Hopefully with the election of almost half of a new 112th Congress, we’ve managed to get some folks in whom – unlike others before them – will listen, read, and do the math on illegal immigration and how much it is costing American taxpayers.

Due to years of federal inaction, the burning issue of illegal immigration has reached a tipping point. It’s time for us to come together as a community, as a state, and as a nation, to stop throwing rhetorical firebombs.

We would like to assist them in such a way as the “fortunate ones” may not be aware of, or perhaps to enlighten those who need some powder for their canons. In fact, we all need to listen and try to calculate what the accommodation of illegal alien’s is costing us.

This aspect of immigration reform is one that does not get addressed often enough; moreover, when it does it is usually by some left-wing progressives who would rather run than to face the reality of the matter – USA’s fiscal position.

Up to this date the United States has an accumulated debt of some odd staggering 14 trillion dollars. Typing that out could make one’s fingers twitch; however, it is much easier to type it rather than to look at that number. Suffice it to say that unless mindful steps are taken we doubt that the USA will still be the USA in 2060. Just a few suggestions: ($14,000,000,000,000.00)

With one small disclaimer: We will be using some states as examples. Insofar as these examples address deficit spending and subsequent amounts of money we feel that until or unless policymakers come to decisions regarding “Sanctuary Cities” and/or anything that is not in full compliance with the rule of law of our nation then certain necessities may be needed.

With many state budgets in deficit, policymakers have an obligation to look for ways to reduce the fiscal burden of illegal migration. California, facing a budget deficit of $14.4 billion in 2010-2011, is hit with an estimated $21.8 billion in annual expenditures on illegal aliens. New York’s $6.8 billion deficit is smaller than its $9.5 billion in yearly illegal alien costs. (For further reading click here.)

Data gathered from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimates the annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level to be about $113 billion; nearly $29 billion at the federal level and $84.2 billion at the state and local level. The study also estimates tax collections from illegal alien workers, both those in the above-ground economy and those in the underground economy. Those receipts do not come close to the level of expenditures and, in any case, are misleading as an offset because over time unemployed and underemployed U.S. workers would replace illegal alien workers. (For data analysis, click here.)

The government will collect $2.3 trillion in taxes this year. That's well short of the $3.6 trillion it will spend. Fifty-five percent of that spending will go to mandatory expenses like social security, Medicare and Medicaid; 43 percent is called discretionary spending. That's money Congress controls and allocates to more than two dozen government departments like defense or transportation, and the alphabet soup of agencies that the departments oversee. Two percent of the budget goes to Congressional pet-projects or earmarks. (Please see by clicking here.)

In reading this article one is offered the opportunity to see just how much our nation’s illegal alien problem has contributed to the overall state of affairs. Please be mindful that only a few expenditures have been examined and what the costs of those are that devastate America’s economy. We will continue to bring financial data when it becomes available. We leave you with just one question: How long would it take to pay down a huge percentage of our national debt if we were not spending our tax dollars on those entered our nation illegally?

America: What is your government up too?

We heard it live today in an interview with Sen. Orin Hatch (R-UT) the unadulterated statement that we've been waiting for from someone on the Hill. During his interview with Bill Hemmer of FOX News' America's Newsroom, Sen. Hatch constantly referred to initiatives that ostensibly got the health care bill passed in the House of Representatives; however, before even addressing as to whether or not the Senate will debate the issue, Sen. Hatch made mention of those two-biggest lies that he – as well as his colleagues – sincerely hope will not be messed with.

The two issues are health care for illegal aliens and federally funded abortions. While in the process of closing the interview, Mr. Hatch stated: "I hope the American people revolt." And we are at the point of total agreement with Sen. Hatch.

Ladies and gentlemen all one needs to do is look at the language, moreover the lies that are being told everyday albeit from the White House, Department of Justice, Nan Pelosi and 'her health care bill' and the other inside the beltway corrupt-o-crats.

U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops:

In order to get the health care bill passed through Nan Pelosi's House, more than 25 Democrat representatives had to be reassured that federally funded abortion was a big fat NO! For weeks, the Catholic Church has asked its U.S. parishioners to work toward ensuring that tough language restricting federal funding of abortion is included in healthcare overhaul legislation.

But as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the church's governing body in America, tries to rally its forces outside Congress, it is also using its leverage within.

It used that influence this month as the House of Representatives prepared to vote on the healthcare legislation. Negotiators for the church worked with lawmakers to add an amendment to ensure that federal insurance subsidies do not wind up funding elective abortion. Doesn't it seem that the "Almighty Clause" found nowhere in the Constitution, 'Separation between church and state' is a convenient colloquialism when one wants to gain from it?

AG Eric Holder up to 'Old tricks'

Do yourselves a remarkable favor and drop by Michelle Malkin's blog immediately! In her lead story she addresses some rather significant conflicts of interests vis-a-vie Team Obama and starring Attorney General Eric Holder and many, many members of the Culture of Corruption. Michelle has actually included an excerpt from her best-selling masterpiece which bears the same name. This is must reading! Get a grip on what is really going on in America's government.

A Lie is a Lie, not Embellish or Misspoke

Banter, teasing, and more mockery! What on earth is going on with the main-stream media? Of course I reference a very simply, matter of fact fabrication as told by a human being that has been called everything from 'embellishing' to 'misspoke.'

And do you know what! BOLDERDASH! With children we call it lying, no candy-coating, lying.

First things first, let's get together here and work out some suitable definitions, okay? First up; embellishment is the act of making beautiful, adorning, or adding fanciful details that don't exist. Second, lying is the act is being untruthful.

And in the interest of not confusing this verbiage, please be advised that a liar is a person who tells false statements deliberately presented as being true; in addition, the act of lying is the act of presenting something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.

Therefore, can we please dispense with the pleasantries such as 'misspoke' or 'embellished' a story?

People we are talking about a person who not only inhabited our White House for eight years, we are also addressing the conduct of a person who seeks to become our nation's president. And if this is the kind of rhetoric we are getting at this point in that election process, why should anyone who openly lies even continue?

We've got a husband who lied. 'Did you have sex with that woman'? No I did not have sex with that woman. 'When we landed there was sniper fire; we had to take the ceremony inside; there I was with my head down and covered running to get inside.'

For the record was there any sniper fire? No and as such one cannot embellish upon on an event that never occurred; seriously, one cannot dress up or elaborate on something that just did not happen. So what's up with the I misspoke?

I believe she's trying to say, 'I misstated'; which according to the dictionary is the act of stating something wrongly or falsely or in other words, I lied.

I don't condone lying whatsoever. In every class I've taught we've discussed the importance of telling the truth. Moreover, if one has lied, then come clean immediately. First the penalty is less severe and second one gets off the hook sooner, right?

As per Mrs. Clinton: "Well, occasionally I am a human being like everybody else. I've written about it in my book. I talked about it on many other occasions and last week for the first time in 12 or so years I misspoke." No, no, and no, this does not make it all right or over.

Yes…but this was within weeks ago?