« July 2006 | Main | September 2006 »

Arizona: GOP backs losing Steve Huffman over Randy Graf

Illegal immigration supporting Rep. Jim Kolbe is retiring and in the race for his former seat:

...the National Republican Congressional Committee is spending more than $122,000 on television ads for state Rep. Steve Huffman. The primary is Sept. 12...

Huffman faces Randy Graf, a conservative former state lawmaker, and Mike Hellon, a former Arizona Republican Party chairman.

For all the inside baseball, see this blog. The GOP has tried to say that only Huffman could win against the Democrat, but he's campaigned dirty and hasn't received much support from his fellow representatives. And, Graf is well ahead of him in the polls. So, why would the GOP continue to throw money at someone who looks like a loser? Perhaps the fact that Graf is strong on opposition to illegal immigration might be a clue:

The NRCC ad introduces Huffman as "the conservative choice" of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a candidate who backs an immigration policy that "puts security first."

In the unlikely case that you need a translation of that statement, see this:

[Huffman says:] "I'm not willing to run for office and say that all we need to do is secure the border and shouldn't worry about the impact on the economy... I'm not willing to cripple our economy just to play to people's fears."

Huffman then hits many of the points of the moderates: more enforcement, aided by a guest worker program to move would-be workers from deserts and into the process of legal immigration.

"If our Border Patrol can just focus their attention on the bad-news guys who can't come through legally, then their job will be much safer and easier," he says....

Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, the same line was spieled by (in separate articles) John Fund, a WSJ editorial, Tamar Jacoby and David Brooks. Huffman also plays the same semantic games with the word "ammesty" as Bush. And, he was "hand-picked" by Kolbe.

If the GOP wasn't completely corrupt they could find a solution to the dilemma. As it is, they might end up supporting the likely Democratic opponent: former state Sen. Gabrielle Giffords. She's been endorsed by Raul Grijalva, so she probably won't cost the GOP's contributors any money.

UPDATE: The GOP candidates (Graf, Antenori, Hellon, and Jenkins but not, of course, Huffman) have released a joint statement declaring their "unified outrage at the highly unusual actions" taken by the NRCC:

...On March 30, 2006, RNC Chairman Ken Mehiman visited Tucson to attend a local party fundraiser. During his visit, Mehlman held a private meeting with the five declared candidates for Congress or their representatives. Present at that meeting were Frank Antenori, Randy Graf, Mike Hellon, and Mike Jenkins. Steve Huffman sent a representative, his former treasurer, Bill Arnold. At that private meeting, Mehlman made it clear that the national Republican Party would stay out of the primary race, promising to help whomever the voters of the Eighth Congressional District chose as their candidate for Congress in the upcoming General Election. Those sentiments were echoed by NRCC officials during private meetings in Washington, D.C. with some candidates in this race. Sadly, the promises that were made have been broken.

Additionally, the funds expended by the NRCC are monies reserved to defeat Democrats in the fall, and are not used to work against other Republican candidates in the primary. That right is usually - and should always be - reserved for the voters. What's more, these funds are raised from hardworking Republicans across the country, folks who support Republican principles. These donors would be shocked to know that their contributions are being used to defeat credible Republican candidates here in Arizona. We call on the NRCC to immediately stop using Republican fundraising dollars to defeat fellow Republicans. This primary campaign should remain above the belt and outside the Beltway...

Posted to Immigration at 06:21 AM | Comments (1)

Trend: pretend California voters support driver's licenses for illegal aliens

The article "Voters back governor, poll shows" from Steve Geissinger of the "Medianews Sacramento Bureau" contains the following:

Immigration issues, which concern voters most, also may cost Schwarzenegger with his opposition to driver's licenses for illegal immigrants and dispatching of troops to the Mexican border.

Latino voters favored Angelides over the governor 39 percent to 25 percent in the poll.

Those two paragraphs should have probably been tied together in order to make it clearer that about the only group that might oppose the less wimpy version of Arnold's immigration stance are Hispanics who support illegal immigration. As even "One Bill Gil" Cedillo admits, 70% of California voters oppose driver's licenses for illegal aliens.

This is not as misleading as the other recent article from the Los Angeles Times' Jordan Rau. Nevertheless, I'm going to call this part of a new trend.

Another, funnier part of the article was discussed here.

Posted to Immigration at 02:21 AM | Comments (2)

Phil Angelides to be barbecued by voters

A Public Policy Institute of California poll finds that Arnold Schwarzenegger leads the only-slightly-worse challenger Phil Angelides by 45 to 32 percent. Informed of the results, Angelides said the following:

"Arnold Schwarzenegger is known by 100 percent of the world... Despite all his attacks, despite $20 million spent against me, distorting the truth, trying to smear me, Arnold Schwarzenegger is stuck at 45 percent... [...asked why even Democrats are switching to Arnold, he said:] You know, it's summertime, people are barbecuing, they're spending time with their families, and the fact is, Democrats are coming home, they're going to come home."

Posted to California at 11:06 PM | Comments (1)

Is Jim Burns nuttier than Badnarik?

Jim Burns - for all 299,999,999 million of you who didn't know - is a 2008 Libertarian party presidential candidate. An interview with him asks an extremely hypothetical question:

How would your administration deal with the threat of illegal immigration?

The answer:

I believe that people should be allowed to live any way they choose so long as they allow other to do the same. That means, among other things, they should be allowed to trade with whom they choose and go where they choose. One of the major reasons the United States is a great nation is that we have free trade and freedom of travel within our very large territory. We do not need the permission of the government to come and go or buy or sell, and we are the better for it. When I lived in Oregon, many years ago, many of the people wanted to keep the Californians out of Oregon. As I see it, if they had had the power, the people of Oregon would have been much the worst off for it.

Of course, if they wanted to do it, Burns might be forced to use state power to make them let anyone who wanted to live in Oregon move there.

The problems that many people see with immigration are that it cost the tax payer money to provide, among other things, education and medical care to illegal immigrants. The solution is not to restrict freedom of travel, rather not to have the government provide medical care and education. Just as it is not fair for the people of Banger, Maine to be forced to provide medical care and education for people in San Diego, California, so to it is wrong to force U.S. tax payers to provide people from other countries with medical care and education. The problem is not "illegal immigration," the problem is government taking from some people in order to give it to other people (always taking some of it for themselves or using it to buy favor to get re-elected). When I am President, I will promote free trade and freedom of travel.

The odds of Burns becoming president are about 20 billion to 1, but in any case, his "freedom of travel" would allow any foreign country to send us millions of people with sinister intent. Those millions wouldn't have to be sent as an openly invading force; they could just be "immigrants". And, they'd be coming from a stronger country that wasn't just a group of people living in a territory; they'd be coming from a country that could make and carry out plans. Those foreign citizens could then form a political bloc in one part of the U.S. and even claim a part of the U.S.'s formerly "very large territory" for the country to which they owe an allegiance. Just as "liberalism" carries the seeds of its own destruction by protecting those who do not support "liberalism", libertarianism would be considered a weakness by stronger countries and they would assuredly take advantage of it.

In other words, Burns' "freedom of travel" scheme would result in the U.S. losing territory and perhaps having a drastically changed political system as well.

His scheme should be considered on the same level as that of those starry-eyed pacifists who, in a jungle environment, would become another tribe's slaves or dinner.

Note also that Reason Magazine shares his same dream of "freedom of travel". No one who believes in such a concept should be taken seriously and no one should for a moment think that they have the U.S.'s best interests at heart.

Posted to Politics at 08:10 PM | Comments (2)

"Immigration Not A Major Issue For Latinos: Good News For GOP"

From this:

A year of controversy over the immigration issue has had scant impact on the Hispanic vote, a new Democratic survey has found.

Voter loyalties among that group remain frozen where they were last election, with Hispanics tending Democratic about 2-to-1.

If anything, Democrats may have a problem turning out Hispanics to vote in an off-year election.

That's according to a poll of 984 Hispanic likely voters by Democracy Corps, a group run by former Bill Clinton strategist James Carville and pollster Stanley Greenberg...

..."Our polls show the same thing," said Joe Garcia, director of the Hispanic Strategy Center for NDN, formerly the New Democrat Network...

Posted to Immigration at 03:27 PM | Comments (1)

Suzanne Gamboa/AP on immigration ads

Suzanne Gamboa of the Associated Press offers "Immigration ads a problem for campaigns":

Capturing the immigration debate in political ads this campaign season - without upsetting Hispanics - is proving tricky for the parties and candidates.

Heaven forbid that we should discuss such a vital topic in a straightforward way and by so doing offend anyone's fragile sensibilities.

Of course, Gamboa doesn't present evidence that anyone other than self-appointed leaders and others with a conflict of interest might be "upset". And, she doesn't discuss at all the group that issued the press release "Self-Appointed Latino Spokespeople Would Sacrifice National Security to Promote Illegal Immigration".

She discusses the anti-Stephen Laffey ad, saying it "set off grumbling in the Latino community," but the only two "community" members she can find opposed to the ad are the Democratic National Committee's Hispanic Caucus and Rhode Island state Sen. Juan M. Pichardo (who, despite being Dominican-American, is apparently standing in solidarity with illegal aliens from Mexico).

And, she offers the thoughts of Janet Murguia, president of the National Council of La Raza, ("National Council of The Race") a group that's considered mainstream but is not:

"Both parties are crossing the line... The issue of what to do about immigration is fair game for this election, demonizing an entire community is not."

Then, she discusses how Houston City Councilwoman Carol Alvarado was outraged by the DSCC's since-disappeared Internet-only ad 'Secure'.

And:

Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., has an ad on his re-election campaign Web site praising his anti-terrorism work. The ad includes an image of him standing in the desert near two white SUVs, similar to those used by the Border Patrol. Critics say the scene looks like the U.S.-Mexican border.

Has anyone besides some unknown leftie at TPMCafe even discussed that ad? If one subset of Americans takes offense at someone trying to reduce the possibility of terrorist infiltration via our southern border, is the problem with us or with that subset of Americans? If "community leaders" don't want to discuss border security except in the most childlike terms, aren't they leading their followers down the wrong path?

While Kyl is generally wrong about immigration, he has at least had some grown-up concerns:

Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona tonight demanding the United States launch an official investigation into the shocking border incursions by the Mexican military, and Governor Rick Perry of Texas is also demanding an investigation into the incident.

If two seconds of a possible BP SUV cause those "community leaders" to be upset, they may need smelling salts after that.

Two others quoted are "Lorena Chambers, founder of Chambers Lopez & Gaitan, an advertising company" and "Frank Guerra, founder of Guerra DeBerry Coody marketing and communications".

Posted to Immigration at 01:54 PM | Comments (2)

Maywood SOS protest, Round Two

There are already four updates to the post about the SOS protest in Maywood CA that saw a Mexican flag being raised over a U.S. Post Office, and the updates keep coming.

The L.A. Daily News' Bridget Johnson offers "Something's wrong with immigration protests" (also here with pictures):

...And if immigration proponents have been trying to pass off reconquista claims - the belief that immigrants want to take back "Aztlan" - as paranoid, these protesters weren't helping. One sign proclaimed "Stolen continent" - yet displayed two continents, North and South America. "White racists this is our continent" read one sign. Another said, "We will never live in peace until we get the European squatters off our lands."

...A couple of times, unwelcome people came into the counter-protesting crowd to take photos or video, and were quickly surrounded by an angry crowd and pelted with water bottles and debris. Shouts of "you little white b-" were directed at a blond woman; a man yelled "Get out of here, this is our town" through a bullhorn to others.

Some wearing lucha libre masks and some with bandannas obscuring their faces, counter-protesters tried to get close to the SOS demonstrators by cutting down side streets leading to Slauson, and were angry when the cops were already there. Others manned the front lines with signs depicting Arnold Schwarzenegger as a Nazi, chanting "Minutemen! Resist! They're the real terrorists."

Toward the end of the counter-demonstration, those protesters raised the Mexican flag on the pole in front of the U.S. Post Office. Don Silva of SOS said one woman with his group was assaulted while trying to move through the opposition crowd, and some of their cars had tires slashed and were vandalized...

...But when you have virulent protests that include a pre-teen boy yelling "f- that white b-" at a passing fair-skinned woman - me - something is seriously wrong. Especially when it comes from the side holding a banner that proclaimed "Say NO to racism."

And, WND offers pictures and links in "Mexican flag flies at U.S. post office":

The [KRLA] radio listener, volunteering for Save our State, said that when she arrived at the rally she was rushed by counter-protesters who called out, "Death to the Minutemen."

"They pushed me around and told me if I was to take one step further, they would beat the s*** out of me," Sandra said. "I looked to the back of me and there were about four police officers leaning on their vehicle just watching, doing nothing!"

As she stepped forward, Sandra said, the counter-protesters stole her sign and ripped it up as another threw water on her.

A police officer eventually escorted her to her group...

UPDATE: There's a radio interview with some of the participants here.

Posted to Immigration at 11:28 AM | Comments (8)

Palm Beach Post's joke editorial about Senate amnesty

The Palm Beach Post offers an editorial that would be funny if it weren't so utterly pathetic: "Real immigration reform also comes at good price". Like the S.F. Chronical, they call for an "honest" accounting of the costs vs. benefits of giving amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. And:

For example, one provision that has wide support in the Senate calls for fining immigrants who sign up for the government program $2,000 for illegally entering the country. The idea could generate billions.

If we really wanted to make the long green, we should just open the floodgates now, then wait a year or two and declare a massive amnesty for everyone. Think of the profits.

An honest accounting of the Senate plan - allowing for the needed security upgrades and the offsets brought by new taxes and fees - shows that the net cost to the government would be about $4 billion over 10 years.

Their version of "honest" is obtained by subtracting the $78 billion for security from the projection of $126 billion. Leaving $48 billion, from which the projected income of $44 billion is subtracted. As Homer Simpson would say, we'd be stupid not to do it.

The number that House Republicans don't want to talk about is 12 million. That's the estimated population of illegal immigrants, and the House GOP still doesn't have a plan for dealing with it.

Many pro-American House Republicans do indeed have a plan: start enforcing the laws, whether something like HR4437 or the current laws. That will reduce the number of illegal aliens currently here and disencentivize others from coming.

As if the preceding wasn't enough, the PBP stretches the limits of credulity with this:

The Center for American Progress, a Washington-based think tank, puts the cost of arresting, processing and deporting all the illegal immigrants in the country at between $206 billion and $230 billion. The estimate is theoretical because it's hard to find a rational person who believes that mass deportation is possible. Which says a lot about House Republicans.

CAP is affiliated with the Clintons, and as discussed at the link the study they mention is as much a joke as their editorial. And, of course, no mainstream Republican is calling for mass deportations.

Does the Palm Beach Post expect anyone to take them seriously?

Posted to Immigration at 08:18 AM | Comments (3)

California Assembly passes Cedillo's "full student aid for illegal aliens" bill

California already gives illegal aliens the same in-state tuition discounts that U.S. citizens who are residents of California receive. Now, the state Assembly has passed a bill that goes a step further and gives illegal aliens the same rights to financial aid as citizens.

The bill is SB 160 (the "California Dream Act") and was authored by state senator Gil Cedillo with the assistance of Gloria Romero. It now goes to the Senate for their stamp of approval.

From this:

Students who came to the country illegally could apply for state financial aid when they attend California colleges and universities under legislation approved Tuesday by the Assembly in a party-line vote... Supporters said immigrant children who have graduated and completed at least three years of high school in California should not be penalized for their parents' decision to bring them to the U.S. illegally.

This explanation is just for the "liberals" out there: When allocating limited resources, someone's always going to get "penalized". There is only a limited amount of such financial aid, and there will always be more applicants for that aid than there is aid money.

So, to put it another way, those supporters think we should give some of those benefits to foreign citizens even if U.S. citizens are "penalized", and the opponents think we should reserve those benefits for U.S. citizens. If we don't do that, aren't we continuing down the dangerous slope of devaluing U.S. citizenship? Those who've supported this bill don't just represent U.S. citizens, they also represent citizens of Mexico. Everyone in the state would be better off if they would renounce their U.S. citizenships and run for office in Mexico.

From the current version of the bill:

This bill would enact the California Dream Act, which would require the Trustees of the California State University and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and would request the Regents of the University of California, to establish procedures and forms that enable persons who are exempt from paying nonresident tuition under the provision described above, or who meet equivalent requirements adopted by the regents, to apply for, and participate in, all student aid programs administered by these segments to the full extent permitted by federal law. This provision would apply to the University of California only if the regents, by appropriate resolution, act to make it applicable.

Regarding one bit of federal law, there's this:

A district shall waive the fees of a person who is exempt from paying nonresident tuition under Section 68130.5, and who otherwise qualifies for a waiver under this section, under regulations and procedures adopted by the board of governors. The Legislature finds and declares that this subdivision is a state law within the meaning of subsection (d) of Section 1621 of Title 8 of the United States Code.

Subsection (d) of Section 1621 of Title 8 says this:

A State may provide that an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States is eligible for any State or local public benefit for which such alien would otherwise be ineligible under subsection (a) of this section only through the enactment of a State law after August 22, 1996, which affirmatively provides for such eligibility.

Now, let's look at 1623 (also covered here):

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State (or a political subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an amount, duration, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident.

One way to take that is that the current in-state tuition scheme has to be offered to every U.S. citizen no matter where they live or else California is violating federal law. In that case the new financial aid scheme just furthers that violation. I'll leave it to someone else to look into whether they think they're taking advantage of a loophole.

Previously: Gil Cedillo/SB 160: free community college for illegal aliens

Posted to Immigration at 05:18 AM | Comments (4)

Assembly passes Cedillo's drivers licenses for illegal aliens bill (SB 1162)

The California Assembly has passed Gil Cedillo's latest attempt to give driver's license to illegal aliens, SB 1162. This is just a week after the Democrat-controlled Assembly Appropriations Committe shelved his earlier attempt.

Needless to say, that minor setback didn't deter "One Bill Gil" from his life's work of giving U.S. benefits to Mexican citizens as he weaved, bobbed, and "gutted and amended" SB1162 to transform it into its current form.

In January, it was just about a minimum wage increase (link) and had nothing in there about driving. Now, compare that version to the latest, with vast tracts of struck-through text and italicized sections.

The Senate must pass it by Thursday, and it will probably be vetoed by Arnold even despite his weakened state. Nevertheless, a few phone calls might not hurt. Perhaps you could suggest that they remind themselves of which country they're supposed to represent.

And, Assemblyman Alberto Torrico, D-Newark has a message for Republicans. They should deal with the "reality" that illegal immigrants are driving. And:

"These people are living in this country, they're working in this country, they're paying taxes... If you want to keep track of immigrants and you're scared of terrorism, vote for this bill."

Yes, indeed! Why, it's almost as if he's speaking directly to me, and his finely-honed logic has certainly convinced me that he's not just supporting this issue in order to gain more race-based political power.

And, Jordan Rau of the Los Angeles Times has some "facts" for us to consider:

The [DLs for IAs] and health insurance bills have been the projects of passion for two rank-and-file Democrats in the Legislature, and are strongly supported by two key party constituencies: liberals and Latinos.

Actually, both groups "strongly support[ing]" drivers licenses for illegal aliens is not entirely accurate. Even "One Bill Gil" admits that 70% of voters oppose what he keeps trying to do. Given that fact, "strong support" by those two groups is impossible. Rau also doesn't mention the curious way in which he changed a minimum wage bill into yet another "vehicle" for his "passion". Write: readers.rep *at* latimes.com

Posted to Immigration_dls at 12:25 AM | Comments (0)

Arnold: California not the Zinfandel State

Sen. Carole Migden (D-Frisco) wanted to name Zinfandel as California's "historic wine". She originally wanted to name it "California's official wine", but we know that's actually those high-pitched sounds coming from the Legislature itself and anyway the wine industries bitched about it.

In his gutsiest decision yet (apparently Maria took the leash off by accident or something), Arnold Schwarzenegger has vetoed her attempt. He didn't want to be unfair to all the other fine wines - many of them not so wimpy-sounding - that the state produces.

Posted to California at 10:50 PM | Comments (0)

Teamsters come out against "NAFTA superhighway"

From this:

The NAFTA superhighway, a north-south interstate trade corridor linking Mexico, Canada and the U.S., would mean U.S. truckers replaced by Mexicans, more unsafe rigs on American roads and more drivers relying on drugs for their long hauls, charges the International Brotherhood of Teamsters – the latest group to weigh in against the Bush administration plan.

The August issue of Teamster magazine features a cover story on the plan for an enlarged I-35 that will reach north from the drug capital border town of Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, 1,600 miles to Canada through San Antonio, Austin, Dallas, Kansas City, Minneapolis and Duluth, while I-69 originating at the same crossing will shoot north to Michigan and across the Canadian border...

Some of the interviews from the magazine don't entirely add up; some Mexican drivers say they drive 4500 km (around 2800 miles) in five or six nights but they need "magic dust" to do it. Your own blogger did 1250 miles in less than 48 hours, no magic involved. Yes, some of that was faster than most trucks drive, but I also took three short hikes along the way.

Details, details! In this case it's only the thought that matters, and perhaps the Teamsters can convince other unions to come around to a more American position than that they currently hold, and perhaps some unions might even somewhat reduce their support for illegal immigration.

Posted to NAU at 11:50 AM | Comments (1)

Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission seems a little biased

The Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (link) held a "special meeting" in Hazleton to discuss illegal immigration. The guest list was highly biased; so too are the report by Kent Jackson and so too is at least the head of the Commission:

...Since 1991, the commission has opposed English-only laws, Chairman Stephen Glassman said.

Glassman said Hazleton enacted its law under the perception that illegal immigration fuels crime and adds to the cost of running city government, but those perceptions are unsupported by data, he said.

Immigrants, regardless of their legal status, might contribute more to government than the government spends to serve them, he said...

1. Kent may have committed a cardinal sin; Glassman apparently prefers "Chairperson" to "Chairman".

2. I'm pretty sure the Chairperson's statistics are wrong.

3. One wonders how far we've fallen when a government official is promoting the idea that it's somehow acceptable for the government to profit from illegal activity. Since most people and organizations try to maximize their profits, should the government encourage even more illegal activity, so as to increase their take?

At a guest posting at the ACLU of PA's blog, Glassman says "[a]s a law enforcement agency, the Commission does not, of course, condone or support illegal immigration." Of course, the rest of his post does in effect support illegal immigration, as do his comments above.

And, here's another quote:

"Even though this may not have been the intent of Geno's, the presence of the sign harkens back to a time when signs stating, 'no colored allowed,' 'Whites only,' 'no Jews,' or 'no Italians or Irish need apply,' often greeted patrons of public places."

The other guests included:

* Dr. Agapito Lopez of the Governor's Advisory Commission on Latino Affairs (an earlier quote from him: "We will acculturate, we will adapt to your rules, we will follow your laws, but we will never assimilate.")

Robert Nix of Phoenix Strategies in Philadelphia ("We need immigrants for our future. It seems communities taking immigration into their own hands are barking up the wrong tree.") However, what the article fails to note is that Nix is or was on the board of the Hispanic Bar Association of Pennsylvania (link).

Another guest made some "interesting" comments; I'll leave it to someone else to search for his name in order to discover a possible reason why.

And, rounding out the roster was someone from the National Immigration Law Center.

Posted to Immigration at 06:54 AM | Comments (0)

"A North American United Nations?"

From Rep. Ron Paul:

Globalists and one-world promoters never seem to tire of coming up with ways to undermine the sovereignty of the United States. The most recent attempt comes in the form of the misnamed "Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America (SPP)." In reality, this new "partnership" will likely make us far less secure and certainly less prosperous.

...Congressional oversight of what might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is non-existent. Congress has had no role at all in a "dialogue" that many see as a plan for a North American union.

...Critics of NAFTA and CAFTA warned at the time that the agreements were actually a move toward more government control over international trade and an eventual merging of North America into a border-free area. Proponents of these agreements dismissed this as preposterous and conspiratorial. Now we see that the criticisms appear to be justified.

...Though the US administration insists that the SPP does not undermine US sovereignty, how else can one take statements like this? How can establishing a "trilateral regulatory cooperation" not undermine our national sovereignty?

[...NAFTA superhighway...]

...This all adds up to not only more and bigger government, but to the establishment of an unelected mega-government. As the SPP website itself admits, "The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America represents a broad and ambitious agenda." I hope my colleagues in Congress and American citizens will join me in opposing any "broad and ambitious" effort to undermine the security and sovereignty of the United States.

He also says that one of their other proposals seems similar to the Codex Alimentarius proposal, something that I hadn't heard of before.

Posted to NAU at 05:01 AM | Comments (0)

Send an email about Ramos/Compean Border Patrol case

As discussed previously, Ramos and Compean are two Border Patrol agents who appear to have been railroaded by our own federal government. You can read the details on the matter and send an email to George Bush, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff here. Other actions discussed at the previous link.

Posted to Immigration at 02:46 AM | Comments (0)

Farmers Branch: will Hector Flores violate fair housing laws?

Farmers Branch is a Dallas suburb that's been considering enacting a Hazelton-style ordinance designed to reduce the number of illegal immigrants moving to their city.

Needless to say, various local groups including "Hector Flores, immediate past national president of the League of Latin American Citizens" are playing not just the race card but going further, saying that "the suggestions are an attempt to rid the city of all Hispanics".

Ironically but not unexpectedly, what they propose to counter the ordinance certainly seems racist. Let's see if the title of the article by Stephanie Sandoval gives us a clue: "Group to encourage Hispanics to buy homes in Farmers Branch". Is that racist? Well, let's see: would a headline entitled "Group to encourage Whites to buy homes in Maywood" ever fly?

Let's look at the article and see if the proposal is racist:

One City Council member's idea to limit illegal immigrants in Farmers Branch has prompted a plan by opponents to promote and sell homes in the city to Hispanics - including illegal immigrants.

A group of Hispanic and civil rights groups Monday announced Compre Farmers Branch, a consortium of real estate agents, lending institutions and others aimed at helping Hispanics buy homes in Farmers Branch.

They're hoping Hispanics will buy all 157 homes they say are on the market in that city - including the home of City Council member Tim O'Hare...

I wonder, what would happen if a non-Hispanic wanted in on the deal? What an interesting opportunity for a local investigative reporter with a hidden camera, provided they are very very careful about following all relevant laws.

Flores was featured here before in "LULAC criticizes Mexico's pro-illegal immigration propaganda". Most people who are unfamiliar with that organization might think they were complaining about Mexico spreading their propaganda in the U.S. In fact, here's a quote from Mr. Flores:

"The Mexican government should have worked to provide this opportunity to a Hispanic business. LULAC is always trying to find ways to open the doors for Hispanics; the Mexican government should do the same."

I kid you not.

Posted to Immigration at 10:39 PM | Comments (1)

MRC: "How TV Promotes Illegal Immigration"

Via this comes the Media Research Center's "Election in the Streets". From the summary here:

[It] demonstrates that ABC, CBS, and NBC behaved like protester publicists in late March, April, and May, in complete contradiction to public opinion polls showing America had a serious problem with the tide of illegal immigration. Gooey stories about illegal aliens "emerging from the shadows" to fight for their "rights" piled up the soundbites for amnesty, and the protest organizers somehow evaded ever being described as liberals or leftists, despite talking about the "fascist clauses" in the Sensenbrenner bill. Check it out before the next round of protests heats up next weekend...

Posted to Immigration at 01:01 PM | Comments (1)

S.F. Chronical: CBO should be honest about benefits of a massive amnesty

I have words of advice for the San Francisco Chronical: be careful what you wish for:

Last week, the allegedly "nonpartisan" Congressional Budget Office declared that the cost of implementing the immigration-reform plan approved by the U.S. Senate would be a staggering $126 billion over 10 years...

...But the report leaves out the economic contributions immigrants will make to the economy that might far outweigh any benefits they might receive. It also doesn't take into account the Social Security taxes newly legalized immigrants will pay at precisely the time that the Baby Boom generation begins retiring.

Those who want to play the immigration "cost" card should be willing to be honest not only about the costs, but also the benefits of legalizing immigrants to the U.S. economy.

Some of those costs are listed in "CBO Estimate of Senate Amnesty Grossly Understated, Asserts FAIR" (excerpt here). I look forward to the Chron discussing those costs in a future editorial, as well as the impact any amnesty will have on increased illegal immigration and other non-financial costs.

Posted to Immigration at 12:57 PM | Comments (3)

Democratic National Committee Press Release Mentions Immigration

The Democratic National Committee has issued a press release entitled "Americans Less Safe Because of Bush Administration's Shortsightedness and Failed Leadership Says DNC":

...BORDERS: Millions Wasted On Inadequate Border Security Efforts. Millions of tax dollars have been wasted as a result of failed border security technology initiatives that have been undertaken by the Department - the Integrated Surveillance Intelligence System and the America's Shield Initiatives. The Administration has failed to provide promised funding for Border Patrol agents (20 percent short), detention bed spaces (20 percent short), and the Immigration and Customs agent resources called for by the 9/11 Act (75 percent short). ("The State of Homeland Security, 2006" prepared by the Democratic Staff of the Committee on Homeland Security; 2/06)...

Their figures are probably right, but they aren't telling the whole story. Such as how the Democratic Party makes some of that border security necessary by constantly supporting illegal immigration.

They do the latter by constantly trying to give illegal aliens benefits, in some cases benefits not available to some U.S. citizens. And, they do that by supporting illegal aliens marching in our streets demanding rights to which they aren't entitled. And, they do it by refusing to fully call the Bush administration to task, rather than simply issuing half-hearted, almost-hidden comments like those above.

Posted to Immigration at 02:04 AM | Comments (1)

Washington Post promotes cheap labor in Virginia, gets busted

On the front page of the August 7 Washington Post, the article "Constructing Lives off the Soccer Field Latino League Team Owners Attract Athletes With Jobs, Housing" by Nick Miroff promoted, among other things, immigrants (whether legal or illegal is not known) being "stabled" (their word) in "cramped, dormitory-style accommodations" and spending "almost all their hours together, either working, practicing or playing in games".

As described here, someone looked into the company that was promoted and couldn't find a business license. And, this comes on the heels of Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell saying this at a public meeting:

"Many Virginia and American business people say that they cannot find a sufficient quantity of American citizens to do some of the dirty, hard jobs."

An American who had had to leave the area responded and pointed out just how wrong he is:

...All of us normal, blue collar folks can't earn a decent wage anymore doing blue collar work around here. It's impossible to do. The construction industry's been taken over by illegal immigrants. You can't make money in it any more. They've undercut the wages. You can go ask anybody who has worked construction and they'll tell you the same thing. They're undercutting everybody. And the way the undercut is, they don't play by the same rules as everybody else. It's like you said, it's an underground economy. And what's the state of Virginia doing to penalize employers who knowingly employ illegal immigrants?

More excerpts at the link.

Posted to Immigration at 02:17 PM | Comments (2)

"A Progressive and Populist Position on Illegal Immigration"

Democratic visitors might want to take a look at this article. For instance this bit:

...The other problem with Democrats, liberals and progressives is their willingness to put the welfare of illegal immigrants above the rights and needs of current and future American citizens. I am nauseated by the stupidity and lack of patriotism by these peoples' willingness to sacrifice the prosperity of working- and middle-class Americans – their fellow citizens. George Lakoff has remarkable standing and credentials as a progressive thinker. Yet his recent writings on this immigration issue reveal total disregard for his fellow American CITIZENS...

Posted to Immigration at 01:14 PM | Comments (1)

Sheldon Drobny blows lid off Huffington Post comments system

Air America Radio co-founder Sheldon Drobny is a contributor to the Huffington Post, and he's posted several threads lately where he criticizes Bill Maher for apparently planning to have Ann Coulter on his show. In one post he called him a "sell out", and supposedly Arianna herself gave him a call. And, that was supposedly the first time that The Huff herself had called him.

There's no word on what prompted Arianna's call, but one can imagine that it followed a long, tearful conversation with Maher himself.

In the latest post, Drobny describes the Huffington Post "backstage" screen, which is apparently a blog posting screen provided to contributors. In case it disappears, here's the relevant bits:

...Besides having the tools to post, you get information about approved and unapproved comments. Unapproved comments eventually show up at an almost 100% rate...

Below is the status of comments from my recent posts all criticizing Maher and the Hollywood folks:

My Response To Some Comments On Recent Posts
(Comments: 14 approved, 73 unapproved)
Air America Complaint Department
(Comments: 58 approved, 9 unapproved)
Bill Maher: A Retraction Clarification
(Comments: 82 approved, 2 unapproved)
Bill Maher Retraction
(Comments: 11 approved, )
Bill Maher: Another Hollywood Sellout
(Comments: 103 approved, 1 unapproved)

As you can see, almost all of the comments were eventually approved. My latest post showing Hitchins fingering the Maher audience was posted 08.26.2006 at 03:51pm and yet 73 of the 87 posts have been held back for nearly 19 hours. The same thing happened with the other Maher/Hollywood posts. In the past, I have had many posts that got lots of comments that were all approved within a couple of hours. The whole point of getting comments posted on the various blogs is to keep the action going and increase the average time of each person on the blog...

...I need an explanation for the fact that Maher benefited from the unusual hold back delays of the commentors posts about Bill Maher. The blogosphere is supposed to be the highest form of free speech and with all the F words and C words I see on the Huffpo comments, it is hard for me to believe that Huffpo gives serious review of comments that need to be withheld. It is possible that Huffpo is having technical difficulties which need to be explained to its contributors. But, that aside, we don't want censorship or cronyism on the blogosphere...

I omitted the bits where he discussed his mad forensic accounting skillz.

Also, a few months ago I sent an email to another contributor about a comment I left that wasn't approved. That unnamed person, despite being a far-left loon, to his/her credit did write back with the news that he/she had no way to approve or disapprove comments. (OK, OK, it was Nora Ephron). That squares with what Sheldon says, but they didn't mention the count of approved comments; perhaps that was added later.

UPDATE: I should have seen this coming. His post has now been prepended with a seemingly acceptable explanation: two of their comment-approvers were on vacation and they were just backlogged with their discussion-stopping comments approval process.

Posted to Bloggage at 10:59 AM | Comments (2)

Mexican flag raised over Maywood, CA (SOS protest)

The Save Our State group held an anti-illegal immigration protest in Maywood, California earlier today. According to various posts in their forums (1,2) there were allegedly a few incidents, including:

- An elderly couple being swarmed and having to go into an auto parts store and then be escorted out by police to avoid the crowd... (picture at one of the links)

- One of their female members being roughed up...

- Several of their cars being vandalized with spray paint and given flat tires.

And, at this link you can see a picture of the Mexican flag being raised over the Maywood Post Office, as in United States Post Office.

As it says in the front page (no permalink yet) of la.indymedia.org: "Sat., 2:00pm Counter-protesters raise Mexican flag up Maywood post office flag pole Caller reports 100 counters and 30 SOS-MM still facing off in Maywood near post office. A small group of counters have replaced the US flag at Maywood post office with a Mexican flag. Police tried to pull the Mexican flag down but the ropes got stuck and it still flies at this time."

In the pictures, the "counters" are seen with the usual banners from ANSWER LA and from various reconquista groups ("White racists this is out continent", "We are Indigenous! The ONLY owners of this continent", etc.)

Reading these reports I'm continuously reminded of this John Derbyshire summary of what he was told by someone involved with immigration enforcement:

Grass roots immigration-enforcement groups: They are babes in the wood. The La Raza types run rings round them. They easily fall into factional squabbling. They attract kooky fringe types, and don't know how to get rid of them. The enemy has all the heavy artillery: AILA, Republican elites, pretty much the entire Democratic Party (though there were some kind words for James Webb), all the media, the universities, etc.

SOS might indeed have some fringe members, and they also have a problem with realizing who the real enemy is. It isn't the "Mexica Movement". Rather, it's those in the "mainstream" who come close to their views, such as Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa or state Senator Gil Cedillo. And, it includes those who shelter or lie about such groups, such as the media.

They complain in their forums that a KABC reporter didn't want to cover one of their members supposedly getting shoved around. Leaving aside the question of why they let one of their female members get into that situation in the first place, shouldn't they have been videotaping everything that went on? And, shouldn't they also have videotaped the KABC reporter refusing to cover this matter? Shouldn't they be trying to discredit those in the mainstream who are the ones with actual power instead of engaging in low-level street protests with loonies and Communists?

UPDATE: There are more pictures here from the L.A. Daily News' Bridget Johnson. There are more pictures here: tinyurl.com/ft8wn Note the resulting link; unless I misunderstood the rest of his posts, that may be one of those on the fringe mentioned above.

UPDATE 2: Still more pictures at this far-left site: tinyurl.com/htogl and tinyurl.com/j8a5y (SapphoManifesto). From the second link: "...the Mexican flag is raised, & refuses to come down, even for Maywood police! In pic # 2, the crowd of pro-immigrant rights supporters reacts with cheers as they watch the new flag wave..."

UPDATE 3: There's a clear picture of the Mexican flag flying over a United States Post Office here. A commenter points to a KCBS video report which he says is biased (and he's probably right). If it is, contact them here: cbs2.com/contact. LA Opinion has a fairly stock article, here's a translation:

[...ANSWER is an "antiwar" group... one of the counter-protestors says:] "They dare to come here to Maywood that is a sanctuary, where the mayor declared itself against the racist laws, and come to say to us that we do not have to be here... They think that they can say to him to people that is illegal, when it is a right of humans to look for a better life." ...While the demonstrators of the side of minutemen them observed from the other end of the barrier, several people raised a Mexican flag in the post of the post office, causing shouts and applause of the side of the immigrants and curses on the part of their opponents, who waved American flags.

UPDATE 4: What a productive protest. There's a video of the Mexican flag flying here. I only watched the beginning; the sound is bad and includes one or more people on the SOS side making a lot of noise rather than, for instance, trying to catch the sounds of the other side cheering or saying things. There may be some of that later on in the video. And, someone who claims to be a cop who was there left a comment in the SOS forums; a copy is here:

...About the parking situation, the original plan was to have everyone park in the grocery store parking lot. Unfortunately, the store's manager was on the side of your foes and would not cooperate... The city council is out of control in Maywood. There are 2 good councilmen and 3 bad ones. The leader is the Vice Mayor. He takes all his orders from the church. The police dept pretty much has its hands tied. They did disband the traffic unit by order of the city council. They do still impound cars but can't put the state's mandatory 30 day hold on them. Another agency has been enforcing traffic laws and impounding cars. The city has no authority over their officers. The city council is now drafting a plan to move from being a general law city to being a charter law city. For those of you that don’t understand the ramifications of this, here it is. Under a city charter, the city council makes all the decisions. Nothing has to be voted on by the people. The police officers can lose civil service rights. This will make them 'at will' employees. Can you see a cop getting fired for enforcing the law on one of the city's migrant children. This sounds like a tyranny to me. By the way, in case you didn't know, the Vice Mayor was at the demonstration. Guess which side he was on...

UPDATE 5: See "Maywood SOS protest, Round Two".

Posted to Immigration at 07:25 PM | Comments (4)

"CBO Estimate of Senate Amnesty Grossly Understated, Asserts FAIR"

From this:

The estimate by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), released [last] Friday, that the Senate-passed guest worker amnesty bill (S. 2611) would cost the country a net amount of $127 billion over the next ten years is misleading and grossly underestimates the real fiscal impact, contends the Federation from American Immigration Reform (FAIR). According to FAIR, the CBO estimate includes only the fiscal impact at the federal level, but ignores the much greater impact S. 2611 would have on state and local governments.

An estimate of the fiscal impact at the local level by FAIR identifies a cost of $70 billion per year by 2020, primarily for education and health care. The $70 billion annual price tag does not include a number of other likely cost increases for programs such as assisted housing and other social welfare programs.

"The formidable cost estimate by the CBO of the Senate amnesty bill is only the tip of the iceberg," commented FAIR president Dan Stein. "The full impact of this disastrous legislation won't begin to be felt for another decade. Once millions of illegal aliens become eligible for all government programs, benefits and services, the fiscal impact on local governments are likely to be catastrophic."

Supporters of the Senate-passed amnesty/guest worker bill are attempting to lessen the impact of the CBO projection by noting that the enforcement-only bill passed by the House of Representatives (H.R. 4437) also comes with a hefty price tag. While that is true, because the House bill does not include amnesty and expanded admission of low-wage workers, these would be one-time-only expenditures, not an ever expanding liability. The enforcement measures in the House bill, if implemented, would result in reduced state and local costs as the illegal alien population began to decrease...

Posted to Immigration at 12:33 PM | Comments (4)

Sheila Kuehl: free healthcare for anyone who can make it across the California border

Now comes California state Senator Sheila Kuehl with SB 840, the "California Health Insurance Reliability Act". It would mandate "universal health care" and would cover "dental care, prescriptions, mental health care and hospitalization".

And, it would be open to "undocumented" residents.

No longer would California need to worry about citizens of Mexico crossing illegally and then heading to other states. No, Kuehl's plan would make sure that they would stay right here. In fact, many thousands, tens of thousands, or more! would come just to take advantage of her largess.

Of course, some worry-worts might say that all those illegal aliens would not only drive up the cost of the scheme but would take healthcare from U.S. citizens. And, some people might suggest that the "progressives" in the California legislature are better suited to being Mexican politicians than U.S. politicians. And, others might say that their constant support for illegal immigration and spreading U.S. programs to foreign citizens who are here illegally is one of the major reasons why "progressives" are so widely distrusted and one of the major reasons that they keep getting their proposals shot down.

And, of course, they'd be right.

Posted to California at 09:17 AM | Comments (2)

Schwarzenegger, Perry, Napolitano, Richardson urge "comprehensive" immigration reform

The four border governers (Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, Rick Perry of Texas, Janet Napolitano of Arizona, and Bill Richardson of New Mexico) have sent a letter House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist urging them to pass "comprehensive" immigration "reform". While Perry says they aren't endorsing either the House or the Senate bill, they are in fact endorsing the Senate's version due to their use of the word "comprehensive".

And, they're also using a Democrat talking point:

"Instead of holding dozens of field hearings that do little but stir the pot of discontent, we urge you to get back to work and pass legislation that puts the interest of taxpayers first and solves this crisis once and for all."

Of course, the Senate's bill will only make things far, far worse by vastly increasing legal immigration and encouraging millions more illegal aliens to come here.

But, wait, there's even more of a sellout ahead:

The state leaders also joined the governors of six Mexican states in signing a joint declaration in which they agreed to vigilantly detect and deter criminal activity along the border by sharing information about issues such as human, drug and arms trafficking...

...While the Mexican governors did not sign the letter to Hastert and Frist, several of them urged Congress to act in their closing remarks. Baja California Gov. Eugenio Elorduy Walther said political leaders must recognize that people will always migrate across borders, like the first North American settlers did thousands of years ago...

Posted to Immigration at 03:09 AM | Comments (1)

El Salvador president Tony Saca to his citizens: get a green card

Via this comes this:

Salvadoran President Tony Saca visited Miami Friday to warn his citizens not to let their temporary residency status run out as they wait for Congress to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill.

Many migrants from El Salvador received the temporary status after a devastating earthquake struck the Central American country in 2001. The temporary protection allowed those already in the U.S. to work legally. Their status must be renewed annually, and Sept. 1 is the deadline.

But Saca is concerned that with all the discussion about U.S. immigration reform, some Salvadorans living here may become complacent and decide not to renew their status in hopes that Congress will approve a broader change to U.S. immigration law that would put them on the path to permanent residency.

"If they don't register for this program, they will lose their immigration status and will get an order for deportation. Then they won't be able to apply for future programs that might lead to a permanent residency, so it is very important that they renew," said Rene Leon, El Salvador's ambassador to the U.S.

Posted to Immigration at 10:31 PM | Comments (1)

Mike Huckabee: opposition to "comprehensive" immigration reform isn't racist

In May, Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee spoke to reporters in Washington D.C. Hotline was there:

Huckabee, who supports guest worker programs and is not an immigration hard-liner, said he believes opposition to comprehensive immigration reform is 'irrational in many cases.' And he did not discount the causative factor of racism.

"If I were to say that some of it is driven by just sheer racism, I think I would be telling you the truth. I've had conversations with people that and it became very evident that what they really didn't like was that people didn't look like them, didn't talk like them, didn't celebrate ht holidays like they do, and they just had a problem with it. Now, that is not to say that everyone who is really fired out about immigration is racist. They're not."

Of course, this could be considered a smear attempt, and the "reporters" at Hotline title their piece "Huckabee: Some Critics Of Comprehensive Reform Are Motivated By Racism".

But, let's think logically about this. "Huck" is only refering to the motivations of some people, not all. According to him, some opponents of "comprehensive" reform aren't doing so because they're racists. Therefore, according to Huckabee, opposition to "comprehensive" reform is not, in and of itself, racist. If Huckabee thinks some people are racist, then he should argue against them personally and he shouldn't try to conflate those who are racist with opposition to "reform".

Now that "Huck" has cleared the air, I eagerly await him arguing for the reasons why we should support a massive amnesty for millions of illegal aliens without relying on smears.

I wonder: is this where Arnold got the similar smear that he later partially retracted? (the La Mesa townhall meeting: Arnold Heckled on SoCal Campaign Tour)

Previous coverage of the even-more-sanctimonious than Bush presidential hopeful starts in these posts:

Molly Hennessy-Fiske/LAT promotes corruption in Arkansas; Huckabee

Mexican consulate coming to Little Rock

Arkansas Republican governor Mike Huckabee and the "underground economy"

Arkansas' Bob Caudle doesn't pull any punches

Arkansas' Huckabee, Tyson Foods, LULAC all aligned

Posted to Immigration at 04:04 PM | Comments (2)

Help David Garbe, the Suburban Chicago News provide America-friendly coverage

David Garbe is a reporter for the Suburban Chicago News (owned by the Chicago Sun-Times group) and he offers the latest in a very long line of similar reports on the mobile Mexican consulate coming to small towns to pass out their ID cards to their citizens, most of whom are here illegally: "Hundreds line up at mobile Mexican consulate". While his article is fairly standard for the genre, it does provide a tiny bit more information than most, but it also has the same downsides as the others. Let's take a look at it and see if we can help David Garbe support what's in the best interests of America:

AURORA - Hundreds of Mexican immigrants lined the sidewalk at Bardwell Elementary School Thursday, awaiting a chance to get identification cards from their native country.

The school's gymnasium is playing host to the mobile operation of the Mexican Consulate in Chicago, which will be available to assist Mexican citizens there through Saturday.

The vast majority of people waiting in line were seeking to get a matricula consular, a photo ID card designed by the Mexican government primarily for its millions of citizens living in the United States without American documentation.

American immigration hawks criticize the matricula cards for making it easier for illegal immigrants to continue living in the United States...

...Banks are keen on selling their services to the estimated 5 million undocumented immigrants in America.

"You're missing the boat if you're not serving that population," said Sandy Lorenz, a regional manager for Fifth Third Bank...

Here are some questions the SCN might consider asking if they want to be a real newspaper:

* Shouldn't he have questioned the bank in a bit more depth? For instance, isn't that bank profiting from illegal activity? Would they, for instance, go after deposits from those who traffic in cigarettes or pot?

* What is a foreign country doing passing out their IDs to illegal aliens in a United States school (link)? Who authorized their use of public facilities? Was it Thomas Hartman, the principal (email: thartman.bardwell *at* d131.org)? Or, was it a higher-up? Should public facilities be used by a foreign country that wants to pass out ID cards to its citizens who are here illegally? What kind of "lesson" does that teach to the students at the school?

* Should Garbe have refered to those who want to enforce our immigration laws as "hawks"? What term would we use for those who support a foreign country's agenda?

Let's write the reporter and his editor and see if we can help them understand what they should have done:

dgarbe *at* scn1.com
rnagel *at* scn1.com

NOTE: I bought some Adwords in that paper last year, but I won't be making the same mistake again.

Posted to Immigration at 11:17 AM | Comments (1)

A Wayne Cornelius/Center for Comparative Immigration Studies/UCSD quote

Wayne Cornelius, director of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at the University of California at San Diego, is a quote source I've seen occasionally. In case you see him being presented as in any way impartial or not partisan, could you please send the reporter the following quote he gave to the CSM?

"[The recent focus on immigration matters is] mainly because of a strategic choice made by the Republican Congressional leadership to make immigration their party's wedge issue du jour for this election year... Exploiting anti-immigration hostility is ... an effective and efficient way to mobilize their base."

The quote is from the generally unremarkable article "Why illegal immigration is one of the hot topics of 2006".

Posted to Immigration at 11:00 AM | Comments (0)

Justice for the Border Patrol (Compean/Ramos)

A new site from FAIR has a petition you can sign supporting the two Border Patrol agents who appear to have been railroaded: Justice for the Border Patrol.

It contains this interesting quote from Sen. Dianne Feinstein:

"It appears that the facts do not add up or justify the length of the sentences for these agents, let alone their conviction on multiple counts. Border agents often have a difficult and dangerous job in guarding our nation's borders. Undue prosecution of Border Patrol Agents could have a chilling effect on their ability to carry out their duties."

Related:

"Legal defense fund started for convicted Border Patrol agents"

Ramos/Compean case: Bonner responds; Hostettler, Sensenbrenner will look into it

"Petition seeks pardon for agents"

Posted to Immigration at 05:41 AM | Comments (1)

A "comprehensive" 1986 amnesty would have prevented pro-grower propaganda

Today's Wacky but Thought-Provoking Immigration Quote of the Day is featured in the article "Immigration bill sticker shock". The quote source is John Young, co-chairman of the Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform:

"In my opinion, the fairer question is: How will illegal immigrants impact the costs of healthcare, local education, and social services without passage of comprehensive immigration reform? ...Had we solved this problem in a truly comprehensive way in 1986 ... we would not have the daily news reporting outright shortages of farm labor threatening the very existence of agricultural industries coast to coast".

1. This meme that the problem with the 1986 amnesty was not that it was a massive amnesty but that it wasn't "comprehensive" enough has also been used by such notable cheap labor pimps as Jack Kemp and Sheila Jackson Lee.

2. The "crops rotting in the fields" articles that he refers to are simply propaganda printed by MSM sources highly sympathetic to the needs of cheap labor employers. Even if the 1986 amnesty had been as "comprehensive" as it could be, if it weren't in any way enough the same forces would work their magic to have the same sources print their propaganda. And, farmers have been singing this same song for literally decades; before then, employers of child labor carried the tune.

Posted to Immigration at 10:27 PM | Comments (1)

Mike Pence "compromise" amnesty pimped by Chertoff, White House

As predicted, earlier today DHS chief Michael Chertoff joined with Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) to pimp the latter's massive illegal alien amnesty and "guest" worker scheme. You know, the scheme that would allow unlimited immigrants and the one that's supported by the WaPo. It's being sold as a "compromise":

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff will tour the Texas-Mexico border this morning with the conservative authors of a congressional immigration compromise, in what will be the clearest sign yet that the Bush administration is prepared to make major concessions to reach an immigration deal this year.

Chertoff's appearance with Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.) and Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) is "in no way meant to signal an endorsement" of their compromise, Department of Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke said. But it was seen by supporters and opponents yesterday as a boost for the plan and a significant White House concession to conservatives...

[Pence says:] "The White House thinks we have a very interesting idea, and the president was very adamant about wanting to encourage my efforts... Going to the border with Secretary Chertoff will help emphasize our seriousness about putting border security first."

The WaPo's understanding of the amnesty is slightly better than AP's. From the WaPo:

But no guest-worker program would be made operational until stringent border-security measures are implemented, and illegal immigrants would have to report to privately run "Ellis Island" centers in Mexico to apply for legal work permits.

Compare the AP report from Lynn Brezosky:

The centers would not open until the president certifies to Congress that the border is secure.

In fact, the certification would only be that we had the resources in place, not that they were having any sort of an effect.

In brief, it's a scam.

Posted to Immigration at 10:11 PM | Comments (0)

"Terrorist screening missed 75% of time"

From Sara Carter:

An estimated 75 percent of applicants for immigrant benefits - green cards, work visas, and a host of other documents - at a major federal processing center were not screened through the U.S. terrorism watch list over the past four years, the Daily Bulletin has learned.

The error - on nearly 3 million applications dating to 2002 - was confirmed by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officers at the National Benefits Center in Lee's Summit, Mo., near Kansas City. The center is one of several facilities across the country that process foreign applications for immigrant benefits.

Numerous Department of Homeland Security e-mails - sent the day after British authorities uncovered major terror plot - noted that supervisors and adjudicators at the Missouri center were not aware that a simple touch of a computer key would have allowed them to check the names of applicants against the highest-priority terrorist list. According to the e-mails and the adjudicators themselves, up to 2.8 million applications at the center dating to 2002 did not get such checks.

Robert Cowan, director of the National Benefits Center, denied that benefits were processed incorrectly and said any failed background checks were given to supervisors for final review. Cowan added that the 75 percent figure was attributable to employees not properly marking enforcement documents, misspelling names, or leaving out names altogether...

Now, read Chapter 3 of the 9/11 Commission Staff Report.

Posted to Immigration_terror at 12:49 PM | Comments (1)

AP ignores Peter Schey Mexican government links (Border Human Rights Working Group)

An AP story about a recent crash fails to note a key affiliation of one of the groups mentioned. If you've never heard of the CHRCL, you might think they're just an ordinary "human rights" group:

A border rights coalition asked federal officials Wednesday to suspend Border Patrol high-speed chases pending a review of a Yuma-area rollover two weeks ago that resulted in multiple deaths.

The letter from the Los Angeles-based Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law also asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and the heads of Customs and Border Protection and the Border Patrol to update Border Patrol hot-pursuit policies.

The letter was sent on behalf of the Border Human Rights Working Group, a coalition of organizations involved in human-rights advocacy in the four states bordering Mexico.

It also sought through a Freedom of Information request copies of all Border Patrol documents concerning the Yuma chase and crash, and policies and training materials concerning high-speed chases...

What the article fails to note is that the CHRCL is headed by Peter Schey, someone who's collaborating with the Mexican government on a website. He's also representing some illegal aliens who were arrested under a new Arizona law, and there is some kind of involvement of the Mexican consul. And, an "opposition research" paper he wrote appears on a Mexican government website.

And, this is at least the second time that the AP has failed to note these connections.

At post time, google shows no results for "Border Human Rights Working Group". (UPDATE: See the info below.)

Please contact the AP at feedback@ap.org and suggest they start telling their readers the whole truth. Also, here are the sources currently featuring this article and their contact information:

KTVK (contact link at bottom of page)

KVOA (contact link on left sidebar)

KOLD (the only contact form I could find is here; also has their phone numbers)

Daily Star (perhaps their News and Research Services Director: eraines *at* azstarnet.com)

AZCentral (try jleach@azcentral.com and llevitt@azcentral.com)

UPDATE: A copy of the letter that "BHRWG" sent is at this link. However, you'll need to right-click, choose "Save as", and add ".pdf" to the end of the file name since it doesn't have an extension.

The letter reveals who's in the BHRWG:

American Civil Liberties Union of Texas
American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico
American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego
American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona
American Friends Service Committee (San Diego, CA)
American Friends Service Committee (Tucson, AZ)
Binacional Migration Institute (Tucson, AZ)
Border Angels / Gente Unida (San Diego, CA)
Border Action Network (Tucson/Nogales/Douglas)
Border Network for Human Rights (El Paso, TX)
Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law
Diocesan Migrant and Refugee Services (El Paso, TX)
Coalicion de Derechos Humanos (Tucson, AZ)
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
No More Deaths (Tucson, AZ)
South Texas Civil Rights Project (McAllen, TX)
Southern Poverty Law Center (Montgomery, AL)
Texas RioGrande Legal Aid

Derechos Humanos is working with the Mexican government. So is the CHRCL. So, MALDEF, the ACLU and the SPLC are associated with at least two groups openly working with the Mexican government.

Posted to Immigration at 11:19 AM | Comments (2)

Catch-and-release "stopped"; White House to pimp Pence massive illegal alien amnesty

Yesterday DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff claimed that nearly all non-Mexican illegal aliens were being returned to their home countries and that "catch-and-release" had been stopped. Under C&R non-Mexicans who were caught were given notices to appear and released into the U.S. Almost all of them, of course, never bothered to show up.

That resulted in, for instance, "45,000 from terror-linked countries released into U.S." and "70% of OTMs detained [in 2005] were released into the U.S." and "Other-than-Mexicans give themselves up to get released into the U.S."

I have no way of verifying whether Chertoff is telling the truth or not, but based on his past actions and statements I tend to suspect that there's something that he's not telling us.

And, if you're looking for a reason why they might have done (or claimed to have done) this, see "White House to back Pence reform bill":

The White House plans [today] to make a show of support for Rep. Mike Pence's proposed immigration compromise, which has been criticized by some conservatives as another form of amnesty.

Washington sources told WND the Bush administration will send to the Texas border Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff; Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas; and Pence, R-Ind., for a press conference.

The White House intends to make a push to get some form of immigration reform passed by the Senate and House so President Bush can sign the legislation before the November elections, those sources tell WND.

The plan championed by White House election strategist Karl Rove is to avoid having Republican senators and congressmen face the voters without being able to take credit for any immigration reform passed by the GOP-controlled 109th Congress...

UPDATE: See Mike Pence "compromise" amnesty pimped by Chertoff, White House

Posted to Immigration at 05:21 AM | Comments (9)

Nancy Boyda brings up NAFTA highway against Rep. Jim Ryun

From this:

Democratic congressional challenger Nancy Boyda repeated concerns Wednesday about a proposed multilane superhighway that eventually could span the United States from Mexico to Canada, calling it a threat to Kansans.

"There seems to be a plan to blur the border with the United States and Mexico," Boyda said, referring to a proposed 10-lane corridor parallel to Interstate 35 in Texas.

Boyda has made the highway an issue in her effort to defeat incumbent Republican Jim Ryun in a rematch of their 2nd District race two years ago. While Ryun says immigration is the top issue on his agenda, Boyda said allowing Texas to "blow a quarter-mile-wide hole in the border" runs afoul with any get-tough talk.

Speaking Wednesday at a candidate forum in Topeka, Ryun dismissed the Texas proposal and fears of a flow of illegal guns, drugs and immigrants as nothing more than a growing conspiracy theory.

"This is definitely based on fiction," Ryun said. "It is based on an Internet story."

State and regional highway officials agree, saying there are no grandiose plans to cut a wide swath across the central United States from Laredo, Texas, to Detroit.

Terry Heidner, Kansas Department of Transportation director of planning and development, said any potential for expanding Interstate 35 through Kansas is in the distant future...

Posted to NAU at 02:16 AM | Comments (2)

Steve Laffey, Lincoln Chafee, Matricula Consular cards, the NRSC, and idiots

Steve Laffey is the mayor of Cranston, Rhode Island and he's trying to defeat fellow Republican Lincoln Chafee in the Senatorial primary. Apparently the National Republican Senatorial Committee supports the RINO Chafee, believing that only he can defeat the Democratic challenger. Past examples of that support include "NRSC Files FEC Complaint Against Stephen Laffey For Using Taxpayer Money To Pay For Political Mailing" and "Unelectable Laffey Missteps Again".

The latest example is in this video about Matricula Consular cards. Apparently Laffey supports them; not mentioned is that Chafee is almost as "liberal" as Teddy Kennedy on the topic of illegal immigration.

The video has a tiny bit more heat than light, but it does provide an accurate rundown of some of the dangers of those cards, including the fact that the FBI has called them a security risk.

But, what the ad doesn't mention is that our own president, through the person of former Treasury Secretary John Snow, fought to allow banks to accept those cards.

Doesn't that mean that what the NRSC says in the video should also apply to George Bush?

As for the idiots, well, that's where our friends on the Democratic side of things come in: they're calling the video racist. I don't see anything racist about it; perhaps they're projecting and assume that any time someone mentions the word "Mexicans" as the ad does it's racist. Or, perhaps they're confused as usual about the differences between Mexican citizens and American citizens of Mexican descent. Or, perhaps they're just race-baiting sleazeballs.

Wouldn't it make much more sense, be more downright American, and be more of a vote getter to take what the FBI said and make the Bush administration look weak on homeland security? Especially since everything in the video applies to Bush. Apparently not; the Democratic Party is more scared of press release from the NCLR than they are interested in making the Bush administration look weak on homeland security.

And, here's a comment I left in a couple places about this issue:

Who's calling it racist, the Mexican government?

There are millions of those cards being used by illegal aliens, and they're used to send billions of dollars back to Mexico. In fact, that money is Mexico's second greatest source of income behind oil.

Lots of people have their hands in the pie in addition to Mexico: banks, money transfer companies, politicians who receive donations from those banks and money transfer companies, etc. etc.

So, I ask again: who's calling this racist? And, do they have a profit motive to do so? And, since the FBI has clearly stated that those cards are a security risk, are they willing to put their profits ahead of the security of the U.S.?

Here's a FAQ on the cards.

Posted to Politics at 10:47 PM | Comments (2)

Larry Craig voters unhappy over his support for illegal immigration

From the article "Craig shouted down at feisty forum on immigration":

A town hall meeting with Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, dissolved into angry shouts and walkouts when Craig began discussing the controversial issue of immigration.

"I am sick of listening to these lies," one woman said, interrupting Craig as she left the Tuesday meeting, the Coeur d'Alene Press reported.

Stan Hess, candidate for the North Idaho College Board of Trustees, screamed at Craig as others booed. Before leaving, Hess yelled at a woman, his face inches from hers, as several people tried to separate them...

[Craig said:] "The reality is that there are 2.5 million jobs here that Americans won't do... For 20 years, immigration laws have failed. We know there's a problem and we're working on it. The first step is securing the border and we're doing that."

Craig is the primary co-sponsor of the AgJobs amnesty which he tried to attach to an Iraq funding bill. He's also a co-sponsor of one of the versions of the DREAM Act, which would take college discounts from U.S. citizens and give them to citizens of other countries who are here illegally.

A list of his various immigration votes is here.

There's more on his funding here, here, and here.

Along the same lines: Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) gets earful on immigration from constituents

Posted to Immigration at 10:28 PM | Comments (2)

Is Harry Reid dirty?

To help understand the Senator a bit better, in 2003 the L.A. Times offered the Harry Reid expose "In Nevada, Reid Is the Name to Know".

A few days ago that same paper offered yet another expose of Dingy Harry's questionable dealings: "Desert Connections".

...One of the most inhospitable places in the country, Coyote Springs Valley is so barren that, until recently, its best use was thought to be as a weapons test range.

Yet the valley - an hour northeast of Las Vegas - is on its way to becoming a real estate development of historic proportions, with as many as 159,000 homes, 16 golf courses and a full complement of stores and service facilities. At nearly 43,000 acres, Coyote Springs covers almost twice as much space as the next-largest development in a state famous for outsized building projects.

...Helping make Coyote Springs come alive was an alliance between a multimillionaire developer [Harvey Whittemore] and one of the highest-ranking members of Congress: Nevada Democrat Harry Reid, the Senate minority leader and a member of the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee.

...Over the last four years, Reid has used his influence in Washington to help the developer, Nevada super-lobbyist Whittemore, clear obstacles from Coyote Springs' path.

At one point, Reid proposed opening the way for Whittemore to develop part of the site for free — something for which the developer later agreed to pay the government $10 million.

As the project advanced, Reid received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Whittemore. The contributions not only went to Reid's Senate campaigns, but also to his leadership fund, which he used to help bankroll the campaigns of Democratic colleagues...

Whittemore also helped advance the legal careers of two of Reid's four sons. One of the two, Leif Reid, who is Whittemore's personal lawyer, has represented the developer throughout the Coyote Springs project, including in negotiations with federal officials...

There's much more at the link.

Previously:
Harry Reid wants amnesty for illegal aliens who are taking jobs that could go to Katrina victims
"Harry Reid Tied to Chinagate Figure"
Congress: $4 million for National Council of The Race
"Reid Aided Abramoff Clients, Records Show"
Harry Reid strongly opposed illegal immigration. In 1993.
Harry Reid perpetuates illegal alien "Catch and Release"

Posted to Politics at 11:22 AM | Comments (3)

Chicago Tribune, Sun-Times oppose Elvira Arellano; Slim Coleman mentioned

Both the Chicago Tribune and the Sun-Times are leading the charge against Elvira Arellano, the illegal alien who's thumbing her nose at our legal system from inside a storefront church in western Chicago. Previously the CT offered the editorial "Elvira Arellano and the law". Now they offer "Immigration issue indeed one of morality" from a local writer of some kind, Dennis Byrne.

That article offers a backgrounder on the pastor of the church, infamous local activist Walter "Slim" Coleman which, as NewsBusters pointed out, was absent from their earlier coverage. No more, as Byrne rips into him with glee.

Meanwhile, the Sun-Times' Mary Mitchell offers "Immigrant activist holed up in church is no Rosa Parks":

As they say in the streets, Arellano is pimping the system. She is using Rosa Parks' name to buy herself more time, and that disgusts me.

Why have two papers that in the past have fully supported illegal immigration seemingly turned on a poor, oppressed illegal alien? The answer appears to be offered by Byrne:

Slim continues in the same vein with the Arellano stunt, with the same results: a PR disaster. Yes, conventional wisdom says that claiming church sanctuary is masterful PR, putting immigration officials in the Hobson's choice of dragging a woman and her young son out of a church, or letting her flout the law. But already it has hardened feelings against illegal immigrants and created some doubts among their supporters. Clearly, it didn't prove the need for "legalization" of illegal immigrants, as provided in a Senate-passed bill.

While they seem slightly shocked by her brazen disregard for our laws, and while Mitchell opposes her using Parks' name, one of the major subtexts is that Arellano is making illegal immigration supporters like the Tribune and the Sun-Times look bad.

Posted to Immigration at 06:21 AM | Comments (6)

Jeanette Rishell on illegal immigration (Manassas, Virginia)

Jeanette Rishell is running for Virginia's House of Delegates from the Manassas area. At her site - if you can make it through the Flash maze - you can read her stock "Democrat who claims to want to fine employers but in fact really wants to encourage more illegal immigration" plank.

However, this site highlights her evolving views on this issue. In October 2005 she wrote the following in "Crossroads", the newsletter of BRUU (Bull Run Unitarian Universalists) available in this PDF file:

Social Justice Committee is making available a pamphlet that addresses immigrant worker issues. Immigrants face greater challenges than do longtime residents of our community. They are newly arrived and vulnerable to exploitation because of the language barrier, because they are on the lower rung of the economic ladder and because for many there is a fear that they will be sent back if their undocumented status is reported.

This pamphlet touches on their struggles and their contributions to our society. It also advocates for a positive and sympathetic approach towards these newcomers. Please stop by the Social Justice table after service and pick up a copy of this pamphlet.

Clearly, her new "tough" stance is just hot air.

Posted to Immigration at 01:33 AM | Comments (0)

The childlike Dave Weigel

David Weigel of Reason is guest posting at Andrew Sullivan's blog and offers a discussion of Pat Buchanan's latest book that's even dumber than that that Sully would have provided.

Can anyone point me to the border towns where democracy has collapsed, supplanted by Latin American-style caudillos?

We can come close: "Mexican drug cartels take over U.S. cities", colonias, "Task force targets cross-border violence", "Combating Southwest border violence" (and as pointed out below, Maywood CA)

Have Arizona, California, and the rest of the Southwest become less American or less loyal?

Apparently he missed all those Mexican flags when all those hundreds of thousands of foreign citizens were marching in our streets demanding rights to which they aren't entitled, and all those politicians who act more like Mexican agents than elected U.S. representatives.

Restrictionists are too quick to compare America's immigration with that of Europe or of collapsed empires of the past. But it's a false comparison between, say, Muslim immigrants who settle in Rotterdam and refuse to integrate with Dutch society, and Mexican immigrants who go to Catholic mass and long to become American citizens.

What an idiotic comment. Why does he bring up issues that no one is complaining about, other than that he's either trying to religion-bait or he has no clue about this issue?

A hypothetical that is probably beyond the capabilities of Weigel, Sully, Reason Magazine, or all the rest was provided in the previous entry. It is truly pathetic that so many so-called pundits are simply not serious about such a vital issue. UPDATE: He prints a letter from a reader here:

...there is a very real undercurrent to the present political Chicano advocacy groups that believe (and are teaching their progeny) the notion that since the American southwest was stolen from Mexico, they have a right to the land including repatriating at a future date. Many of them understand the slow political process required to leverage our democracy to accomplish it. But make no mistake: repopulating the southwest and registering voters for this eventuality is the first step.

There are places in California where if you don't speak Spanish, you're SOL as far as communication goes. I have lived in SoCal for thirty years and this wasn't the case in these places 20 years ago. Take the LA suburb of Maywood, CA, (hardly a "border town"). According to the March 29, 2006 CBS Evening News, more than 50% of the city's population are illegal aliens, and the mayor has declared that the city will refuse to cooperate with any enforcement of U.S. immigration law, declaring the city a "haven for Illegals. This mayor and his city council were swept into office during last November's election. My God, they even demanded that all city proceedings be held in Spanish when they were debating this declaration last April!

Weigel is making a fool out of himself and by extension Andrew Sullivan.

Posted to Immigration at 12:39 AM | Comments (7)

Fabian Nunez in snit over pro-illegal immigration resolution

From this:

The rancorous national debate over illegal immigration spilled into the California Assembly on Tuesday as Democrats yanked an immigration resolution after a testy, partisan exchange that drew an outburst from Speaker Fabian Nunez.

The Los Angeles Democrat emerged from his office to silence Republican critics who were lambasting the nonbinding resolution.

"We're pulling the bill. You've got a problem with that?" he asked before uttering an expletive about Republican nitpicking and leaving the chamber, slamming the door that joins the Assembly to his conference room...

The legislation in question is numbered AJR 51, and it's of the same high quality we've come to expect from a group that reminds me more of Mexican agents than elected U.S. politicians.

The key paragraph (see leginfo.ca.gov for the full text) is where they mischaracterize HR4437:

WHEREAS, Unfortunately, in December 2005, the House of Representatives passed the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 (H.R. 4437) that seeks to criminalize an individual for his or her immigration status; make any relative, coworker, parishioner, or friend who provides assistance to an undocumented worker a criminal; deny due process to undocumented immigrants; supersede United States Supreme Court decisions; and infringe on an individual's civil rights. H.R. 4437 is not in our nation's best interests and can only be characterized as mean-spirited, short-sighted, and anti-immigrant...

Even Cardinal Roger Mahony (remember him?) admits that he was exaggerating about HR 4437 and soup kitchens, yet that lie made it into a possible California resolution. Their other claims are probably also lies.

Then, they show what they're really after:

...A bipartisan, comprehensive workable immigration reform package must be based on respect for human rights; a path towards permanent residency and citizenship; enforcement of border policies, protecting the wages and working conditions of all workers, whether U.S. born or immigrant workers; reunification of families; and the promotion of citizenship and civic participation...

This is a bald attempt at obtaining racial power.

Posted to California at 09:51 PM | Comments (3)

OC lawyer goes after employers of illegal aliens

One of the major reasons why those who employ illegal aliens are so supportive of "comprehensive" immigration "reform" is probably to avoid legal penalties. Not those coming from various government forces, since most politicians have been corrupted. Rather, penalties obtained by lawyers in civil suits. Howard Foster is one lawyer who's brought such suits, and another is profiled in the Orange County Register's "Suit contends illegal pickers undercut firm":

An Orange County attorney filed a lawsuit Monday accusing a Kern County farmer of hiring illegal immigrants to undercut his client's contract to provide blueberry pickers during harvest.

The suit on behalf of farm-labor contractor AgriLabor is the first in a series of suits that attorney David Klehm of Anaheim says he has undertaken since quitting his stable job as a medical-malpractice lawyer two months ago to take on California companies that he says skirt immigration law.

Klehm, 42, said his goal isn't to go after undocumented immigrants but rather the employers that make it tough for businesses to compete if they hire workers legally. Klehm, whose office is in Santa Ana, started a Web site in June with help from anti-illegal-immigration activists to reach out to companies that say they are being outbid for jobs or losing work because their legal labor costs are higher...

Sadly, their website uses a flash frontend. On a more entertaining note, "Dane" at FreeRepublic offers this comment on the lawyer:

Great this ambulance chaser puts hospitals out of business, now he sets his sights on Farmer Joe.

UPDATE: Peter Prengaman of the AP has more in "California law used to target businesses using illegal immigrants". On yet another side note, the article is a bit less biased than his previous reports.

Posted to Immigration at 11:52 AM | Comments (2)

More on the Chicago NAIR meeting from Workers World

Around August 11, a few hundred illegal immigration supporters met near Chicago and created the "National Alliance for Immigrant Rights". One of their leaders is an official with Mexico's PRD party, and the article "Immigrant rights activists meet near Chicago" from Workers World has a little bit more on who's involved and what they want: workers.org/2006/us/immigrant-rights-0824

Of course, it's necessary to take what they write with a grain of salt because the article contains things that could have been written by chief reactionary George Bush himself:

Nineteen Minutemen vigilantes stood outside the conference at one point, their racist, pro-slavery Confederate flags flying, their anti-immigrant signs resting on their paunches.

Struggling bravely on, we're informed that:

Former Young Lord Vincente "Panama" Alba of New York's May 1 Coalition added that the immigrant communities were facing serious crises in food and housing, raids and arrests by police and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The Women's Caucus resolution, unanimously accepted, called for a defense of the rights of women as workers and mothers. Women face exploitation as domestic workers, and confront the cruelty of the international sex trade, rape and brutality from police and the Border Patrol.

But not, apparently, from coyotes.

After a short struggle, resolutions supporting the Gulf Coast evacuees and against the war in the Middle East were passed. The resolution presented by New York and Los Angeles activists on Katrina reads in part: to "support the right of return, right to housing, and the right to jobs for African American, immigrant, and poor white workers, the survivors of Katrina and Rita, in the Gulf Region."

A teacher from Los Angeles' March 25th Coalition said, "To immigrant students nothing is given, but they sacrifice everything in wars for a government who despises them."

Ignacio Meneses from Detroit said many immigrants in Michigan are people of Middle Eastern backgrounds, facing detentions and deportation every day. "Failure to oppose U.S./Israeli policies in the Middle East would be a betrayal of comrades in the struggle for immigrant rights."

Meneses continued, "Immigrants don't come to the U.S. looking for 'democracy.' They are looking to escape their economies, destroyed by U.S. commercial policies." The case of Elvira Arellano and her young son Saul epitomizes this.

Elvira Arellano was "driven to come to this country by the economic policies of the United States." Arellano said she is an activist with Pueblo Sin Fronteras, which organizes families with U.S. citizen children facing separation by deportation. She went seven times to Washington, D.C., to testify before Congress, putting family unity at the center of the immigration debate. She mobilized a mass protest on July 5, 2005, in Chicago, a demonstration that drew 50,000 people. She helped form the Coalition for African Asian Arab European Latino Immigrants of Illinois (CAAAELII).

ICE called her and ordered her to pack her bags and report for deportation.

She called on everyone at the conference to pick up their cell phones and lodge protests with Senators Dick Durbin and Barack Obama. They did.

And, I urge you to pick up your cell phone or email client and contact every reporter who gives NAIR the time of day.

Posted to Immigration at 06:05 AM | Comments (2)

"Legal defense fund started for convicted Border Patrol agents"

From this:

The union representing U.S. Border Patrol agents has set up a legal defense fund for two agents convicted earlier this year of wounding a suspected drug smuggler and then trying to cover up the shooting.

The National Border Patrol Council, the union that represents nearly all Border Patrol agents, launched the fund this week to help former agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean pay for an appeal and provide some money for their families. The men were suspended without pay after their 2005 arrests and fired after a federal jury convicted them in March.

Union chief T.J. Bonner, a Border Patrol agent, said the fund is a way for fellow agents and other friends of the Border Patrol to show their support for the agents who Bonner believes were wrongly prosecuted. The union contributed $10,000 in "seed money."

...U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, a former Border Patrol sector chief from El Paso, said he Tuesday has not been contacted and will not take up the case.

"A jury found them guilty," Reyes said. "I will refer to (U.S. Attorney) Johnny Sutton."

The last bit contradicts the article here, which said:

Several other House members, including Democrat Silvestre Reyes, who led the El Paso Sector of the U.S. Border Patrol before being elected to Congress, also agreed to support a probe...

In more favorable news, Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) has sent a letter to George Bush about the case.

Posted to Immigration at 02:01 AM | Comments (2)

Phil Angelides, my MySpace friend

California's far-left, in-the-pocket-of-the-unions, only-slightly-worse-than-Arnold gubanatorial candidate has a MySpace page: myspace.com/angelides. The AP says that he had nothing to do with creating that page:

But rather than kill a volunteer's unauthorized efforts, the campaign has embraced the youth-heavy site, using Angelides' personal profile page to post position papers and other announcements. It also scans the comments section to gauge what's on youths' minds, turning it into an informal focus group.

I don't know who really runs the page, but whoever it is has apparently decided not to approve a comment I left there, even after I took the time to add Phil as my first real friend to my never-used account at that service. Here's the comment I tried to post; if someone can ask him this or a related question at a campaign appearance that might be interesting:

I have an (easy) math question for Phil Angelides.

Let's say California only has 1000 discounted college educations, but 2000 applicants for those discounts.

Let's say 900 of those discounts go to U.S. citizens, but 100 of those discounts go to citizens of other countries who are here illegally.

Phil, doesn't that mean that 100 U.S. citizens will not receive education discounts? Doesn't that mean that many of those U.S. citizens won't be able to go to college?

Phil, why do you support taking discounted college educations away from U.S. citizens and giving them to citizens of other countries who are here illegally?

Posted to California at 11:44 PM | Comments (1)

Senate Immigration Bill: $126 billion in spending over 10 years

[UPDATE: see below]

Friday evening, the Congressional Budget Office released their estimate of just how much the Senate's massive illegal alien amnesty would cost us financially: $126 billion over 10 years:

Supporters of the legislation cautioned that the CBO's total needs to be put into context. For instance, most of the $78 billion in discretionary spending that the Senate bill authorizes through 2016 would fund law enforcement measures that conservatives are pushing for anyway.

Yes, but there is a small difference: in that case we'd have millions fewer new immigrants, millions fewer amnestied former illegal aliens and millions fewer new illegal aliens.

Amnesty supporters are clearly scared:

"Most people recognize there is going to be a price tag for fixing a broken immigration system, no question about that," said Ben Johnson, director of the Immigration Policy Center, which favors the Senate bill. "It still comes down to the moral question of 'How do we create a new, workable immigration policy?' "

In the long run, tax revenue generated by new workers would ease the baby-boom generation's burden on Social Security and offset virtually all the additional spending, said James Horney, a senior fellow at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

The report "will be problematic," he said. "People who don't like the bill will jump on the 10-year number. But I hope others will look at the longer term and realize in the end, the answer is still the same. It's all a wash."

Well, not really for the reasons pointed out above.

Given all the horrific details buried in the bill, and given the costs associated with it, and given the hugely negative impact it would have had on the U.S., is there any reason to trust its authors or supporters?

UPDATE: Our fiscal department has finally informed us that there's a difference between "cost" and "spend". The bill would apparently increase spending by $126 billion, but some of that would be offset by income. The title has been adjusted accordingly. Supposedly: "the net cost of the bill, after taking into account the projected increase in tax revenue, is $83 billion over ten years, or 0.2 percent of projected spending." That percentage is inaccurate, unless he's refering to total federal spending.

UPDATE 2: There's a little more in "Immigration bill sticker shock", including this fun quote from John Young, co-chairman of the Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform:

"In my opinion, the fairer question is: How will illegal immigrants impact the costs of healthcare, local education, and social services without passage of comprehensive immigration reform? ...Had we solved this problem in a truly comprehensive way in 1986 ... we would not have the daily news reporting outright shortages of farm labor threatening the very existence of agricultural industries coast to coast".

Posted to Immigration at 09:03 PM | Comments (2)

"Illegals From Terror-Sponsoring Nations at Large in US"

This is a couple weeks old, but from this:

Almost half of the illegal aliens arriving in the U.S. from terrorist-sponsoring or "special interest" nations in the past few years have been released into the American population following their apprehension. This key finding is published in an internal audit of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) obtained by Cybercast News Service.

The so-called "catch and release" policies have allowed more than 45,000 illegal aliens from countries that are well known for their anti-American views or considered "hotbeds of Islamic fundamentalism" to be freed.

U.S. Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas), in conversations with sheriffs operating along the Texas-Mexico border, learned that illegal aliens of Middle Eastern descent have been able to blend into the culture south of the U.S. border and pass themselves off as Mexicans.

"They learn Spanish and assimilate into the population," Poe said. "Coming across the Canadian border they would be more conspicuous..."

Posted to Immigration_terror at 04:03 PM | Comments (1)

Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) gets earful on immigration from constituents

A Q&A session Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) held at a public library in Des Plaines, Illinois is described here.

The second attendee asked two questions: First, If someone enters your house uninvited, is it a crime? After some consideration, Rep. Schakowsky granted that that situation might be construed as trespassing. Second: Do you support a moratorium on the deportation of illegal immigrants? to which Mrs. Schakowsky emphatically answered "Yes."

The questioner wanted to know the whys and wherefores of her reasoning, but the good congresswoman mumbled something about the 'Day Without Mexicans' movie and moved to the next questioner...

...The next inquirer mentioned a news account of an older American citizen, a veteran, who had undergone emergency surgery costing money that he didn't have. According to the story, the man subsequently lost his house to his medical bills while an illegal immigrant in the same hospital received treatment, free of charge, totaling twice the veteran's amount. Why, wondered the inquirer, would an American citizen be forced to pay such an extreme price while an illegal immigrant paid nothing? Why are illegal immigrants treated better than American citizens?

The room burst into applause...

Posted to Immigration at 01:21 PM | Comments (2)

The Australian, Catherine Philp support U.S. illegal immigration

A discussion of foreign sources that support illegal immigration is a bit rare around here, but Catherine Philp is a U.S.-based reporter for The Australian, so if you run into her you might want to ask her about the article "Whites drive out Latinos who saved their town". Yes, that's the real headline.

You might ask whether she come up with that headline, and if not whether she supports it. Does she think it's accurate? Does she think it's horribly biased or not?

Or, you might ask where she learned to write a PIIPP:

FRANCIS Rodriguez, a Dominican immigrant, moved from the big city to Hazleton, a small town in northern Pennsylvania, in search of a better life. He found what he was looking for: a home, a job, schools for his children and a friendliness he had never encountered in New York.

Was it from studying the works of the WAPOLATNYT, or do they teach how to write articles like that Down Under?

Or, you might ask her about this:

Legal immigrants feel the city legislation, which some call the Nazi law, is aimed at the whole Latino community. "It's in the open now - people feel it's OK to hate," says Anna Arias, who sits on the Governor's Committee on Hispanic Affairs.

Shouldn't she also have pointed out that those using such terms are extremists who reject assimilation, or that Pennsylvania Democratic governor Ed Rendell is anti-American and doesn't support U.S. laws?

In the past I've speculated that one of the reasons newspapers support illegal immigration is because they're part of the local business community and their peers profit from that illegal activity. I don't know what The Australian's game is however. Perhaps they're just angry about Australianism not catching on.

Posted to Immigration_piipps at 11:24 AM | Comments (1)

WaPo: All Macaca, all the time

This post discusses how the Washington Post is still pushing "Macaca Mania", this time in the article "For One Group, 'Macaca' Recalls Slurs After 9/11." NewsBusters then goes on to provide information on those mentioned in the article, some of whom turn out to be contributors to the Democrats, one of whom works for a pro-illegal immigration group that the WaPo only describes as "nonprofit organization in Takoma Park that supports people with South Asian ancestry", etc. etc.

On a somewhat related note, there are interesting comments here on Indian illegal aliens.

Posted to Politics at 09:19 AM | Comments (1)

"North American Union Threatens U.S. Sovereignty"

Alan Caruba:

The problem with the Bush administration is that not enough of its officials have read the U.S. Constitution. Take, for example, Section 2 of Article 2. When dealing with foreign nations, it says that the President "shall have the power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur..."

So, why is President Bush and his administration seeking to establish a North American Union that would, in effect, abolish the borders between Canada, Mexico, and the United States of America?

Moreover, it would involve our government in so many common regulatory mandates with these two nations as to render the sovereignty of the United States a memory of what national self-governance is supposed to be.

The name of this effort is called the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) and, guess what, it has not been submitted to the Senate for its oversight or concurrence because, by some magic of governmental definition, it is not a treaty. Instead, its administration is buried in the bowels of the Commerce Department...

Posted to NAU at 06:13 AM | Comments (7)

50th Mexican consulate in Wichita? TreatCo.

Mexico has 49 or so consulates in the U.S., more than any other country. Some Wichita residents are trying to get the 50th built in Wichita, Kansas. The nearest consulate is in Kansas City, Missouri, just 200 miles away. From the report by Christina M. Woods in the Wichita Eagle:

Officials from the Kansas City, Mo.-based Mexican consulate got to witness the local Mexican community's interest in opening a permanent Wichita office.

At a temporary office in Treatco at 2300 N. Broadway on Saturday, consulate officials assisted about 500 people and more than 1,000 people picked up information and applications, according to Beatriz Ledezma, who works for Tiempos, a Spanish-language newspaper in Wichita, and who is coordinating the effort for a Wichita consulate...

..."We have the roots here," [Alejandro Molina, another volunteer coordinator] said, but added that, in many instances, the community's needs are overlooked because of immigration status or language barriers...

The last bit is the only hint in the article that many or most of those receiving those Matricula Consular cards might in fact be illegal aliens. This is just the latest in a long line of puff pieces (and a small number with some truth) announcing appearances by representatives from Mexico, and one is forced to wonder why almost all of them seem to have been written by the same person.

As for TreatCo, they appear to be a manufacturer of pet food; whether it's possible to boycott them or not is not known.

Posted to Immigration_consul at 02:02 AM | Comments (4)

Pat Buchanan: 'State of Emergency' (a reply to his critics)

Dear ____________:

What an interesting discussion of Pat Buchanan's latest book 'State of Emergency'! It's unfortunate that you spent [so much] time on [race-baiting|smearing|name-calling] instead of responding to his points.

You dismissed Buchanan refering to massive illegal immigration as an "invasion", but you only offered a few warmed-over [platitudes about this being a nation of immigrants|biased push polls|thoughts of extremists who you portrayed as mainstream|outtakes from a Mexican government comic book].

Let me try a quick thought experiment to help you understand this issue a bit better. Buchanan supports an "Eisenhower-type deportation program". How exactly could we do that?

Now, come on, answer the question. Humor me. Since you're a [slightly serious|semi-serious|serious] commentator, you should be able to think things through. So, how could we conduct Eisenhower-style mass deportations of illegal aliens?

After all, if a country is no longer able to enforce its laws, it's pretty much ceased to be a country and someone else - whether mobs, or warlords, or criminals, or neighboring countries or similar - are in charge, right? And, you do agree that the U.S. has every right to deport foreign citizens who've settled here illegally, right? Just as long as it's done in a lawful manner, the U.S. has every right to deport illegal aliens, right?

You probably said it would be very difficult to conduct mass deportations. After all (you probably said), all those illegal aliens are here now, they've settled down, we have to deal with them.

What you've just described is a non-traditional invasion, but an invasion nonetheless. See, you and Pat Buchanan agree on something, and that's a start.

To learn more about this issue, see my intro to illegal immigration.

Posted to Immigration at 07:56 PM | Comments (26)

Cynthia Tucker still illegal immigration-supporting idiot

I swear Cynthia Tucker must write columns just so bloggers can have an easy fisk. "Immigration - and strange bedfellows" discusses attempts by "right-wing zealots" and "ultraconservatives" to protect American workers, including blacks. According to Tucker, that's quite out of character for groups such as the Minutemen and pundits such as Sean Hannity. It's only those who support illegal immigration like Tucker who are the true friends of disadvantaged blacks, and she has the biased, problematic Pew survey to back her up. Of course, the study couldn't find any great employment-related benefit from massive illegal immigration, a large percentage of working-age black men are out of work in NYC and other areas, and large numbers of blacks have simply stopped looking for work. So, she might want to research the Pew study and all the other studies first, then decide which side she's really on.

And, she might want to give a bit more thought to this bit:

Perhaps nothing has done more harm to uneducated black men over the past 10 years than the shift toward long prison sentences for nonviolent drug offenses. By some estimates, one-third of young black men are either in prison, on parole or on probation. Once a black man acquires a prison record, his prospects for legal employment dim dramatically - at any wage... If all 11 million illegal immigrants disappeared tomorrow, that would not change. So let's not kid ourselves by blaming Mexicans.

Obviously to everyone except Tucker, if all those illegal aliens went home tomorrow those with the limited skill sets of most illegal aliens or greater would be in great demand and that would lead to a large reduction in the conditions she claims to oppose. Whether she can figure that out or not, it's clear that the "right-wing zealots" and "ultraconservatives" have a more effective plan to help disadvantaged Americans than she does.

Previously:
Cynthia Tucker still idiot on immigration
Cynthia Tucker to uncover corruption! (I'm still waiting)
Cynthia Tucker is an idiot
Cynthia Tucker's illegal immigration strawman; a challenge

Posted to Immigration at 04:58 AM | Comments (14)

Immigrant Mobilization Project, Nilda Flores-Gonzalez

In the July 18 post Esther J. Cepeda: "May [illegal immigration] marchers mostly U.S. citizens" I discussed the findings of a "study" done by a group calling itself the "Immigrant Mobilization Project" which was supposedly affiliated with the University of Illinois-Chicago. The fact that at the time I couldn't find any information on that group either through google or uic.edu caused me to wonder even more about the "study" than I did for the other reasons listed.

Now, it's come to my attention that the "Immigrant Mobilization Project" does indeed exist and it's run by "Professor Nilda Flores-Gonzalez (Sociology and Latin American and Latino Studies) and Professor Amalia Pallares (Political Science and Latin American and Latino Studies)". They apparently put up (or had indexed) their page after the Cepeda article appeared.

My other comments regarding the "study" not only stand, they've been strengthened by the researchers themselves. From the article "Survey: Most in rally citizens":

...Flores-Gonzalez acknowledged that the U.S. citizen responses might be inflated because as many as 20 percent of UIC staff who conducted the survey spoke only English and could not interview respondents who didn't speak the language. Those respondents likely were not U.S. citizens, she said.

Also, because the May 1 rally happened just days after a high-profile raid by the Department of Homeland Security against illegal immigrants in Chicago, some respondents might have said they were U.S. citizens out of fear, Flores-Gonzalez said...

And, I thank her for adding to my list of reasons why the survey should not be trusted.

If anyone has any background information on those professors, please leave it in the comments.

Posted to Immigration at 08:18 PM | Comments (3)

CIS: The costs of illegal immigration

On July 26, Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies testified before Congress, and his prepared testimony is in "Immigration's Impact on Public Coffers":

There is general agreement that the fiscal impact of immigration depends largely on the education level of the immigrants in question. Immigrants with a lot of education pay more in taxes than they use in services, while those with little education tend to have low incomes, pay relatively little in taxes and often use a good deal in public services. In the case of illegal alien, the vast majority have little education, and this is the key reason they create fiscal costs. Illegal families often receive benefits on behalf of their US-born children. As a general proposition, the large scale immigration of less-educated immigrants (legal or illegal) creates significant funding problems for social programs, including those for retirees, even though the immigrants work...

A detailed description of the costs follows. Obviously, these findings will be disputed. A much better way to deal with this issue is described here.

Posted to Immigration at 11:35 AM | Comments (2)

CA Democrats shelve driver's licenses for illegal aliens

The seventh year wasn't a charm for California state senator Gil Cedillo (D-MX), as the Democrat-controlled Assembly Appropriations Committee decided to shelve his latest attempt to give legal California driver's licenses to illegal aliens:

Political insiders suggested the measure was perhaps too controversial for an election year. The bill is opposed by Republicans -- and a majority of voters -- who say licenses would reward people in violation of immigration law.

Republican Schwarzenegger, who is running for re-election, has said he would veto the bill. His Democratic opponent, state Treasurer Phil Angelides, supports the measure.

Appropriations committee chair Judy Chu, D-Monterey Park, said she "strongly supports" the public-safety premise behind the bill but said a "rational, productive debate" on the Assembly floor was unlikely.

Cedillo was "angered":

"It is absolutely unacceptable... My intention and my commitment is to move this bill to the floor. We have the right to have this bill debated, voted on and moved to the governor's desk."

Combined with the recent 'Secure' video, this shows that despite the happy, amateurish public polls, the Dems' internal polls probably show just how much trouble they're in because of their constant support for illegal immigration.

UPDATE: As you might expect, "One Bill Gil" has a plan:

"There are a myriad of ways to [pass the bill]... We're going to find one of them to do it... [Cedillo said Democrats shouldn't] gauge our values based on the tenor of the debate... Our convictions transcend that... We have an obligation to develop good public policy. We have a duty to vote on that policy, and we have a duty to move that policy to the governor's desk."

And:

He said he had commitments from Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, to try to find a way to get the bill -- or another measure with similar provisions -- to Schwarzenegger's desk before lawmakers adjourn their 2006 on Aug. 31.

Nunez said he had agreed to work with Cedillo to try to fashion a bill that could pass this year, but he said he opposes provisions of the current Cedillo legislation that would implement the federal Real ID Act, which he said would be costly for the state...

A discussion of that follows.

Posted to Immigration_dls at 11:12 AM | Comments (3)

Large cell phone purchases in Huachuca City and Tucson AZ; Nashville

From this:

...Reports of large numbers of cell phones purchased have occurred this month in Caro, Mich.; and Midland, Texas. Suspicious parties in those instances were of Middle Eastern descent.

Another incident under suspicion occurred on April 21 in Huachuca City. At 3:30 p.m., town police responded to the Dollar General Store on Highway 90 to a report of suspicious activity regarding two men purchasing more than 300 Tracfone-brand cell phones.

According to the Huachuca City dispatch records, two California men were traveling in a black 2001 Ford Explorer.

The vehicle contained about another 700 such cell phones in addition to those that were purchased at the Huachuca City Dollar General Store, Police Chief Dennis Grey said.

They weren't arrested because, obviously, buying a lot of cellular telephones isn't a crime. The FBI did, however, retrieve some of the discarded packaging. And, we're informed that not only could the phones be used to detonate bombs, but the lithium in the batteries can be used to make meth.

And:

Last weekend, a suspicious cell phone shopping spree took place in Tucson.

A concerned caller told the Tucson police dispatch that two men apparently of Middle Eastern descent purchased an unusual amount of cell phones at the Sam's Club in the 4600 block of North Stone, said Tucson police Sgt. Decio Hopffer.

And, the - dare I say it - statists at GovExec reprint an email from a reader without comment. I'm going to assume they do so sarcastically, although one person owning 12 cellphones would seem to be a bit odd:

I live in Northern Georgia and required transportation to Nashville, The VA sent a cab service to pick me up just south of Chattanooga and for 3 hours I listened as my driver talked to many different people via his many cell phones, I also had to listen to him explain the Koran and his religious beliefs. This only raised my level of awareness of his and many others involved in his group. I reported this to the VA upon my arrival, nothing was done other than the transportation personal calling the dispatcher of the cab company and complain of the cab driver pushing his religion on me. When it was time to return home I recieved yet another arab speaking driver who like the first had many cell phones, and for 3 hours the driver spoke to 30 different people on 12 different phones. I really don't think these people are family and he's not calling to ask whats for dinner. You have too many people talking about it and doing little to improve our security. Start taking a look right under your noses and see whats going on.

Why do I get the same feeling from this whole thing that I got from the whole Israeli Art Students craze?

Previously:
Do hundreds of cellphones imply terrorism?
Georgian illegal alien with 15 pre-paid cell phones held in Pennsylvania

Posted to Terrorism at 06:08 AM | Comments (1)

Jimmy Carter High School rated "persistently dangerous"

This is a serious story, but I just couldn't resist with the headline. Anyway:

Almost 5,000 Rio Grande Valley high school students will begin the new school year at campuses rated "persistently dangerous" by the state education agency.

Jimmy Carter High School in the La Joya school district and Todd Ninth Grade campus and Donna High School in the Donna district received the "dangerous" designation this year from the Texas Education Association...

...In Texas, a school receives the dangerous rating if, for three years running, it has reported expelling three or more students per 1,000 for any of the following: felony-level drug or alcohol offenses; possession or use of a firearm, club or weapons; murder or attempted murder, arson, aggravated kidnapping or assault; sexual assault or aggravated sexual assault...

School officials say they're actually safe and it's just because of a high number of drug and alcohol incidents.

Posted to Immigration at 03:52 AM | Comments (5)

The Hazleton PA legal defense fund

Hazleton Pennsylvania is being sued by various far-left, pro-illegal immigration groups over their new ordinance. If you'd like to help the pro-American side, you can donate to their legal defense fund at smalltowndefenders.com.

And, from this:

[Mayor Lou Barletta] plans to meet, perhaps as early as this week, with lawyers from a firm that offered to represent the city pro bono and said another firm made a similar offer.

And, an email from Barletta concerning the fund is here.

Posted to Immigration at 02:46 AM | Comments (2)

Ramos/Compean case: Bonner responds; Hostettler, Sensenbrenner will look into it

From this:

Republican congressmen said today they would call for an investigation into why two U.S. Border Patrol agents were prosecuted then convicted this year of shooting a drug-smuggling suspect and trying to cover it up.

They were in El Paso for a House Judiciary Committee field hearing on immigration, one of about a dozen such hearings around the country this month.

Indiana U.S. Rep. John Hostettler, a member of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims, pledged to take up the case of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean. They were convicted in March on several felonies and a civil rights violation.

Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, the Wisconsin Republican whose House bill calls for the criminalization of illegal immigrants and other immigration enforcement reforms, called for an investigation into the case.

Several other House members, including Democrat Silvestre Reyes, who led the El Paso Sector of the U.S. Border Patrol before being elected to Congress, also agreed to support a probe...

From this:

[National Border Patrol Council - a union that represents agents -] President T.J. Bonner said exonerating evidence was withheld during the March trial of Senior Agents Ignacio "Nacho" Ramos and Jose A. Compean, whose sentencing is set for Tuesday, adding that the agents followed long-established Border Patrol policies in the incident.

He also said the suspect fled into Mexico after the shooting but later was given immunity on drug-smuggling charges to testify against the agents.

"This thing stinks to high heaven," Mr. Bonner said. "I am outraged and at a loss to explain why there were so many irregularities in this case. The only thing that is clear is that the prosecutors pointed their guns at the wrong guys, the good guys, and they let the bad guy walk. Now they want to send these agents to prison for doing their job...

"Fire the DA, angry readers write of border agents case" has the thoughts of Daily Bulletin readers.

And, "U.S. Attorney Protects Mexican Invaders" has some of the legal background.

Related: "Petition seeks pardon for agents"

Posted to Immigration at 11:38 PM | Comments (1)

National Restaurant Association wants DHS to finesse 'no-match' letters

From a press release:

The National Restaurant Association this week sent a letter to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The letter urged reconsideration of regulations set forth by the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement regarding legal obligations of employers upon receipt of 'no-match' letters from DHS or the Social Security Administration (SSA)...

The Association also suggests that if DHS decides to move forward before Congress acts, the finalized proposals should be non-mandatory guidelines as to possible steps employers may take if they receive a no-match letter. In short, no-match notices should not be used to create a new basis for legal liability under the statute...

Previously:
Bush touts "guest" workers at National Restaurant Association meeting
Waving Mexican flags on America's Independence Mall
National Restaurant Association and illegal immigration

Posted to Immigration at 11:13 PM | Comments (2)

Shocker: Chicago Tribune supports U.S. laws

Chicago's knockoff of the WAPOLATNYT offers the editorial "Elvira Arellano and the law" about the illegal alien who was ordered to report to DHS to be deported but instead took refuge in a church. It ends with:

...she has benefited from some extraordinary political support, which few illegal immigrants get to enjoy. She won the help of members of the Illinois congressional delegation, who rallied around her because her 7-year-old son, Saul, a U.S. citizen, has ADHD and other health problems. She has been granted three stays of deportation since 2003. U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) sent a letter to President Bush on Wednesday asking that Arellano be granted yet another stay.

But Sen. Dick Durbin, Sen. Barack Obama and others have said there is nothing more they can do for her...

...Many illegal immigrants face the same situation as Arellano. Few get the breaks she has received in the last few years. They are all subject to U.S. law, as is Arellano.

It is time for her to abide by that law.

In related news: "Chicago Tribune Silent on Illegal Immigration Activist's History". The activist in question is the pastor of the church, Walter "Slim" Coleman.

Posted to Immigration at 09:28 PM | Comments (0)

Help Alec Baldwin write his BlogAd!

Alec Baldwin is a megastar, but he's got a problem and he needs your help! He came up with a brilliant BlogAd campaign for some friends of his, but now he has to come up with the copy. And, he's got writer's block!

So, will you help Alec out and write the text of his ad?

Posted to Celebrities at 02:56 PM | Comments (1)

More words of advice from Mexican Ambassador Carlos de Icaza

Mexican Ambassador Carlos de Icaza visited his forward outpost in Atlanta and proferred words of wisdom for us all:

"We need to start talking like neighbors, stop the 'blame game' and start looking at this issue constructively... We need both the United States and Mexico to acknowledge that international cooperation is essential in immigration issue. No country can solve this dilemma by itself... The fact that Congress is holding hearings all around the country means there is a great interest in reforming the immigration laws... We sincerely hope while doing this they acknowledge they have a neighbor to the south, that it is a friendly neighbor to the U.S."

Previously: "Mexican ambassador endorses comprehensive immigration reform" [safe, legal and orderly]

Posted to Immigration_consul at 11:18 AM | Comments (2)

DSCC pro-American 'Secure' video never existed

Yesterday I noted that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee removed their "controversial" video 'Secure' from Youtube. Today, it's gone completely. The previous URL was:

dscc.org/news/multimedia/20060813_secure/

Now, the video at that page is called "Want A Different Course?" which should be available at this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avPRG8s2haU However, that link doesn't work either, leading me to suspect that in their haste to throw 'Secure' down the memory hole they accidentally deleted the replacement video.

Everyone can play this fun DSCC game too! Repeat after me: "There never was a video called 'Secure'. The video named 'Secure' was always named 'Want A Different Course'."

UPDATE: Following our lead, UPI offers "Democrats pull ad after Hispanics complain" and the AP offers "Ad Disappears From Democratic Web Site":

No announcement was made about what happened to the ad. A DSCC spokesman did not return phone calls and an e-mail message seeking comment.

A couple days ago, NRO took a screenshot of the NYT linking to the Dems' ad:

The article still links to the video, but, of course, the video has been changed as described above. For completeness, a screengrab of the NYT article is below.

Posted to Immigration at 09:59 AM | Comments (0)

Hazleton's immigration enforcement to be only after the fact

From this:

..."We cannot and will not enforce immigration law; that’s the federal government's job," [Hazleton mayor Lou Barletta] said. "So, if ICE (the federal Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement) visits a plant and takes out employees as illegal, the city will follow up."

In those instances, Barletta said, city officials would visit the business involved and start asking questions about how it hired an illegal and whether it "knowingly" did so. If the city determines it did, the loss of business license would take effect.

Similarly, city officials would also determine whether anyone involved in the above-mentioned ICE raid rented property. If so, officials would visit the landlord, or apartment manager or agent and make a determination as to whether the apartment was "knowingly" rented to an illegal.

If so, the landlord would be assessed a $1,000 fine for each day for every illegal on the premises.

..."That's why we have the city issuing the [housing] permits; it takes the burden off landlords and also eliminates things such as racial profiling," Barletta said.

Perhaps the far-left illegal immigration supporters that sued Hazelton will have to think up new excuses and amend their suit.

Posted to Immigration at 06:13 AM | Comments (2)

Houston Congressional Hearing on Immigration report

A first-person account is here:

Four Congressmen, Michael McCaul, Ted Poe, Sheila Jackson Lee and Gene Green held a Congressional hearing in Houston today. I drove in last night to be there. Demonstrators from both sides began showing up at 5:00 a.m. 90% of the PRO-Illegal crowd was bussed in by an orgaizaton known as "The Metro Organization" (TMO)which is sponsored by the Catholic Church who wants illegals here. They need the Mexican Catholic's money since attendance has fallen off due to the Child Molesting Priests Scandal.

The Chair, Congressman McCaul and GOP Congressman Ted Poe were GREAT!!! Gene Green (D) wasn't too bad. Sheila Jackson Lee was her same old "witchy" self. The Chair wanted to show a video of violence on the Texas border and she objected to he video being shown. The Chair overruled her. She also addressed the PRO-Illegal Demonstrators before the hearing.

All 17 "witensses" that testified before the Committee were ANTI-Illegal Immigration and ANTI-Amnesty. Sheriffs Flores and Jernigan from Laredo and Del Rio respectively were present and "on fire" as was the head of Border Patrol...

The MSM version - complete with a picture of "immigrants" holding a sign in effect saying that God is on their side - is here.

Posted to Immigration at 01:56 AM | Comments (2)

Zulima Farber resigns as New Jersey attorney general

From this:

New Jersey Attorney General Zulima Farber resigned today after a special prosecutor said she violated the state's ethics code by improperly helping her boyfriend at police traffic stop.

Farber, 61, quit hours after retired state judge Richard Williams wrote in a report that while she broke no criminal laws, she failed to "ensure that the laws were faithfully and fairly enforced." Farber, the state's first Hispanic attorney general, said at a news conference with Governor Jon Corzine that she would leave office after seven months rather than defend herself...

As the second link discusses, she attended at least two marches in support of illegal immigration, and spoke at at least one of those.

Posted to Politics at 12:07 AM | Comments (1)

"Self-Appointed Latino Spokespeople Would Sacrifice National Security to Promote Illegal Immigration"

From their press release:

Washington, DC--(HISPANIC PR WIRE)--August 16, 2006--As the danger to Americans of all backgrounds, posed by radical Islamic terrorist groups intensifies, individuals and groups purporting to speak on behalf of American Hispanics demonstrated once again that they are prepared to place their open borders agenda above the interests of homeland security, charged You Don't Speak for Me! (YDSFM), a national coalition of American Hispanics.

YDSFM responded to calls from a Houston City Councilwoman, the National Council of La Raza, and the Republican National Hispanic Assembly that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) pull an ad from its web site showing breaches of American border security. Critics of the ad claim that it compares illegal immigrants to terrorists and, in the estimation of Democratic Houston Councilwoman Carol Alvarado, "lowers us to a despicable level as breeders of unfounded fear and hatred."

..."The only thing that is despicable is the political opportunism of those who would jeopardize this nation's security and the lives of innocent Americans," responded retired Col. Al Rodriguez, chairman of YDSFM. "Homeland security is not a racial or ethnic issue, nor is it a partisan one. It is a matter of life and death, as current events have once again demonstrated how vulnerable our nation remains to fanatic Islamic terrorists."

Posted to Immigration at 11:56 PM | Comments (0)

Richard Rodriguez: "Mexicans in America"

The TV pundit offers this. Victor Davis Hanson replies here.

Here's my reply:

I stopped right around where he supported a race-based immigration policy that allows "Indians" to settle anywhere in North America that they wish. What about those who are just part Indian blood? Will one drop do? Will there be a DNA test to determine whether someone can move anywhere they want regardless of our laws, or shall we just go by looks?

As for the reason why all those illegal aliens are Indians/Mestizos, that's because the Mexican oligarchy - almost all Europeans - have a wonderful scam going, one that useful idiot liberals fully support. They get to send their possible revolutionaries north and get remittances back. Those are now Mexico's second greatest source of income, right behind oil.

And, all that money is undermining the U.S. system: corrupt companies that profit from illegal immigration or from sending money earned by illegal aliens donate to politicians who then allow massive illegal immigration. So, we aren't just importing people who have no ties to the U.S., we're importing massive corruption as well.

On the general Cato Institute issue, see these:
Join The Jobs for South Asia Coalition! (a Cato analyst might have gotten caught up in a little prank I played)
Daniel Griswold's libertarian fantasy world
Charlie Norwood on CATO's latest anti-American proposal
"Dogmatic Libertarians: Over the edge."
More Kato-Aid, senor?
Libertarians on the loose
That's enough Kato-Aid, thanks though
Bush "guest worker" program to be "open to any type of employee" (read the little-noted horrific details on that scheme, which was inspired by Dan Griswold of Cato)

Posted to Immigration at 09:26 PM | Comments (0)

Tainted National Alliance for Immigrant Rights to march on Labor Day

The National Alliance for Immigrant Rights is organizing pro-illegal immigration marches for Labor Day in, among others, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Dallas, and New York.

That's according to one of their spokespersons, Nativo Lopez of the Hermandad Mexicana Nacional.

And, as the first link points out, one of the leaders of the NAIR is an official with Mexico's PRD Party.

So, who's linked to these extremists and Fifth Columnists? The protest in Long Beach will include:

Teamsters, the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor and other union members will join pro-illegal immigrant activists and their supporters at the Sept. 4 event, Lopez said.

The aim, he added, is to show a "united refutation" of immigration reform proposals that would hurt the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants living here.

"For the first time, this will be the immigrant rights' Labor Day with labor workers."

Even the reporter Araceli Esparza admits that this is all about illegal immigration.

Posted to Immigration at 03:32 PM | Comments (1)

Napolitano, Arpaio complain about ICE official not doing job

This is slightly surprising:

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio have written U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff strongly complaining about a top federal immigration official in Phoenix.

Napolitano and Arpaio do not directly name the special agent at the Immigration & Customs Enforcement Agency in Phoenix. But state government and Sheriff's office sources say the subject of the criticism is Special Agent in Charge Roberto Medina. The governor and sheriff are upset with lack of cooperation from Medina when it comes to sharing intelligence and investigation information and his refusal to pick up and deport illegal immigrants detained under the state's human smuggling laws, the sources say.

Napolitano and Arpaio further said they welcome expected personnel changes at ICE's Phoenix office, which apparently have included Medina's exit, which was confirmed late Tuesday. They also asked the Bush administration to improve communications with state and local officials. The Phoenix ICE office said Medina is being moved to the agency's office in El Paso, Texas...

In interesting and almost certainly unrelated older news, AFAIK it's never been made clear exactly why the interim director of the Phoenix ICE office shot himself while driving to Tucson to appear at a press conference with, among others, Asa Hutchinson.

Posted to Immigration at 01:24 PM | Comments (1)

Is U.S. Rep. Bob Beauprez dirty?

In 2004, Colorado Republican Bob Beauprez voted to allow banks to accept Mexico's "ID for illegals", the Matricula Consular card. This appears to be a conflict of interest because he founded a bank in the early 90s and, while he wasn't employed by them at the time of the vote, he is currently a shareholder in the bank and his wife currently serves on the board.

This is similar to the case of Georgia state senator Sam Zamarripa, who also owns a bank.

From "Beauprez's Mexican ID vote questioned" by Stuart Steers:

...Beauprez founded Heritage Bank in the early 1990s, becoming chairman and CEO as the company grew to 14 locations and more than $400 million of assets. He stepped down after being elected to Congress in 2002.

In 2004, Beauprez broke ranks with the other Republicans in Colorado's congressional delegation and voted in favor of an amendment that allowed banks to accept the matricula consular cards from their customers. Heritage Bank, like many others, accepts the IDs from Mexican citizens who want to open an account or take out a loan.

"He voted to maintain private financial institutions' ability to use those cards," said John Marshall, spokesman for Beauprez. "Private business needs to enforce their due diligence on hiring employees, but they shouldn't be forced to become immigration police."

Marshall said Heritage began accepting the Mexican IDs after Beauprez left the bank. His wife, Claudia, however, still serves on the bank's board.

"Bob has no role (in the bank)other than being a shareholder," said Marshall.

The legislation that Beauprez supported was a bipartisan bill that also had the support of the Bush administration. Still, most Republicans in Congress opposed the bill, including Coloradans Tom Tancredo, Joel Hefley and Marilyn Musgrave. Beauprez was one of 49 Republicans who voted with Democrats to pass the bill.

...A loan application on Heritage Bank's Web site says the bank will accept the matricula consular cards along with one additional form of ID, including a birth certificate, passport or major credit card. Many of the country's largest banks now accept the Mexican IDs.

...Marshall insisted that Beauprez's vote was a principled one against regulatory burdens on business. He also emphasized that Beauprez had left Heritage Bank before it began accepting the IDs.

"It's a fair question whether folks ought to be allowed to use (the cards)," Marshall said. "The fact is (that) it wasn't Bob's decision."

Posted to Immigration at 10:39 AM | Comments (2)

Zack Exley has a Wiki

Zack Exley of MoveOn and New Organizing has a Wiki: neworganizing.com/wiki

You need to sign up to edit pages, and I don't want to encourage any sort of defacement or anything like that. But, I do note that the site could do with something like a section not just praising George Soros, but extolling him, lionizing him, praising him to the skies for being the veritable demigod that he is.

Posted to Bloggage at 10:33 AM | Comments (0)

DSCC removes 'Secure' video from Youtube

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has removed their campaign video 'Secure' from Youtube. If you search for "DSCC" there, you get 12 results. "Rubber Stamp Republicans" and "Conrad Burns: Stay Home" are still there, but the controversial ad in which the Dems grew a tiny little spine and supported U.S. laws and the security of the U.S. has been removed.

If you click the link shown above (youtube.com/watch?v=RsZVQ7SwEks), you get the message "This video has been removed by the user." As of now, the video is still available at their page, but if anyone can save it and repost it elsewhere if necessary that would be useful.

8/17/06 UPDATE: Stage 2 is complete and their video has been flushed down the Memory Hole.

Posted to Politics at 09:49 AM | Comments (0)

"[Washington] State winks at illegal immigration"

Dan Stein of FAIR writes in the Seattle PI:

Gov. Chris Gregoire recently made some headlines by sending the federal government a $50 million bill for the cost of incarcerating criminal illegal immigrants. We wish her and the taxpayers of Washington luck. For all the chance the state of Washington has of getting a check from the federal government, Gregoire might just as well have saved the postage.

There is also a strong case to be made that Washington does not deserve to have the taxpayers of the other 49 states defray the costs of incarcerating illegals who commit crimes in that state. Washington, and especially the state's dominant metropolitan area, Seattle, have been willing accomplices to illegal immigration...

Posted to Immigration at 06:35 AM | Comments (1)

ACLU, PRLDEF sue Hazleton over immigration law

Various far-left forces have sued Hazleton over the immigration law they passed last month. The suit has no less than 235 individual claims, and those filing it include:

* Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF)
* American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
* Wilkes-Barre attorneys Barry Dyller and George Barron
* Philadelphia's Cozen O'Connor law firm

In addition to various individuals, those supposedly harmed by the law include:

* Casa Dominica (described as a non-profit agency designed to "promote the Hispanic culture and empower the Hispanic community of Hazleton." The suit claims it had 150 members before the ordinance was passed, but that number has now dropped to 110.)
* Hazleton Hispanic Business Association (no search results)
* Pennsylvania Statewide Latino Coalition (pslconline.org)

It would be quite helpful if anyone could find any links between any of the above and extremists, foreign governments, etc.

And:

The suit admits one plaintiff, John Doe 2, is in the country illegally. It reads he "is included within the definition if 'illegal alien,' but he is in fact living and working in the United States with the full knowledge of the federal government."

Mysterioso! Is he not really an illegal alien, or are those far-left groups just trying to say no person is illegal? And, expect a similar formulation to be used in other suits to try to prevent deportations in the future: a form of squatter's rights.

In the media bias arena, Jon Hurdle of Reuters' report is headlined "Pennsylvania town sued over strict immigration law". In his world, anti-American groups like the ACLU are "civil rights campaigners".

Previously:
Al Walentis/Reading Eagle taken to task
Ed Rendell: America's anti-American governor
Hazleton: Dr. Agapito Lopez rejects assimilation
Hazleton sued by far-left illegal immigration supporters

Posted to Immigration at 02:20 AM | Comments (1)

"Return to Reason" (Costa Mesa, Segerstrom & Sons)

The "Return to Reason" coalition is trying to remove the pro-American councilmembers from the board of Costa Mesa, California, including mayor Alan Mansoor:

"Things have deteriorated to where people are not mentioning the fine points of our community," said former Police Chief Dave Snowden, who was the city's top law enforcement officer for 18 years before retiring in 2003. "No one is for illegal immigration here, but there's a right and a wrong way to fight it…. Costa Mesa should be known for many better things."

Other members of the coalition include C.J. Segerstrom & Sons, owners of South Coast Plaza. I won't go as far as calling it "treason", but I am willing to help shed a bit more light on their activities and "reasons".

That last link also notes that a Wolfgang Puck restaurant at South Coast Plaza was raided by the INS in 1997, and they found that 40% of the employees used fake documents.

Posted to Immigration at 12:36 AM | Comments (4)

Gang members, illegal aliens: baggage handlers at airports

From this:

In a seven minute Full Disclosure Network Video News Blog United States Attorney Debra Yang and retired L. A. County Sheriff Sergeant Richard Valdemar discuss the problems of gang members and illegal foreign nationals working as airport baggage handlers and in high security areas of airports and who have access to the tarmacs and commercial airliners...

Posted to Immigration_terror at 10:58 PM | Comments (1)

"Census Shows Growth of Immigrants"

From this:

The number of immigrants living in American households rose 16 percent over the last five years, fueled largely by recent arrivals from Mexico, according to fresh data released by the Census Bureau.

And increasingly, immigrants are bypassing the traditional gateway states like California and New York and settling directly in parts of the country that until recently saw little immigrant activity — regions like the Upper Midwest, New England and the Rocky Mountain States...

Related:
Antonio Villaraigosa: "take a snapshot of Los Angeles and in 25 or 30 years so will go Topeka, Kansas and Des Moines, Iowa"

"Under bill, illegals wouldn't count toward political clout"

Posted to Immigration at 04:26 PM | Comments (0)

"Taxpayers called 'doormat' for illegal border crossings"

From this:

San Diego area government officials complained yesterday that the federal government's failure to curb illegal crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border was sapping local public services while a key House chairman said prospects for action this year on the immigration front did not look good.

"San Diego may be the gateway to Mexico, but our taxpayers are the doormat," County Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Horn told a hearing of the House Government Reform Committee in San Diego. "Every dollar spent on providing services to illegal immigrants or their children is a dollar that isn't used on taxpaying citizens."

A slightly more detailed report on the meeting is here. The Dems - in the person of Xavier Becerra of Los Angeles - took their standard tack. From the first link:

"This is a hearing to discuss a bill that the House has already passed... We don't need more hearings. We need action."

Of course, the action he has in mind is a massive amnesty for millions of people with whom he just happens to share ethnicity.

At a nearby restaurant, the farmers were lowing in the fields:

"Enforcement-only would cripple the agriculture industry and the California economy," said Luawanna Hallstrom, who serves on the boards of the California Farm Bureau and the Western Growers Association.

Outside, extremist Enrique Morones - affiliated with San Diego's Democratic Party - and his Border Angels complained about border deaths, without realizing or admitting that it's those who support illegal immigration that are partly responsible for those incidents.

Posted to Immigration at 01:00 PM | Comments (1)

DSCC: complaining about illegal immigration isn't racist

A new web-only video ad from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) tries to "Impugn[ the] GOP Claim That We're Safer".

It includes a shot of an illegal alien climbing over a wall with the caption "millions more illegal immigrants".

While it's certainly good to see the Democrats slightly waking up to the fact that there are indeed untold millions of foreign citizens in this country, somehow I think their opposition to illegal immigration is a bit half-hearted.

Especially considering all the links between the Democratic Party and the government of Mexico and all the attempts by Democrats to encourage illegal immigration.

But, if the Democrats are complaining about illegal immigration, that automatically implies that complaining about illegal immigration in and of itself is not racist. If anyone says different, send them to the video.

UPDATE: In 1996, Bill Clinton ("Bubba") ran a TV commercial called "Signed":

ANNOUNCER: Bob Dole. Desperate and wrong. President Clinton doubled border agents, a thousand more for California. Signed a tough anti-illegal immigration law protecting US workers. And 160 thousand illegal immigrants and criminals deported, a record. Bob Dole voted against reimbursing California for jailing illegal immigrants. Time Magazine says his risky tax scheme could cut 2,000 border agents, cut 4,000 FBI. Bob Dole. Wrong in the past. Wrong for our future.

Unfortunately returning to the present day, we find that overnight the roles have reversed. Not only are some Dems making sounds like the GOP, some Republicans are sounding like Dems:

Pedro Celis, chairman of the Republican National Hispanic Assembly, said in a statement Tuesday that the DSCC should remove the ad because it vilifies illegal Hispanic immigrants and is "appalling."

Here's a hint: "immigrants" don't scale fences. As the article points out, there's no indication that climbing the fence are Hispanic, and some might think that Celis is vilifying Hispanics by trying to claim that being an illegal alien implies being Hispanic.

The article goes on to quote Bettina Inclan of the assembly as well as DSCC spokesman Phil Singer as both supporting "comprehensive" immigration "reform". Couldn't at least one party support what's in America's best interests?

Posted to Immigration at 10:47 AM | Comments (0)

Help Tan Nguyen Beat Loretta Sanchez!

I have absolutely no idea who Tan Nguyen is, but I am unconditionally endorsing him in California's 47th District against illegal alien vote recipient Loretta Sanchez.

He needs to, of course, fix his website by using the tan4congress.com domain name which he registered. Then, he needs to transfer over the few URLs he has to a similar structure with, for instance, Drupal or another CMS. Given a suitable theme, that's only a half-day's work at most.

Posted to California at 10:27 AM | Comments (0)

"Why the DREAM Act Is a Nightmare"

Kris Kobach:

It is no secret that the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (S. 2611), passed by the U.S. Sen­ate on May 25, 2006, contains numerous provisions that reward illegal aliens for violating federal immigra­tion law. What is less well known is that the Senate bill also condones the violation of federal law by 10 U.S. states. Indeed, S. 2611 expressly shields these states from liability for their past violations of federal law.

These absurdities are found in the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act provisions of S. 2611.[1] Just before the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the first version of the bill in the evening of March 27, 2006, Senator Richard Durbin (D–IL) offered the DREAM Act as an amendment. It passed on a voice vote and was in the compromise version of the bill that the Senate passed in May.

The DREAM Act is a nightmare. It repeals a 1996 federal law that prohibits any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens unless the state also offers in-state tuition rates to all U.S. citizens. On top of that, the DREAM Act offers a separate amnesty to illegal-alien students.

He goes on to tell the tale of yet another sell-out to Mexico by former California Governor Gray Davis who initially vetoed and then signed a bill from the late Marco Firebaugh that gives foreign citizens in California a better deal than U.S. citizens in other states.

Posted to Immigration at 02:53 AM | Comments (1)

"Mexican ambassador endorses comprehensive immigration reform" [safe, legal and orderly]

Speaking at the third annual Border Security Conference at UTEP (University of Texas at El Paso), Mexico's ambassador to the United States, Carlos de Icaza, gave his stamp of approval to "comprehensive" immigration "reform." He not only joins Bush, Fox, Kennedy, McCain, Sheila Jackson Lee, Jack Kemp, and a host of others in supporting the scam, but U.S. ambassador to Mexico Tony Garza spoke at the same gala and also supported the scam:

[De Icaza] praised growing cooperation that has allowed increased trade and security efforts between Mexico and the United States while encouraging U.S. lawmakers to approve reforms that allow "legal, safe and orderly human migration."

"We respect the right of every country in the world ... to enforce its laws and protect its borders," de Icaza said. "But enforcement by itself won't be enough."

It's good to know that he's going to allow us to have certain rights, but the second sentence is wrong. Enforcement across the board would be enough.

The ambassador, who said the decisions on immigration policy lie in Washington and with the American people, also acknowledged that his country was to blame for not creating economic conditions that encourage Mexican citizens to stay in Mexico... "We have a shared responsibility," de Icaza said. "In Mexico we also have to recognize that we need our people to stay."

There's no time like the present, and helping us repatriate their citizens would be a good way to show that they're not just full of hot air.

Icaza's remarks are similar to what he said before (which I thought I'd covered but I guess not):

Mexico's ambassador to the United States says his country is committed to finding a solution to the growing problem of illegal aliens, but the United States and Mexico "must address this phenomenon in a comprehensive and mutually beneficial manner."

"Mexico absolutely respects the sovereign right of every country to control its borders and enforce its laws," Ambassador Carlos de Icaza told The Washington Times. "However, given that this is a complex challenge that affects both countries, we are absolutely convinced it is necessary to work together under the principle of shared responsibility for the proper bilateral management of the migration phenomenon.

"It is essential that Mexico is engaged in the solution because of the international implications, which require actions and commitments from Mexico," Mr. de Icaza said.

Posted to Immigration_consul at 09:10 PM | Comments (2)

National Alliance for Immigrant Rights: Pro-illegal immigration groups seek power

On Sunday around 400 people from 25 states met in Chicago to try to organize the disparate groups that assisted in getting illegal aliens and their supporters to march in our streets and demand rights to which they aren't entitled: "Pro-immigration groups seek formal political power" by Oscar Avila and Antonio Olivo. They formed a group called the "National Alliance for Immigrant Rights".

One of the leaders is Jorge Mujica, an official with the Mexican political party PRD. At least to me, that completely taints everyone else involved in the group, and the reader is strongly encouraged to break that news to any reporter who does an article on this new group.

The new group split on other forms of extremism, such as whether to condemn the Iraq war, whether to condemn U.S. support for Israel's invasion of Lebanon, and whether to conduct a general strike by "immigrants".

The meeting was held in Spanish and - just like a mini-U.N. - headphones were provided to non-Spanish speakers. This didn't sit too well:

Berna Ellorin, of the National Alliance for Filipino Concerns, fumed that Asians and other immigrants appeared to be merely token participants used for photo opportunities... "It's not enough to say we are all-inclusive and then come up with an all-Latino leadership. We have to practice what we preach," she said...

We're informed that some of the leaders of the group are Irish, and while their affiliation isn't known they might be linked to the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform, which is partly funded by the Irish government.

If newspapers and their reporters aren't willing to disclose such links to foreign governments and foreign political parties, they should be considered Fifth Columnists as well.

Posted to Immigration at 12:36 PM | Comments (2)

Nell Soto plan rewards illegal alien drivers

From this:

The [California state] Senate already has voted 25 to 14 to create a special exemption in state law that would reduce the mandatory 30-day impoundment of cars driven by unlicensed drivers, so that offenders who have never had a valid license can get their cars back after 24 hours. Right now, when officers impound the cars of unlicensed drivers, the mandatory term is 30 days. A new law would keep the 30 days for drivers whose bad driving led to the forfeiture or suspension of their license -- may the courts add whatever punishment they so choose -- but create a loophole to give unlicensed illegal immigrants their cars back overnight. Expect the California Assembly to approve SB626 as early as today [Thu 8/10]

It doesn't look like it was passed, but that might change any moment.

Posted to Immigration_dls at 11:55 AM | Comments (2)

Minuteman leader reportedly attacked in Lake Forest, CA

From this:

Raymond Herrera, national rally coordinator for The Minuteman Project co-founded by Jim Gilchrist, was attacked at a day labor site in Lake Forest, California over the weekend. While Herrera was exercising his First Amendment right to speak out against illegal immigration, he was run over by an irate truck driver not once, but twice...

Posted to Immigration at 11:52 AM | Comments (1)

Pence massive amnesty bad enough to get WaPo support

If the news that Mike Pence's massive illegal alien amnesty would allow unlimited immigration wasn't enough of a clue to how bad it is, and if this article didn't do the trick, now comes the WaPo to let us know just how bad it is. In "Hope for Immigration Reform?" they come just short of endorsing it, and try to spin it the best way they can:

One plus is that their brand of enforcement-first is not tied to achieving an unrealistic -- and unattainable without other reforms -- degree of border control. Rather, Pence-Hutchison concentrates on benchmarks tied to resources and capabilities: hiring more agents, increasing detention capacity and making certain that employers poised to hire immigrant workers have a reliable system (secure identification cards, accurate databases) to verify eligibility.

In other words, the Big Show on the Border would continue. We'd just have to spend the money on enforcement but if things continue as they are now and only a limited amount of real enforcement is actually performed, then the Pence amnesty scheme would kick in. We'd just have to look like (and spend like) we're doing something, we wouldn't have to actually do anything. Why doesn't the WaPo save the verbage and come right out and say that they're supporting a Potemkin immigration scheme?

They do have a few qualms however, and provide us with the news that "only illegal immigrants from countries that are part of the North American and Central American free-trade agreements would be eligible for citizenship."

Posted to Immigration at 11:13 AM | Comments (0)

Will far-left "environmentalists" block the border fence?

The credulous article "Experts say border fence would hurt bighorn sheep" offers the thoughts of an organization that building the proposed 370-mile fence on the border would prevent bighorns from migrating to Mexico in order to mate.

Unfortunately, the "experts" are from Tucson's "Center for Biological Diversity", a far-left group that calls themselves "Nature's Legal Eagles" and which have been litigating environmental matters for decades. And, they have past ties to Earth First! More on them here and here. A favorable article on them is here. They receive money from the Pew Charitable Trust and no doubt other leftwing foundations.

And, the quotes in the article should have been a huge clue to the reporter (Chuck Mueller) that he should have asked them if they had another agenda.

Daniel Patterson, a CBD desert ecologist: "If the California herds are isolated from herds in Mexico, repopulation and genetic flow in both herds will be affected... [the proposed steel barrier would be] a monumental environmental disaster that will not stem illegal immigration...The only living things the wall won't stop is people. It's a moral low-point for America when the government moves to destroy nature and wall us off from a friendly neighbor."

And: [Michel Finkelstein, CBD executive director called] the barrier "a new Berlin Wall," he said President Reagan admonished Soviet leader Mikal Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall in 1987, but now American legislators have launched a move to build a similar barrier along the Mexican border.

Their agenda is quite clear and appears to have only tangential involvement with protecting migrating sheep.

Expect far-left groups to attempt to block the wall by any means necessary, including telling tall tales and even lawsuits over environmental issues. All the while ignoring the issue of over-population and the massive environmental damage caused by the trash left behind by illegal aliens.

Note that the San Diego fence was given an environmental waiver. I don't want to see migration routes disturbed, but I don't trust groups that have other agendas when they make such claims. Hopefully workarounds such as a waiver won't be necessary, but it will take the assistance of scientists not Lysenkoists.

Posted to Immigration at 10:47 AM | Comments (2)

"Petition seeks pardon for agents"

From this:

A conservative, grass-roots organization has gathered nearly 40,000 signatures since Wednesday on a petition to be sent to President Bush on behalf of two Border Patrol agents convicted of violating a drug smuggler's civil rights.

Two of the jurors who convicted the agents also are expressing misgivings about the verdict, saying they were pressured by other jury members and the prosecution to reach a quick decision in the case.

Grassfire, a nonprofit organization that uses online petitions to effect legislation, has created a special Web link and letter to President Bush for Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, who were convicted on numerous counts of violating Mexican national Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila's civil rights during a pursuit on Feb. 17, 2005...

The article doesn't provide the link, but the petition is here.

Posted to Immigration at 06:08 AM | Comments (2)

Mountain Rescue: Griffith Park

Shown above, a Los Angeles Fire Department rescue helicopter awaits an apparent hiking accident victim in Los Angeles' Griffith Park. This is the helipad near the "Five Points" intersection; apparently the accident occured closer to the Observatory (probably on the "Hogsback" section) and involved a broken clavicle (neckbone).

The "Hogsback" starts shortly after the helipad and runs to the fire road that runs around Mt. Hollywood; presumably they chose to transport the victim down the grade to the helicopter rather than hiking up the trail to a vehicle.

Before seeing this, I spent some time driving and then biked in Cheeseboro Canyon and powered up some hills (I was on the Palo Comado or a connecting trail), but I decided to cut that short since it was too hot. I came back to do a Griffith Park loop which, while on the road, is at least shaded in parts.

Posted to Los_Angeles at 09:30 PM | Comments (3)

New liberal group blog needs contributors

Welcome American dogs! My friend Mahmoud is looking for obscene American liberal peoples to contribute to his new blog: ahmadinejad.ir Will you not contribute?

WARNING: Before going to that link, read this.

UPDATE: I strapped on the ball tightener, drank a gallon of Zinfandel laced with a couple Viicodins, reviewed the work of Dean Wheeler, and took other steps that allow me to think just like a liberal. Then, I watched the Mike Wallace 60 Minutes interview with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and... well... I'm sold! Is there anything he said that doesn't deserve our full attention? Why, he even cares about our "oppressed" people and the fact that 45 million residents don't have health care! Is there any way that he could be encouraged to seek the Democratic Party's nomination for president... of the U.S.?!?!

Posted to WackyHumor at 01:33 PM | Comments (0)

George Stephanopoulos: Castro is OK!

On ABC's This Week, a gleeful George Stephanopoulos announced that Fidel Castro was A-OK and showed the following picture. However, he failed to note that some question whether the image is photoshopped or real:

From the caption:

This is one of four photographs published Sunday Aug. 13, 2006 by Cuba's Communist Youth newspaper's online edition Juventud Rebelde proporting to show The first photographs of Fidel Castro since his illness two weeks ago. Castro holds a copy of the Saturday Aug. 12, 2006 edition of Granma, the Communist Party newspaper. The headline reads "Absolved by history." The Associated Press cannot verify the authenticity or the date when these photographs were shot. (AP Photo/HO)

Posted to Miscellania at 12:41 PM | Comments (1)

"[Canadian] Immigration policy a 'death wish''

From this:

A leading terrorism expert says Canada's liberal open-door immigration policy is a "death wish" for an attack on home soil.

David Harris, a former top CSIS official who's now a senior fellow with the Canadian Coalition for Democracies, believes a bloated influx of immigrants and refugees poses a serious threat to national security. He said the entry system has spun "out of control," with the country now taking in far more people than it can properly screen and integrate into society.

"That's a death wish," he said. "It's inconceivable the way that we've managed ourselves in that regard, and it's a terrible shame for the immigrant communities who have come in to make a constructive, peaceful life to find that they're frequently under siege by radicals in their midst."

Harris said the growing problem of homegrown terrorists also stems from flawed immigration policies, since Canada is building "colonies of isolation" with the extensive penetration of certain ethnic groups. That has a ghettoizing effect, fuelling isolation and imagined racial or religious supremacy, he said.

"If people come in absorbable, smaller numbers, then presumably there's a better chance they can interact and integrate charter values," Harris said...

Posted to Immigration_terror at 11:25 AM | Comments (5)

Pew Hispanic Study on immigration and jobs: what it really means

A new study from the Pew Hispanic Center's Rakesh Kochhar purports to show that the massive immigration over the past 15 years has had little effect on jobs. Needless to say, this gives a glimmer of hope to racial advocates and massive immigration supporters everywhere. But, a closer look shows that - as usual - they're wrong.

For instance, you could point out that the PHC is hardly "unbiased" as the WaPo's Kim Hart states. They're a racial advocacy group, for gosh sake (see the second comment here for bios of their two top advocates).

Or, you could be like Andrew Sum, director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University: "There's an age, gender and educational component to this story that this report does not address".

But, let's take the study at face value and listen closely to the words of the study's author:

"We cannot say with certainty that growth in the foreign population has hurt or helped American jobs."

If it's true that immigrants and illegal aliens haven't been taking jobs, they have contributed to economic growth. However, wouldn't one expect just a bit more?

Given all of the downsides of massive immigration - especially of the illegal variety - shouldn't each of us be getting a dividend of hundreds of dollars a month or something? Instead, even a racial advocacy group can't find a demonstrably large benefit from massive illegal immigration.

On the other hand, because of illegal immigration our entire political system has been compromised. Our representatives take money from companies that profit from illegal immigration and then spend their time trying to find workarounds for our laws rather than enforcing the current law. A foreign country is given free rein to claim part of our population as their own; they may have used proxies to stage demonstrations in our streets; they spread propaganda to students in U.S. schools; and they generally meddle in our internal politics. Our politicians try to devalue U.S. citizenship through bills such as the DREAM Act. And, illegal immigration leads to worker abuse, low safety standards, and border deaths.

On balance, is it really worth it?

Posted to Immigration at 06:33 AM | Comments (3)

Do hundreds of cellphones imply terrorism?

There have been a few recent cases of those generally of Middle Eastern descent being detained or arrested with large numbers of cell phones in their possession. The case of the Georgian illegal alien in Pennsylvania from a few days ago.

And, from Caro, Michigan: Three men - apparently naturalized citizens from Texas via Palestine - bought 80 cell phones from a WalMart. The cops found 1000 other phones in their van. They also had a laptop "with store addresses and store logos".

And, from Marietta, Ohio: Two men from Dearborn, Michigan were stopped with several prepaid phones and have been arrested on an unnamed charge. A week earlier, another Middle Easterner from Dearborn was stopped with a large number of phones. Debbie Schlussel has been covering this story, however from a comment on that thread we get a possible more innocent explanation (something I already figured as a possibility):

What is going on is tracfones are sold in the US at a substantial subsidy and low minute intial purchase phones are way cheaper than buying phones outright.

Tracfone works on GSM and it is easy to remove the chips, unlock the phones subisidy lock (not in itself illegal) and ship the phones for a good profit. Indeed a HUGE number of new unlocked tracphones are sold in the US on EBAY everyday for about $20 over retail. bulk buying in lots of 10 to 20k is at $25 a unit...

Looking at walmart this week they had a tracfone on sale for an unusually low $15wiht calling credits -- and this phone is currently on sale on ebay for $60 new unlocked...

While those in the last incident also had more suspicious items such as flight and passenger information, and there are links between them and an airline worker. So, the purchases might have been for detonators, or they might have been designed to test our defenses or make us worried, or their boss might have just trying to make some money on the gray market.

Posted to Terrorism at 03:29 AM | Comments (2)

What the "Northern Alliance" won't ask Michael Barone

The "Northern Alliance Radio Network" (featuring the hopeless BushBots at PowerLine and their friends) will be interviewing TV pundit Michael Barone tomorrow at 1pm Eastern. The topic of discussion will be the repurposed edition of his book The New Americans ("How the melting pot can work again"). Apparently it's on a real radio station (not shortwave!) that can be streamed over the web.

I am going on record as stating that this will be a puffball interview that strongly favors the Bush/Fox/McCain/Kennedy amnesty, but I'm not going to waste my time bothering to find out whether I'm correct or not. Someone else did another radio interview (nofollowpolicy) with him which, while I didn't listen to that either, sounds like it might have been a bit harder-edged than the PL guys are up to.

It's a shame that neither PowerLine nor Fraters Libertas have comments, because if they did I'd suggest some items they might discuss (modified from the comment I left at the last link):

- The huge differences between then and now.

- All of the instances of Mexico meddling in our internal politics and gaining political power inside the U.S. Is Barone even aware of some of those incidents? Does he care?

- How does he intend to encourage assimilation when the leadership of the GOP cozies up to groups (such as National Council of The Race) that actively oppose assimilation? The NCLR, for instance, funds the school whose principal was interviewed here. Karl Rove spoke at their convention recently.

- On a personal note, will those pundits and others who promote massive immigration continue to have careers left after most Americans figure out - or see firsthand - the effects of their policies? Will the only thing they have to look forward to be sinecures at think tanks funded by those who profit from illegal immigration?

Posted to Immigration at 09:14 PM | Comments (2)

Immigration piffle from The Nation

The far-left rag's latest issue is all about the "New Nativism". It goes downhill from there. For instance, let's look at just one article entitled "Nightly Nativism" about Lou Dobbs:

Dobbs elaborated in his online column: "It is no accident that they chose May 1 as their day of demonstration and boycott. It is the worldwide day of commemorative demonstrations by various socialist, communist and even anarchic organizations.... No matter which flag demonstrators and protesters carry today, their leadership is showing its true colors to all who will see." ...You might expect that sort of McCarthyesque description from Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh or some other famously right-wing provocateur on Fox or talk-radio. But Lou Dobbs, on CNN? These days, the network once pilloried by conservatives as a leading voice of the "liberal media" is offering an expansive platform to the nation's leading spokesman for anti-immigration hardliners.

Of course, what The Nation doesn't tell its readers is just how accurate Dobbs' description is. The marches were organized by ANSWER, for gosh's sake, and many of the organizers of those and other marches have links to socialist and communist groups and several even have links to the Mexican government. Don't expect to read about that in The Nation.

UPDATE: Dobbs replies:

...Tonight, a few words for an otherwise irrelevant publication called "The Nation," which accuses me in a mistake-riddled left-wing screed (ph) of being hysterical, jingoistic and an immigration restrictionist, even though I'm on record in favor of immigration, legal immigration, but that's not a distinction important to "The Nation" of course. Even by "The Nation's" sorry standards the article is pitiful. But "The Nation's" introductory editorial, entitled "The New Nativism" is worthy of note...

More at the link.

Posted to Immigration at 12:53 PM | Comments (1)

Pro-illegal immigration protesters shout down Paul Revere Riders

The headline reads "Anti-Illegal Immigration Speakers Attacked on Boston Common" but unless I'm missing something what happened doesn't rise to the level of an "attack". However, if you watch the video here you'll see the usual group of far-leftie illegal immigration supporters swarming the cameraman and one of them shoving her sign at the camera. Then, you'll see them having to be escorted away from the protesters by cops on horseback.

On a related note, Pat Schneider of the illegal immigration-supporting rag Madison Capital Times offers "Dueling groups rev up debate on immigration":

"Si, se puede!" "Yes, we can!"

Fifty local immigration reform activists rallied Friday on the grounds of the State Capitol, shouting chants, banging drums and drowning out members of the 21st Century Paul Revere Ride, a group of self-styled patriots crossing the country by motorcycle to "warn Americans of the unarmed invasion from Mexico," the group's Web page says.

As in Boston (and everywhere else), pro-illegal immigration supporters chanted and banged drums in an attempt to drown them out.

Likewise in Providence Rhode Island:

A motorcycle group's "21st Century Paul Revere Ride" roared into town yesterday to warn Americans against the "disastrous consequences" of illegal immigration. Organizers said those consequences range from "overpopulation," "crime" and "diseases" to "decimation of the middle class" and the "breakdown of civilization."

Counter-protesters gave them a hostile reception outside the State House, with clashing cymbals and bullhorn-amplified shouts of "Get Up! Get Down! Get the Racists Out of Our Town!"

"Oh yeah, this is about the tenth state where we've had opposition," said Howard J. Wooldridge, 55, of Colorado, ride coordinator and retired police detective. "We're here to open debate, and they're here to shut off debate."

As asked in the other post, why does the news media support groups that would gladly strip them of the Constitutional protections they require to do their jobs?

Posted to Immigration at 11:55 AM | Comments (4)

Farmers hollowed when laws followed

Drivers along the 5 Freeway through California's Central Valley are treated to signs saying, "Crops grow where water flows" or similar. Based on growers' support for illegal labor, perhaps they should consider throwing signs saying "Farmers hollowed when laws followed" into the mix.

From "Farmers say 'enforcement only' immigration will cripple industry" by Eunice Moscoso:

After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the government checked the background of every farm worker in Camp Pendleton, where tomatoes have been harvested since 1940.

As a result, most of the workers were fired for being in the United States illegally. And the company -- Harry Singh & Sons -- lost $2.5 million in rotted crops.

The same fate awaits farmers across the country if Congress enacts an enforcement-only immigration bill passed by the House, said Luawanna Hallstrom, general manager of the California tomato company [and co-chair of the National Council of Agricultural Employers]

Let me get this straight. There were illegal aliens working on a Marine Corps base, and I'm supposed to feel sorry for a company that was employing those illegal aliens? Is this a joke?

The article quotes not only Tamar Jacoby but a couple other growers who in effect admit employing illegal aliens. However, it does have some balance:

"Farmers moan and groan over what they allege is a shortage of legal agricultural workers. In fact, under current law, farmers can import an unlimited number of foreign ag workers using the H-2A visa," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., who heads a 104-member caucus pushing for stronger immigration controls. "Their true motive for breaking the law is that they want to reap maximum profit by paying substandard wages, not that there aren't enough workers."

Last year, less than 50,000 H-2A visas were issued, accounting for a small fraction of the nation's 1.6 million seasonal farm workers. Employers complain that the program is expensive, cumbersome, time-consuming and not practical.

Hallstrom is also quoted in "Ag leaders advocate guest-worker program":

...Fruit and vegetable production in San Diego County would drop by about 40 percent if a guest worker program is not included in legislation being hammered out in Congress, according to Eric Larson, executive director of the San Diego County Farm Bureau...

...A guest-worker program would allow an agricultural employer to legally bring in workers when there are not enough willing or available workers to take those jobs, according to Luawanna Hallstrom, co-chairwoman of the Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform and an officer of the National Council of Agricultural Employers...

Previous coverage of crops rotting in the fields starts here.

Posted to Immigration at 06:08 AM | Comments (3)

7/28: Pro-American protesters attacked in Fremont; ISO, NLG involvement

This is the first time I've heard of it, but on July 28 there was a clash between a pro-American group and a group of illegal immigration supporters in Fremont (in the East Bay Area in California). From "Protesters may change their tactics":

...Police also said that coalition members were defending themselves when five males, ranging in age from 16 to 28, attacked them...

...The anti-illegal-immigration activists were gathered peacefully at Irvington's Five Corners intersection until Perry's husband, Mike Perry, and four teenage neighbors disrupted them, police said. They struck coalition members, some of whom were elderly, and knocked signs out of their hands, police Detective Bill Veteran said.

"I saw the whole thing unfold," he said.

Mike Perry, 28, said he was arrested on an outstanding warrant related to an unresolved traffic violation. Two minors — ages 16 and 17 — and 18-year-old Tony Rounds also were arrested Friday on suspicion of battery, police said. David Anaya, 18, was arrested on suspicion of assaulting a police officer.

Police said that all four of the teens taken into custody have gang affiliations.

"One of them admitted it to us, and we have them on videotape flashing gang signs," Mazzone said. But Priscilla Perry emphatically denied that she, her husband or the four teens have any gang ties...

The pro-American group has been hounded by counter-protesters from the International Socialist Organization; most of them were apparently on their way to the corner where the fight occured and they claim that the attackers are not affiliated with that group. However, from this report:

Fremont police Detective Bill Veteran, who witnessed the scene, said a small group of pro-immigrant Fremont teens started the trouble, egged on by chants from ISO members.

In the first report, the ISO shows how much they respect the First Amendment:

Meanwhile, leaders of the International Socialist Organization, who support granting citizenship to the nation's 12 million illegal immigrants, disagreed. They painted a contrasting picture of Friday's events, blaming coalition members for starting the violence.

"You don't go to a community as diverse as Fremont and say, 'Immigrants go home' and 'Build a fence on the border,' unless you're looking for a fight," [spokesman Michael Smith] said.

They're now working on a legal defense with the National Lawyers Guild.

While the above reports are somewhat balanced, if the MSM's dreams had come true and pro-borders groups had attacked helpless "immigrants" we would never hear the end of it. This incident will obviously not be endlessly discussed. It's odd how the news media supports groups such as the ISO that clearly do not believe in the Constitutional protections that they require to do their jobs.

Posted to Immigration at 03:26 AM | Comments (3)

Ruben Navarrette, disingenuous race-baiter

The San Diego Union-Tribune's Ruben Navarrette Jr. offers a disingenuous, race-baiting hit piece on U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI):

...What concerns Sensenbrenner is that [Pence massive amnesty] "provides unlimited immigration from Mexico and Central America." I asked him if that meant he would like to see a return to the pre-1965 system when we had immigration quotas based on country of origin.

No, he insisted, he didn't support quotas, but he and some of his GOP colleagues did have concerns about an "immigration system heavily weighted toward Mexicans and Central Americans, rather than people from other parts of the world." Then, he tried to change the subject.

I pressed him on whether rhetoric such as that fed the perception that Republicans are flirting with nativism or racism. If you say the problem is that there are too many Mexicans, I asked, then why isn't the conversation anti-Mexican?

What follows is similar to that excerpt. Sensenbrenner was discussing the percentages of Mexicans allowed in. Sensenbrenner wasn't discussing "too many Mexicans", he was discussing too many Mexicans in comparison to others. Navarrette, knowing that many of those who read him won't figure out what he's doing, tries to call that racism. In fact, it's those who would gladly accept as many Mexicans as possible even if those in other countries were disadvantaged who are the true racists.

And, while RN is correct that there are differences between Mexicans and the Mexican government, the more people of Mexican descent in the U.S., the greater the chance that the Mexican government can "get closer" to them and use them to advance the Mexican agenda in the U.S. In fact, Navarrette wrote a column about his friend Rob Allyn who was paid $720,000 to spread Mexican propaganda in the U.S.

Posted to Immigration at 01:52 AM | Comments (1)

"Memos reveal [UK] Government complacency towards immigration"

A cautionary tale:

The complacency of the government towards the vast scale of immigration from Eastern Europe has been graphically exposed by Foreign Office documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.

Memos from Britain's embassy in Warsaw to Foreign Office bosses in London openly mocked claims that hundreds of thousands of Poles would flock to the UK after the country was granted entry into the UK.

Ministers claimed at the time that just 13,000 people would come to Britain when the borders were opened.

In fact more than 700,000 immigrants from the former Soviet bloc have arrived in Britain since 2004 - around half of them from Poland...

Posted to Immigration_euro at 08:41 PM | Comments (1)

Georgian illegal alien with 15 pre-paid cell phones held in Pennsylvania

There's no word on any terrorism connection, but a man from the Republic of Georgia is being held in the Westmoreland County Prison under orders of ICE after admitting to being an illegal alien. He and a compatriot (who wasn't held) had in their possession: $4200 in cash, 15 pre-paid cellular phones, a laptop, and GPS software. Obviously, there are both innocent and more sinister explanations for those possessions.

Posted to Immigration_terror at 08:30 PM | Comments (0)

Phyllis Schlafly testimony on illegal immigration

On July 18 she testified before the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims. Her testimony is in this PDF file, and it's a very good overview of the subject. (Via this)

Posted to Immigration at 09:25 AM | Comments (4)

John Fonte replies to Tamar Jacoby

Continuing their dialog, Fonte points out yet again just how wrong she is.

Previously: Tamar Jacoby's "Immigration Realism"

Posted to Immigration at 06:11 AM | Comments (0)

Rogue Border Patrol agents, or punished for doing their jobs?

The article "Breaking the silence: Convicted border agent tells his story" has the details on the case of two Border Patrol agents (Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean) who were convicted of shooting a drug smuggler:

Even more broadly, Assistant U.S. Attorney Debra Kanof said, Ramos and Compean had no business chasing someone in the first place.

"It is a violation of Border Patrol regulations to go after someone who is fleeing," she said. "The Border Patrol pursuit policy prohibits the pursuit of someone."

...The smuggler was given full immunity to testify against the agents and complete medical care at William Beaumont Army Medical Center, in El Paso...

...A Texas jury convicted the pair of assault with serious bodily injury; assault with a deadly weapon; discharge of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence; and a civil rights violation. Compean and Ramos also were convicted of four counts and two counts, respectively, of obstruction of justice for not reporting that their weapons had been fired.

The jury acquitted both men of assault with intent to commit murder...

I haven't researched this case, but see this for some actions you can take.

Posted to Immigration at 03:02 AM | Comments (1)

Global warming satires compared

NRO Contributing Editor James S. Robbins offers "Hooray for Global Warming", which I presume to be a satire:

...A population distribution map of Canada shows most people live in a belt running along the southern border with the United States. But add global warming and vast regions would become comfortably habitable. As well, there would be more land available for cultivation. Resources would be easier to extract...

This has the lefties outraged that anyone would dare make fun of the principles of their religion: ThinkProgress, TruthDig, and HuffPost.

Speaking of the HuffPost, back on July 9, "Jim Gillespie" posted "Global warming: the libertarian approach". Why didn't TP, TD, or the HP link to that, which goes even further than the NRO satire? I guess I need to send out press releases or something.

Posted to Bloggage at 10:34 PM | Comments (0)

Vindication at 14,246 feet

Last year I tried for White Mountain Peak - at 14,246 feet the easiest 14er in California - and turned around just shy of the summit due to a thunderstorm. At least that was better than 2003 when I didn't even make it to the campground but was forced to turn around when my water pump failed going up the road.

This year, finally, I attained the summit. All the details - including just how clear and copious I was - at the link.

Posted to OutdoorSports at 11:11 PM | Comments (3)

Have you ever considered becoming a florist?

Well, it looks like I'm still out of town, so a question: have you ever considered the work of a florist?

UPDATE: A word of explanation. The title is a take-off on a question from the MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory); a purported copy of which can be found here.

Posted to Bloggage at 12:26 PM | Comments (1)

"A Compromised Plan" (Mike Pence massive illegal alien amnesty)

From National Review:

Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, both Republicans, are making a last-ditch effort to bridge their party's divide on immigration and pass a bill this year. We agree that the country, and the Republican party, would benefit if a sensible immigration plan were passed soon. The Pence-Hutchison plan isn't one.

The pro-amnesty Republicans have responded more favorably to the plan than the enforcement-first Republicans, and both sides are reading the plan correctly. Its central component is to allow illegal immigrants to continue their jobs legally. All they would have to do is briefly leave the country and then return...

...When our illegal immigrant comes back, he will become a "guest worker." As a guest worker, he will be able to keep renewing his "temporary" status and exploiting other features of the plan so as to remain here for 17 years. At that point, he can go through the process of getting a green card. Any children he has while here will be American citizens, which will make it more difficult to deport him should he overstay his welcome.
The plan's supporters advertise its "trigger" mechanism: The guest-worker/amnesty would supposedly not go into effect until after enforcement was shown to have worked. But the triggers would be the achievement of bureaucratic objectives such as personnel targets. The amnesty would go into effect even if there were no evidence that the illegal population was shrinking...

They go on, but I think it's clear what the Pence plan entails.

Posted to Immigration at 08:15 AM | Comments (2)

What's your favorite color?

Since it looks like I'm out of town for a couple days, what's your favorite color? How does it make you feel?

As for myself, I tend to prefer red. I don't like orange or yellow that much because they're a bit wishy-washy and seem a bit garish, especially orange. I do, however, greatly enjoy citrus fruits and vegetables that are orange or yellow.

What about you?

Posted to Bloggage at 12:22 PM | Comments (6)

Democrat Raul Grijalva + Mexican government-linked Derechos Humanos at forum

Representative Raul Grijalva - an Arizona Democrat and a proud former member of the racial separatist group MEChA - will be appearing at an immigration forum hosted by the groups Derechos Humanos and National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. The first group is not only working with the Mexican government, their head is also on the payroll of Pima County (Tucson). The meeting is scheduled for August 17, but there's no word on where it will be held.

This is yet another link between the Democratic Party and the government of Mexico.

Posted to Immigration at 11:04 PM | Comments (1)

Bush sees how many immigration lies the Americans will accept

Unfortunately, president Bush cannot yet be ignored, so: he toured the border in Mission Texas yesterday:

President Bush got a firsthand look Thursday at ways the government fights illegal immigration and said that securing the border with Mexico will require more people and modern technology.

For Bush's arrival at the airport in nearby McAllen, Texas, the Border Patrol had set up several tools it uses on patrol _ helicopters, a boat and a small plane.



Then the president's motorcade took him past waving residents lined up along the streets of Mission to a point about a half-mile from the border. He looked at a "skybox" _ a small box equipped with infrared technology that can be raised in the air so that agents can get a view of busy crossing points. He also petted some of the horses used by agents on the ground.

"We have an obligation to secure our border and we have an obligation to treat people with decency and respect," the president said after his tour. He spoke of using motion and heat sensors, infrared detection equipment and other high-tech devices to catch illegal immigrants.

"We're going to help build a virtual border," he said. "This border is changing and it needs to change so the Border Patrol can do its job."

Shouldn't someone sometime call him on his lies? Since Karl Rove admits 6 million illegal aliens have entered on Bush's watch, isn't it obvious to everyone that Bush is completely lying?

Posted to Immigration at 11:53 AM | Comments (4)

Drug lookout towers 200 miles inside U.S. territory, Rove doesn't care; Bush quotes

The Derb attended a soiree about immigration and has an interesting roundup. I've numbered them and bolded bits:

1. Of GOP '08 serious prospects, only George Allen looks as if he understands the immigration issue. (Unless you think Newt Gingrich is a serious prospect.)

2. Quote on GWB: "He loves his servants. He's a guy with a ranch and lots of Mexican help. Vicente Fox is a guy with a ranch and lots of Mexican help. Of course they got on well."

3. Quote *from* GWB (reportedly): "I spent a lot of time with my baseball team. I understand immigration." (Sounds authentic GWB to me.)

4. Quote from a guy who's been toiling in the immigration-enforcement vineyard for a decade or so: "This administration will never do anything to stop illegal immigration, except grudgingly and half-heartedly. They just don't believe in it. If you squeeze 'em real hard, they'll make a gesture. That's it. They just don't believe in it. Their real effort, their real concentration, is always on finding ways to do nothing about immigration."

5. Grass roots immigration-enforcement groups: They are babes in the wood. The La Raza types run rings round them. They easily fall into factional squabbling. They attract kooky fringe types, and don't know how to get rid of them. The enemy has all the heavy artillery: AILA, Republican elites, pretty much the entire Democratic Party (though there were some kind words for James Webb), all the media, the universities, etc.

6. The Mexican drug cartels have staked out lookout posts on high ground up to 200 miles into U.S. territory. There are armed foreign nationals on U.S. soil, protecting their drug shipment routes. Presented with photographic evidence of this Karl Rove pooh-poohed it.

#2: The LAPL might still have 50s-era a book I saw there once called something like, "Spanish for the Texas Housewife". I should scan that in to go with that comment.

#3: I think he actually said something like that.

#4: Obviously correct.

#5: One way to counteract that is to discredit those on the other side who make themselves available. This site and others have frequently pointed out false or misleading coverage. While many reporters and sources could care less, some don't like being shown to be liars and have modified their reporting. The same goes for lower-tier thought leaders who have blogs with comment sections.

#6: If the Democratic Party ever decided to represent Americans, they could verify that issue, get the photos, and run with it all the way to sure victory. Instead, they'll ignore it and if anyone pays any attention some of their further left members will end up in effect supporting the smugglers.

Posted to Immigration_terror at 09:22 AM | Comments (3)

Don Perata: only small minority against driver's licenses for illegal aliens are "crackers"

[California] Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata spoke yesterday about opponents of giving driver's licenses to illegal aliens:

"Immigration is a red meat issue... You've got all these crackers down in Southern Cal – ah, where is it, San Diego, taking on the governor. Even the governor was shocked."

He's a Democrat, and "cracker" is a derogatory term for a white person, so - don't worry! - everything's going to be OK. Plus, he's issued a followup statement:

Next time I come to Sacramento in August I'll be sure to run the air conditioner. I want to clarify something I said earlier today. While I am concerned about the coarse and divisive tone used by a small minority in the driver's license debate, I believe that the vast majority on both sides are people of good will.

So, only a small minority of those opposed to giving state-sponsored ID to foreign citizens who are here illegally and thereby supporting massive illegal immigration and its associated massive corruption are "crackers". Thanks for clearing that up.

In previous news, Don Perata also supports foreign citizens marching in our streets, making a show of force and demanding rights to which they aren't entitled. And, he was involved in a rather curious situation with a donation from Regency Outdoor.

Posted to Immigration_dls at 06:38 AM | Comments (2)

Stupid MyDD poll: Francine Busby didn't lose because of support for massive illegal alien amnesty

What a relief it must be to the Democratic Party to learn that they can fully support massive illegal immigration and a massive amnesty for illegal aliens, and not pay the price on election day.

Of course - just between us - that news comes to us via a somewhat questionable poll from a questionable source. But, let's not tell our Democrat friends, let's just let that be a surprise.

The poll was conducted on the orders of the "Courage Campaign" which is supposedly both "non-partisan" and "progressive" (I guess that means Dem/Green/Peace and Freedom/WOW), together with the Kososphere's own MyDD.com. It was conducted by Wright Consulting Services of Phoenix. From their press release:

In another twist, immigration, and the now infamous "gaffe" uttered by Busby did not have that much of an impact. While the punitive rhetoric may have held the Republican base together, it did not appeal to moderate or swing voters... Ultimately, low Independent turnout was attributed to Busby's own campaign message, which focused on what she and others characterized as a complete breakdown of Republican honesty and integrity in Washington. Findings indicate running against the "culture of corruption" was a failure and actually backfired. The poll shows widespread mistrust of both parties and the promise of "cleaning up Washington" was not believable, particularly to Independents, who instead took out their frustrations by voting for third party candidates.

Once again, let's not tell our Democrat friends that it's difficult to complain about massive corruption while at the same time supporting it. It would take MyDD a million years to figure it out, but many voters can see that those who support illegal immigration are supporting corruption. It just isn't believable when those same people complain about corruption.

As for the poll, they asked two questions, and respondents were asked to choose which was closest to their opinion. The PDF and the results are linked from here, but good luck wading through the results. Here are the two immigration questions:

1. Statement A says: "Immigration has gone too far and many of today's immigrants do not learn the English language nor blend into American culture."

Statement B says: "Our country was founded by immigrants and we benefit from the work they do and the cultural diversity they provide."

And:

2. Statement A says: "Immigration is a serious problem and we need to toughen security at the borders, while giving a path to citizenship to undocumented immigrants who learn English and abide by our laws."

Statement B says: "Illegal immigration is a serious problem and we should send illegal immigrants back to their countries, instead of giving them amnesty and government benefits Americans pay for."

Obviously, those questions are bit muddled. None of those statements accurately represent the views of either Bilbray or Busby. The terminology appears to be intentionally misleading: "immigrants", "undocumented immigrants", and "illegal immigrants." The use of those terms doesn't even fit with the supposed D/R choices. And, our country, like every other settlement ever created, was indeed founded by immigrants.

Perhaps the goal was to see how credulous the respondent was. Which is probably the goal of the whole poll.

Posted to Politics at 10:33 PM | Comments (0)

Does Eliot Spitzer support U.S. laws?

As the New York Attorney General - and Democratic candidate for NY governor - you'd hope so. However, there are some laws he doesn't support, as revealed in a 7/25/06 debate:

...The candidates were asked whether they would enforce the federal law that went into effect July 1, mandating that states require proof of citizenship from Medicaid applicants.

Spitzer responded: "I would not enforce that provision . . . I do not believe that it is the role of the state to be transformed into one big I.N.S. agent."

Spitzer added that he'd be prepared to issue an executive order similar to one in New York City, where municipal employees are forbidden to ask about an individual's immigration status...

Posted to Politics at 11:07 AM | Comments (3)

Note to Mexico: Americans love being told what to do

The Mexican consul general in Colorado, Juan Marcos Gutierrez-Gonzalez ("JMGG"), has thoughts and notes on their new law against illegal immigration.

JMGG says the new laws are creating "a climate of fear and anxiety", even causing some Mexicans living in Colorado to consider a change of venue: "Some are asking which is closer, Wyoming or New Mexico."

He also says that Luis Ernesto Derbez:

sent a letter to Colorado Gov. Bill Owens to express his concerns. Derbez said the "migration phenomenon" is complex and the United States needs to find a solution at the federal level.

Gutierrez-Gonzalez said he acknowledges Colorado's right to enforce its laws but his country is asking Owens to ensure it is done fairly.

"The consul general of Mexico is respectful of the right to find a solution," he said.

That's a close one. For a moment there I thought the third world kleptocracy to our south wasn't going to let us enforce our laws. Thankfully, they gave us some leeway. We can find a solution but, of course, it has to be solution in line with Mexico's agenda.

Posted to Immigration_consul at 05:53 AM | Comments (2)

Darrell Issa, PFAW, Huerta, Catholic leaders, immigration town hall meetings

Yesterday yet another town hall meeting on immigration was held, and this time they let in a whopping 200 people. (I foolishly tried to attend the last one they held; I won't make that same mistake again.)

The SDUT devotes most of this story to discussing the thoughts of those who favor illegal immigration, but an important comment from Darrell Issa does get mentioned:

Meantime, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Vista, the grandson of Lebanese immigrants, accused Mexico of threatening America's long tradition of legal immigration because the vast majority of illegal immigrants here come from that nation.

Why, Issa asked, does illegal immigration come "99 percent (from) one country [Mexico] when the Statue of Liberty intended us to look at the downtrodden of the world equally?"

Earlier in the day, the illegal immigration supporters held their own press conference. Here are the thoughts of Melissa Daar, California policy and field director for People for the American Way:

"(Illegal immigrants) are here in our economy, they are working, they are buying things – you can't just pretend that they don't exist or pretend that we are going to kick them out, because we're not... We are not going to build a fence high enough to keep them out. So why not bring them in the system and have them pay more taxes, and give them insurance? ...It is more logical, it is more rational."

If her argument has any validity, it would apply in the future, right? So, we can fully expect to see Daar making this same argument after we have millions more new illegal aliens. So, in effect, Daar is promoting not open borders, but highly porous borders where almost anyone who can make it over the border and settle in for a bit will be granted citizenship. Her argument is "logical" and "rational", just as long as she realizes that's what the impact of her thoughts would be. However, a huge majority of Americans - once the impact of her thoughts was described - would oppose what she and PFAW want.

Reaching even further down into the barrel:

Dolores Huerta, co-founder of the United Farm Workers, said the House-passed immigration bill would result in the incarceration of undocumented workers and represents a type of "ethnic cleansing."

"(This) is about putting people who are undocumented into prisons and building more prisons at the taxpayers' expense. . . . We think it is the prison-industrial complex that is supporting this bill, and the American public needs to know," she added.

Does anyone - aside from the Democratic Party and the MSM - take anyone who says things like that seriously? She also echoed earlier thoughts:

Huerta said the country historically has extended legalization to immigrants who have come to the United States to work.

A similar analysis as that above for Daar's comments applies. If people have the preconception, than millions more illegal aliens will come here to take advantage of future amnesties. It's better to disabuse them of that notion than to have to do this every decade or two.

Then, at the same level of the barrel, we've got Rosemary Johnston, a board member of the Interfaith Coalition for Immigrant Rights:

"We have a different set of questions that drive comprehensive immigration reforms, like how many deaths will it take (until) we know that too many have died along the border with Mexico."

And the Most Rev. Gilbert E. Chavez, Auxiliary Bishop of the Diocese of San Diego:

"Every day we see in our parishes the humanitarian consequences of a broken system: families which are separated, migrant workers that are exploited by smugglers and unscrupulous employers, and human beings who die in the desert."

Shouldn't someone tell them that those who support illegal immigration - such as themselves - are partially responsible for those issues? Is it that they can't figure that out, or that they don't care?

Posted to Immigration at 04:42 AM | Comments (4)

Sheila Jackson-Lee channels the weeping Gen. Peter Pace

Is Sheila Jackson-Lee an "immigration sponge"? Let me explain.

A couple of weeks ago came "Jack Kemp, Sheila Jackson Lee aligned on 1986 amnesty talking points". That described how SJL and JK used the almost identical talking point that the problem with the 1986 amnesty wasn't that it wasn't an amnesty, but that it wasn't "comprehensive" enough.

Now, our sources inform us that at yesterday's immigration dog-n-pony show she used one of the same talking points as General Peter Pace did when he broke down and cried in support of massive corruption and illegal behavior. I don't have what she said exactly and it's not in that article, but it was something along the lines that refusing to allow a Marine to bring his parents into the country or refusing to grant citizenship to his illegal alien parents was disrespecting him.

Obviously Pace's remarks came before SJL's in the latter case, but in the former case it's unclear whether SJL got the lines she used from Kemp, or vice versa.

Posted to Immigration at 01:35 AM | Comments (1)

Tamar Jacoby's "Immigration Realism"

America's favorite amnestibot, Tamar Jacoby, has joined with Cesar V. Conda to pen "Immigration Realism". It's their reply to John Fonte's reply to the WSJ's reply to the original National Review open letter demanding enforcement first.

And, as you might assume, Jacoby is wrong. Here's just one way:

None of those who signed our letter believe that immigrants have a "human right" to come to work in the U.S., as Fonte claims.

From the way that's worded, you might think that Fonte claimed that the WSJ letter that they signed said that. In fact, he was refering to a WSJ editorial in the same issue, and he wanted to know whether they agreed. Needless to say, her statement is highly misleading.

She goes on to pimp the Pence amnesty (that's the one that would allow "unlimited immigrants"). Rather than discussing the rest, I'm going to outsource an evisceration of her thoughts to this comment.

Posted to Immigration at 10:20 PM | Comments (2)

EU to begin fingerprinting children (for their safety, of course)

From this:

The EU is planning to fingerprint children from as young as six, and earlier just as soon as it is technically feasible, according to documents obtained by Statewatch. The matter has already caused considerable debate (albeit behind closed doors and with no visible civil liberties concerns) among member states, but is being pushed ahead as part of a broader push towards biometric identifiers, without reference to the European Parliament...

Via this, which despite - or perhaps because of - being a Sun blog says:

[Former Sun CEO and wacky hundreds-of-millionsaire] Scott McNealy was renowned for expressing the view that he'd happily have his kids RFID tagged if it meant be could keep track of them. As a father's prerogative, there may be something in that - but when representatives of the 25 EU member states gather behind closed doors to plan the compulsory fingerprinting of children as young as 6, I tend towards deep unease.

Posted to Privacy at 11:52 AM | Comments (3)

Jane Hamsher goes nuts(er)

Maybe I'm just not attuned to her special wavelength, but Jane Hamsher strikes me as just a tad - just a tad - incoherent. The same goes for her blog. Once again, maybe it's just me. However, her latest post is truly the lowest in a long string of low points for the Huffington Post:

Note: the original file name is 4931cdbe-934f-4622-97c7-9629e6b7f8a3.jpg and it's in the
firedoglake.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/ directory

UPDATE: Hamsher has removed the Lieberman picture from the original post, without any explanation on the post itself. However, she does have a long, tortured explanation here. A commenter on the latter thread says:

I find it so ironic that this blog has been all over Mel Gibson for days now "some justified" has one if its "treasured" contributors post one of the most racist pieces of trash.

Posted to Bloggage at 10:30 AM | Comments (0)

El Cucuy es Raza! (Bustamante, Cedillo, NCLR, voting)

Popular Spanish-language radio host El Cucuy (real name: Renan Almendarez Coello) is on a 10 city bus tour trying to register members of his audience as voters. He kicked off the campaign in San Jose (California) on Monday, and joining him on his fun bus were Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante state senator Gil Cedillo, and assemblyman Joe Coto (more on him here), all putatively American elected politicians.

The "locutor's" campaign is called "Votos por America", and he'll push it to his "35 million listeners" (twice as popular as Rush Limbaugh, but I guess they're using different metrics). He was one of those behind getting hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens to march in our streets demanding rights, and now he wants to take it to the next level.

And, as you've probably already assumed, it's completely oriented towards Latinos and not other races. Which shouldn't come as a surprise since one billboard featuring the DJ had the tagline: "El Cucuy es Raza!" And, we're told that he'll be:

coordinating with the We Are America alliance, which includes national immigrant rights groups and service employees' unions involved in Latino voter registration efforts.

That group deserves its own post, but for now an article on them is here and a partial list of their members is here.

# Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA) (allegedly has collaborated with the Mexican government)

# Center for Community Change

# Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR)

# Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy (MIRA) Coalition

# National Association for Latin and Caribbean Communities (NALACC)

# National Capitol Immigration Coalition (NCIC)

# National Day Laborers Organizing Network

# National Korean American Service & Education Consortium (NAKASEC)

# New American Opportunity Campaign (NAOC)/Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CCIR)

# New York Immigration Coalition (NYIC)

# Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste (Northwest Treeplanters and Farmworkers United)

# Service Employees International Union (SEIU)

# UNITE HERE!

Another one of their members of the National Council of The Race.

Posted to Immigration at 02:51 AM | Comments (2)

Think Progress deletes another comment, again!

All thoughts must be sanitized and correct in the fine sparkling world of Think Progress, and the latest example comes from the thread "Malkin: Outrage About Qana 'Manufactured,' 'If It's Not Qana, It's Something Else... It's Beauty Pageants'".

As you might expect, a firestorm of witty "liberal" comments and jokes follows, partly because they don't understand the "Beauty Pageants" reference, and partly because, well, they're who they are. (That said, there are occasionally a few intelligent, non-childish people commenting on TP's threads).

Anywhoo, in an attempt to be useful, I decided to leave a comment explaining the reference, which refers to 2002 riots in Nigeria when the Miss World competition was held there. My comment was deleted, but here it is (only modified to HTMLize the links):

Judd is apparently too young to remember, so here's what Malkin is refering to.

(Remove the underscores to read the details on my banning)

Needless to say, Judd Legum or an underling deleted that comment. Why ever would he do that? There are several other comments deleted from that thread, but many of the "jokes" and obscene statements have been left. Why would he delete a useful comment (admittedly a bit snarky, but still providing useful information) and leave mostly fluff? Surely Judd isn't afraid of the facts, is he?

Posted to Bloggage at 09:45 PM | Comments (2)

Tom Bevan: sarcastic or idiotic?

Welcome to the first edition of "Tom Bevan: sarcastic or idiotic?" Bevan runs Real Clear Politics, and says:

Yesterday Governor Bill Owens signed a package of new immigration laws which he called the toughest in America. Among the new set of laws is one unbelievably draconian measure that "requires applicants for public benefits such as welfare to provide proof that they are legally in the United States."

Is that really draconian? Certainly, there are some people who don't have that, but I'm sure there are alternative ways of proving that they are in fact here legally.

And, should taxpayer money really be spent subsidizing corrupt, inefficient businesses?

Thus, the title. Is he being sarcastic, or is he just an idiot?

At post time, I'm favoring the latter explanation, based in part on this post, which engendered the following unanswered reply from me via email:

---
1. You argue against making those who've settled here go home. Presumably if your argument is valid now it would be valid (and used) later. So, you're saying that, despite our laws to the contrary, once someone has settled here you don't want to send them home. So, you're adding something additional on to any legislation that's passed. No matter how strongly that legislation opposes illegal immigration, the "Bevans Rule" is that those who've settled won't be deported.

Needless to say, the "Bevans Rule" will lead to even more massive illegal immigration.

2. The public is only coalescing around "comprehensive" "reform" in the fantasies of push pollers and GOP hacks.

Whatever you do, do not add comments to your site, because you - and especially Ryan Sager - would get eaten alive.
---

The fact that Sager is also a contributor there tends to make me favor the "idiot" choice.

Posted to Immigration at 04:39 PM | Comments (1)

Commerce's Carlos Gutierrez offers incompetent immigration advice

Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez recently pimped "comprehensive" immigration "reform" in Louisville and offered some incompetent immigration advice:

Countries such as Germany, Japan and China are facing future population declines, and are using immigration as a way to fill jobs and maintain their economies, he said. The U.S. "can stand out from the past" by doing a better job with immigration than its global competitors, Gutierrez said.

I'm going to assume they meant "stand out from the rest" instead of "past", otherwise it makes even less sense. Of course, China's view of labor is not exactly consistent with the American ideal, although some forces' desire for cheap labor come close. Japan's guest worker program is also not the American ideal, and Germany - obvious to everyone except Gutierrez - has a huge problem both with a failed "guest" worker program and also with Muslim immigrants transforming their society in unhealthy ways.

"We have the advantage that we have dealt with immigration for over 230 years and we should be able to deal with this wave of immigration in a very successful and effective manner as we have done in the past," Gutierrez said.

It's obvious to many that today's immigration is not the same as yesterday's. If he's really concerned about policy - and not just a hack - he'd address those issues.

Posted to Immigration at 01:47 PM | Comments (4)

Is Houston a sanctuary city or not?

Some say Houston is an illegal alien sanctuary, some deny it. The denials seem to be based on how you define "sanctuary", and the denials seem to be contradicted by the thoughts of the local leaders:

...A group called Protect Our Citizens is gathering signatures for a November ballot referendum that would amend Houston's city charter to allow police to verify any suspect's citizenship.

U.S. Rep John Culberson, R-Houston, last month added an amendment to an appropriations bill that would block federal law enforcement money for cities with "sanctuary policies." The spending measure still has to be discussed in the Senate.

Mayor Bill White and police department officials deny Houston is a sanctuary city, saying officers will arrest anybody, including illegal immigrants, as needed. But White added that officers would be diverted from priority calls if they had to check the citizenship status of every person they dealt with.

...The Houston policy allows officers to inquire about citizenship status if a person is arrested for anything other than a traffic or city ordinance violation.

But Houston City Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, who is seeking the nod to be former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's replacement in the race for his congressional seat, said officers should be allowed to check in any situation...

Craig Ferrell, general counsel for the Houston Police Department, said officers can't legally question individuals solely on the suspicion they are in the country illegally. He also noted police need immigrants to feel comfortable talking to authorities and not fear deportation.

...Houston City Councilwoman Carol Alvarado called anti-immigration efforts an "immoral" result of election-year politics.

Alvarado is helping organize opposition to the referendum movement...

Previously:

Houston reaffirms illegal aliens sanctuary policy

"'Sanctuary' practice in Houston draws fire"

"The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave"

Posted to Immigration at 11:43 AM | Comments (3)

DOJ adds immigration prosecutors, promises to finally do their job

Speaking in Santa Fe, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez promoted "comprehensive" immigration "reform", and also said that the Department of Justice will add twenty new federal prosecutors in the border region to handle immigration cases. Five new prosecutors will handle drug-related crimes.

And:

Gonzales said over the past six years, the Justice Department has boosted the number of federal prosecutors along the Mexican border by 29 percent, to 561. During the same span, he said immigration prosecutions have increased about 40 percent, and about 30 percent of all new criminal cases involve immigration crimes.

Of course, speaking at the NCLR convention a few weeks ago, Karl Rove admitted that on Bush's watch 6 million illegal aliens have entered since 2001. It's results that count, and it's clear that Bush is not doing his job.

Bill Richardson also popped by and said that he supports Bush's position on immigration.

UPDATE: The 7/22/06 article "Gonzales stumps for Bush immigration reform plan" by Jesse Mangaliman describes a remarkably similar appareance by Gonzalez in Santa Clara. And, it helps illustrate that no matter how far left Bush is on immigration, the GOP can always be undercut by those even further left:

Outside, about 20 members of the Raging Grannies and anti-war protesters held up signs that declared, ''No War on Immigrants, Iraq, Iran.'' An hour after the address, a couple members of the group chanted in the hotel lobby as the crowd left the room, ''Immigrants Have Human Rights/Grannies join in the fight.''

Since Republicans will always be underbid on the far-left, perhaps they should try the American side instead.

Posted to Immigration at 11:35 AM | Comments (1)

September 4 illegal immigration march

Another illegal immigration march is planned for September 4. A list of the organizers and their announcement is here. I am willing to bet $100 that any links between those or other organizers of the march and the Mexican government are swept under the rug by the AP, Reuters, LAT, NYT, and WaPo.

Anyone willing to take that bet?

Anyone?

Posted to Immigration at 10:31 AM | Comments (0)

Michael Ramirez immigration cartoon

Here's a Michael Ramirez cartoon from 3/29:

This is partially a takeoff on which students at Montebello High School in California did the day before.

Posted to Immigration at 10:25 AM | Comments (0)

Non-"liberal" coverage of immigration, Iraq, terrorism, multiculturalism, Los Angeles, California, privacy, and occasionally celebrities and wacky humor...

Main

Atom feed · RSS 2.0 feed · RSS 0.91 feed · WML

Immigration 2008a · Immigration 2007b · Immigration 2007a · Immigration · Immigration (6/05 to 12/05) · Immigration (1/05 to 6/05) · Immigration (8/04 to 12/04) · Immigration (before 8/04) · Immigration & Terrorism · Immigration & Driver's Licenses · Immigration & Consuls · Immigration & Media Bias · Immigration & Europe · North American Union

Blogging Across America

MultiCulti Madness · General Politics · Privacy · Miscellaneous · The "Peace" Movement

Los Angeles · California · Outdoors and sports · Celebrities · Wackiness · Inside Blogging

Iraq · Beltway Sniper · Terrorism & Extremism · The Saudis · Warblogging · War On Drugs

• 2008: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 
• 2007: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 
• 2006: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 
• 2005: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 
• 2004: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 
• 2003: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12 
• 2002: 9  10  11  12 

All Posts(links to each post by title)

• Arizona: GOP backs losing Steve Huffman over Randy Graf
• Trend: pretend California voters support driver's licenses for illegal aliens
• Phil Angelides to be barbecued by voters
• Is Jim Burns nuttier than Badnarik?
• "Immigration Not A Major Issue For Latinos: Good News For GOP"
• Suzanne Gamboa/AP on immigration ads
• Maywood SOS protest, Round Two
• Palm Beach Post's joke editorial about Senate amnesty
• California Assembly passes Cedillo's "full student aid for illegal aliens" bill
• Assembly passes Cedillo's drivers licenses for illegal aliens bill (SB 1162)
• Arnold: California not the Zinfandel State
• Teamsters come out against "NAFTA superhighway"
• Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission seems a little biased
• "A North American United Nations?"
• Send an email about Ramos/Compean Border Patrol case
• Farmers Branch: will Hector Flores violate fair housing laws?
• MRC: "How TV Promotes Illegal Immigration"
• S.F. Chronical: CBO should be honest about benefits of a massive amnesty
• Democratic National Committee Press Release Mentions Immigration
• Washington Post promotes cheap labor in Virginia, gets busted

My trip to Alpine County What not to do, again (September 1-2, 2002)

Boston Market Cornbread Temperatures Please help contribute to this important study (August 28, 2002)

Did The Gap Put Celebrities at Risk? An Open Web Letter to The Gap (May 20, 2002)

Humphreys Peak Arizona's highest point (May 19, 2001)

Go Heavy, Go Slow, Get Lost Bay Area highpoints (December 14, 2000)

Hubris in New England The highpoints of RI, CT, and MA (October 8, 2000)

Let's go to Utah Zion, Bryce, and Grand Canyon (August 14, 2000)

Your host, climbing Monkey Face (5.14d)

Your host's arm (circled)

Your host's hopelessly outdated conditioning progress

BigMediaBlog.com : "Comments for sites that don't have comments."

BoreAmerica.com: monitoring Air America Radio

tolstoy.com : my business site

Drudge
The John and Ken Show (KFI-Los Angeles)
The Stein Report
Sam Zamarripa
RedState
Res Ipsa Loquitur
PCWatch
Natalie Merchant
Samizdata