Wow...this just completely turns reality on its head:
Aug. 22, 2007. Elvira Arellano speaks to the Mexican Congress about her deportation from the United States. Elvira claims the U.S. broke that law first by 'allowing' illegal immigrants to pay taxes.
She may be a senora rather than a senor, but she still has major cojones.
LiveLeak.com - Elvira Arellano Says U.S. 'Broke The Law First'
Yet another reason for us to get serious about immigration enforcement:
LOS ANGELES - Nine Guatemalans were indicted for their roles in an alleged sex trafficking ring that lured young women to the United States with promises of good jobs and then forced them into prostitution, according to federal court records.
ADVERTISEMENT
Four of the defendants pleaded not guilty in January to sex trafficking charges in the case. A superseding indictment, unsealed Thursday, includes more serious allegations that five of the 12 victims were minors.
According to the new 50-count indictment, the defendants at times sold Guatemalan women and girls to one another like slaves and allegedly brought the victims to witch doctors who threatened to put curses on them and their families if they ran away.
"These young women were enticed into coming to this country by promises of the American dream only to arrive and discover that what awaited was a nightmare," said Robert Schoch, a special agent in charge for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Traffic in illegal immigration doesn't just hurt the U.S. - it hurts those attempting to come here, too, some of whom are victimized by those promising them a better life. How many are being enslaved, or are dying in crowded, overheated trucks every year because too often we look the other way?
Or so says Barak Obama, while fishing for support from a group whose name translates as "The Race". But of course, they're not racist...no:
MIAMI BEACH, Fla. — Sen. Barack Obama told the nation's largest Hispanic advocacy group yesterday that he earned their support for his presidential campaign by marching in last year's May 1 immigrant rallies and challenged them to learn whether others met that standard.
"Find out how many senators appeared before an immigration rally last year. Who was talking the talk, and who walked the walk — because I walked," Mr. Obama said at the National Council of La Raza's annual convention in Miami Beach. "I didn't run away from the issue, and I didn't just talk about it in front of Latino audiences."
The Illinois Democrat said the recent Senate immigration debate "was both ugly and racist in a way we haven't see since the struggle for civil rights."
Of course, his primary opponent, the former First Lady, was no better:
In remarks during a morning brunch, Mrs. Clinton said she has been trying "to understand where all of the venom and the incredible anxiety came from" in the immigration debate.
The only venom I've seen lately is from proponents of open borders (both Democrats and Republicans) accusing those who want to see our existing laws enforced of racism. I've said repeatedly, both publicly and privately, that I am in favor of immigration. And I have no problem whatsoever with hard-working immigrants, Hispanic or otherwise, who come to this country legally. But we must have control over who comes here, and have an orderly process. Simply allowing anyone who wants to to traipse across the border (or overstay a visa), and then every few years call a "do-over" with the latest amnesty is unworkable.
The reason we're in the mess we're in currently is because of the 1986 amnesty bill, which encouraged millions more to enter this country illegally, while we showed no will whatsoever to enforce the parts of the 1986 bill that were supposed to secure the border and make it harder to work illegally. That Obama and Clinton wanted to pass a bill that will do much the same as the 1986 amnesty -- give a free pass to millions who've broken our laws, and provide lip service to enforcement -- tells you everything you need to know about their motivation...they're looking for more votes, pure and simple, and they don't care if they have to import them illegally.
Obama solicits La Raza backing - Nation/Politics - The Washington Times, America's Newspaper via The Corner
I'm pretty sure this is supposed to evoke sympathy:
Mexican illegal immigrant Jose Madrid, 28, said he has been unable to find a construction job over the past six weeks because of the crackdown, and hasn't been able to send money to his parents and his 7-year-old son back home.
"We immigrants, we are leaving Panama City. People are afraid they will be deported," he said. "The companies don't want to hire illegal people. Now they're only hiring those with papers."
But while I'm sorry to see anyone suffer unnecessarily, I have little sympathy for the complaints of someone who came to this country illegally. The United States simply cannot provide for or solve all the world's problems, particularly not by ignoring our existing immigration laws.
The fact that one sheriff in Florida is fed up and trying to do something, particularly in the face of the disgusting and undemocratic maneuverings as the Senate attempts to ramrod an amnesty bill through Congress, despite overwhelming evidence that few in the country support it, is pretty amazing. Even more so is that given the comments above, it's effective, and being reported as such.
Just imagine if the feds actually got in on the enforcement business...
This covers it about as well as I've seen:
Regarding immigration like a crime problem is the succinct answer to the comprehensive-reform crowd's best rhetorical device: The searing question, What are you going to do about 12 million people? The answer is: The same thing I do about the millions of drug felonies that happen yearly.
I don't expect to deal with every one, much as I might like to. I don't have the resources and the public would not support such a sweeping program. So, I am going to go after the low-hanging fruit (smugglers and felons who are apprehended by federal state and local authorities violating criminal laws), I am going to deal aggressively with the root of the problem (the employers who knowingly hire illegals — if I had my druthers, I would also address access to public welfare services and too-easy citizenship qualification, but that is probably too much to ask). And I am going to strengthen my border and external enforcement to try to prevent the flow from getting here in the first place.
But as for the rest, I am going to tolerate their law-breaking — not approve it or give it amnesty, but grudgingly tolerate it — as I do with the gazillion instances of people who use illegal drugs. I am going to make life difficult for them; I am going to round up the occasional bunch of them so they don't get too comfortable in their law-breaking; and I am going to encourage other measures (analogous to drug testing in schools and certain industries) which, short of arrest, discourage the behavior. But I am going to realistically accept that I can't, and don't want to, round-up every offender. Illegal immigration is a crime problem to be managed and reduced, not exterminated.
Remember that...we don't need to round up and deport 12 million illegals, any more than we round up and jail every criminal in the U.S. We do the best we can with the resources available, and consistent with our notion of liberty, and we do so in the knowledge that while we can't catch all criminals, the ones we do catch and punish provide a disincentive to the rest.
As if the recently-deceased immigration bill wasn't bad enough, we've also got lunatic federal judges to deal with:
A New York town will pay six illegal day laborers $550,000 and forbid its police department from checking suspects’ immigration status to settle a discrimination lawsuit that claims the men were harassed because they are Hispanic.
The case stems from a much-needed police crackdown on disruptive and violent loitering in a public park in Mamaroneck, a town of about 20,000 residents located some two dozen miles from New York City. Multiple complaints of hundreds of drunken men fighting, littering, urinating and defecating at the park’s makeshift day laborer hiring site led to police to shut it down.
A Latino rights group sued the town alleging that the illegal immigrants’ constitutional rights to assemble and exercise free speech were violated. The suit also accuses village officials of discriminating against the day laborers—all admitted illegal aliens who didn’t use their real name in court documents for fear of deportation---simply because they are Hispanic.
A White Plains federal judge named Colleen McMahon sided with the illegal immigrants ruling in November that police had deliberately harassed the day laborers because they were Hispanic. In her decision Judge McMahon actually wrote that “the fact that the day laborers were Latinos, and not whites, was, at least in part, a motivating factor in defendants' actions."
Sure, because there are such a vast number of white illegal immigrants hanging out at day laborer sites. And since when do criminals who have come here illegally have constitutional rights? Excuse me? One hopes that this case will be appealed, but there's no indication in the article of whether that's likely or not.
Source: Illegal Day Laborers Win Big Settlement In N.Y. via The Corner
Interesting story in today's Washington Times, noting that the RNC has fired its entire telephone fundraising staff. According to some of the staffers, at least part of the motivation is a major drop-off in contributions from small donors (I'm certainly one of those who are refusing to donate another penny until the RNC and the President stop spitting in our faces and insulting us on immigration). This statement, by an RNC spokeswoman, just smacks of denial:
"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)."
Why doesn't the GOP get this? The base is mad as hell, and even if they think amnesty will translate to some gain for the GOP from newly-legalized Hispanics (though there's plenty of reason to doubt it will), how can they be so blind to the fact that they appear to be losing at least as much from the base as any conceivable gains? It's just nuts.
Source: RNC fires phone solicitors - Nation/Politics - The Washington Times, America's Newspaper
via The Corner
I used to respect and admire Linda Chavez. Hers was a voice of reason on race and racial politics, among other subjects. I greatly enjoyed her book, An Unlikely Conservative, and found her story inspiring. But reading the following, I cannot believe my eyes:
Some people just don't like Mexicans -- or anyone else from south of the border. They think Latinos are freeloaders and welfare cheats who are too lazy to learn English. They think Latinos have too many babies, and that Latino kids will dumb down our schools. They think Latinos are dirty, diseased, indolent and more prone to criminal behavior. They think Latinos are just too different from us ever to become real Americans.
I find it hard to believe that she truly thinks this. Chavez has lost my respect by insulting me, and those folks like me, who believe that we should be enforcing our immigration laws. Not because we "don't like Mexicans" but because we believe in the rule of law, and we believe that unrestricted immigration in violation of our laws is bad for the country in many ways, both culturally, and economically.
I'm not sure why Chavez has suddenly lost her ability to see and speak clearly on race, and I'm not sure I care. I'm very tired of being called a racist for my desire to have the US government enforce and protect our borders.
And for the edification of Chavez and those like her, I make it a point to seek out and purchase goods made in Mexico, particularly higher-ticket items like consumer electronics, in the hope that by encouraging more trade, we can help Mexicans find higher-paying jobs at home, rather than risking their lives and breaking our laws crossing the border into the U.S. Seems to me that that would represent a nice win-win.
Source: Townhall.com::Latino Fear and Loathing::By Linda Chavez
A while back, I posted the reasons why I cannot and will not support John McCain for the GOP presidential nomination. One of the first reasons I mentioned was that he is "terrible on immigration" from a conservative's viewpoint, and this week's immigration "deal" with Democrats only proves my point.
And McCain's contempt for conservative objections to this deal became all the more obvious after his blast at fellow Republican John Cornyn, following the latter's attempt to improve the enforcement provisions of the immigration deal. McCain reportedly responded to Cornyn's concerns with:
"F*** you! I know what is going on here. I know more about immigration than anybody in this room!”
The fact that he's working with serial bloviator Ted Kennedy on the deal is bad enough...but attacking a member of your own party for trying to inject even a minimal level of sanity in the deal demonstrates an unfitness for office that even I didn't credit McCain with until now.
I continue to be astonished at the desire of some in the GOP, including the President, to self-immolate on immigration. Beyond the surface issue of big business supporting illegal immigration for cheap labor, I just don't see the upside of amnesty for the GOP, nor do I see even the remotest chance that passing this deal will help the GOP's fortunes in 2008, although it might help the "outsider" GOP presidential candidate, if such exists (Thompson anyone?).
In that sense, McCain is hardly the only GOP senator betraying conservatives, but he's certainly the most egregious.
Creative Commons License
© 2008 - Duthieon
