As previously blogged, Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA) claimed credit for making Asa Hutchinson cave on the recent minor immigration sweeps (the government of Mexico probably played a part too).
In a recent interview ("Lawmaker reasserts criticism of Border Patrol"), Baca reiterated what he considers acceptable immigration enforcement:
If you do two things, increase security on the border and enforce the law against employers that are hiring (illegal immigrants). Some of these employers are the ones that are paying the (smugglers) and others to make sure they obtain the false Social Security cards. They're the ones we should go after.
I agree. There should be illegal alien sweeps, but the employers should be the first priority. Employers aren't going to get much sympathy from racial demagogues (cough, cough), Racial Identity groups, and the non-liberal media. The only thing politicians need to worry about is losing campaign contributions and the like. That's why voters need to make it clear that it's either lose some of the contributions or lose a lot of votes.
You can't go after employers and then just let the aliens go free. And, I'm pretty sure that somehow Rep. Baca wants a fantasy prosecution where the employers are punished and the illegals get automatic amnesty or similar.
The rest of the article makes quite clear that he sees nothing wrong with illegal immigration, and it gets a bit out there, so to speak. He plays semantic games, he plays the race card, he plays the Christian card, he plays the Gangs of New York card, he plays so many cards they probably had to send out for extra decks. You can almost hear his inner voice shouting "Aztlan!"
Compare Baca's remarks about going after employers with Nanci Pelosi's remarks about the "terrorizing raids" at Wal*Mart. I believe she also believes in miraculous prosecutions.
P.S. Ed Laning is running against Joe Baca if you'd like to, for instance, move to the Inland Empire and vote Baca out.
Immigration2004 · Mon, 08/09/2004 - 21:48 · Importance: 1