I expect that Obamessiah is going to act like the regular politician he is ("a new kind of politics"?  No, just a better speaker and an "in the tank" MSM that refuses to ask the hard questions) when it comes to enforcing our present set of laws against illegal aliens.  Yeah, I'm already getting that sinking feeling again with McCain now talking, AGAIN, about "comprehensive immigration reform".

Sidebar - you know, I'd really like to see a debate where conservative bloggers are the questions askers to Obama and liberal ones for McCain.  However, since I would predict that McCain would do alright but Obama, without his teleprompter, would fold faster than a cheap paper plate caught in a New England summer thunderstorm.

Still, from USANumbers, I just saw this:

The House Appropriations Committee now plans to consider on Tuesday (June 24) the DHS spending bill that will determine funding levels for immigration enforcement next year.

Postponement of the planned markup of the bill on June 18 looks like a case of cold feet. I am proud of all the NumbersUSA members whose icy reception of talk of de-funding resulted in a blizzard of phone calls -- and perhaps the cold feet.

U.S. House leaders continue to gauge whether next Tuesday they can escape public wrath if they take funding away from a couple of the most effective enforcement procedures resulting in illegal aliens leaving the country. Appropriators will decide whether to de-fund that enforcement for next year or, as we encourage the public to demand, to expand the funding.

[snip]

We cannot tell you for sure what committee leaders had planned to introduce on June 18 because they have refused to make public their bill. (Whenever that happens, we generally are correct in suspecting that they are including convoluted language designed to disguise legislation that we would oppose. If they wait to the last minute to make a bill public, we don't have time to read and analyze it and to alert you to any dangers.)

I am an Open and Transparent Government kind of guy - I want ALL aspects of what the bureacracy and elected officials are doing to be in full view.  With the power of the 'Net, the ability of ordinary citizens to use off-the-shelf technology to use to monitor these folks, people in government have to realize that thousands of flashlights are coming in to what used to be dark or murky corners.

We do know that there are strong currents within Congress wanting an election-year action that will look really tough against the worst criminals among illegal aliens while secretly gutting the enforcement programs that are proving effective in pushing overall illegal immigration down.

Particularly at risk are two effective efforts that the pro-illegal groups despise:

• No. 1: 287(g) program allowing and equipping local agencies to arrest and detain illegal aliens of all kinds.
• No. 2: Arrests of any illegal alien encountered while looking for criminal alien fugitives.

One idea floating around Congress would be to take away all funding for 287(g) and put it into a larger fund for tracking down fugitive criminal aliens.

Well, we lit it up and melted it down before, folks......time for a threepeat?

You can continue to phone committee members at 202-224-3121, asking for expanded funding for the 287(g) program for local immigration enforcement.

Posted by Skip at 8:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

What happened?  The illegals are leaving for states that are more lenient. 

Now, South Carolina is following suit:

Senate initially OKs immigration bill that would fine employers who hire illegals

COLUMBIA -- The state Senate gave preliminary approval Wednesday night to a new immigration reform plan that provides for civil fines of up to $10,000 for businesses that knowingly hire illegal workers.

"This is probably the toughest anti-illegal immigration bill in the country," President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell said.

The voice-vote approval of the amendment came after hours of a Democrat-led fillibuster of the previous plan and complaints that it would hurt farmers and not solve the state’s illegal immigration problems.

Given the empirical evidence from Arizona and from Prince William County in Maryland, I'm not so sure I'd be so quick to use that last phrase.  It does seem quite clear that when the law is passed and enforced, it DOES solve the illegal immigration problem.

And not a red cent has to be spent on deportation - they self-deport (or at least, self-move). 

The new proposal would require that private employers verify each workers’ legal status using either a South Carolina driver’s license, a federal electronic verification system or a new state form similar to the federal I-9 form that would be monitored by state regulators.

[snip]  "We’ve had meetings, numerous phone calls and letters back and forth with Senate Republicans over the past couple of days about the need for a strong electronic verification system," Sanford said in a statement after the vote.

[snip]  "The message should go out loud and clear that South Carolina is not a haven for the employment of illegals," McConnell told senators.

[snip] McConnell said businesses that fail to keep the proper records could be fined between $100 and $1,000 per violation, while those that are found guilty of knowingly and intentionally hiring illegals could be fined a maximum of $2,000 per violation for first offense and up to $10,000 per violation on third and subsequent offenses.

So, why South Carolina?  And right now?  Probably this is why....

Continue reading "Yet another state cracking down on illegal aliens...wonder why?" »

Posted by Skip at 8:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

THere is also the problem that when illegal immigrants flood into an area, wages become depressed relative to when there are none. 

Problem is, even when immigration is legal (and I DO support legal immigration), if employers game the system, it can depress wages as well:

Jobs Americans Won't Do?   [Mark Krikorian]

Another WaPo sob story about a firm desperate for more H-1B visas. The Baltimore company's CEO says "We offer the same salaries and perks whether you're from Baltimore or Bangladesh . . . but we simply cannot find enough qualified U.S.-born staff to fuel our growth."

My profession, computer tech, keeps saying the same thing - it needs more legal immigration.  However, continue on to see how it has put itself into a pickle in this regard and it did it to itself.

Well, John Miano, a Fellow with my Center, took a look for me at the "Labor Condition Applications" that the company filed with the Department of Labor to receive its H-1B workers. Lo and behold, the average H-1B wage for architects at this particular firm is about $45,000, compared with the average for all architects in Baltimore of about $69,000.

So, by gaming the legal immigration process, this firm has gained an advantage over the competition (all other things remaining equal). My, my, no wonder they want more cheaper sources of labor!

So while it may be true that the company pays its foreign contract labor the same as its American workers, it seems to be paying all its architects 35 percent less than the market average. It's no wonder they can't find enough American workers. But why is it government's job to help this business avoid adjusting to market realities?

We've had Mark on Meet The New Press before - perhaps it is time to have him back on!

Posted by Skip at 6:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Regular readers of the 'Grok know that one of our guiding lights is the Rule of Law.  It is, along with right to Free Speech, the right to Private Property, and the Right to Vote, among the chief standards upon which our society functions.

You may not like the Law, you may protest the Law, you may wish (or are attempting to) change the Law, but we all must OBEY the Law and be held accountable when we refuse to recognize and follow the Law.  Most adults understand this.  Unfortunately, this view is not always held by all - especially those (sorry, couldn't resist) that have no problem with open borders and having illegal aliens in their midst.

Well, decisions DO have consequences, as Grizzly Groundswell has the story (emphasis mine):

Recently, I wrote on the murder of Jamiel Shaw Jr last month in Los Angeles by an illegal alien gang member who was never deported after being released from LA County Jail. The suspect had served 4 months on a weapons charge. Apparently, when arrested, he told the cops that he was born in LA, and his word was accepted. One day after his release, he shot and killed Jamiel Shaw, a 17-year-old star high school football player and son of a servicewoman serving in Iraq. Had normal procedures been followed, an immigration hold would have been placed on this person, and he would have been deported upon his release. But because Los Angeles is a “sanctuary city”, immigration authorities were never notified. Now, we have a dead youth senselessly murdered.

In response to this outrage, mayoral candidate Walter Moore, with the support of Jamiel Shaw Sr, is asking the LA City Council to revoke the city regulation (Rule 40) that prohibits LAPD officers from even detaining known illegal alien gang members. Yesterday, the two appeared before the City Council to state that “Enough is enough” and plead for their support.

So far, they have met with zero results. In fact, they were treated with arrogance and disinterest.

For example, City Councilmember Ed Reyes, while expressing sympathy for Mr Shaw, stated that to revoke the rule would bring “unintended consequences”. Such as, Mr Reyes? Saving innocent lives, perhaps?

 What a bunch of garbage that is the leadership of the City of Los Angeles. From Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa [you know, the one who just had to admit having an affair with a local TV reporter covering City Hall?  -Skip], the leading voice of Sanctuary, to his political hack police chief, William Bratton, to the City Council, this has to be one of the worst-run cities in America-and there is a lot of competition.

I've blogged about this before....this time, the sweeping under the rug may not work.

Read the whole thing. 

Posted by Skip at 11:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Bumped and Updated:

This is unexcusable - perhaps THIS is why she resigned - or was she forced to resign?

This comes from an article from the Union Leader discussing Tom Tancredo, former Republican candidate for President as he visited BAE Systems as a campaign stop.  The below was left as a response to the article (the Union Leader allows comments on its articles):

Tancredo and his allies are xenophobics with strong ties to white supremacists groups. NH is going back to the times of segregation, and bringing back KKK.

- Representative Lily Mesa, Manchester

If indeed this was her feelings and her writing, there is absolutely no excuse for it. Given my conversations and emails with her, I am not surprised.

________________________________________________________________ 

For quite sometime, I was reporting about the attempt by Lily Mesa and Susie Nord (Democrats in the State House) to have HB404 passed here in NH.  This bill, if implemented, would have made it illegal for any law enforcement agent or official to ask anyone their immigration status.

Well, that bill failed.  I am happy to report that I am hearing that one of the legislators has decided to resign.  From talk show host, Micheal Graham at his blog "the natural truth":

Sad news for John McCain, Ted Kennedy and amnesty supporters across America: Rep. Lily Mesa has resigned from the New Hampshire state legislature.

According to some of her fellow legislators, she is resigning in part because her pro-amnesty, anti-enforcement bill was soundly defeated in the legislature. It would have banned any state or local resources from being used in any way to help enforce immigration laws. That proposal wasn't popular with the New Hampshire Union-Leader, or the people of New Hampshire.

Good.  and.  riddance.

HB404 was a lame idea to begin with, and they refused to even defend it in public.  If you are unwilling to defend your agendas in public, they deserve to be defeated.

Yippee!! 

(H/T: Mike P) 

Posted by Skip at 9:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I was reading the story in the Union Leader about the wanted man arrested after his picture appeared on the front page of Tuesday's paper, which I found rather comical in its own right:

CONCORD – Vern Potter's whereabouts had been unknown since Concord police issued an arrest warrant for him in January.

Then a police lieutenant happened to spot a Page 1 photo of Potter in yesterday's New Hampshire Union Leader, shoveling snow off the roof of Andover Elementary School. The photo accompanied a story with the headline, "Up on the roof; shoveling reaches new levels."

Police learned that the 31-year-old Potter, who works for a roofing company, was at the school again yesterday and arranged to arrest him on a Class A felony insurance fraud charge.

Heh! Then I read the comment left by John of Merrimack:

It's too bad for this guy he isn't an illegal immigrant. Then the cops would have just looked the other way.

Sad, but true...

Posted by Doug at 7:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Deputy Uses Taser on Fleeing Bicyclist; riding at night without proper lighting...

Rivera was transported to Glenn Medical Center, where he was cleared for booking into the Glenn County Jail on suspicion of resisting arrest, riding a bicycle without proper lighting, riding under the influence of alcohol and use of false citizenship/government documents.

Posted by Doug at 8:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Update 3:  Look at the post below and ask yourself one question - WHY is McCain accepting money for his Reform Institute from GEORGE "I hate America" SOROS?  This guy has used his billions to fund left wing and anti-American groups - he hates Republicans as right-wing fascists.

So let me ask: if McCain is running on an "America #1 policy" (which I agree with), why is he taking money from Soros whose stated aim is:

"I'm not looking for a worldwide recession. I'm looking for a significant shift of power and influence away from the US in particular and a shift in favour of the developing world, particularly China."

I put Juan Hernandez in that same class - he wants Mexico ahead of the US.  So why is McCain trucking with these two?
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Update 2:  So the campaign says that he's an unpaid volunteer? It's getting worse; Michelle is really on it big time:

Hernandez is a fellow at McCain’s “Reform Institute.” What has he been working on there for the past year?

“Dr. Juan Hernandez serves as a Senior Fellow of the Institute’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform Initiative.”

 The Reform Institute is a tax-exempt, supposedly independent 501(c)(3) group, as Ed Morrissey noted two years ago, “that employs Rick Davis, who also works on McCain’s staff as his chief political advisor, and they pay him $110,000 per year. The Reform Institute has often supported McCain, paid for events highlighting him and his agenda, presumably including campaign finance reform.”

Who funded the Reform Institute, which boasts Juan “Think Mexico First” Hernandez as its resident amnesty fellow? The donor list is a who’s who of ultra left-wing, open borders elites.

• OSI (Open Society Institute), founded and funded by George Soros.
• David Geffen is an entertainment-industry mogul who supports Democrats and left-wing causes.
• The Proteus Fund
• Educational Foundation Of America, which also supports abortion.
• The Tides Foundation, which heavily promotes “reproductive justice”

 Soros’s OSI is a key open borders funder–providing support to the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund; the Immigrant Legal Resource Center; the National Immigration Law Center; the National Immigration Forum; the National Council of La Raza; and the American Immigration Law Foundation

Florida voters - read and weep...then get ANGRY!!!
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Update: News is spreading fast in the conservative blogosphere - From AnkleBitingPundits:

McCain’s campaign is trying to dodge the issue with this lame explanation:

McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers emphasized to WND that Hernandez is “a non-paid volunteer to the campaign, and he does not play a policy role.”

“Juan works with us to reach out to the Hispanic community to meet with the folks in the various states,” Rogers said.

Asked if the McCain campaign has repudiated Hernandez’s “Mexico first” declarations, Rogers did not give a direct answer.

Sell that crap somewhere else guys. 

There’s a saying that goes like this: “Show me who you hang with and I’ll show you what you are”.

If that’s the case then John McCain is in serious trouble.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
 

My guy was Fred - conservative, articulate, painted out all of the stances he had.  So now the question is who would I next support?

My #1 issue is the war on Islamofascism - a 7th century religious/political ideology that wants us all under Shari'a Law.  On this issue, all of the Repubs are good (except for the neo-isolationist Ron Paul). McCain, with me however, has the most credibility. 

My #2 issue is illegal immigration - the singular issue on which I have had heartburn for a while.  Yes, I was irate this past summer when McCain, Graham, and others insulted we conservatives as being bigots (along with other names) acting as we were frickin' rascist idiots.

The blogs and talk radio melted their phone system and handed their heads to them - the bill with it's thinly veiled attempt at amnesty (sorry, a fine, learn English, pay back taxes [what a joke - and HOW were officials supposed to figure that out??] does not fit the crime of illegally passing our borders) and that despicable Z-Visa (yeah, SURE governmental officials can do a complete background check in 24 hours to deny that visa when they cannot even do passports in 6 months for LEGAL CITIZENS).

I thought that things might be better, as in Wolfeboro during the NH Primary runup, McCain said he learned his lesson - "secure the borders first". 

NO FRICKIN' WAY HE DID - NOT WITH THIS NEWS!!!! 

And now, at MichelleMalkin as well as a few other sites, I find out that this two-faced open border retread from the Mexican Government is now going to be McCain's advisor on the border????  His National Director of Hispanic Outreach??  Credibility => now zero.

Dr. Juan Hernandez, McCain Hispanic outreach director: "We must not only have a free flow of goods and services, but also start working for a free flow of people.”

Hernandez was a close advisor to Vicente “Welcome to North America” Fox and headed up a Mexican bureaucracy called the “Presidential Office for Mexicans Abroad.” It was designed to allow Hernandez to travel across the country, meddling with local, state, and federal immigration enforcement on behalf of millions of illegal aliens in America. He lobbied for illegal alien driver’s licenses and Mexico first, defended Mexican bus operators carrying illegal aliens to the USA, and promoted extending banking privileges to illegal aliens.

In an interview on ABC News’s Nightline, Hernandez stated bluntly that he was betting that the Mexican American population in the United States –all generations– “will think Mexico first…”I want ‘em all to think Mexico first.”

Continue reading "Aw jeesh...McCain picked who for what?!?!?!?" »

Posted by Skip at 8:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

I am confident that McCain “gets it” when it comes to this one. At a town hall meeting in Wolfeboro just after the defeat of the so-called “comprehensive” immigration bill, he duly noted that Americans had spoken and want the borders verifiably sealed before anything else gets done in this area. It is the rare politician that acknowledges being wrong on a matter, and recognizes the collective voice of regular people.

Posted by Doug at 5:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

I previously blogged about Huckabee's turn around on the Arkansas version of the DREAM act.  I did not know about this.  Michelle Malkin's column in the Detroit News has more:

Breakout GOP candidate Mike Huckabee, the soft-on-border control former governor of Arkansas, scored a jaw-dropping endorsement Tuesday from Jim Gilchrist, founder of the Minuteman Project. Despite a long gubernatorial record opposing employer sanctions and pushing tax-subsidized illegal alien education benefits, Huckabee won Gilchrist's support by unveiling a last-minute, tough-sounding homeland security plan.

I was a bit confused when his immigration plan, especially when I read that it was basically Mark Krikorian (a former guest of Meet The New Press).  Yet, this flip flop, once again, is as big as any of which Romney is accused: 

Just two years ago, Huckabee appeared before the open-borders Hispanic group, The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), preaching an open-door policy. According to the Arkansas News Bureau, Huckabee also criticized state legislation requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote and enhanced reporting of illegal aliens as un-Christian, un-American, irresponsible and anti-life -- not to mention "inflammatory," "race-baiting" and "demagoguery."

Just last year, Huckabee lambasted opponents of the bipartisan shamnesty bill providing a mass pardon to illegal aliens as "driven by racism or nativism." He called strict immigration enforcement -- the kind he now supports -- "sheer folly" in his campaign-timed book released earlier this year. He actively invited the Mexican government to establish a consulate in Arkansas -- giving its office a $1 per year special office space rate -- so that its foreign officials could start dispensing security-undermining matricula consular ID cards to illegal aliens for banking and employment purposes. And he's not only for government in-state illegal alien discounts, he's for expanding them far beyond what the federal DREAM Act proposed.

Not once do I see Rule of Law mentioned.... to flip this late in the campaign?  Ha!

Yes, Rudy and McCain have had similar stances in the past concerning my #2 issue.  And they still need to be watched.  However, what Huck has done is pure pandering to conservatives like me.  At least McCain has apologized for being wrong on the border issue.

Posted by Skip at 8:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Continue reading "So, don't take it!" »

Posted by Skip at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In the previous post, Huckabee - the wrong message to the wrong folks, Sanity Please decided to respond.  Rather than keeping my response in the comments section, I've decided to Post it, as this is one of the most important issues in the illegal immigration debate.  Once again, in different guise, we have the all inclusive phrase "it's for the children".

Continue reading "Wrong Msg to the Wrong People - A rebuttal" »

Posted by Skip at 8:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It ain't rocket science!

by Skip Murphy

There have been many out there that have consistently said that we cannot, as a nation, deport all of the illegal aliens that are here (estimates range from 12 to 20 million).

My response has always been is that we don't have to forceably round them up, clap them into buses, trains, and planes and then ship them out.  Nope, being a frugal conservative Yankee (are there many others out there like me?  Please?), just make the incentives go away and then they will go away.

By themselves.

So when I noted it here and here, I figured it was time to just sit back and watch.  Now, I am happy to report that my hyposthesis is correct:

Migrants lose jobs as hiring law nears

Employers verifying status fire hundreds, attorneys say

 Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of undocumented workers have been fired as a result of Arizona businesses reviewing the work-eligibility forms of their employees as the state's new employer-sanctions law draws near.

The fired workers couldn't provide missing information uncovered during the reviews or confessed to being in the country illegally, say attorneys involved in the reviews.

The number of firings could grow significantly once the law goes into effect Jan. 1 as employers scramble to make sure they are in compliance. Under the law, repeat violators will lose their business licenses.

The key here is that finally our politicians have made the "tough" decisions - protect our sovereignty and our lower skilled workers.  The kicker is that this action has teeth in it - if employers get caught, it will be the kiss of death.  No longer is it at a level where it can be assumed to be simply a cost of doing business.   

The law, signed by Gov. Janet Napolitano in July, is aimed at clamping down on illegal immigration in Arizona by pulling the plug on the job magnet that has drawn undocumented immigrants to the state by the tens of thousands over the past decade.

But of course, those that profit from illegal workers have their panties in a bunch....

Continue reading "See - taking away the incentives DOES work!" »

Posted by Skip at 7:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

Arizona Republican (H/T: Lucianne.com):

Driver's licenses for migrants?  Not in Mexico

MEXICO CITY - The question of whether to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants ignited a national debate in the United States. But in Mexico, the largest source of U.S. immigrants, there's no question: Here, you must be a legal resident to get a driver's license.

All of Mexico's 31 states, along with Mexico City, require foreigners to present a valid visa if they want a driver's license, according to a survey of states by The Arizona Republic.

"When it comes to foreigners, we're a little more strict here," said Alejandro Ruíz, director of education at the Mexican Automobile Association.

Once again we see the fecklessness of the debate:

• oh, the poor things, we have to let the drive here.  They only want a better life
• We have to know who is here!
• Once they get them, then they will have to get insurance, obey the law, yadda, yadda, yadda

Sorry, not buying it. Once again, Los Gringos have been had over throwing away the basics of the Rule of Law - if it were not for the flap of Hillary trying to parse and have the issue both ways on licenses for NY immigrants and Gov. Spitzer's ham-fisted ways on this, most of us would just be called bigots once again for asking that our laws be followed and it would have slipped by.  Yet, the Mexican government is just as complicit in this as these chuckleheads are:

Mexico's Foreign Relations Secretariat declined to comment on the controversy this week, but the Mexican government has fought U.S. restrictions on licenses in the past.

Once again, that phrase of "Fine for me but not for thee" rears its ugly head.  I MIGHT, as Glen Reynold put it, if there was some reciprocity, but there isn't. 

And I might add... 

Continue reading "Equal Rights under Law" »

Posted by Skip at 3:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Democrats had better start dealing with this. Polls show a large majority of Americans, including Democrats, opposed to illegal immigration. They also find that most Americans favor some sort of amnesty for many illegals. Clinton apparently tried to finesse the two, while ignoring what's behind the numbers.

.

What many Democrats (and Republicans) don't "get" is that the support for amnesty is highly conditional. It rests on trust that any official pardon will be the last one. The "grand bargain" on immigration went down in flames last spring because no one believed the sales pitch — that with the amnesty would come a stop to future illegal immigration.

.

When will people know that their politicians mean business? When they hear them say "no."

Posted by Doug at 2:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A Big Thumbs Up for Sununu & Gregg! Keep up the good work...

Posted by Doug at 8:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Call Senator Gregg's office at 224-3324 as he has not committed to voting no on illegal immigration. They're voting today so please call before 11 am.

   From:   Roy Beck, President, NumbersUSA 
Date:   Wednesday 24oct07     2 a.m. EDT 
 
 
Use this for your final phone calls to stop DREAM Act amnesty this morning 
 
PHONE SENATE SWITCHBOARD AT:
202-224-3121

THIS IS A SHOW-DOWN MORNING, FRIENDS.

The vote on amnesty may be before noon.

I have a simple paragraph you can use on the phone if you have never

called a Senate office. It is so easy.

"Hi, my name is xmxmxm xmxmxmx. I am calling about S. 2205, the DREAM

Continue reading "Urge Senator Gregg to Vote No on S. 2205" »

Posted by Judy at 5:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Continue reading "CALL NOW OR LIVE WITH DREAM AMNESTY!" »

Posted by Judy at 1:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I just could not let this one go ( the same one that Jorge wrote about here).

How many other countries do you know actively help their countrymen to willingly break their neighbor's laws?  But absolutely crack down on illegal immigration into their own country?

And what other country in the world seems to be allowing it?

Mexico to bolster immigrant defense

The Mexican government is giving its consulates in the U.S. wide latitude to ramp up a campaign to toughen their defense of immigrants and plans to give them more resources as well, officials familiar with the strategy said.

The move comes as deportations reach an all-time high in the toughest crackdown in decades by the U.S. government and police authorities.

Once again, it is "immigration" and not written as "illegal immigration" in the report.  And that is, and has been, the crux of my ire.  Not only now is it focused on individuals but now the country of Mexico. Yet, that decry that we discriminate against Mexicans - do you think that there may now well be a legitimate reason (aw, just forget about those comic books they cooked up earlier!).  Thus, we have a sovereign country's laws being flouted, but another country is being blatantly open about subverting their neighbor's laws. 

Among the actions under discussion are the creation of...

Continue reading "And those that seek to undermine them" »

Posted by Skip at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The tightening of immigration enforcement and state laws threatening employers with severe penalties for employing illegal immigrants—to the extent of closing the business after the second conviction--has resulted in a steady wave of illegals fleeing north to Canada for fear of deportation, not just from Arizona and Texas but from Florida and other states. 

.

Windsor, Ontario, seems to be the destination of choice, thanks to a non-profit outfit in Florida which, for a “donation of $400,” will complete the necessary paperwork to seek asylum in Canada.  So reports the Windsor Star in the article Mexicans Pour Into Canada from the U.S. 

.

This influx of new mouths to feed and service is straining the coffers of the local government.  Windsor Mayor Eddie Francis has appealed to Ottawa for financial help, as reported in the article “Refugees Pose ‘Potential Crisis’”

.

For the three weeks ending September 19, more than 45 families and 31 individuals –200 people—have crossed the Detroit River over the Ambassador Bridge between Detroit and Windsor. Will the Detroit River become the northern equivalent of the Rio Grande?

.

Continue reading "An example of existing laws that work..." »

Posted by Doug at 6:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 6:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, the Senate is at it again.  They are about to vote on legislation that contains the DREAM Act.  Briefly put, it allows for illegal immigrants to receive discounted tuition at colleges.

Note:  members of our armed services, who put themselves in harms way to protect us, are not entitled to this.  My sons are not entitled to this.  

Why should the sons and daughters of legal citizens be penalized for being.....well, legal?

Neither of my two Senators, Sununu or Gregg, have a public stance on how they will vote - I know as I just called.  No press releases, nothing on their website, and the receptionists have no information on how they will vote.

Call their offices: (202) 224-2841 and (202) 224-3324.

They listened once - they will listen if you call!

Posted by Skip at 12:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Sanctions that is!  I'm not a 'deport them all' kind of guy.  I am a Rule of Law - Enforce the Law kind.  I have been more than irate ("seething" was I used in the past). In fact, I have advocated that if the incentives were removed, illegals would self-deport (being one of those frugal New England Yankees, why spend the money for something when you can get it for free?).

I told you so!

Well, back on July 5th I was quite happy to blog that Arizona had passed a real strict law - one with teeth as long as a T-Rex.  Frankly - a death knell for any business that knowingly employ illegal immigrants:

• The suspension of a business license on the first violation
• Permanent revocation on a second

Captain Ed gets the Hat Tip here (bold emphasis mine): 

Arizona Republic reported on an interesting phenomenon taking place as a new workplace identification law approaches implementation. Those workers with no documentation -- in other words, illegal aliens -- have begun to sell off their property and leave the state:

Undocumented immigrants are starting to leave Arizona because of the new employer-sanctions law.

The state's strong economy has been a magnet for illegal immigrants for years. But a growing number are pulling up stakes out of fear they will be jobless come Jan. 1, when the law takes effect. The departures are drawing cheers from immigration hard-liners and alarm from business owners already seeing a drop in sales.

It's impossible to count how many undocumented immigrants have fled because of the new law. But based on interviews with undocumented immigrants, immigrant advocates, community leaders and real-estate agents, at least several hundred have left since Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano signed the bill on July 2. There are an estimated 500,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona.

Some are moving to other states, where they think they will have an easier time getting jobs. Others are returning to Mexico, selling their effects and putting their houses on the market.

The number departing is expected to mushroom as the Jan. 1 deadline draws closer. After that, the law will require employers to verify the employment eligibility of their workers through a federal database.

The immigration hard-liners appear to have proven one of their main arguments. Illegal immigrants who face a loss of employment due to strict employer sanctions will move elsewhere, and rather quickly. One talk-radio host that caters to what the Republic calls "undocumented immigrants" estimates that the departure rate has already hit 100 per day. It will likely increase until most of them depart before the end of the year, when their jobs will disappear.

Continue reading "See, try it and it works!" »

Posted by Skip at 8:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

One could, I suppose, regard this as one of those unforeseen incremental consequences that happens in the darkest shadows of society. But that doesn't extend to Newark's official status as an illegal-immigrant "sanctuary city." Like Los Angeles, New York and untold others, Newark has formally erased the distinction between U.S. citizens and the armies of the undocumented. This is the active collusion by multiple cities and states in the subversion of U.S. sovereignty. In Newark, N.J., it means an illegal-immigrant child rapist is free to murder on a Saturday night. In Somerville, Mass., it means two deaf girls are raped by MS-13 members. And in Falls Church, Va., it means Saudi Wahhabists figuring out that, if the "sanctuary nation" (in Michelle Malkin's phrases) offers such rich pickings to imported killers and imported gangs, why not to jihadists?

Posted by Doug at 10:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

At least Sentor McCain "got" the message.  In this post, I wrote:

Has he changed because of political expediency?  Watching him closely last night, I would say no.  For that to have been true, he would have had to change much earlier in the process so as to minimize the political damage to his Presidential campaign.  Tonight, I saw a man, a very powerful man, humbled by acknowledging that what he had been pitching was not what the people wanted.  He even fought against at that time!  But now, with the battle over that bill is over, he has reflected  over what the people wanted and has come to grips that he was wrong.  An "all in one" package may be what he wants, but is not what the American people want.

It may have been a bitter pill, but he swallowed it and his pride and is now acknowledging that the right thing to do is to secure the border.  Why?  While securing the border is of utmost importance to many (very much including myself), it is a way to try to EARN back the respect and confidence of the American people towards Congress (something that he admits is quite bruised at the moment).

I give him kudoes to doing this - given the political capital spent, to admit one is wrong takes a big man.  To turn it around and do and support what he didn't want to do at first takes a bigger one. 

Meanwhile, first time Senator Mel Martinez and head of the Republican National Committee has yet to learn this lesson. This article talks about what he said that in retrospect, shows him a tad behind the times:

ST. PETERSBURG - Sen. Mel Martinez, the head of the Republican National Committee, took a swipe Tuesday at the leading Republican presidential candidates for not offering solid solutions to America's immigration crisis.

The first-term Republican from Orlando, who absorbed enormous criticism mainly from within the GOP for pushing an immigration overhaul that included letting illegal immigrants become citizens, turned the tables on some who had been most critical.

"Presidential contests are about leadership. ... It's about leading on the tough issues," Martinez told the St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce. "It was easy to say, 'This wasn't good enough, this isn't right, I don't agree with Martinez.' ... But at the end of the day what is your answer? How would you solve this?"

In his remarks, Martinez did not directly refer to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney or former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, but he later suggested both candidates, who were critics of the controversial Senate immigration proposal, had mischaracterized the plan. He also urged audience members to pin down the Republican candidates on immigration when they come to St. Petersburg for the YouTube/CNN Republican presidential debate Nov. 28.

We saw the effort by Republicans and others that figuratively caused a meltdown of the Senate phone system.  Millions of emails were sent.  Talk radio (including Meet The New Press) discussed it and mobilized listeners while bloggers marshalled their readers.  An uproar ensued to the likes that have not been seen in a long, long time.

Yup, put him in the corner with a dunce cap.  Not for his stance (which I disagree with) but for his obstinence and arrogance for openly defying the base.  At a time when Republicans are quite nervous about the upcoming elections, the Rs are going to need all of the activists they can get in order to get out the vote.  Insulting them as well as your front running candidates only pours more burning oil on the Republican leadership that those of us looking up already distrust.

And distrust looses not only voters but money and time.

Continue reading "Go ahead Mel - continue to insult the base" »

Posted by Skip at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I have blogged before about HB404 here in NH - a bill that would turn all of NH into a sanctuary state (here, and here).  Basically, this bill is a free pass to illegal aliens to roost here.  It seems that other people are starting to notice

From the Nashua Telegraph 

CONCORD – U.S. Attorney Thomas Colantuono, four federal immigration agents and three police chiefs warned Tuesday that a proposed bill would block state and local law enforcement officials from going after suspected terrorists who were also illegal immigrants.

Colantuono said the state might also risk the loss of up to $200,000 that local communities and the state get from the federal government for detaining foreign-born residents unlawfully in this country.

“It is unrealistic in the way law enforcement operates in the 21st century in the wake of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001,” Colantuono said.

“The bill, as written, would be a disaster.”

Ah yes, the Law of Unintended Consequences....or is it?  Let me be positive for just a sec - even with the best of intentions (and I doubt that this bill is actually that - the best for NH citizens), things go wrong because the "moves" were not thought out correctly.  In an immediate response to a perceived ill or wrong, a bill may sound good emotionally but can fail at critical junctions.

It seems that the people who know best, the "boots" on the ground in law enforcement, are not exactly thrilled with the efforts of Lily Mesa and Susi Nord (both Democrats):

The legislation (HB 404) – introduced by Rep. Lily Mesa, D-Manchester – would prohibit state and local police from detaining or arresting anyone whose sole offense is the violation of federal immigration laws.

Gee, I always believed that do bad things meant that bad consequences should follow.  Once again, these two Democrats wish to continue the process of not holding people accountable for their actions and decisions.  What a way to run a society.....no responsibilities at all....unless you are a citizen/taxpayer.... 

A four-person subcommittee of the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee is studying the measure, which the House of Representatives sent back to committee last spring.Speaking at a subcommittee work session Tuesday, Londonderry Police Chief Joseph Ryan said the bill’s adoption would stop his officers from assisting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who were detaining suspected aliens at Manchester-Boston Regional Airport.

“To think state and local officers have to turn our backs is contrary to everything I believe in,” Ryan told the subcommittee. 

Absolutely true.  Once again, we are a nation whose main principle is the Rule of Law.  Take that away, and anything can happen.

Rep. Timothy Robertson, D-Keene, said police and prosecutors were overreacting.

Great, another Democrat weighs in......

Continue reading "More Lily and HB404 - and none of it positive" »

Posted by Skip at 8:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

TMEW and I went back to PA for a few days this week - Gettysburg. 

We toured the Civil War battlefields.  I took away the visualizations of 150,000 or so Blue and Gray soldiers in a fairly small area - and in some cases, literally brother fighting brother.  In all, 1 in 3 died for their respective sides.  In one small area, the Wheatfield, 4,000 men died in one day.  It gives you a better appreciation of sacrifice, and of honor - each soldier knowing full well that his time on earth may end that day.  May God rest their souls.

As always with a trip of a couple of days with a hotel in it, I take the chance to look through USA Today - the traveler's newspaper - for something on which to comment or bring to someone's attention. Once again, I was not disappointed.

The background to the item is that we have all seen or heard about the Mexican officials, claiming that what the US does is racially motivated, racial profiling, not humane, against international law, and over all, gets their knickers in a knot.  All the while, they must be laughing like hyenas!

Why?  This (not online):

Mexico deports thousands of stranded illegal migrants

Mexico began deporting thousands of U.S.-bound illegal immigrants from Central America who were stranded in southern Mexico after the Chiapas-Mayab railway closed.  migrants used the freight cars to ride north.

Buses were taking deportees from immigration detention centers to the Guatemalan border.

The U.S.-run railway closed in late July, but migrants continued to pour into the area where they used to hop the trains.  Some camped along the rail line, and some turned themselves in to authorities.  Others tried to walk hundreds of miles to the next rail line, Salvadoran Consul Nelson Cuellar said.

Oh, where is the shame of Mexico?  Where is the compassion?  Why won't they let the illegal immigrants stay?  After all, they are only looking for a better life for themselves by working hard, right?

Oh yeah, a double standard. We're wrong for doing it, but for them, it is against the law.

Hypocrites....

Posted by Skip at 7:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This afternoon Lilly Mesa decided to post a comment on my post discussing her legislation (along with Susi Nord), HB404, that would make it illegal to ask anyone their immigration status here in NH. I have approved it entirely and without commenting upon it, as requested.

Again, I do not not agree with her legislation - at all.  She does, however, have the right to sponsor such legislation.  My feeling, however, is that ALL legislation is open for discussion including any reasons behind it.  And it should be done with more speech, not less. 

As she brings up more issues and reasons in her comment, and upon more contemplation, I've decided that it merits its own posting.  Along with my comments. 

I thought I will save you some time doing your homework and decided to send you my reply to your assumptions about me. My only hope is that you don't edit it and post it as it is.

Which I have done here (scroll down to the Comments section) for those that wish to read it without my comments.  All I have done is a cut and paste for her words - any grammer / spelling mistakes are hers.  All of mine belong to me!

The rest of her comment (and it is long) can be found after the jump...

But before that, I did ask her one question:

Instead of not asking ANYONE what their immigration / citizenship status is, what about asking EVERYONE that status?  Would this satisfy your concern of racial profiling, as if the police stop anyone (anyone of any color or not), they would ask and not just of some?  And that would alleviate my concern of those that are here illegally would be found and dealt with appropriately?

A win-win solution, right?

Continue reading "HB404 update - One sponsor decides to write" »

Posted by Skip at 8:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Sen. Judd Gregg is leading a push to resurrect a portion of last month's failed immigration reform bill that would tighten security along the nation's southern border.

"The American people will not move forward... in the area of comprehensive immigration reform until they are confident that we have regained control over our borders."

The Senate overwhelming approved a border security amendment today that was written by Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H.

Posted by Doug at 8:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

HB404 here in NH is an attempt to make it illegal for our local law enforcement to ask if someone is illegally here in the state.  Make sense to you?  Certainly not to me, and I blogged about this bill earlier here.

I tried to get the two sponsors of this bill to come on Meet The New Press for the last couple of weeks to discuss the WHY and the RAMIFICATIONS of the bill.  At first, the answer was yes, then it turned to silence, then yes, and then quickly to "nope".  So, we will be talking about it on the show today, but for those of you who cannot listen to the show or to the podcast (it will be here after the show), here's the primary info.

I was first alerted to this bill by a loyal reader (H/T: Mike) who emailed me (I've edited):

I just listened to rMichael Graham interviewing a NH legislature who claims to want to make NH into something like a sanctuary state.
 
She represents Manchester West according to her.  Her name is Lilly Mesa and she has introduced a bill to not allow police in this state to ask any questions regarding immigration status.  I think the bill is HB404.
 
Since I was kind of half listening to the radio at the time I noticed what the subject was and who the host was talking to I'm not sure of the above facts, but I got the gist right.
 
What do you guys know about this one?

Well, I knew nothing about this, so I figured that I would listen to the show (podcast here).  Now, my own opinion is that is not how we do interviews on MTNP, but it did perk my interest, and then, bluntly, my ire.  I am a conservative - the idea of combating illegal immigration by making it illegal to ask was nonsense.

In fact, it forces law enforcement to not enforce our nation's law.  I have little tolerance for foolishness like this.  It is one thing to not like a law, but if we are to maintain one of the greatest things about this country, all must obey the laws and not single out a class of people that would be immune from that law.

Especially if they are here illegally. In fact, my take on this law is to not make it illegal to ask, but make it illegal to NOT ask!  That way, there is no racial profiling, there is no pre-judgement, and all are subject to that law.  Anyways, back to the story. 

I invited Lily Mesa onto the show:

Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 12:06:52 -0400
From: skip@GraniteGrok.com
To:   Lilly Mesa
Subject: House Bill 404

Dear Ms. Mesa,

This email concerns House Bill 404, of which you and Susi Nord are sponsors.  It is currently retained in the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee.  I have reprinted it below.

I have a radio show, Meet The New Press, here in Central NH that is broadcast on WEMJ 1490AM (and we also live stream and podcast as well).  I was wondering if you would be willing to come on the show and talk about this bill?  While I and my co-hosts are conservative, we try hard to be a "no sandbag zone" - we are not out to be a Hannity-Colmes where shouting is the norm - we want to talk about the issues and the philosophies behind them.

Kindest Regards,

-Skip

Skip Murphy
Meet The New Press
GraniteGrok.com

Her answer was (6/27):

I will be more than glad to come to your show because I want to have the opportunity to talk about all the issues behind this since the interview that I had this morning it was just a set-up from someone in NH to cruxify me.  I'm coming back to NH on Sunday because I am right now in Atlanta attending the US Social Forum.  I will give you a call on Monday the 2nd.  Thank you.

Representative Mesa.

So far, so good....but then the prevarication started...

Continue reading "HB404 - the sponsors and refusal to defend it on MTNP" »

Posted by Skip at 9:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

As I've noted in the past, not only is the Nuge one of my long-time favorite guitar players, he also happens to be on the right side of many of the issues of the day. The last time we checked with Ted Nugent, he was dishing common-sense talk about guns and who should be carrying them. Now, it's illegal immigration.

.

The answer is so simple, it's stupid. I've secured my stage, Neil. I've secured my home. I've secured my fishing pond. I secured my swamp. And I'm just a guitar player. I don't let any unauthorized penetrators into my secured area. And it really is that simple.

.

[snip]

.

We've got a real bunch of real warrior-heroes in Border Patrol. In ICE. In law-enforcement all along our southern borders-- and northern borders. JUST LET 'EM DO THEIR JOB! Cut the big dogs loose. Let 'em enforce laws. That's not novel. That's logic unless you're a bureacratic chimp!

Continue reading "Ted Nugent. Solving illegal immigration. It's so easy. Really." »

Posted by Doug at 8:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Talk about the rule of law..... 

Governer OKs toughest migrant-hire law in the U.S.

Gov. Janet Napolitano on Monday signed sweeping legislation against employers of undocumented workers, targeting the state's market for illegal labor with what she called "the most aggressive action in the country."

The penalty for violators: the suspension of a business license on the first violation and permanent revocation on a second, amounting to a death sentence for repeat offenders.

Teeth!  A law with teeth!  I am a big proponent of consequences - simply, it is an "adult" thing.  Too often we as a society paper over bad decisions by individuals and groups and not holding them accountable for their actions.  Instead, we say "oh, how dreadful....we'll make it better".  As we have seen with extending welfare benefits, what seems to be "the nice thing to do" turns out to be the worst thing.

"It's monumental. It's a change from anything we've done in the past," said Speaker of the House Jim Weiers, R-Phoenix. "It's time for the states to start stepping up and stop waiting for Congress." 

Good thinking.  With President Bush and the other political elites unwilling to "do the right thing" (IMHO), it is time, under our Federalist system of government to work.  After all, all powers not explicitly given to the to central government belong to the States.  Hey, if the Feds wish to drop their power into the gutter, why not have the States, seeing it lying there, just pick it up. 

[snip]

"We're dealing somewhat in uncharted territory right now - uncharted territory because of the inability of the Congress to act," Napolitano said. "The states will take the lead, and Arizona will take the lead among the states."

Sometimes, the vernacular fits better than anything else: "You go, girl!"

But opposition to the new law was swift, led by Latino activists and the business community. Eight minutes after the governor's announcement that she had signed the bill, the Arizona Chamber of Commerce issued a statement calling it "a crippling blow to Arizona business."

I direct you to someone who says it better than I could: John over at RWN

Business is nothing but adaptable - that is the essence of capitalism.  Find a niche, fill it, and make a profit - legally.  If the business environment changes, the business either adapts or dies (been there, done that).

I have no compassion for companies that have built their business model on employing illegal workers at the expense of legal one.  Let them go out of buisness - AFTER their owners suffer the consequences of their actions in our judicial system. 

"We have five months for the business community to rally and come to the table and demand that the House and Senate come back to the table and work on this bill," said Mary Rose Wilcox, a Maricopa County supervisor and Hispanic activist. "People are just incensed about this. This will be disastrous for the state of Arizona."

"Anyone worried about this bill ought to be worried about their hiring practices," said Pearce, who called the measure "the toughest yet fairest employer-sanction law in the country."

Absolutely!  Talk about making sure that the economic and business landscape will be even and just for all!  By mandating that business use only legal workers, the playing field will be level again.  The analogy is apt - illegals are the steroids of the low-skill business world.  Time to put things straight.

Posted by Skip at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

Much is made of the taxes that illegal immigrants pay into US coffers as they work here in the US.  Often, the slant of the press is one of "oh, isn't that a shame - these undocumented workers will never see that money....it goes right into our Social Security system of which they cannot use!".

Leaving aside the millions of illegals that work under the table (where criminal employers reap a financial boon twice - the below market price wages paid to these illegals being the first and the second being the part of taxes that employers should be paying in conjunction with legal employees), this article from The Oregonian shows the complicity of our Federal government in this whole mess.

A mess that I do lay at the feet of our political elite leaders (who may be neither in the near term future due to their utter disregard of the American people while pandering to the special interest groups advocating for open borders and cheap labor).

On Meet The New Press, we had two interviews this week dealing with immigration - John Hawkins of RightWingNews - to whom I apologize for shamelessly requested a link back to 'Grok!) on the back room goings on in the Senate on the Amnesty Bill and the part that the Chamber of Commerce folks had in this (Amnesty Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, and CoC).

Our other guest was NH conservative activist Jorge Mesa-Tejada who legally emigrated to the US when he was 15, served in the US Marine Corp, became a US citizen, and has played an enormous role as a mentor to grassroots activists here in NH.

Each stressed, in their two topics (the high jinx of our federal Senators / Chamber of Commerce and citizenship) "the rule of law" is under stress.  Without the philosophy remaining strong and enforced, our society would be at great risk.

This article shows this faulty reasoning behind our federal bureacratic nightmare in regards to upholding the rule of law. 

llegal immigrants pump as much as $7 billion in taxes into the Social Security trust fund each year, money that helps pay retirement and disability benefits of U.S. workers. The chances are slim that those undocumented workers will ever see a penny in retirement or other benefits.

Consider the Rule of Law - frankly, it is as it should be - one is not entitled the gains from illegal activities.

Continue reading "Enforcing the Rule of Law in immigration" »

Posted by Skip at 8:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I got a heads up from a loyal reader (H/T: Michael) that there is a bill in the NH house, HB 404, that would declare the entire state of NH to be a sanctuary state.  I have replicated the text of the bill after the jump (bolded is my emphasis).

This bill is being sponsored by Lilly Mesa, a Democrat.  I have sent her an email inviting her to discuss  her bill on Meet The New Press radio show.  At the time of this writing, she has indicated that she will come on Meet The New Press a week from today.

What this bill would mean is that no law enforcement agent - State, county, or local - could ask if a person "of suspicion" is here legally in the country.

As far as I know, there are several schools of thoughts on this:

• Let's punish / embarrass the Feds by not enforcing immigration law at their level (hey, the Feds aren't enforcing the border and going after folks the way they should - we should not be doing their jobs.
• This is an unfunded mandate to NH - if we aren't getting paid to do this, why should do your work?
  
• Hey, illegal immigrants (er, undocumented migrants) are here only to make a better life for themselves - who are we to deny them?  And it is the Christian, humane thing to do!  No person is illegal, and there should not be borders that restrict people from getting a better life.  After all, it's a right, right?
  

The first is rather silly - a petty turf battle.  Frankly, the outcome of this is zip - the Feds haven't effectively  enforced our border since the last "comprehensive immigration reform" back in '86 when the problem was only 3-4 million illegals.  Who in their right mind would think that this line of action would actually work?  This attitude will only make things worse.

The second is merely a variation of the first - let's dig in our heels a bit more and yelp louder.  Empirical results are? The same - do nothing and nothing gets down.  Problem gets worse and festers, gets more expensive to solve later, but hey, who cares....it's somebody else's job!

Both of these are wrong - it takes the most fundamental tenet that has made this country the envy of the world and throws it in with the other garbarge that illegals leave on our southern border as they tresspass. 

I have come to recognize that more and more, people believe that it is only the "professionals" that are supposed to do one thing or another.  They are the ones that are trained for a given job or responsibility - get out of the way and let them do it.  The problem here is that there are generally not enough of the "professionals" to do the jobs right. And I have observed that as government becomes larger and larger, this compartmentalization only increases as well.

In this area, the rule of law, I believe that we all, even as "mere" citizens, have the moral obligation to obey ALL laws.  Add to that, when we see that laws are being broken, we should let those in charge know when laws are being broken.  

The third is the real problem - it is wrong on a lot of different levels:

• We lack the political will
• We should not have sovereigty
• Emotions overrule the law
• We value other cultures more than our own
• We refuse to face up to our problems and take the tough action

What kind of society do we become when it becomes common place to pick and choose what laws we will and will not obey?  Right now, it seems fine for our political leaders to ignore some when it is politically expediant or when it fits their philosophical needs. 

Let's consider all of them from a single perspective - we are supposed to be a country where the "rule of law" rules. Without this philosophy, without adherence to this most basic tenet of our democratic system (arising from protection of private ownership), we will become very much like the dysfunctional and corrupt governments from which many of these illegals come.

What happens when it is another set of laws that others wish to ignore?  What kind of leadership and authority figures do we represent to our youth - that laws don't matter?  Taken to the extreme, this leads to anarchy.

Hey, when does state law get to overrule federal law? When those in charge make that proclaimation and when those in charge of those "superior" or "overriding" remain silent.

This is a dangerous law...

Continue reading "NH - they want to turn us into a sanctuary state?" »

Posted by Skip at 7:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

UPDATE: 

Well, Senator Gregg has his statement ready to go:

WASHINGTON– U.S. Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) today made the following statement regarding today’s cloture vote on the immigration bill. 

 U.S. Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) stated, “The immigration situation in this country is a mess and this bill, which was a work in progress, was our last opportunity in the foreseeable future to take the action necessary to fix this acute problem.

Bullcrap....the only thing that would make that statement true is a lack of political will.  Frankly, the only thing that has to be done to "fix" this problem is if our political leaders had HAD the political will to make sure that the CURRENT laws had been enforced....and Senator Gregg has been around long enough to have helped out. 

It is critical that we get control of our borders, and as a result of language that I included in my amendment, this bill would have dramatically increased the number of border patrol agents and detention beds, and expanded the fencing at the Southern border at a level that would allow us to gain control there.

Fine and dandy.....why cannot he take that now-boilerplate and submit that as a brand new bill?  Is there a rule that says once words have been used, they are automatically unusable in the future (oh wait, they just TRIED that!)? 

 “In addition, we need a functioning guest worker program that allows people to come here and work in jobs that Americans are not available to do, without becoming U.S. citizens.

I only have to bring up the Swift meatpacking plants where illegals were rousted to prove this straw man toast.  THE NEXT DAY, legal American workers were lining up to apply....and the plants were forced to pay higher wages to boot (notice: higher wages - didja get the clue?). 

We also need an employer ID system that makes it clear that when an employee is hired, he or she is here legally.

 Tell you what....start fining (we're talking BIG fines) businesses that break the laws like the illegals they employ, and this will start to be a non-problem.  Make them big enough to bite into profit margins and presto!  Problem gone.

Jail time wouldn't hurt either.....in terms of years, not days. 

Also critical, this legislation would have moved our immigration system forward to encourage capable and highly trained individuals to come to America and contribute to strengthening our economy and culture.  Each of these issues was taken up and addressed in this bill.

We already have that in our current laws.....just stop letting people wade across the Rio Grande and the percentages will flip to the highly educated and skilled workers.

 “That said, I would have opposed the bill as currently drafted because it still had some serious flaws, and it had a long way to go before it was in an acceptable form that could have been passed.  I was hopeful that we could continue to work to make improvements to this bill and move this important debate forward through the amendment process.  However, this approach is no longer available and we will need to find other means to secure our borders and create a workable immigration system.” 

This is the most egregious part - "I was for this war before I was against it....er, against it...for it...".   Even if Senator Sununu was personally in favor of this bill, at least he had the courage of his political convictions to vote straight through.  I'd also say the same for McCain and Graham (although they are both DESPERATELY wrong on this issue, IMHO).

Stand up, take it like a man, and stop the flip-flopping....it makes you sound like Senator Kerry. 

========================= 

Well, this battle is over, but the war is probably not.  The vote for cloture (to close off debate) failed.  With that, Majority Leader Reid has said he will pull the bill.  The shamnesty is dead.....for now.

How did our Senators from NH vote?  Well, here's the complete list, but for Gregg and Sununu:

Senator Gregg (R-NH)      Yea

Senator Sununu (R-NH)   Nay

Translation - Sununu effectively voted to kill the bill.  Gregg voted to keep the amnesty bill alive.

Our motto at the 'Grok is to spank them when they're wrong and thank 'em when they're right.  Thus:

THANK YOU SENATOR SUNUNU!!!!!

Now, where's that paddle.....

Note:  I found it amusing that the Senate phone system crashed from all of the incoming calls.  I tried calling Gregg's office a couple of times, then switched to NH offices....I had to call three of his offices before I got through.  I was polite (no need to be otherwise) and told the lady who answered that I would appreciate the Senator to vote to kill the bill.  I asked if he announced his decision (this was about a half hour before the vote) and she said that he had not told them what he was going to do.

I'm quite sure that we'll talk about this on Meet The New Press this Saturday - consider this an open invitation to both Senators Gregg and Sununu to call in (or, better yet, come to the studio) for the show!

Complete list, last name alphabetical order, after the jump

Continue reading "Amnesty Bill update" »

Posted by Skip at 11:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 8:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

You know, just a little while ago the Republicans excoriated the Democrats over porking up the supplemental Defense bill (mostly for the Global War on Terror, especially Iraq).  They decried that votes were bought via $24 Billion worth of pork (some of which is being brought home by our Dem congressional Reps Hodes and Shea-Porter - both of which vigorously defend their actions).

Pork is pork, whether for vote buying or for secret / hidden earmarks.

Question for you - this Senate bill was made $4.4 Billion more expensive just to get cloture to pass. 

Does the phrase 'glass houses" have any ring for the amnesty favoring Republican Senators?  Go ahead, YOU try to convince people that the Republican Party is any better than the Dems after this vote purchasing fiasco in the making. 

Are we ordinary citizens going to get any more value out of this higher expense?  Hardly - the wall that was passed into law still is not built (not even much of an effort being done) and the only thing that is value added is 370 extra pages of amendments being handled in a most un-Senate type way.

No, once again the Republicans, including our own Senator Gregg, have let we common folks down.  Almost instant protection from deportation, no back taxes due to the IRS, cheaper tuition at state universities than I can get, less qualification for Social Security than I (16 quarters for them vs 40 for me), the ability to cross the borders without repercussions and I would be denied if I don't have the proper paperwork - what's not to like if you are an illegal alien?

And the national GOP and its leaders cannot understand why we at the local level are boiling mad?  Mark my words - there is going to be a heavy fine to be paid - both monetary and voting wise - by Republicans for a long time to come.  I, along with many, will not lift a finget to help those that hurt us. 

Posted by Skip at 8:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A loyal reader sent this to me a little while ago (H/T: Ron)...while I kind of figured these kind of numbers, it was surprising to be reminded how bad the numbers are.  And to see where the numbers came from - The L.A. Times (which seems to prefer an open borders policy):

1. 40% of all workers in L.A. County ( L.A. County has 10.2 million people) are working for  cash and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal immigrants working without a green card.
 2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.
 
 3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens
 
 4. Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on  Medi-Cal , whose births were paid for by taxpayers.
 
 5. Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally.
 
 6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.
 
 7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.
 
 8. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.
 
 9. 21 radio stations in L.A. are Spanish speaking.
 
 10. In L.A. County 5.1 million people speak English, 3.9 million speak Spanish.
      (There are 10.2 million people in L.A. County ).
 
 (All of the above are from the Los Angeles Times)
 
Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but 29% are on welfare.
 
29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.  

Posted by Skip at 8:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The latest shot at 'comprehensive immigration reform" is still making its way throught he legislative process.  While I oppose this bill on moral grounds ("no citizenship for lawbreakers - I have to suffer the consequences of my actions if I break the law ->why shouldn't they??) as it sets up special treatment for folks that should not be here, I also oppose this law for the tremendous hypocrisy that our political elite in Washington are trying to pull.

As can be seen at various other blogs out there, a dirty little secret is beginning to become known -> we cannot process all those Z-visa applications int eh time frames being mandated even if we wanted to in (which is basically a "get in free card").

I feel for the clerks that will have to deal with crush of folks coming in trying to get that Z-visa, especially if many of the applicants use false documents. Kinda like the poor Border Patrol folks in the video below (click on bailout - I didn't want to spoil it...):

Posted by Skip at 12:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 

Guys,
 
Saw this today and thought you might find it interesting that BOTH Hodes and Shea-Porter voted against this portion of HR 2638 (Tancredo Amendment).  It's Roll Call 485 from Friday's session if you need to look it up:
. 
H.AMDT.294 (A045)
Amends: H.R.2638
Sponsor: Rep Tancredo, Thomas G. [CO-6] (offered 6/15/2007)

.
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: An amendment numbered 7 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit funds to be used in contravention of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.  

.

What this basically means is that the Amendment Tancredo submitted (and which passed at least in the House) is that any so-called "sanctuary city" which harbors illegals would not receive DHS funding for 2008.

.

Some of those cities include such places as Phoenix, Los Angeles, New Haven, CT, Cambridge, MA, but even such places as Portland ME, Salt Lake City, and Jackson Hole, Wyoming.  Fortunately, no cities or town in NH are currently listed (per OJJPAC), but how long will it be until we DO have to do something about this?

.

Guys, this is one of the main reasons I left California--liberal policies which gave a damn about good, honest, hard-working, tax-paying CITIZENS, and gave our rights to those who crossed our borders illegally, filling our schools, prisons, hospital emergency rooms, and roads, all the while demanding more and more, which the socialists in Sacramento were all to happy to provide.

.

These two (Hodes and Porter) have GOT to go.  I'm not letting either one of them get away with this.

.

Randy R.

Posted by Doug at 8:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Reese: Listen. And understand. That terminator is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever...

I asked my source [ed. note: a GOP Senate aid] if his boss has been hearing from his constituents on this bill and what the for and against ratio was. He said that they have received thousands and thousands of calls and the ratio was something like 95%-98% against the bill.

The White House argued the setback was not fatal for Bush's top domestic priority and urged Reid to allow the bill to continue to be debated and eventually receive a vote.

.

"He obviously is disappointed by the setback," White House counselor Dan Bartlett said of Bush. "But based on the latest information we have, there still is a good chance this bill could go forward."

Whether Bush can revive the legislation may depend largely on whether he can soften some of the differences between key components of his party's base, including the corporate community and social conservatives.

Posted by Doug at 10:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Our friend Pat (AnkleBitingPundits,GG contributor, and co-host of Meet The New Press with Doug and me) keeps trying to persuade Doug and me that we are the outliers in the brouhaha over illegal immigration - most Americans want it and cites poll results.  Pat is real good - as a political consultant, he lives and breathes giving and reading polls.  While I've had stats and higher math (one doesn't study biochem and computer science without it), I'm rusty.

Well, I know that the polls are very dependent on how the questions are couched and where in the poll they are asked.  But sometimes real world actions trump polls - money talks....and talks louder when it goes away:

The Republican National Committee, hit by a grass-roots donors' rebellion over President Bush's immigration policy, has fired all 65 of its telephone solicitors, Ralph Z. Hallow will report Friday in The Washington Times.

Faced with an estimated 40 percent fall-off in small-donor contributions and aging phone-bank equipment that the RNC said would cost too much to update, Anne Hathaway, the committee's chief of staff, summoned the solicitations staff last week and told them they were out of work, effective immediately, the fired staffers told The Times.

The national committee yesterday confirmed the firings that took place more than a week ago, but denied that the move was motivated by declining donor response to phone solicitations.

"The phone-bank employees were terminated," RNC spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt wrote by e-mail in response to questions sent by The Times. "This was not an easy decision. The first and primary motivating factor was the state of the phone bank technology, which was outdated and difficult to maintain. The RNC was advised that we would soon need an entire new system to remain viable."

Fired employees acknowledged that the committee's phone equipment was outdated, but said a sharp drop-off in donations "probably" hastened the end of the RNC's in-house phone-bank operation.

"Last year, my solicitations totaled $164,000, and this year the way they were running for the first four months, they would total $100,000 by the end of 2007," said one fired phone bank solicitor who asked not to be identified.

There has been a sharp decline in contributions from RNC phone solicitations, another fired staffer said, reporting that many former donors flatly refuse to give more money to the national party if Mr. Bush and the Senate Republicans insist on supporting what these angry contributors call "amnesty" for illegal aliens.

"Everyone donor in 50 states we reached has been angry, especially in the last month and a half, and for 99 percent of them immigration is the No. 1 issue," said the former employee.

The RNC spokeswoman denied that the committee has seen any drop-off in contributions.

"Any assertion that overall donations have gone down is patently false," Miss Schmitt said. "We continue to out raise our Democrat counterpart by a substantive amount (nearly double)."

Politics is politics, and a major part of that is spin....  Even though I am a life long Repub, I'm mad too!   While I have to admit that my circle of friends is self-selected, they too, are not happy campers.

Part of politics (that I have yet to learn...do I really want to??) is "parsing" - carefully selecting and using words for very particular nuances.  While I have not done homework on this yet, I do wonder if the word "donations" that Miss Schmitt uses is meant directly for just those donations from the phone bank or donations in general?

Anyways, it does seem to lend a bit of credence to the position Doug and I hold - why give money to folks that are acting contrary to our best interests, that do not uphold the rule of law - the laws that we already have?

(H/T: Lucienne.com and LaShawn Barber)

Posted by Skip at 8:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Our political elite chuckleheads (and I am going to use that word on the 'Grok for any politician that continues this charade of this "comprehensive immigration bill") think that we are the morons eh?

Gee, thanks President Bush.....with this pronouncement, I think you've overspent your political capital with conservatives:

"I’m sure you’ve heard some of the talk out there about people defining the bill. It’s clear they hadn’t read the bill. They’re speculating about what the bill says, and they’re trying to rile up people’s emotions," he told an audience at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, near Brunswick. "If you want to kill the bill, if you don’t want to do what’s right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it, you can use it to frighten people. Or you can show leadership and solve this problem once and for all."

Go ahead, explain this little item and why you are letting a foreign government aid its illegal immigrants suck off the teat of the American taxpayer!!!  Does this give you an idea as to WHY conservatives have now throwing in the towel and picking up pitchforks?

First came the Mexican consular photo identification cards that closely resembled U.S. driver's licenses and allowed immigrants, including those in the country illegally, to establish credit and apply for government services.

Then the Mexican government worked with the Treasury Department to make sure the U.S. banking system remained open to immigrants.  [er, where's the word "illegal!! -Skip]

Now Mexican consulates in the U.S. are taking on an even more formidable challenge: the healthcare system.

A program called Ventanillas de Salud, or Health Windows, aims to provide Mexican immigrants with basic health information, cholesterol checks and other preventive tests. It also makes referrals to U.S. hospitals, health centers and government programs where patients can get care without fear of being turned over to immigration authorities.

Get this - instead of taking care of its own citizens, a foreign government is actively spending our money for the care of its citizens!  And our government does nothing?  Would they do the same for our citizens (nope - go read their Constitution and laws - no reciprocation there!) 

If my tax money is going to support health care for the poor, I want it to be for the LEGAL residents and citizens of MY country.  I do not want it to go to those that break laws in coming here and then steal our resources that do not belong to them.

When do we start to hear the outrage of "why aren't the home countries of these illegals supporting and taking care of their own people?".  

And with the Republican elites pushing for this illegal alien bill, then they wonder why donations are down?  Are they that blind?

Hernandez, a housecleaner, and her boyfriend, a gardener, said they rarely go to the doctor because of treatment costs and fear of deportation. But after a visit to the Mexican Consulate last week to get her consular ID card, Hernandez now knows she can get affordable insurance and free access to some government health services.

"Health-related issues are a very important absent piece of information," said Ruben Beltran, Mexican consul general in Los Angeles. "We're filling the blanks…. The consulate is the prime location to disseminate that information to the Mexican community."

Yup, the Mexican government is actively assisting their citizens, illegally in the country, to get free help on our dime?  How come I have to pay for mine?  How come others I know cannot receive this benefit?

When's the last time the Mexican government done the same thing for the illegal aliens in their country?  Oh yeah, right...they don't....they meet them at the border.....with guns.

"It facilitates people remaining in the country illegally," said Ira Mehlman, spokesman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform. "Clearly it is a policy of the Mexican government … to get all the institutions in the U.S. to provide services to their citizens who are living here illegally."

Posted by Skip at 8:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

UPDATE: I just rec'd this from the Hays Daily News:

The article we ran, we found out subsequently, was not written by the author listed, but was snagged off the internet. If you can find it again, it's yours, but don't source our paper.

I apologize for the error, but I think it's still a good article regardless of its source.

from the HAYS DAILY NEWS, Norton, Ks.

We need to show more sympathy for these people. They travel miles in the heat, they risk their lives crossing a border,they don't get paid enough wages, they do jobs that others won't do or are afraid to do, they live in crowed conditions among a people who speak a different language, they rarely see their families, and they face adversity all day every day.

I'm not talking about illegal Mexicans, I'm talking about our troops. Doesn't it seem strange that the Democrats are willing to lavish all kinds of social benefits on illegals, but don't support our troops and are now threatening to defund them?

Unfortunately, this truth hurts, huh? Many Americans can't even get behind other Americans, but we're supposed to jump on the bandwagon to reward illegals?

While I'd like to think that I'm as sympathetic as the next guy, does feeling sorry for someone mean we have to act on it by not only rewarding them for breaking our laws, but by also enabling the lawbreakers rather than holding them accountable? People tend not to appreciate anything they get for nothing, but more importantly, what's this mean for our already underfunded social security system if we legalize millions of illegals?

As a concerned aging baby boomer myself along with millions of others, these low-wage earners will no doubt never be able to pay enough into social security like the rest of us have over a long lifetime to properly fund their own portion of their social security retirement benefits prior to their starting to receive them.

Let's see, that's an estimated 12 million times, oh let's just pick, $600 a month equals $7,200,000,000 times 12 months equals $86,400,000,000 per year paid out in social security benefits. Wow, and you thought the war was expensive!

Well, supposedly we can't find illegals to deport them although I hear that the majority apparently work in agriculture. Perhaps we could start checking the fields first. They seem to be very visible to me when I'm out in California on business or in Michigan at our vacation home where the cherry-picking industry hires them in droves. Hey, even a neighbor of mine brags about her illegal cheap housekeeper/babysitter from Guatemala so I could perhaps help round her up for deportation.

Then perhaps we could go out to Long Island to the rich and famous people's homes, where I'm thinking we could round up another large population of illegals.  They seem to be very visible to me but maybe it's because I try to always have my eyes open and pay attention most of the time.

Here in NH, we could possibly divert our law enforcement officers to checking papers rather than checking to see if adults are wearing seatbelts? I wrongly thought the police probably had their hands full with domestic violence, child abuse, murder, rape, robberies and other unseemly crimes to solve, but since they obviously have mucho time on their hands for seat belt gastopo duties, they could perhaps use their time for paper checking illegals instead?

Hey, Doug, would you please add my name to the letter to President Bush?

Now about really supporting our troops......  

Posted by Judy at 4:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington, DC 20500

.
Dear President Bush,

.

I hate to disagree with the President but in this instance I must.

.

In 2000 and again n 2004 I not only supported you I in fact spent more time and effort on your re-election bid than my own campaign as State Senator in New Hampshire. I hauled piles of signs to your supporters and erected dozens of 4 by 8 foot Bush / Cheney signs, and replaced them when they were vandalized. My car still sports a “Support President Bush and our troops” sticker (which has by now destroyed the paint I am certain). I still support you on nearly every subject.

.

Here comes the “However”.

.

However on the matter of the immigration bill now before Congress I cannot agree that those of us opposing it are spouting “empty political rhetoric”. Sealing the borders – yes! Do that, it is essential! Create a guest worker program – yes. Do that so the businesses that need the laborers can hire them legally and the workers can be here legally! But the plan to deal with the people who are here illegally by granting them “Z visas” and a “path to citizenship” no! Unequivocally no!

.

The major flaw is that it assumes the people who came here illegally want to be citizens and want to be Americans. It assumes they want to assimilate into our culture and learn to be good citizens. It assumes that people who broke the laws to get here will want to pay a fine and jump thru hoops to become good citizens. I ask you to show me proof that they want this.

 I believe that at least a large portion of the current illegal aliens in this country have no desire to become citizens of the USA and they have no intention of assimilating into the melting pot. They will take their Z visas and ignore the fines and hoops. They will stay here, we will support them with our Medicaid, Medicare, and social security taxes. Then another horde of illegal aliens will again assault our borders because they will understand that this current amnesty plan, as have the others in the past, will be followed by yet another amnesty plan that “is not an amnesty plan”. They will also get to stay here and become legal because another congress and another President will say that “we cannot control the borders, our businesses need the workers, they do the jobs Americans won’t do … yada yada yada.

.

The words of the supporters of this latest amnesty bill are the rhetoric, Mr. President. You can dress this pig up and put lipstick on her but she is still a pig! Amnesty is what it is. When you allow someone to break the law and be absolved of the consequences that is amnesty.

.

This is exactly what I read the text of section 601 of the bill to mean. Immediately upon signing this bill you would be granting to virtually every person who came here illegally benefits simply for having broken our laws. The penalty – the fine – if it were ever actually imposed would only be imposed upon those who chose to pursue citizenship. If they were content to simply become legal immigrants – they would have no penalty, they would not be required to pay a fine, they would not be required to return home, they would not have to go to the back of the line of people wishing to come here legally. There would be no penalty and further – the bill grants them due process rights which would make it even harder to deport them if the other sections of this bill – the so called triggers – never happen. These due process rights would make it less likely that any of the 12 million lawbreakers here now would ever be deported and it would virtually guarantee that another wave of illegal immigrants will follow in their footsteps.

.

This is not empty political rhetoric. This is legitimate opposition to a bill that if passed by Congress and signed by you will forever change the culture of this great country – and not for the better.

.

Please Mr. President do not push this bill thru and do not sign it if it passes.

.

Sincerely,

.

Hon. Robert K. Boyce
Former NH State Senator
Alton Bay, NH 03810

Posted by Doug at 9:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

<odeo player here>

Doug,

.

I am right there with you and Skip on Immigration.  The biggest problem in this nation is enforcement of our laws. As a parent, I am teaching my children the importance of following the rules of this nation.  I don't think it is too much to ask of people from other nations to do the same.  If you want to come to our country, you need to follow our laws. And to our government officials, enforce the laws we have and seal our border first.

.

Gail in Stratham

GET HERE LEGAL & PAY YOUR TAXES. NO GIVING MONEY FOR JUST SHOWING UP.

My goodness Doug, your friend Pat is so invested in McCain that he can't listen to reason.  When I was listening today, he was the one who was getting hot under the collar - trying to defend that immigration bill.  All of the defenses I have heard so far don't hold any water.  The idea that provisions would be "triggered" only when control of the border is "certified" by the president is really frightening! My understanding is that certification would be triggered not by border control, but by the hiring of border control agents and other spending. So, Bush could let the invasion of our country go forward as soon as the money is appropriated.  And if Bush didn't do so, we would have to worry even more of a Democrat getting the presidency. 
. 
I did think it was very funny that Pat was so willing to accept a poll by CBS and The NY Times.  I wonder how many times in the past he has trusted them?
. 
I remember one of you mentioning the following scenario, so please pass the following story on to Pat.  I didn't see his email address on the web site.
. 
Denise C.

Let's say I break into your house
. 
A lady wrote the best letter in the Editorials in ages!!!  It explains things better than all the baloney you hear on TV.

.

Her point:

.

Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration.
.

Certain people are angry that the US might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely.

.

Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests. Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave.

.

But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors.  I've done all the things you don't like to do.  I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house) .

.

According to the protesters:

.

You are Required to let me stay in your house You are Required to add me to your family's insurance plan You are Required to Educate my kids You are Required to Provide other benefits to me & to my family (my husband will do all of your yard work because he is also hard-working and honest, except for that breaking in part).

.

If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my RIGHT to be there.

.
It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself.  I'm a hard-working and honest, person, except for well, you know, I did break into your house...

.

And what a deal it is for me!!!

.

I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of cold,  uncaring, selfish, prejudiced, and bigoted behavior.

.

Oh yeah, I DEMAND that you to learn MY LANGUAGE!!! so you can communicate with me.

.

Why can't people see how ridiculous this is?! Only in America . if you agree, pass it on ( in English ). Share it if you see the value of  it.

.

If not blow it off......... along with your future Social Security funds, and a lot of other things.

Doug:

.

The last two presidential elections were very tight.  The next one will not be that close.  The Democrats will win.  That's because the Republican party is not unified. When I heard Pat Hynes debating you and Skip on ILLEGAL immigration, he reminded me of James Carville or George Stephanopoulos. He was totally convinced he was right and acted like you were a nut case. If enough Republicans share his view, we are very divided.

.

Steve

Posted by Doug at 9:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Senator Ted Kennedy's third attempt at "comprehesive immigration reform" has certainly drawn a LOT of attention.  Given that the first two attempts (1965 and 1986) have been abject failures, why are people thinking he's the end all be all again? 

Unfortunately, like many government projects, politicians take little heed to actual past results in judging what to do...

...or not do.  From NR Online, John Fonte (Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute)

I like this phrase (not):

Deputy White House chief of staff, Joel Kaplan, a key negotiator in the Senate immigration bill, told the Washington Post that there are “things in this bill that Republicans and conservatives have wanted for a long time.”

The question I pose is that while there might be, I've been around long enougy to know that in the area of solving illegal immigration over the last 40 years, politicians have made the situation worse, not better.  Every time, they've thrown up their hands and said "hey, there's too many to deport".

Gee, who put us into this mess, and why should we trust them now?  Look at the track record - ain't too hot now, is it?  Every time they promised to fix things in the last 40 years, it has gotten worse.

And that may be why the supporters of this bill just don't get it - most of us, if brutally honest, really don't or can't trust them in this area.

Anyways, here's Mr. Fonte's list of things conservative really don't want:

 One-day amnesty: Once the bill is enacted illegal aliens can apply for and receive probationary legal status immediately. Criminal/terrorist background checks are required to be completed by the “end of the next business day.” Illegal Monday, legal Tuesday, now that’s almost instant amnesty.

We have Armed Forces members that have been waiting up to a full year to get their clearances to man sensitive areas.  ICE itself says that it cannot account for over 600,000 fugitives - illegal aliens who have not returned for deportation hearings (gee, whoda thunk?).  And the bill does not account for phony paperwork presented in this area, does it?

Tax amnesty: Unlike last year’s Senate amnesty bill, which required the illegal immigrants to pay three of five years back taxes, this year’s bill does not require them to pay any back taxes. Senator Kennedy wanted them to pay some taxes, but the White House insisted upon a complete tax amnesty.

Once again, illegal aliens get special treatment not available to CITIZENS!  It was bad enough when illegals only had to pay 3 out of 5 past years IRS taxes.....now -> NOTHING!

And President Bush has to wonder why his support, and support of Republicans, is going into the toilet!

Add to it the ten states that illegally (against Federal law) offer in state tuition rates that I, as a Citizen in another state, cannot get.

Faux enforcement “triggers”: The so-called “enforcement” measures do not require that the border be secure. They only require that a few thousand more Border Patrol agents be hired (not deployed); that about half (370 miles) of the already authorized 700 miles of border fence be built; and that a few other bureaucratic inputs are announced. Then DHS will authorize the second phase of the amnesty by awarding the Z visas. Can anyone imagine Michael Chertoff declaring that these phony “triggers” have not been met?

'65 and '86 laws promised stuff too.....it never happened.  Many of us are stunned by the hypocrisy of spending billions to secure airliners and fight Islamofascists, but won't secure the border.....sigh...

Weak employer verification: This is not the long-promised “tamper proof” identity for employment. No serious fingerprint digital system is required, massive fraud will continue.

Oh yeah, the secure "consular matricula" IDs - or try phone SS cards!

Yup, check this one off!

No exit system for guest workers: The guest workers are supposed to be “temporary” and required to eventually leave. But there is no way to enforce their leaving because there is still no Entry-Exit system in place.

Sure, I believe this.  We can't even track those on student visas and get them out of the country when they expire - all of a sudden, we are supposed to believe that we can now successfully track 10 - 30 million new entries into this database?

Hey, I'm in IT - haven't seen a heck of a lot of HUGE Federal  IT projects  come in on time and on budget.  Do these chuckleheads (I seem to be growing fond of that word lately...) in Congress understand the magnitude of this project? 

We are talking YEARS and millions (if not Billions) to get this working - even with good people!

Trust criminal gang members: As former Ashcroft deputy Kris Kobach notes there are more than 30,000 illegal immigrant gang members “trafficking in drugs, arms, and people.” They get a Z (amnesty) Visa if they simply sign a “renunciation of gang affiliation.” I guess the Senate-administration “negotiators” trust these M-13 guys.

Thankfully, an amendment has already been put forth to seal this loophole.

Note:  if the original "couple of days" of debate had be followed, this would be law and NOT fixed!

“Section 136: Nothing in this section may be construed to provide additional authority to any State or local entity to enforce Federal immigration laws.” Why not? The illegal aliens who were part of the Fort Dix terrorist conspiracy were stopped by local law enforcement 56 times but their immigration status was never checked. This bill does nothing to ensure cooperation between local and federal officials in combating terrorism.

My feeling - we are supposed to be a nation ruled by the rule of law.  Supposedly, we do not have the ability to pick and choose those laws that we wish to follow or not.

Yet, once again, there are local city Mayors and councils (San Francisco's Newsome comes to mind) that believe their local ruling over rule Federal law.

And then politicians wonder why the public at large have such a dim view of them?  Such an example they they set - I get to ignore this law because of who I am, or who we are.

And then, of course, the Feds turn a blind eye......Thanks President Bush AND our Congressional leaders!

No real merit or skills-based (point) system instead current extended family chain migration is accelerated: The chain migration of extended family members will continue and be greatly expanded for the next eight years and only then would a skills-based merit (points) system supposedly go into effect. That is, if you really believe that after eight years a skills system would be adopted against strong business and liberal opposition.

Costs over $2 Trillion: Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation has estimated that the costs to American taxpayers for low-skilled immigrant households is $19, 588 per household, per year. The lifetime costs for the Senate amnesty are estimated to be over 2 trillion dollars.

Posted by Skip at 8:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

THANK YOU, SENATOR SUNUNU!

Sununu said he would oppose opening debate in a vote scheduled for late yesterday. He said a more limited bill, focusing on security, should be considered and passed before lawmakers try to reform how the government deals with illegal immigrants.

.

Sununu recalled his opposition to last year's plan, and said, "I still have some strong concerns."

.

He said the new bill "allows anyone who is here illegally as of January 2007 to remain in the country. It doesn't require any of those illegal immigrants to return to their homelands.

.

"It doesn't matter what you call it," he said. "It's a problem, and if you allow anyone who is here illegally to remain in the country, you run the risk of encouraging others to break the law in the future. The effort to implement a new visa program and deal with 12 million new immigrants is going to put pressure on a system that should be focusing on helping those who have played by the rules."

Posted by Doug at 9:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Bush administration insisted on a little-noticed change in the bipartisan Senate immigration bill that would enable 12 million undocumented residents to avoid paying back taxes or associated fines to the Internal Revenue Service, officials said.

A provision requiring payment of back taxes had been in the initial version of a bill proposed by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat. But the administration called for the provision to be removed due to concern that it would be too difficult to figure out which illegal immigrants owed back taxes.

Posted by Doug at 8:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From Yahoo News:

France: no mass legalizing of immigrants

PARIS - France's new immigration minister ruled out the possibility of legalizing undocumented immigrants on masse, saying Monday that government policy would be firm and pragmatic.

Brice Hortefeux heads the Ministry of Immigration and National Identity — newly created by President Nicolas Sarkozy to manage the inflow of immigrants and protect French values and cohesion.

"We have to put aside massive legalization. It doesn't work and it penalizes, even immigrants," Hortefeux said on Europe 1 radio. Policy, he added, would be guided by "firmness and humanism" with "lots of pragmatism."

He said he planned to adhere to the policy of deporting illegal immigrants from France. The number of deportees was expected to reach some 25,000 this year, and Hortefeux said he would ensure that figure was reached.

Instead of giving up.....

Posted by Skip at 8:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I AM SEETHING!!!!

The 'Grok ain't a happy place right now, and it seems that MANY conservatives have joined this angry party. 

I've been traveling all day and have only had the chance to listen to snippets to what the Senate has done to us regular folks but it basically comes down to this:

THEY SOLD US OUT!

As I make the normal rounds of the blog and news sites, I am getting madder and madder as I see more and more parts to what is in this bill. A "Z-visa" - c'mon, what the heck is that!  And a silly $5K fine?  Some folks pay more than than to beat a DUI charge, and we are going to give away US Citizenship for that lowely amount????

Earned citizenship my eye!  This is the THIRD illegal immigration bill I've lived through (60's, 80's, and now) and there is nothing about earned about this.  As far as I am concerned, you EARN it either by following our laws concerning immigration, or serve in the armed forces (if you are willing to put your life on the line for this country, you DESERVE citizenship!).  Waving your own flag and demanding citizenship here?

No. 

And you know what the common feature is with all of the previous bills?  You are correct - good ole' Teddy K.  When are we going to learn is that this guy has screwed up our immigration policy THREE TIMES now.  

More to come later......I'll leave it at this - boy, our remaining Republican representation to Congress (Gregg and Sunnunu) had better not have voted for this crap - if they have, they might as well resign now 'cause they will have a slim to none chance of re-election now.  The reinvigorated Dems are already shooting at Sunnunu, and if half the Repubs (we conservatives) abandon him, he's toast already.......and Gregg may not be in much better shape...

Morons....

Posted by Skip at 5:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Now, compared to Doug, I've blogged little about the Prez '08 campaigns so far.  Given that the campaigns are now moving into the next higher gear, perhaps it's time for this conservative to start wading in.

Illegal immigration is one of my hot buttons.  So is the jr. Senator from MA (my birth state) for his flip-flops.  Well, here's sorta of a new twofer take on this as the Boston Herald is reporting some more stuff on Mitt Romney:

Immigration stance improv: From Mitt, another dubious act

Add immigration to the long list of hesitations conservatives ought to have about Mitt Romney.

What he thinks ought to be done about the millions of illegal immigrants already in the country depends on whether you asked him POC (pre-official candidacy) or AOC (after-official candidacy).

Back in 1994, when the U.S. Senate, not the Oval Office, was in Romney’s sights, he said in those now infamous (on YouTube anyway) debates with Sen. Edward Kennedy: “I do not believe that we should deny all services to people who come here from across the border.”

Continue reading "Not good - Is Mitt just the Repub version of Kerry?" »

Posted by Skip at 8:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

That's so HARSH, so NOT NICE, it just cripples the argument...it .....it....just shouldn't be used!

Yeah, right.  Let's just say this is another attempt a la "illegal immigrant" to "undocumented migrant".  What maroon would really fall for yet another attempt? 

This one is certainly trying to make it happen! 

TALLAHASSEE -- A state legislator whose district is home to thousands of Caribbean immigrants wants to ban the term "illegal alien" from the state's official documents.

"I personally find the word 'alien' offensive when applied to individuals, especially to children," said Sen. Frederica Wilson, D-Miami. "An alien to me is someone from out of space."

And frankly, I don't care a hoot if it is offensive to you personally or not.  For I resent and find extremely offensive that a public official will not condemn those that break our laws.  Papering that over by trying to mis-use language to bury a problem.

And she should get a dictionary too.  And then read it. 

She has introduced a bill providing that: "A state agency or official may not use the term 'illegal alien' in an official document of the state." There would be no penalty for using the words.

I'm no lawyer, but...

Continue reading "Well, let's just not use that word, shall we?" »

Posted by Skip at 8:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

On the road again....hotel again...USA Today again.

This time, USA Today is papering over the illegal acts committed by illegal immigrants and once again focuses on the problems that "fractured" families face now that some parents and families got picked up in the raids by the Feds at the Swift meatpacking plants in Iowa.

You remember, the place where  

This is nothing more (and certainly not less) than simple emotional blackmail.  In this case, the tactic is to use the suffering of some to affect the emotions and heartstrings of the general public in an attempt to sway public perception.

The problem with this tactic is that the USA Today reporter, Judy Keen, seemingly believes that emotions trump the rule of law.

MARSHALLTOWN, Iowa — When José Mora tucks his 7-year-old niece into bed at night, she often asks, "Where's my mommy?"

He doesn't want to say that her mother is in a Des Moines jail awaiting a hearing that could result in her being deported to Mexico.

My response is "what kind of parent puts their children at risk by doing illegal things?"  Yet, that fact seems absolutely absent in this whole discussion.

Continue reading "Actions have consequences - even in Iowa" »

Posted by Skip at 8:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Exercising the First    by Doug Lambert

Got Imagination?

In the official report of the 9-11 Commission, one of the major concerns raised was that of a lack of imagination on the part of those whose job it is to think about such things. Page 346 of the report states, “Since the Pearl Harbor attack of 1941, the intelligence community has devoted generations of effort to understanding the problem of forestalling a surprise attack. Rigorous analytic methods were developed, focused in particular on the Soviet Union, and several leading practitioners within the intelligence community discussed them with us. These methods have been articulated in many ways, but almost all seem to have at least four elements in common: (1) think about how surprise attacks might be launched; (2) identify telltale indicators connected to the most dangerous possibilities; (3) where feasible, collect intelligence on these indicators; and (4) adopt defenses to deflect the most dangerous possibilities or at least trigger an earlier warning.” So what was the problem with this time tested system?

.

Section 11.1 of the report concludes: “The methods for detecting and then warning of surprise attack that the U.S. government had so painstakingly developed in the decades after Pearl Harbor did not fail; instead, they were not really tried. They were not employed to analyze the enemy that, as the twentieth century closed, was most likely to launch a surprise attack directly against the United States.” It seems that, after the end of the Cold War, everybody, including those who shouldn’t have, turned a blind eye to the dangers of the world. Nobody apparently saw anything but peace and love and happiness. America took a collective holiday from history, which ended on September 11th, 2001.

.

In the famous ancient Chinese text, “The Art of Warfare”, Sun-Tzu writes, “The ultimate skill in taking up a strategic position is to have no form. If your position is formless, the most carefully concealed spies will not be able to get a look at it, and the wisest counselors will not be able to lay plans against it.” The classic military guidebook reminds the reader that, “Warfare is the art of deceit. Therefore, when able, seem to be unable; when ready, seem unready; when nearby, seem far away; and when far away, seem near. …Attack where he is not prepared; go by way of places where it would never occur to him you would go.” Again from The 9-11 Commission Report: “We believe the 9/11 attacks revealed four kinds of failures: in imagination, policy, capabilities, and management.” Imagination.

Continue reading "This day in history: Tet Offensive. Could it happen again?" »

Posted by Doug at 8:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

(H/T: The Washington Times)

Alien hiring fine fails on Hill

Well, that's what the headline says, but there is good news on the illegal immigration front - it's a start!

Senate Democrats quashed a proposal yesterday that would have dramatically increased civil fines on employers who hire illegal aliens.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, offered the amendment to the bill now being debated that would increase the federal minimum wage.

Ridding the economy of illegal aliens, he argued, would do far more to help low-income wage earners than simply raising the minimum wage. Not only do aliens displace U.S. citizens in the work force, he said, they also artificially suppress wages.

OK, one down - too bad. But now that it has been shown true that illegals depress wages (remember the meatpacking plants that ICE raided?  The line circled the block at LEGAL residents and citizens lined up around the block to sign up for the jobs that were "vacated").  So Americans will do the work - that single action pushed up the wages at those plants up a buck an hour almost overnight!

It is my contention that we do not have to round up all of the illegals forceably. All that has to be done is to use the "IRS philosophy"!  Prosocute and deport some; many will then will leave on their own (as proved in any others). 

The other tactic is to dry up the incentives that attract illegals in the first place.  They are here for the jobs, but by putting those employers using illegals on notice that if caught breaking the law by hiring them, there will be severe consequences.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican, offered the amendment to the bill now being debated that would increase the federal minimum wage.

Ridding the economy of illegal aliens, he argued, would do far more to help low-income wage earners than simply raising the minimum wage. Not only do aliens displace U.S. citizens in the work force, he said, they also artificially suppress wages.

"Our whole purpose of the minimum-wage act is to increase the wages of working Americans, particularly low-skilled workers," Mr. Sessions said. "That's a noble goal."

Well, I'm not impressed with using law to raise the minimum wage...

Continue reading "I'd reallly want both, but I'll take one!" »

Posted by Skip at 8:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

My attitude towards people that do this?

Al-Arian begins hunger strike to protest 'government harassment'

TAMPA -- A former college professor who pleaded guilty to aiding a Palestinian terrorist group has begun a hunger strike to protest "continued government harassment," his supporters said.

Sami Al-Arian stopped eating after being held in contempt for refusing to testify before a grand jury in Virginia, the Tampa Bay Coalition for Justice and Peace said in a news release Tuesday.

Al-Arian, who has less than 18 months left on a 57-month sentence for aiding the Palestinian Islamic Jihad with nonviolence activities, was found guilty of contempt in November in federal court in Alexandria, Va.

Let them.  And this one?  Double.

Posted by Skip at 8:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I really chuckled at this one - the police WERE there when you needed them!  From The Washington Times:

BALTIMORE -- Federal agents taking a break from an unrelated assignment yesterday arrested 24 illegal aliens at a Fells Point 7-Eleven after the men attempted to solicit "underground" employment from the agents. 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were stopped in the convenience store parking lot when the group of Hispanic men approached the agents' unmarked vehicles, ICE spokesman Marc Raimondi said.

Officials said "several" agents were approached, but they declined to say how many.

The agents, members of an ICE fugitive operations team conducting a mission targeting illegal aliens, determined that all 24 men assembled at the store were illegal aliens and brought them to an ICE holding facility in Baltimore, Mr. Raimondi said.

Hey, this works GREAT!  More please!  Faster!  But of course, there are those that just have to try to spin it

The nonprofit immigrant-advocacy group CASA of Maryland called the arrests an "illegal raid" that was beyond ICE's authority.

Er, I guess I would allow that it wasn't a raid....how can it be when the perps walk right to the vehicle?  A walk-by? 

"Asking a bunch of people about their immigration status is well beyond the confines of a specific warrant," CASA spokeswoman Kim Propeack said.

Not all arrests need a warrant.  Would these same nay-sayers, trying to protect these law-breakers, say the same thing if they saw another type of law broken before their very eyes? 

CASA officials invited other immigrant advocates and faith leaders to protest the arrests, which they say unfairly targeted Hispanics, and call for reforms to the country's immigration system. "We're making it more difficult for people to be good," said the Rev. Robert Wojtek, pastor of neighboring St. Michael and St. Patrick Roman Catholic parishes. "What sin against God have these people done?"

Tell me, is there really a company that makes decks of race cards?  There has to be, it is thrown so many times.  Do these folks ever realize how silly they sound?  Those arrested acted like many who are illegals, the majority are Latino (we now host 1 out of every 10 Mexican workers - such a sad communtary on Mexico and its business culture).

What, they want the police to do nothing unless the guilty walk up and say "I'm guilty"...oh wait, never mind.....yeah....they do. 

Oh, that last question? The answer is this:  It is quite clear that God ordains those in authority, including government.  And makes it clear that according to God, these laws are to be followed unless they go against God.  Which our immigration laws do not.  Thus, they have sinned.

A spokeswoman for Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon told the Associated Press that the arrests highlighted the need for a designated day-laborer center in the city.

Great!  More elected officials that know better deciding to ignore laws that they do not like, just to pander to voters.....

Rule of Law?  You decide.

Posted by Skip at 8:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From the Boston Herald:

Bay State officials seeking to save a coveted congressional seat are turning for help to residents who can’t even vote: illegal immigrants.

A census of the often-maligned underground residents - who face constant calls for their deportation - could be critical to reaching a population total that could preserve the seat.

Right.

Let's see, we have people here that break our laws, take jobs that Americans will do (re: the recent ICE sweeps of meat packing plants), and steal identities.  Yup, good crop of folks.  Poor, poor folks painted as victims once again.

This is a case of "winning at all costs", the "means justifies the end".  Hey, leaders in MA, how about fixing the problem of WHY you are losing your seat - your population is moving away! There may be a number of reasons, but certainly one of them is the high cost living - and high cost of taxes and fees. 

So, it seems, they wish to band-aid this structural problem of their own making with lawbreakers!

 “We need to chase them,” Secretary of State William Galvin said yesterday, stressing the need for an “all local” hunt for everyone living here.

Crucial to the census success: Convincing the estimated 150,000 to 200,000 illegal immigrants that they will simply be counted, not arrested.

Anybody notice this?  A duly elected state official, sworn to uphold the law, is not willing to uphold that oath.  Lawbreakers?  Heck, never mind that - we need that Congressman's seat!  Why?

“The money to fund many important federal programs is distributed to the states on the basis of population, so everyone in Massachusetts has a major stake in ensuring that we are not shortchanged by failing to get an accurate population count,” warned U.S. Rep. Edward Markey (D-Malden), the senior member of the state’s congressional delegation.

And as always, it is about the money....and not about upholding basic principles.  Hey, they're politicians, right (asked by a guy who does see an elected official in the morning's mirror).....

Posted by Skip at 8:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This past Saturday I had the honor to spend an evening with U.S. Rep Tom Tancredo of Colorado at the beautiful home of former Franklin mayor Tony Giunta and his wife Mariska. Together with local neighbors, politicians, and a contingent of regular co-hosts of Niel Young’s “Advocates” program, I had the opportunity to listen to the Congressman discuss several of the issues for which he is best known: illegal immigration and what he refers to as “the cult of multiculturalism”.

.

Citing his dissatisfaction with the status of immigration reforms and enforcement, particularly now in the post 9/11 era, Congressman Tancredo has begun a strategy of traveling to the early presidential primary states with the hope of publicizing the issue enough to make it part of some future presidential hopeful’s campaign platform.

“Because you here in New Hampshire can get up close to those asking for your vote,” he told the gathering, “you can ask them questions. New Hampshire is unique in that way. Ask them about illegal immigration. Make them address it.”

He informed us that “this issue is bubbling. Congress is starting to listen. The beautiful thing about our republic is that it responds to its people.”

.

I believe that the question of illegal immigration is important to more ordinary people in America than most mainstream politicians realize. The good news for us is that Congressman Tancredo has long been carrying the fight to fix our nation’s broken borders and the resulting broken immigration system. When talking the numbers of illegal entrants, the congressman ominously noted that, “along with them are coming other people. Very bad people.” Given the current wartime environment, this obviously becomes a national security issue. What we ultimately need according to Tancredo is a “safe, secure, and legal way for people to come into America.”

.

If no major Republican candidate takes up this issue, Tancredo says he may have to make a presidential run himself in order to give it the full and public airing he feels it deserves. He readily admits his odds of success in such an endeavor would be overwhelming, but he would do it anyway because of his commitment to his cause. Who knows, there are a lot of regular folks out there concerned about this subject. Stay tuned…

 

Posted by Doug at 9:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Pat is striking back here!

An anti-immigration friend of mine (it seems like that describes all of my friends lately) sent me a taunting e-mail that reads: “Hey Pat: John [Hawkins] says you’re wrong.” Appended to the message was a link to John’s latest column in Human Events.

Taunting was fine (and it was, in good fun).  But I do take exception to the "anti-immigration".  If anyone has actually READ what I do (or LISTENED to me, Pat   8^)  ), I am anti-ILLEGAL immigration.  I have nothing but admiration for those that have taken the massive amounts of time, money, and strife to emigrate here legally.

Xenophobic?  No, Pat is going over the top with that one.....I welcome those that are here LEGALLY - Pat just continues the tradition of making it personal by categorizing those that disagree with him with a racially, emotionally laden word.

But he is my friend, and in the evangelical tradition of which he writes about ("In Defense of The Religious Right by Patrick Hynes), I forgive him. 

Well, if you have been listening to the radio show, Meet The New Press (or the associated podcasts here), you know that Pat, Doug, and I have a big difference in opinion on illegal immigration. Simply and quickly, Pat believes that we should offer a guest worker program now and offer amnesty of some type (e.g., illegals don't have to go to their home countries first before applying).

Well, I kicked off something, as I was on RightWingNews and saw what John had written here:

So, what comes naturally? I sent it to Pat with a gleeful look on my face:

Hey PAT!

John is saying that you're wrong!

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18670

-Skip

(titter, titter)

The money graphs are the following:

Since the election, you may have heard pro-amnesty Republicans or liberals saying something like this, "The 2006 election proves that being tough on illegal immigration doesn't work as a political issue. Look at J.D. Hayworth, John Hostettler, Randy Graf and Henry Bonilla. After that debacle, the GOP is surely going to cave on illegal immigration now."

[snip] 

In other words, about 9.6% of the tough guys on illegal immigration lost, while 25% of the amnesty crowd went down to defeat. Along those same lines, these numbers from the same article seem to be rather compelling:

• 11.5% of all Republican seats in Congress were lost as Democrats took back control of Congress
• But only 6.7% of the members of Tancredo's Immigration Reform Caucus lost their seats.
  

So now Pat want to play here, so I will oblige him.

Pat, being a political consultant, sees the world through that lens. I, on the other hand, am just a software engineer, viewing the world through results. Also, being a conservative, my world view is shaped by conservative principles – one of which is “laws matter”. Putting aside the political expediency arguments that Pat has, mine is rather simple (sorta like Reagan's when asked about fighting Communism - “We win, they lose”). Just because there are millions of illegals here does not make it right – laws have been broken and there should be penalties for that. Otherwise, why bother to have laws? Simplistic? Sure! But go ahead, fault my logic.

But Skip! We cannot deport them all! The answer is “don't have to”.

I am a proponent of “first things first”. First, shutdown the border traffic. A physical wall is not the whole answer, but certainly it cannot be stated that it wouldn't help. Then, layer it with the high tech stuff that we are so good at. That would address that part of the problem.

The other part – what to do with those already here? Well, look at the model of the IRS – it does not have to prosecute all tax cheats – just some and make sure the word gets out. In the same way, when ICE does a crack down, it does have an effect on others. Next is to dry up the social incentives to be here – if the welfare society's checks and benefits stop coming to illegals, that source of revenue dries up. Next, boost the penalties and enforce the laws that govern employers hiring illegals. And I don't give a hoot about the arguments about raising the cost of everything and the destruction of our economy if the illegals go home – a REAL serious study would show an effect but nowhere the size that the illegal advocates (and Pat to a degree) espouse. Fine the heck out of the companies AND hold senior management criminal responsible.

What happens? Without sources of revenues, the illegals will go home. When one rewards bad behavior, you stimulate more bad behavior, not less (Pat will slowly learn this the hard way now that he has TWO offspring...ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!). Remove the carrots, employ some stick, and the problem will start to heal itself.

BTW, Pat, Doug, and I will be welcoming John to MTNP this Saturday, WEMJ 1490AM in the Lakes Region of NH from 204pm (603-527-1490 if you want to call in). We don't have live streaming yet but we are trying to get the Management to put it in for us. In any case, I'll have the podcasts up on Sunday sometime (watch GraniteGrok.com for the announcement).

Posted by Skip at 11:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

(H/T: Lucienne.com)

Dawn - ISLAMABAD, Dec 26: Pakistan has decided to put in place landmines and a fence along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border as a ‘last resort’ to stop cross-border movement of terrorists, Interior Minister Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao said on Tuesday.

Wow, imagine that....really defending one's border?  Hey, can we try this on our new border fence?  Betcha that this would blow a hole in those critics that say that a wall won't work.  After all, a mine is more high tech than a few concrete blocks, right?

“By taking such steps we want to show our intention to those who have been blaming Pakistan for not controlling the infiltration of the Taliban into Afghanistan,” said the minister at a function here. He said the government had already deployed 80,000 troops and established over 800 check posts on the border.

Expressing similar sentiments, Foreign Secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan at the weekly Foreign Office briefing said that Islamabad had decided to “selectively” mine and fence the border with Afghanistan. It also planned to expand the deployment of Frontier Corps to prevent cross-border militant activity.

[snip]

To a question if Pakistan had reached an agreement with the Afghan government on fencing and mining of the border given that it had been opposed to these measures, his response was: “There is no question of an agreement in this regard as this is a measure that we will be taking on our side of the border.” He said Pakistan’s suggestion to take such measures had been well-known to all sides as it had been stated publicly a number of times.

Hey, Mexico, are you listening?

Posted by Skip at 8:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

A new entitlement for illegals

Never say Ken Boehm didn't warn you.

He's not a kook or an alarmist and he doesn't hear voices, strange eerie ones, in his head. He understands all too well what can happen and how if the public has been lulled into a false sense of security -- especially when the issue is illegal immigration.

As absurd as this story line surely must seem to rational people, Mr. Boehm worries that someday taxpayers actually could be forced to pay for lawyers representing illegal aliens in the U.S. who want amnesty and citizenship.

At 12 million estimated illegal aliens here in the US, let's say a cost at $10K per case, that's $120 Billion....why don't we just flipping throw it out the window instead?  This is basically allowing people who should not be here to use our money to sue ourselves....this is absurd at too many levels.  Have we gone this nuts; have we gotten to the point where political correctness trumps simple logic?

Logic? Anyone?  Please?

Boehm is co-founder and chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, a Virginia nonpartisan foundation promoting ethics in public life. He also is not delusional.

"Once again, the government was requiring taxpayers to pay for something not in the best interest of taxpayers," Boehm says about this year's U.S. Senate immigration bill. "In effect, it's an entitlement program for criminals."

The controversial 614-page immigration "reform" legislation passed by the Senate in May would have done so much more damage than just giving amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. In the AgJOBS amendment, illegal aliens seeking amnesty could get "free" legal counseling paid by American taxpayers. The bill also required the alien to have an attorney file the application for him.

Once the lawyers get involved, you can just imagine the money wheels spinning faster than any slot machine in Vegas!  Once a revenue stream has been established, you can be SURE that the spigot will only be opened wider, not smaller.  And talk about being protected - NOTHING will ever come between these advocates and the tax money that will keep them going.

Yet, can we citizens ever argue that this money would be better spent on taking care of our own first?  I hate to keep sounding like a broken record, but I wish the politicians (do-gooders all having to prove that they are indeed do-gooders to their voters) would just go home for a while and stay there.

Two years might not be long enough at the rate they spend our money.... 

Continue reading "WE have to pay for it? Another possible Entitlement?" »

Posted by Skip at 8:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

What is just so appealing to make your group look, feel, or sound like another?  For a group that seems to be so vilified by the world (think Israel), why would anyone want to compare themselves to the Jews?

Answer: assumed victimhood.

Yes, by comparing oneself to a hated subgroup, advocates are trying to pull the wool over our eyes by making those poor, defenseless, illegal immigrants look like such oppressed people.....oh, you can just hear the sighs.....

Hispanic Groups Call for Moratorium on Raids

(Yahoo News)

SAN ANTONIO, Texas (Reuters) - U.S. Hispanic groups and activists on Thursday called for a moratorium on workplace raids to round up illegal immigrants, with some saying they were reminiscent of Nazi crackdowns on Jews in the 1930s.

Those who do not study their history are doomed to repeat it.  And if not repeat it, mangle it.  This is such nonsense!

The Jews living in Germany at the time were CITIZENS....legally there, they were being rounded up and harrassed - first to leave and then to be killed.  Illegal immigrants are not being harrassed, they are being arrested because they have broken long standing laws - not "made up" ones created for pogroms.

Besides, isn't it a truism that anyone that has to invoke Hitler or the Nazis to win an argument has already lost such?
 

They accused the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement of "racial profiling," or selective enforcement against Hispanics, for arresting 1,300 workers on immigration violations in December 12 raids at meatpacking plants in six states.

Sorry, while I condemn racism in everyday life, when it comes to law enforcement, profiling (racial or behavioral) is a tool that has been slammed only due to political correctness.  Face it, most Americans do not wish to be called racists, and any connotation thrown up by advocates for those that break our laws to that effect makes most people hesitate ("well, I don't want to be a racist!").  And if such profiling can lead law enforcement to those breaking the law, shouldn't that tool be used for the benefit of the rest of the public who are law abiding?

"We are demanding an end to these immigration raids, where they are targeting brown faces. That is major, major racial profiling, and that cannot be tolerated," said Rosa Rosales, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, at a news conference.

Tell you what, Ms Rosales.  Tell the illegal immigrants to stop breaking our laws and the raids become irrelevant!  Otherwise, tell me what the next best tool in the arsenal can be used to enforce our laws? 

Continue reading "News Flash: illegal immigrants are like the Jews?" »

Posted by Skip at 9:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

ELLSWORTH - For the third time since August, a group of suspected illegal immigrants was detained in the city, this time after a routine traffic stop.

.

Three men were arrested and taken Sunday to Bangor, where they were turned over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers.

Page said he didn’t know if the men were living in Maine but they told Wilmot they were working at an area wreath factory.

Police didn’t know which employer or whether the employer would be charged. Neighboring Washington County is a large producer of holiday wreaths.

Posted by Doug at 9:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Doug and Skip, 

.

While reading your posts about the Kerry snafu and the Hazelton, PA crackdown on illegals a few moments ago, it occurred to me that perhaps we, native born or properly naturalized American Citizens, should start signing our names followed by LAC, for Legal American Citizen.

.

This title of honor has a higher standing than any other degree or honorific suffix in the world. In fact, LAC attests to the highest credentials for an individual ANYWHERE!!!  

.

It has to be earned the old fashioned way: by obeying the US laws. It cannot be bought in the Internet or granted by any university, real or fictitious.

.

This thought also addresses the ridiculous claims of the Columbia protestors who claim that no human being is illegal—perhaps, depending on the point of reference. But the one irrefutable fact in this charade is that not all humans are Legal American Citizens either, only those born here or properly naturalized.

.

Thoughts?  Could we start a movement? 

.

Jorge, LAC 

.

PS.  See what you have started with your musings?

Posted by Doug at 6:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

"Hispanics Flee Pa. Town Before Crackdown"

imposes fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and denies business permits to companies that give them jobs. The law empowers the city to investigate written complaints about a person's immigration status, using a federal database.  

Mayor Lou Barletta, chief proponent of the new law, contends illegal immigrants have brought drugs, crime and gangs, overwhelming police and municipal budgets. He announced the crackdown in June, a month after two illegal immigrants from the Dominican Republic were charged in a fatal shooting.

The mayor said he would fight all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary, saying the ordinance is "as bulletproof as we can get it."

I've said from the beginning my goal was to make Hazleton one of the toughest cities in America for illegal aliens. Today, if I was an illegal alien, I certainly wouldn't pick Hazleton as my home.

Posted by Doug at 6:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From the Tucson Citizen (H/T: Lucianne) is this (reported elsewhere too) as reported by the AP:

Mexico drafts resolution criticizing border fence at UN Human Rights Council 

The Associated Press

MEXICO CITY - The Mexican government said Monday that it is drafting a resolution for the United Nations Human Rights Council criticizing U.S. plans to build hundreds of miles of fencing on its southern border.

Mexican Ambassador Luis Alfonso de Alba, who is president of the 47-member council, said the resolution will denounce the fence for violating human rights and driving undocumented migrants to cross the border in more remote and dangerous areas.

Continue reading "This is just so rich......" »

Posted by Skip at 2:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

And it is about time that Mexico accept the rules it uses on its southern border by us on ours.  From CNSNews:

Congress Sends Secure Fence Act to President's Desk

(CNSNews.com) - Congress Monday formally sent border fence legislation, also known as the "Secure Fence Act" (H.R. 6061), to President Bush's desk for him to sign. The measure "will help us gain control over our borders by authorizing fences, surveillance technology, and other means necessary," House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) said in a statement. "The legislation will help provide what the public wants and deserves: a secure border controlled by the United States, not by the coyotes and drug kingpins," he added. Sensenbrenner noted that the bill did not receive as many votes from Democrats as was hoped for despite "overwhelming support from the public and House Republicans." Sensenbrenner added that "it is disappointing to once again see that over two-thirds of my Democratic colleagues in the House voted against this effort to gain control of the border. In fact, the Secure Fence Act even garnered 80 votes in the Senate, including from liberal stalwarts such as Senator Boxer and Senator Schumer.""

 There has been discussion this last week - did it go?  Did it not?  Will he sign it?  Will he not (President Bush that is).

Frankly, if he doesn't, a lot of conservatives may really double / triple think whether or not to punch the touch screen / pull the lever / poke the hole / pencil the stripe for Republicans.  While I fear the current crop of Democrats taking over the House, there is little that could be done by anti-illegal immigration supporters at this late date - the primaries are long gone to send a message.

Posted by Skip at 2:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

My biggest heartache (and ire) has been our President and our Congress has failed, up to now, to properly defend our borders.  We have spent billions on protecting ourselves, yet have failed to lock the door.

And what happens when some of our duly appointed folks who work on the border try to at least slam that door shut?  We've seen what happens to the Border Patrol when they use force to defend our border - they end up in jail and court instead of the drug dealers trying to cross over with contraband.  We've heard of the incursions of Mexican drug gangs that enter into the States better armed than our folks.

Finally, however, the House of Representatives stood up and stared down the Senate; the Senate blinked.  And then the President blinked too. 

So now, we've heard a lot of about "the wall" that will be built along our southern border.  While it is only supposed to be about 700 miles long (with that border about 2100 miles long), I consider it a good start.  Others are also building walls, like those done with private funds a la the Minutemen.  The more "wall" that is built AND MAINTAINED AND STAFFED, the better that FIRST line of defense will be. More lines of defense still have to be considered.

Yet, for trying to protect our own border, to keep our land soverign, we've been compared to East Germany and the building of the Iron Curtain (silly people for doing that comparison, not realizing that the East German wall was meant to keep people in as opposed to keeping outsiders out).

We hear all the time that our wall is immoral; that it is separating countries and therefore, families.  We are shown examples of current walls, mostly in the San Diego area, that are in poor repair and easily breached by those wishing to cross illegally.  From the pro-immigration advocates, there is the argument that if we build a 20 foot wall, all that will happen is that we will see 21 foot ladders.  In fact, Mexico wants to take us to the UN and get them to force us not to build it, as it is "disrepectful" to the Mexican people.

And so on.  If we listen to those folks, we are just wasting our money, for this new wall will fail.

But let me ask this question.  If artificial walls are so bad at keeping people on one side or the other, how come the Communist Chinese (as opposed to Taiwanese Chinese) are now beginning to build a wall along their border with North Korea?  What gives them the right to do that?  And why do they can succeed with theirs when we, with all of our technology and money, should be failing with ours?

Simple: 

Continue reading "But they keep saying a wall won't work!" »

Posted by Skip at 8:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

From the BBC

US President George W Bush has signed a controversial bill into law that will pay for a 700-mile fence (1,125km) fence along the border with Mexico.

Yippee!  Finally, we are starting to the US is starting, just starting to address the greatest leakage spot in our border, the Southwest. 

The barrier, equipped with hi-tech surveillance equipment, will be built in areas where many illegal immigrants cross over into the United States.

Ah, this makes sense - "built in areas where many illegal immigrants cross".  At least somebody is thinking....

Under the new law, around $1.2bn will be spent over the coming year on the border, which will be built on remote and inhospitable border areas in the south west of the country.

Given how much this country spends on items of much more frivolity, I have no problem with this expenditure.  Now, the next thing is will it, once built, be manned and maintained correctly?  It certainly would not make my day that this money would be spent and then ill funded for its actual purpose just so someone could say "See, I told you it wouldn't work!" 

Speaking at the signing of the bill in Arizona, Mr Bush said the fence alone was not enough to curb illegal immigration.

And I have not heard, from a single person even rabidly in favor of this wall, that the wall itself would be sufficient. 

"The funds that Congress has appropriated are critical for our efforts to secure this border and enforce our laws, yet we must also recognise that enforcement alone is not going to work," he said.

So far, ok.  Let's add to that...

Continue reading "Only a start - 2/3rds to go" »

Posted by Skip at 8:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In addition to this post, this disturbing story was discussed at LimitstoGrowth.org in March 2006, but received little national attention.  The original news story in the LA Times is no longer available on that newspaper's website archive.  Read here about this experiment in lawlessness, miles from America’s second-largest city.

Welcome to Maywood CA, Where Roads Open Up for Immigrants

   

Take a good look of what happens when Mexicans take over a town (map of Maywood), this one near Los Angeles. Forget about American core beliefs about equal justice under the law, a two-tiered system exists in Maywood, where citizens are required to obey the laws and pay the fines, but "immigrants" (i.e., illegal aliens) are cut unimaginable slack.

Foreigners are not expected to have drivers licenses or car tags, nope, too oppressive. That annoying law stuff is for the suckers, er citizens.

Welcome to the third world, here in America, thanks to open borders. [From the LA Times]

In Maywood, where 96% of the residents are Latino, and more than half are foreign-born, the City Council has vowed to make the municipality a "sanctuary city" for illegal immigrants, and over the last few months it has set out to prove it.

First, the city eliminated the Police Department's traffic division after complaints that officers unfairly targeted illegal immigrants. Then it made it much more difficult for police to tow cars whose owners didn't have driver's licenses, a practice that affected mostly undocumented people who could not obtain licenses.

In January, the City Council passed a resolution opposing a proposed federal law that would criminalize illegal immigration and make local police departments enforce immigration law. Now, some in the community are pushing to rename one of the city's elementary schools after former Mexican President Benito Juarez and debating measures to improve the lives of illegal immigrants.

No traffic enforcement! That sounds attractive and safe. Let's all take a drive through Maywood!

The salient feature of so-called under developed countries is their disregard for the rule of law. Having visited a number of such countries, I can attest to the devastating results of living under a government that does not enforce consistently and fairly rights to life, liberty, or property.

No modern society can prosper without the establishment and protection of these basic rights because without such protections, most people will not invest in the future, will not build for tomorrow.  Any investment involves an expectation of return, but if that return can be confiscated by governmental or criminal fiat, than few would take the risk of losing today's asset or efforts for the promise of a better tomorrow. No society can thrive without the rule of law. 

At its heart, the immigration debate is about the rule of law.  Two sides have clearly emerged:  Those who insist that, to preserve order in society and provide for a better future, we must enforce our laws; and those who, for a multitude of often-conflicting reasons, believe that immigration laws can be ignored without destroying something of great civic value.

In Maywood, CA, we can see the results of the fatally-flawed world view of those who advocate for illegality and wanton disregard of the rule of law. Choose to ignore one law, and soon others become inconvenient, too. It’s not hard to imagine lax enforcement of property crime laws in Maywood, based upon the same justification for abandoning traffic enforcement: Disproportionate impact on those who choose to enter and live illegally in our country.

From Mayberry, RFD to Maywood, CA in less than 40 years. God help us.

Posted by Ken at 1:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There is a woman (and I will NOT use the word 'lady" here) that is holed up in the Adalberto United Methodist Church in the Chicago area by the name of Elvira Arellano.  Why?  She is not only an illegal rights activist, she herself is an illegal that has already been deported once from this country.  Although unmarried, she has a seven year old son that is an American citizen as he was born out of wedlock here in the US.  And yes, I point this out for a reason.

While we talked about this on The Advocates radio show this morning, I first read about it in the paper while coming out to San Diego.  I have to say one thing for the Chicago SunTimes - they are showing multiple facets to the story.  While sitting at O'Hair Airport, I read this commentary by Mary Mitchell.  Her point was that although Arellano was trying to connect her situation to the event of Rosa Parks not giving up her seat to move to the back of the bus, Ms. Mitchell correctly points out that Ms. Parks did not break any laws (although I believe she was arrested). 

Not quite the case with Arellano.  From that story:

Arellano is not a victim of an unjust system. She crossed into the U.S. from Mexico in 1997, obtained a fake ID and was caught at the border and returned home. Three days later, she sneaked back into the country and made her way to Washington state, where she managed to get a driver's license. She met her son's father and gave birth to her son in 1998 [note - not married -Skip]. Two years later, Arellano moved to Chicago and again managed to get a fake ID -- a Social Security card -- and landed a job as a cleaning lady at O'Hare Airport. Three years after that, she was caught and pleaded guilty to working under a false Social Security number.

So now you know the back story.  She even got an extension for her deportation - U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez and U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin ...both men stepped in in 2003 and secured a one-year extension from deportation on Arellano's behalf. They secured another one-year extension in 2004 and again in 2005

OK, if they want to delay it, I'm sorta OK with it (alright, I'm not at all - but they have the power or pull to get it done) as it is a delay and not an amnesty call.

Now to the other commentary - this is so wrong on so many levels that I am about to explode. 

Continue reading "This writer is wrong - actions have consequences" »

Posted by Skip at 5:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Mexicans with little education and limited English skills are leading a wave of newly arrived immigrants who are increasingly fanning out from traditional gateway states, Census data released Tuesday indicate.

.
The dispersal of new immigrants to parts of the Southeast and Midwest that are unaccustomed to foreign-born populations in large numbers may be fueling national concerns about illegal immigration, some population analysts say.

Rapid increases in urbanization, population, immigration, and the aging community... present governments with significant challenges in meeting people's needs.

Posted by Doug at 7:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Here we go again...not able to track those we should! 

FBI Warns Law Enforcement to Look Out for 11 Missing Egyptian Exchange Students
Monday , August 07, 2006

The FBI alerted state and local authorities Monday to be on the lookout for 11 Egyptian exchange students who arrived in the U.S. last month but never showed up for class.

The men, who range in age from 18 to 22,

A group of young Muslim Arab males unaccounted for after entering the USA on student visas ... haven't I heard this story before...

were scheduled to attend a month-long program in U.S. history and culture, plus English language instruction, at Montana State University

...because such a vital program couldn't be taught in Cairo by an American instructor...not much $$$ for Montana State in that kind of program...

along with six other students. The group flew from Cairo and arrived in the U.S. on July 29. All entered the U.S. legally, but officials said the no-shows violated the terms of their visas and that the government would likely send them home once they turn up.

FBI Special Agent Richard Kolko emphasized that there was no indication that the men were involved in any illicit activity.

"At this point, all they have done is not show up for a scheduled academic program," Kolko said. "There is no threat associated with these men."

...ignore the man behind the curtain...innocent until proved guilty...no threat associated with blatantly violating our laws....

Cases like these are actually quite common, Kolko said.

Oftentimes when large groups of foreign students arrive in the United States, it is almost inevitable that some will break off and head to tourist destinations before turning up several days later.

The government tightened the student visa process after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks when it learned that four of the hijackers had entered the country on foreign student visas.

Montana State has tried repeatedly to contact the students, university spokeswoman Cathy Conover said. When that failed, the school notified Homeland Security officials and registered the Egyptians as "no-shows" in the system developed after Sept. 11 to track foreign students.

"We hope this doesn't cast doubt on this program because we think it's important to have international students on our campus and in our community," Conover said.

FOX News' Ian McCaleb, FOXNews.com's C. Spencer Beggs and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Pithy comments by Ken 

Posted by Ken at 9:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

From the Houston Chronicle is this story about illegal immigrants buying houses:

Despite being in the U.S. illegally, undocumented immigrants can legally buy a house.

OK, I can live with this without a problem at all. 

Certain lenders don't ask for immigration papers. And buyers using a special tax ID often don't need a lengthy credit history.

Now I'm getting concerned - is it because of the special tax ID (wink, wink), or a tie in between the "certain lenders" being shown this ID, therefore not asking about immigration or status papers?

If a buyer does provide a Social Security number, real estate agencies and lenders may request proof of legal status, according to Myers. But that is usually not the case with an ITIN.

Well, there IS a tie-in.  How come I get to be discriminated against, as I, being a legal resident / citizen, have an SS number?

For illegal immigrants, however, buying a home can carry risks.

The biggest, said Houston real estate consultant Óscar González, of González Group, is deportation. If homeowners are forced to leave the country, they might be unable to afford payments and, therefore, could lose their home, Myers said.

They could lose their house.  Sorry, boo-hoo from me (but only a teeny tiny one).  I have no problem with anyone from anwhere buying property here.  I have no sympathy if they lose their house, however, if they are here illegally taking jobs from legal residents and citizens and they are deported for mis-representing themselves and their status.

My problem?  My tax money has already participated in a situation like this - remember the Savings & Loan bailout fiasco?  Are we setting ourselves up for round two?  Am I going to have to shell out my tax money to bail out the banks again to cover defaulted mortgages for people who shouldn't be here at all and got tossed out? 

Posted by Skip at 9:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This from Julius Preston at the New York Times:

CINCINNATI, July 30 — Immigration agents had prepared a nasty surprise for the Garcia Labor Company, a temporary worker contractor, when they moved against it on charges of hiring illegal immigrants. They brought a 40-count federal indictment, part of a new nationwide strategy by immigration officials to clamp down on employers of illegal immigrant laborers.

The criminal charges against Mr. Garcia and his company were brought by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security. The campaign has included at least five other federal indictments of business executives in Ohio and Kentucky and has sent payroll managers rushing to re-examine their workers’ papers and rethink plans for their work force.

Your company is breaking the law, and you are surprised? We have had  laws against  hiring illegals - common sense should say "don't do this!"

It also created a new environment of fear in Ohio’s immigrant communities.

“It’s a very uneasy feeling,” said Sister Teresa Ann Wolf, a Roman Catholic nun who works with immigrant workers in Canton, Ohio. “People are afraid to leave the house to go to the store. They are afraid to come to church.”

Notice the lack of the word illegal before "immigrant"? 

Continue reading "Gee, enforcing the law? What a concept!" »

Posted by Skip at 6:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Posted by Doug at 5:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The illegal immigration issue became one of my pet peeves quite some time ago.  On Dec. 18, 2003 (a search did not find the article), the local paper, The Citizen (registration may be required)  ran an editorial by Ricardo Pimentel lamenting the treatment of illegal immigrants by the Social Security system.

Gee, read your own article - can you not see the cause and effect here?  Or does logic play any role in your life at all???? 

Friday, December 26, 2003

Dear Sirs,

I read with concern the "Fleecing 'illegals' of Social Security" column posted in the Citizen today (and in the Arizona Republic on December 18 as "Social Security is robbing the undocumented") by Ricardo Pimentel. Then, reread it again while wondering why such a piece of deliberate intellectual dishonesty is seen as serious journalism. And not having to wonder why the newspaper world wonders why fewer and fewer are partaking of their product.

Continue reading "Changing the vocabulary" »

Posted by Skip at 1:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

As the debate rages on over whether to grant “amnesty” to those persons having violated US laws as their first act on our sovereign soil, the question of securing the border completely remains unsolved. To be sure, improvements are being made, but the end result continues to be a porous border. Like water, as certain points and locations are sealed, new paths of slight resistance will open up, allowing the flow to continue unchecked. Inexplicably, many politicians and “leaders” fail to see any need to rectify a situation whereby laws that they themselves created regarding immigration to the United States are being ignored wholesale. Most ordinary Americans don’t understand why our borders can’t be defended and protected.

Continue reading "“They came in twos and threes...”" »

Posted by Doug at 6:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The debate over illegal immigration rages on. The President, late to the dance, has finally weighed in on the subject. While getting (rightfully) panned by conservatives for continuing his soft stance towards illegals already in the country, he did hit on several points during his recent prime-time address that have long needed to be said in a public forum. For this, he should be applauded, followed by a close watch to keep him moving in the direction of implementing real solutions to America’s illegal immigration problem. He started by stating the obvious: “For decades, the United States has not been in complete control of its borders. As a result, many who want to work in our economy have been able to sneak across our border, and millions have stayed.” It is said that acknowledging a problem is step one towards solving it.

Continue reading "A Suggestion to the President" »

Posted by Doug at 7:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Continue reading "Too Little, Too Late?" »

Posted by Doug at 7:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Continue reading "A Warning From Teddy" »

Posted by Doug at 7:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This is a nation governed by the rule of law peopled by legal immigrants.

We have been treated to massive demonstrations from those who have crossed our borders without following our laws.
And they are demanding citizenship.

“Undocumented” has supplanted the word “illegal”. “Rule of “law” means “do not enforce”. “Secure the borders” translates to “open borders”.
Isn’t this spin on a massive scale?

When laws are created, they are to be followed and enforced. We say we trust in the rule of law. Justice is rightly judging behavior by the standard of law and not by feelings. I want our border and immigration laws enforced. Does this make me a racist, bigoted, or mean spirited?

The demonstrators? They are NOT those that have waited years, stayed within our legal process, who often have given up much to legally obtain their citizenship.
The demonstrators are not quietly following the lawful path to citizenship.

Coming from other countries, mainly Mexico, they feel they are owed US citizenship. They want to cut in line in front of those dutifully following our laws. They claim that they only want their part of the American dream.
They have crashed our gates and are demanding citizenship.

They displayed their countries’ flags with honor and pride. They flew them above an upside down “Old Glory”. They stopped only when they realized that their actions were outraging American citizens who saw the lack of respect for our national symbol for which millions have given their lives.
They are demanding American citizenship while giving their home countries more honor than America.

Why do we have to keep asking our leaders over and over “What part of ‘illegal’ do you not understand?” We are told we need “guest workers” yet illegal aliens take jobs away from the least skilled American workers by undercutting wages, not paying taxes, and gaming the social safety net.
Why do our leaders allow our laws to be flaunted?

Our leaders in the Senate offer amnesty but refuse to call it that. They propose laws offering citizenship by asking illegals to prove length of stay, paying of small fines, learning English, and paying back taxes.
Why do they give away our priceless American Citizenship to gate crashers?

Why will they not enforce our laws by deporting these lawbreakers, and heavily fining the lawbreaking employers who hire them? Why do they not dry up the incentives for illegals to come here (like all other countries do)?
Why don't we demand more from them?

Our Democratic and Republican leaders are not listening to the majority of their citizens; only content to make political deals that puts themselves first instead of the country. Has politics degenerated so much such that they so little value American Citizenship?
Why do we not demand more from them?

No other country would allow Americans to demonstrate for the same rights asked of us. The Mexican constitution denies foreigners many of the rights that they, foreigners in this country, believe they are owed.
They demand citizenship.

Their organizations, MEChA and La Raza, elevate Mexican / Atzlan culture (“Everything for the race. Everything outside the race, nothing”) and labels ours racist. Reconquistas want to turn back the clock 160 yearsl they want the US Southwest returned to Mexico. They work in concert with A.N.S.W.E.R, who has ties to organizations that would be happy to see America brought down. They show us by their actions that they do not wish to assimilate.
They demand citizenship.

They claim that we are a nation of immigrants, that anyone should have the rights of a US citizen. They refuse to acknowledge that the word “illegal” means what it means. If they did, they could not ask for what they feel what is owed them. They refuse to acknowledge that our recent ancestors followed the law.
They cannot respect our laws and they are demanding citizenship.

Under the guise of multiculturalism, they claim that we have to recognize them. That we should recognize that our nation’s borders have no meaning, that our laws are racist and bigoted.
They demand citizenship.

They are demanding citizenship?

From me?

No.

Copyright 2006, David “Skip” Murphy

Posted by Skip at 1:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)