few bucks in. It allows the cartels, La Eme, and other criminal organizations in. It's only a matter of time before terrorists join the flow. And the illegal immigrants are problem enough. It costs significantly less to hire an illegal than to hire a citizen or legal visiting worker. Illegals don't give a shit about minimum wage - 4 bucks an hour is enough for them to live on and still be able to send enough money home for Grandma to live well, and without all the mandatory insurance, social security, taxes, etc. that add to the cost of an American citizen. Then you account for all the social services that they use - welfare, Medicare, food stamps, etc.- and you'll find that illegals are a significant burden upon society
.
The solution is easy, but not particularly nice. Require legal residency for any benefits (personally welfare should be completely defunded, but I'll settle for this). Deport illegals, lower the federal minimum wage, increase patrols on the southern border, bring the hammer down on large corporations that hire illegals, and make legal immigration somewhat easier.

The First Amendment and the Anarchist Cookbook

This is a good one. Senator Feinstein has decided that bomb making manuals such as the Anarchist Cookbook and Al Qaeda's Inspire magazine do not deserve to be protected under the First Amendment.
There are a number of issues with her stance, starting with the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

It doesn't say anything in there about getting to choose what counts as protected speech. Otherwise politicians would be banning all sorts of dangerous speech, such as pretty much everything that Dr. Martin Luther King said. That isn't a can of worms that anyone in their right mind wants to open.

The next problem is the technical issues with removing it from the internet. The Anarchist Cookbook (and it's cousin the Anarchist's Cookbook) are both available from hundreds of sources on the internet, ranging from Amazon to The Pirate Bay and its contemporaries. There are a lot of downloaded copies of the book, and Senator Feinstein doesn't seem to realize just how hard it is to prevent people from sharing their copies with other people. Heck, if two parties are using steganography, the Feds might not even realize that someone's sharing the file.

Bad Numbers

Apparently statistics relating to mass shooting events have been either "tweeked" by the FBI or misrepresented by the media.
You have to read all the way to the end to get "misrepresentation" viewpoint, but whichever one is true, the fact that one of the most emotion grabbing types of crime has been made to appear more prevalent - a definitely political move - makes it evident that important statistics must be carefully reviewed for fraud whenever they are published.