Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Mexifornia
    Posts
    9,455
    Quote Originally Posted by azwreath
    Quote Originally Posted by NoBueno
    La Raza has basically been designated as an executer of the Federal Government to distribute millions of dollars in tax payer monies to illegal invaders, whom the government cannot legally give assistance directly.

    This partisan boondoggle is absolutely disgraceful! It's unconscionable that this vile, un-American group would be earmarked millions of dollars of tax payer funds to distribute to those who are in this country in violation of immigration law!

    Can this bill be recalled?





    It's a little confusing NoBueno, but from what I understand, it's a matter of changing the language to "officially" deny monies to groups such as LaRaza.

    This is how it was explained to me by the manager of our bank branch, whom I've known for the past 10 years:

    Apparently, the language of the bailout was crafted to "officially" bar illegal aliens from receiving any assistance or benefits whatsoever under the bailout. BUT, the problem stems from the fact that funds are available to organizations which offer home ownership related programs such as mortgage counseling, etc.

    LaRaza and ACORN offer these things so would be able to apply for funds and could conceivably be granted those funds. They, of course, would use those funds to assist the IA population.

    Evidently, the language needs to be revised to specifically deny funds to any groups which assist illegal aliens.
    Can the bill be sent back and modified to include language that would exclude funds to those groups who assist illegal invaders? Clearly, this bill was designed to include funding to illegal invaders through such groups as ALCORN and La Raza. These groups must be excluded from this bill!
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #12
    Senior Member crazybird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Joliet, Il
    Posts
    10,175
    It's a little confusing NoBueno, but from what I understand, it's a matter of changing the language to "officially" deny monies to groups such as LaRaza.

    This is how it was explained to me by the manager of our bank branch, whom I've known for the past 10 years:

    Apparently, the language of the bailout was crafted to "officially" bar illegal aliens from receiving any assistance or benefits whatsoever under the bailout. BUT, the problem stems from the fact that funds are available to organizations which offer home ownership related programs such as mortgage counseling, etc.

    LaRaza and ACORN offer these things so would be able to apply for funds and could conceivably be granted those funds. They, of course, would use those funds to assist the IA population.

    Evidently, the language needs to be revised to specifically deny funds to any groups which assist illegal aliens.
    The devil is in the details, isn't it?
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #13
    April
    Guest
    ACTION ALERT HERE! PLEASE JOIN IN!!

    http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-745863.html#745863

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    470
    This really pisses me off. Any group focused on the advancement of one race is a supremacist group. There are many morons that fail to realize that. Taxpayers shouldn't be funding any race supremancy groups. Things like this are screwing up this country.
    ProEnglish:The English Language Advocates
    http://www.proenglish.org/

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    282
    Just sent link of article to Michelle Malkin and Lou Dobbs.

    http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Defa ... ?id=210216
    <div>"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."- James Madison, The Federalist Papers No.49</div>

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •