News Tip Question
An associate made the statement during a recent evening time conversation that drug addicts should not be allowed to vote. His explanation was that addicts vote to protect their addiction needs not their consciences or what is best for their country.
As the conversation continued into the definition of an addict, the point was made that due process would require the standard to apply not only to private sector addicts but also public sector addicts. Since probably more than half of America's eligible voters could be considered public sector addicts the conversation shifted to more reasonable ways to solve America's problems.
From my perspective it seems that some of America's public sector addiction policies supported by all current 2008 Presidential candidates include the following. First, I can almost understand public sector subsidies addictions for individuals and businesses because charity is a make one feel good venture.
Second I halfway understand public sector support for economies based on consumer debt addiction as believing the future will only get better is feel good optimism. Third, I barely understand environmental fascism addiction based on never ending bigger and bigger lies proven by scientific fraud of global warming since saving the world also makes one feel good.
What this old farmer's son does not understand is how supporting an economy with an addiction to profits of criminal activities makes any sense? Guess I should move this writing exercise on to enticement for reading by title.
News tip question: Why McCain, many wealthy Republics and Democrats support a Southern porous border? Answer: porous border economies money laundering collateral retail profits from criminal activities for "reputable" business and corporations with proceeds to politicians as election donations.
This not sound bite news tip so explanation will take more words than usual news tip. A brief history of some of my professional work experiences, conducted undercover investigations to determine where drug dealers hid money in civil cases for attorney's plaintiffs against defendant drug dealer owned "legitimate" businesses for damages involving employees hurt at work.
I heard back then that a government agency has a formula to determine amount of criminal activity profits as percentage of local economies in major drug trafficking cities.
Process for laundering money: collateral retail profits from drug smuggling, illegal immigrant smuggling, wages to illegal immigrant workers, and investments made in U.S. generated by corruption in Mexico. Example, forty percent of South Padre Island high dollar real estate is owned by Mexican nationals.
One of the first impacts of enforcing illegal immigration laws by state of Arizona has reportedly reduced affected areas economy by eight to ten percent as illegal immigrants leave state and move to other places like Texas and California. Number should be higher if drug trafficking and Mexican national investments were included.
A reasonable estimate of border areas like Rio Grande Valley, Laredo, El Paso and other states involved would be that as much as twenty percent of local economies are based on criminal activities. I am sure that those benefiting from the twenty percent are also contributors to McCain and Democrats and other politicians supporting a porous border even if national security is threatened, domestic crime increases, and a public health pandemic is possible not mentioning other problems caused by illegal immigrants.
You have more influence than me, so if you could get the formula (start with DEA") and results identifying cities with percentages; plus why the government does not release the information you should be on to a major story.
In closing what I do understand is that citizens get the governments they tolerate which are the governments they deserve. If you are not an addict, think about that when casting your ballot in America's 2008 Presidential election.
