« April 2007 | Main | June 2007 »

Ezra Klein, useful idiot

Pictured right is a blogad currently running on the site (ezraklein.typepad.com) of Ezra Klein of TAPPED (The American Prospect). The ad is for cirnow.org, the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

I'm not going to hold someone responsible for the ads on their site... except blogads have to be approved by the blog owner and, more importantly, the ad includes a quote from Klein himself, which links to a piece he wrote at TAPPED. So, one might assume that he doesn't have any problems with the ad's extremely over-the-top emotionalistic support for illegal immigration.

And, one can assume that he doesn't have a problem with CCIR, which, as detailed at the link consists of various far-left groups including:

* One member that has allegedly collaborated with the Mexican government (CHIRLA)
* Another that's headed by someone who serves on a Mexican government advisory council (Juan Salgado of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights; see the letter he wrote to Vicente Fox)
* Another that funds extremists (National Council of La Raza)
* Another that's partly funded by the Irish government (Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform)

From that I assume that Klein either supports those groups and their goals, or he's just a useful idiot who isn't capable of doing research.

Previously:
Think Progress, Ezra Klein, AP downplay organizers of illegal immigration marches

Posted to Bloggage at 09:40 PM

Joe Klein/Time Magazine: just a sleazy liar

In his latest column, Joe Klein of Time Magazine discusses Mitt Romney, and says:

[Romney] has flipped on immigration, to better suit the Mexican-fearing tendencies of a segment of the Republican base.

That's a sleazy statement which tries to give the impression that opposition to massive illegal activity and massive public and private corruption is due to xenophobia and racism.

Now for an example of Joe Klien lying. In a previous column, he said this:

I've been surprised by how ineffective Tancredo has been in making his anti-immigrant pitch, which should have some resonance in the Republican Party.

A smear and a lie, in just one sentence. Tancredo is not "anti-immigrant", and the idea that such a platform would find "resonance" is a smear.

(Also: Wonkette/Ana Marie Cox said on their blog that Hugh Hewitt was an "immigration foe", placing me in the uncomfortable position of having to defend him.)

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:05 PM

David Leonhardt/New York Times: illegal immigration supporting hack

David Leonhardt of the New York Times offers the much-linked "Truth, Fiction and Lou Dobbs". It discusses a few facts that Dobbs has gotten wrong, and to that extent it's worthwhile: everybody needs a fact-checker to keep them honest. However, one wonders about this bit:

He is the heir to the nativist tradition that has long used fiction and conspiracy theories as a weapon against the Irish, the Italians, the Chinese, the Jews and, now, the Mexicans.

That kind of smear doesn't sound like fact-checking to me. According to Lesley Stahl, journalists shouldn't mix in opinion with their facts. Does that above sound like a fact? Should Leonhard be considered a journalist?

In fact, what's going on here is the that New York Times and most of our corrupt elite support massive illegal activity, something that Dobbs opposes. The NYT is simply striking back.

He also mentions the Southern Poverty Law Center, calling them a "civil rights group" without mentioning that they have an indirect link to the Mexican government. Shouldn't a good journalist disclose such links?

And, one of Leonhardt's statements doesn't exactly square with previous NYT coverage. He quotes "James L. Krahenbuhl, the director of the National Hansen's Disease Program, an arm of the federal government" as saying:

"It is not a public health problem — that’s the bottom line... You've got a country of 300 million people. This is not something for the public to get alarmed about."

However, one of those sounding alarms... was the New York Times back in February 18, 2003 with "Leprosy, a Synonym for a Stigma, Returns":

But, in fact, as cases of leprosy have been declining worldwide in recent years, the infection has actually been on the rise in the United States... While there were some 900 recorded cases in the United States 40 years ago, today more than 7,000 people have leprosy, or Hansen's disease, as it is now called. ''And those are the ones we know about,'' said Dr. William Levis, attending physician at Bellevue Hospital's Hansen's Disease Clinic. ''There are probably many, many more.'' ...the disease is now officially endemic to the Northeastern United States for the first time ever.

Wouldn't a good journalist have at least mentioned that earlier article? Leonhart's smears continue:

Mr. Dobbs argues that the middle class has many enemies: corporate lobbyists, greedy executives, wimpy journalists, corrupt politicians. But none play a bigger role than illegal immigrants. As he sees it, they are stealing our jobs, depressing our wages and even endangering our lives.

I only see his show occasionally, but I suspect that Dobbs focuses more on illegal aliens themselves as symptoms of the former group, yet Leonhardt is implying that Dobbs focuses on the illegal aliens themselves.

Leonhardt's hack status is further entrenched with this chestnut:

There is no denying that this country's immigration system is broken.

The bottom line here is the bottom line: some people profit from illegal immigration, either monetarily or through obtaining political power. And, they're quite willing to defend their bottom line through lies and smears.

More to come, including Dobbs' response and a list of those who helped retransmit Leonhardt's smears.

UPDATE: Dobbs responds: "An answer for my critics".

I point out that I was one of the few people attempting to counteract this smear here. That helps illustrate why the MSM and politicians are continually allowed to spread lies and pro-illegal immigration propaganda.

The NYT article also contains this:

For one thing, Mr. Dobbs has a somewhat flexible relationship with reality. He has said, for example, that one-third of the inmates in the federal prison system are illegal immigrants. That's wrong, too. According to the Justice Department, 6 percent of prisoners in this country are noncitizens (compared with 7 percent of the population).

Bearing in mind that I'm not familiar with the statistics he cites, this site says:

Notice how Leonhardt has changed the subject. Dobbs was talking about federal prisoners, and Leonhardt is talking about the entire state plus federal prison population.

UPDATE 2: It's starting to get funny now. From the current NYT article:

Second, Mr. Dobbs really does give airtime to white supremacy sympathizers. Ms. Cosman, who is now deceased, was a lawyer and Renaissance studies scholar, never a medical doctor or a leprosy expert. She gave speeches in which she said that Mexican immigrants had a habit of molesting children.

Now, let's turn to this article from March 19, 2006:

Madeleine Pelner Cosman, a prominent writer, scholar and lecturer whose passion for what she called the "glorious order" of the past led her first to a career in medieval and Renaissance studies and more recently to wide public advocacy of tougher immigration laws, died on March 2 in Escondido, Calif. She was 68... Ms. Cosman took her work seriously. She could sing madrigals, play the lute and eat with her fingers off a trencher in the proper medieval style. Her house in suburban New Jersey was appointed with ornately carved period furniture. Arms and armor lay about, the walls were hung with Flemish tapestries, and the cellar was stocked with mead.

It goes on in its own laudatory way, with the only discordant note being the use of the term "anti-immigrant" to refer to websites that promoted her latter works. The source? Why (of course) the New York Times (link, copy).

Posted to Immigration2007a at 05:06 PM

Chicago alderman's father target of document forgery investigation

Back in April, the Feds raided a shopping center in Chicago's Little Village neighborhood to break up a document forgery ring that also involved an attempted murder. One of the stores raided was a photo store owned by the father of Chicago Alderman Ricardo Munoz (22nd); at the time he said that his father had no involvement in the alleged crimes. And, the raid generated a march through the streets with illegal immigration supporters going as far as saying that "Soldiers bombarded our neighborhood".

Now comes this:

ABC7 has learned from a source close to the Munoz family that Elias Munoz will fight the charges maintaining that he only sold photos and had nothing to do with any conspiracy to make fake IDs. But the feds claim the 22nd Ward alderman's father was a major player and target of Operation Paper Tiger.

Federal agents allege that a ring of fake ID sellers that operated for at least 3 1/2 years in the parking lot of a Little Village strip mall routinely sent their customers -- sometimes over 100 a day -- to Nuevo Foto Munoz, 3105 W. 26th St., to fill out forms and have their pictures taken for $10 each. At another location, the counterfeiters used the snapshots to make bogus Social Security cards, green cards and driver's licenses.

The government claims it has affidavits from informants and undercover agents that will link Elias Munoz to the ring, 13 members of which were arrested in an April 24 raid on the mall. On that day, Elias's son, 22nd Ward Alderman Ricky Munoz, led complaints about how the raid was conducted...

The Feds may or may not be over-selling their case; they found blank identity cards in the shop which are apparently legal, but it isn't known the extent to which they're basing the case on that. See also the PDF from the previous post describing the crimes involved in this case.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 04:10 PM

voceunidas.org is now the Swift Raid Collaborative (Mexico-linked Peter Schey)

Peter Schey is an immigration attorney with at least three links to the Mexican government. In addition to heading the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, he also operates vocesunidas.org, which until recently was called the "Mexico Project". It's since undergone an interesting change. The previous version included this:

A collaborative project of the Dirección General de Proteccion y Asuntos Consulares of the Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores of the Government of Mexico and the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law.

It also included a "Partial list of participating consulates", listing Mexican consulates in Los Angeles, Sacramento, Oxnard, San Diego, San Francisco, Austin, Houston, Dallas, Brownsville, El Paso, Laredo, and Chicago.

Now, the site has become the "Swift Raid Collaborative", and there's no note on the front page of any collaboration with the Mexican government. There's a banner on the right called "Voces Unidas/A project for Mexican National women and children survivors of domestic abuse", but that leads back to the home page.

Thankfully, a copy of the original page has been cached both by me, by google, and by archive.org, so the next time Teresa Watanabe, Peter Prengaman, Martha Mendoza, or other "reporters" quote Schey without mentioning his links to the Mexican government, we can have something to send them to.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:37 PM

Is immigration reform an elaborate practical joke? (Chertoff USA Today interview)

USA Today continues their obvious attempt to help the Bush administration push amnesty with a transcript (link) of part of the meeting USA Today's editorial board held with DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez. After reading it, I know three things: a) there were no doubt tougher, less Soviet interviews in Izvestia, b) neither Chertoff nor Gutierrez are inhabiting the same universe as the rest of us (possible name of their universe: rubegoldbergia), and c) their scheme would be a bigger debacle than Iraq and Katrina multiplied together.

First, it's worth noting that USA Today leads off the posting with: "Cabinet secretaries tackle myths of the immigration debate..." Obviously, the non-disclaimed word "myths" is editorializing and gives a strong clue to USA Today's stance on the issue. Let's take a look at this:

Q: So let's be sure we understand this. If this compromise becomes law, 12 million illegal immigrants could instantly enroll in the system and receive probationary legal status. Once a series of enforcement "triggers" are met — such as improved border security and a set system to verify the status of illegal workers — they could apply for a Z visa. That visa would allow them to remain and work in the country and, if they choose, put them on a path to citizenship. You'd be adding this to a system that was strained and challenged even before this legislation. Is this possible?

Chertoff: By simplifying the system and by not having a very complicated process for getting the Z visa, you're eliminating a lot of the problems under the current system, which was built as a patchwork. (Illegal immigrants who were in the country by Jan. 1, 2007, are eligible for the Z visa.)

Of course, what he fails to stress is that after simplifying the current system, they are going to have millions and millions of new applicants. Why not just simplify the current system, without the massive rush of millions and millions of new applicants?

Then:

Q: How will you get the illegal immigrants to enroll, and what happens once they do?

Chertoff: We need to have locations all over the country, particularly in places with large numbers of illegal migrants. We hope to get local community leaders to help...[describes Z visa process...]

A model they could follow is the one the Mexican government uses with their mobile consulates. I'm kidding, but I wouldn't be surprised if they thought of that.

Needless to say, the "local community leaders" will almost all be far-left with some of them being radicals and/or having direct or indirect links to the Mexican government. I have little doubt that individual offices would be under tremendous pressure to get as many people on "probationary" status as quickly as possible, with the "leaders" supplying much of the pressure, and lawyers from the ACLU and other groups supplying more. I am extremely doubtful that intake personnel will be experienced or skilled, with many being taken in by liars, with many feeling sympathy with applicants, and with some being on the take. "Mad rush" doesn't begin to describe what the offices will look like, even if many illegal aliens decide to maintain their current status.

Chertoff goes on to claim that after a certain period there will be no more Z Visas issued; can anyone see that happening? If there are hundreds of thousands or millions of unadmitted illegal aliens after the first phase, what are they going to do but wave the magic wand again? Expect an extension to be issued just before the end of the first phase; see "Temporary" Protected Status for an example of how that would work.

Chertoff then goes on to assure illegal aliens who enter the program that if they play by the rules and don't have criminal records, they won't be deported. While he has to say something like that in order to increase the miniscule possibility that the scheme would work, its irony was no doubt lost on the USA Today board. Or, perhaps they had a nice chuckle.

Then:

Q. So once the Z visa system is in place, will every employer have access to a computer in order to verify an employee's legal status?

Gutierrez: Yes, and for those who may not have a computer, there will be post offices with computers and secretaries of state with computers.

What? The last time I was in a PO (admittedly several months ago), they were barely electrified. Does this bill include the computerization of the post offices?

Q: Would anyone who hires a day laborer — to do yard work, for instance — have to verify status?

Gutierrez: Yes.

Did he stifle a laugh as he said that? The worries about getting caught hiring an illegal alien day laborer would be the same post-"reform" as they are now: none. Newspapers have even promoted the practice.

Asked about the "justification for the guest-worker program":

Gutierrez: Our unemployment is 4.5%. It's below the average of each of the last four decades. This is a very tight labor market. We don't have enough truck drivers. We don't have enough nurses. We don't have enough people working in the fields. We don't have enough maids in hotels. I'm constantly hearing this. So there's no question we don't have enough workers.

I generally avoid economic arguments here, but my understanding is that many of those jobs are of the McJob variety, most of the recent jobs have gone to immigrants, and large numbers of Americans are structurally unemployed (and thus not reflected in the 4.5% figure). So, I don't think Gutierrez is being intellectually honest. And, of course, he says that he's bought the propaganda from cheap labor-seeking employers, and he wants everyone else to buy it as well.

Near the end, USA Today says this:

Q: Some people express concern that so many of today's immigrants speak the same language, and it's not English. Does that make this different from past waves of immigration?

There are huge differences between the current wave and past waves. USA Today can't mention them all, but they're falsely implying that that's the only or the major difference. Gutierrez goes on to inform them that two of his children were born in Mexico (apparently this was when he was a Kellogg executive and after he'd obtained U.S. citizenship) and that because "the television; the whole environment is in English" it's not a problem. Obviously, there are huge problems with that statement.

Chertoff and Gutierrez are just snake oil salesmen, with USA Today as their shill.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:00 PM

Minor immigration debate reveals fundamental issue (Dianne Feinstein)

Not only do open/loose borders loons not understand or support our borders, they also have issues with public vs. private property. Earlier today a small group of said loons delivered petitions to Sen. Dianne Feinstein's San Francisco office. They also gathered on the steps of the building, and the building is private property. The security guard asked them to get off the steps, and it apparently took several minutes before they relented:

[After having been asked to leave the steps...] As a woman who identified herself as Mary Doyle of the Diocese of Oakland began to read a prepared statement, Cooper [the security guard] stepped into the middle of the group and told her to stop.

Another man in the crowd asked Cooper if he was afraid of the group.

"No, I am not afraid of you," Cooper said. "I asked you very politely to break this up and you have not done it. Can you please comply with that?"

A demonstrator told Cooper, "No." Another person said it was the group's First Amendment right to be there.

"To invade private property is your First Amendment right?" Cooper said.

He then apparently showed them the "border line". After having determined that they were on private property, most people would relent and move to public property. It's quite revealing that they did not:

At one point, Doyle began reading her statement again, and Cooper started making loud noises over her speech in an effort to get the group's attention. He asked the group to move again... [...they got into an argument...]

...In the end, the organizers moved 10 feet to a nearby sidewalk and continued their demonstration.

They didn't cross the sidewalk, the sidewalk crossed them.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 08:33 PM

Bush attacks immigration "reform" opponents, taps out literary allusions

Our president spoke [1] in Georgia earlier today at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco. The topic: comprehensive immigration "reform", specifically the Senate's amnesty bill.

I am uncertain how to proceed.

Do I offer a summary? A point-by-point "fisk"? Do I make fun of his blather? Do I outsource commenting to others? Do I frantically search through the collected works of Kafka, Gogol, Shakespeare, even Bradbury or Vonnegut or Asimov to try to find literary corollaries to his remarks? Contact professors of Russian or Classical history for past examples? I really don't know what to do in this case.

[1] whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070529-7.html

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:02 AM

Steve Lopez: up with illegal immigration propaganda, allegedly Mexico-linked CHIRLA

Via this, Steve Lopez of the Los Angeles Times offers "Family crossed the border to success". The family in question is that of Angelica Salas, executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. As discussed at that link, CHIRLA has allegedly collaborated with the Mexican government. In the piece, Lopez says that Salas' job is to "tell stories" and even to "share her stories with immigrant-bashers". And, she "believes the tone of the debate has been and will continue to be changed by humanizing it". "Tell stories, Angelica Salas says."

Does he ask Salas about her group allegedly collaborating with the Mexican government? Does he bust her for spreading pro-illegal immigration propaganda? Does he try to find out who in the media or government has assisted her with spreading that propaganda?

No. In fact, he gladly joins in with her efforts and supports "humanizing" the debate through heartwarming anecdotes, offering a few of his own.

In previous columns, he's shown an inability to understand simple economics but even more relevant Steve Lopez spread propaganda from a Mexican consul.

Please write him at steve.lopez *at* latimes.com with your thoughts.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 09:38 AM

Natalie Merchant is not having a good day

Even transcendental demigoddesses like Natalie Merchant can have their off days, as this photo illustrates:

(It's not one of mine, I got it from here. I didn't get it from here.)

Posted to WackyHumor at 05:24 PM

"North American union plan headed to Congress in fall"

From this:

A powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc.

The final report, published in English, Spanish and French, is scheduled for submission to all three governments by Sept. 30, according to the Center for Strategic & International Studies [csis.org].

CSIS boasts of playing a large role in the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994 – a treaty that set in motion a political movement many believe resembles the early stages of the European Community on its way to becoming the European Union.

There's much more at the link, and their report is here: canadians.org/water/documents/NA_Future_2025.pdf

Posted to NAU at 05:23 PM

Bill Richardson Lied about the Border Fence

Speaking on Meet the Press, New Mexico governor and Democratic presidential contender Bill Richardson lied about the border fence:

MR. RUSSERT: The wall hasn't worked?

GOV. RICHARDSON: No, it hasn't worked.

MR. RUSSERT: Anywhere along the border, the fence hasn't worked.

GOV. RICHARDSON: It hasn't worked. What has worked is more border patrols. What has worked is some National Guardsmen. What has worked is some technology. It's made the program better. But, Tim, we got to talk to Mexico, our friend, get them to do more...

Now, let's turn to NPR from April 2006:

Today, Henry is assistant chief of the Border Patrol's San Diego sector. He says apprehensions here are down 95 percent, from 100,000 a year to 5,000 a year, largely because the single strand of cable marking the border was replaced by double -- and in some places, triple -- fencing.

Obviously, the border fence has worked in that area, and Richardson lied.

And, of course, the idea that Mexico is a "friend" is ludicrous.

Here's the video of him making these claims:



Related:
Bill Richardson still "special envoy" for Organization of American States

Posted to Politics at 01:26 PM

Janet Napolitano endorses Senate immigration bill; "silent amnesty"

Note that she's using the same term as Michael Chertoff; who used it first isn't known:

Saying the only current alternative is allowing a status quo of "silent amnesty," Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano on Wednesday [5/23/07] tentatively endorsed a U.S. Senate proposal on immigration.

Napolitano said she sees some flaws in the Senate proposal but that it "includes all the elements of comprehensive immigration reform."

..."The status quo is not acceptable, and when I hear those who are opposed to the bill call it amnesty, I really want to say to them what we have now is silent amnesty, because nothing is being done with those who are already illegally in this country, and we have no system to do anything with those already illegally in this country," she said.

...Napolitano wrote in a newspaper commentary published Tuesday that she wanted changes made to the U.S. Senate proposal. She criticized the proposal's delay of a temporary worker program until border security measures are deployed, a requirement that temporary workers return home for a year after two years of work in the United States and a requirement that illegal immigrants who are heads of household return to their country before gaining legal status...

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:30 AM

ACLU has "concerns" about Senate immigration amnesty bill

From their press release [1]:

The American Civil Liberties Union today [5/25/07] expressed grave concerns about the due process and privacy implications of the Senate immigration bill. The proposed legislation would create a vast federal database to verify the work eligibility of all job applicants in America - including U.S. citizens; expand indefinite detention; and deny effective judicial review of Department of Homeland Security errors denying immigration status.

...The proposed legislation would require every job applicant in America to have their eligibility to work verified by the DHS, using the error-plagued Employment Eligibility Verification System (EEVS). EEVS creates a massive government database containing extraordinary amounts of personal information on everyone in America, tied to each individual's Social Security number. If DHS makes a mistake in determining work eligibility, there will be virtually no way to challenge the error or recover lost wages due to the bill's prohibitions on judicial review.

As a part of EEVS, every person in America would be forced to carry a hardened Social Security card perhaps containing biometric information about the cardholder - essentially a national ID - and present a Real ID-compliant driver's license to get any new job. The proposed legislation also expands current practice of expedited removal. The ACLU noted that these policies do nothing to solve the problems of illegal immigration and violate the fundamental American value of due process.

In addition to their many othe flaws, the ACLU is indirectly linked to the Mexican government. However, that doesn't stop me from agreeing with them in principle, despite the fact that I think they're overselling the downsides. And, the danger in this case is that the bill could be amended in a way that would make them - and other far-left and racial power groups such as La Raza - support it.

[1] aclu.org/immigrants/gen/29878prs20070525.html

Posted to Immigration2007a at 02:15 PM

Trent Lott's question for voters: "Is the current immigration situation intolerable?"

From "Fury grows over US immigration bill" comes this:

Trent Lott doesn't usually answer his Senate phone himself, but when angry callers are burning up the lines – as they are over this week's debate about revising America's immigration laws – the Republicans' No. 2 Senate leader has picked up to hear what they've got to say.

A lot of the talk is misinformation, he says. Talk radio and the blogs were blasting the compromise bill, which includes a guest-worker program and a path to legal status for many of the 12 million illegal immigrants already in the US, well before the text of the bill was ready for senators on Tuesday.

Of course, if Gail Russell Chaddock wanted to be a real journalist, she would have pressed him on that point, asking for examples of the "misinformation". And, of course, some of the information is obviously true, since Lott only says "a lot" of it isn't. And, of course, whether what he says can be trusted is an open question; he may in fact be lying through his teeth.

Then, continuing the transcription:

The Mississippi senator urges his colleagues to take three questions home to voters this week: Is the current immigration situation intolerable? Is the bill before the Senate significantly better than the current situation? The answer to both questions is yes, he says.

His final question is this: Will more time make a better bill? With next year's election results uncertain for Republicans, the answer is "clearly no," says Lott.

"This," he says, "is our last best chance to make a significant improvement in our immigration laws."

It's an established trick to make a situation far worse than it has to be in order to strongarm through the "fix" you've wanted all along. A very good follow-up question to anyone who asks about whether the situation is intolerable is who's responsible for getting us into this position? What exactly was Lott doing to, for instance, encourage Bush to enforce our laws all throughout his presidency? Isn't Lott partially responsible for the current situation?

Please call him and ask.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 01:17 PM

Linda Chavez: opposition to amnesy is just about racism, xenophobia

Linda Chavez - recently mentioned here playing the race card in the case of the Fort Dix Six - just got back from the 99 Cents store with a bag full of cards and threw all of them - together with whatever small amount of credibility she had remaining - on the table:

Some people just don't like Mexicans -- or anyone else from south of the border. They think Latinos are freeloaders and welfare cheats who are too lazy to learn English. They think Latinos have too many babies, and that Latino kids will dumb down our schools. They think Latinos are dirty, diseased, indolent and more prone to criminal behavior. They think Latinos are just too different from us ever to become real Americans.

No amount of hard, empirical evidence to the contrary, and no amount of reasoned argument or appeals to decency and fairness, will convince this small group of Americans -- fewer than 10 percent of the general population, at most -- otherwise. Unfortunately, among this group is a fair number of Republican members of Congress, almost all influential conservative talk radio hosts, some cable news anchors -- most prominently, Lou Dobbs -- and a handful of public policy "experts" at organizations such as the Center for Immigration Studies, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, NumbersUSA, in addition to fringe groups like the Minuteman Project.

Stripped bare, this is what the current debate on immigration reform is all about...

There really isn't that much of a difference between her argument and those to be found at DailyKos, BrainFireHeadDogLakeBrain, Amanda Marcotte's site, or other left-wing smear sites. And, if she feels this way about the large majority of Republicans who oppose illegal immigration, then perhaps she (together with Bush, Michael Gerson, and the rest) should find another party more to their liking.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 07:59 PM

Michael Chertoff: Mexicans aren't encouraging illegal "migration"; Senate bill is "straight with the American public"

This CSPAN WMV file has DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff saying the following:

"If we're going to change the dynamic here we've gotta be completely honest with the American people about what's practical and what's impractical, about how long it's going to take, about how much it's going to cost and about what the collateral consequences are going to be and this bill was an effort to really be straight with the American public...

I would hope that even an NYT/CBS poll would show that a vast majority think the Senate bill itself, the way it was created (even including secret meetings), the way it's been handled, and the entire immigration "debate" are completely dishonest and reveal deep political corruption. And, I would hope that Congress would look into Chertoff's refusal to do his job, as well as whether he's spending too much federally-subsidized time being a snake oil salesman rather than running the DHS.

After promoting a "holistic" aka comprehensive approach, the host asks about NYT Mexican consulates article. Chertoff replies:

"I don't think the Mexicans are encouraging illegal migration in this country, I don't think they're discouraging it... I think they're servicing their citizens in another country... as long as they comply with the law that's really their business.

...I think they realize that in the long run they're better off [with a "guest" worker program with circular movement]"

I guess it depends on your definition of "the law". Back in 2003, 12 Congressmen complained to Colin Powell about Mexico's "breach of international protocol" regarding their consular activities. And, as detailed in the many other posts here, Mexican consuls are extremely aggresive, with Mexico's former foreign minister even making a sideways threat to the U.S. Wait, what was I thinking? The Bush administration is complicit in their schemes, such as by allowing the FDIC to work with the Mexican consulate in Chicago to give home loans to illegal aliens.

Posted to Immigration_consul at 11:47 AM

Sleazy Bush proxy Michael Gerson attacks "nativists" in GOP base over immigration

The Bush administration's charm offensive continues with Michael Gerson - a Council on Foreign Relations senior fellow and Bush's former head speechwriter ("Axis of Evil") - offering up "Letting Fear Rule/Nativism Is a Recipe for Long-Term GOP Losses". As you might expect, it's one smear after another.

Like Lindsey Graham reading documents from 1911, he leads with the Chinese Exclusion Act, then starts the lies and name calling: "anti-immigrant sentiments", "a nativist party will cease to be a national party", "Tancredo is the lowbrow expression of this fear", "any attempt to grant a legal status to illegal immigrants is as welcome as salsa on their apple pie", "rage and national chauvinism".

His overall thesis is false in at least three ways. First, there's absolutely no guarantee that importing millions more Latin Americans will cause at least 40% of them to vote GOP. Even if the corrupt forces in the GOP prevail and it becomes a party of loose and race-based immigration, the Democrats will always be able to offer a looser deal and one even more explicitly based on race. Anyone who's familiar with this issue realizes that many groups (LULAC, National Council of La Raza/"The Race") are very successful at making racial appeals, as are racial demagogues like Antonio Villaraigosa. Gerson and the rest are actually giving those groups more power, as David Frum stated earlier. He even approvingly quotes someone promoting the "Latinoization of America". There's clearly an extremely strong possibility that he's wrong, yet he doesn't acknowledge that fact.

Second, if his argument has any validity it's one for immigration in general, not massive illegal immigration or massive immigration of any kind from one country or region.

Third, it certainly is possible to both be non-discriminatory to Hispanics and oppose illegal and massive legal immigration at the same time. Yet, he undercuts that by assuming that those are incompatible and smearing those who show it is as "nativists".

He should just be considered a smearing CFR hack and a Bush proxy.

UPDATE: ThinkProgress - the political answer to the National Enquirer - uses his remarks to further spread the "GOP = nativistic racists" meme, something that Gerson and his presumed handlers should spend more time attacking and less time aiding and abetting:

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:10 AM

False choice alert: NYT/CBS poll says "Majority Favor Changing Immigration Laws"

Julia Preston and Marjorie Connelly of the New York Times get out their megaphone and shout, "Majority Favor Changing Immigration Laws, Poll Says". The New York Times/CBS News Poll in question obtains that result by offering a false choice, and some of the other answers in the poll are a bit schizophrenic [questions: graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/20070525poll.pdf].

And, needless to say, the NYT is pushing what is actually a lie to the greatest extent possible:

Taking a pragmatic view on a divisive issue, a large majority of Americans want to change the immigration laws to allow illegal immigrants to gain legal status and to create a new guest worker program to meet future labor demand, the poll found... Point by point, large majorities expressed support for measures contained in the legislation that has been under debate since Monday in the Senate...

Not so fast now. First, the false choice is in this question:

61. If you had to choose, what do you think should happen to most illegal immigrants who have lived and worked in the United States for at least two years: They should be given a chance to keep their jobs and eventually apply for legal status, OR They should be deported back to their native country?

62% said the first, 33% said the second. There are other options which weren't, of course, asked, such as strictly enforcing the current laws in order to encourage many of those here now to return home. Why wouldn't the NYT and CBS ask about that? Obviously, the poll question was dictated by the result they wanted. This is made obvious by the next question they asked:

62. ASKED OF THOSE WHO SAID DEPORTED: Do you think it is possible to find and deport most illegal immigrants to their native countries, or do you think that is not possible?

That was 19 for the first, 14 for the second, plus 1 for undecided (adding up to the 33% in the previous question). Needless to say, this is a stock talking point employed by Bush, Chertoff, and others.

There's also this question:

48. How much have you heard or read about changing the laws regarding immigration in the United States — a lot, some, not much, or nothing at all?

Only 26% said "a lot", with "some" at 51% and "not much" at 18%. One wonders how much the results would differ if they had broken them out by those groups.

Other questions showing support for "guest" workers are followed by this:

71. Some people say a guest worker program would DECREASE illegal immigration by giving the people who want to come and work in the U.S. a legal way to do so. Other people say a guest worker program would INCREASE illegal immigration because those who came to work in the U.S. might stay longer than allowed. What do you think — would having a guest worker program increase or decrease illegal immigration?

45% say it would increase vs. 41% saying it would decrease. Perhaps they should have asked that question before asking the other "guest" worker questions.

And, in the schizophrenia category, 69% (vs. 24%) say yes to this:

Should illegal immigrants be prosecuted and deported for being in the U.S. illegally, or shouldn't they?

Another question shows more support for the Border Patrol than building fences (actually another false choice). 34% would favor a "tamper-proof government-issued identification card", vs. 15% against and 49% undecided. A slim majority oppose a database of all workers, including citizens. 51% vs. 34% favor skills-based rather than family-based immigration.

Then, there's this misleading question about the anti-American DREAM Act:

75. Do you think the children of illegal immigrants who graduate from high school in the U.S. should be allowed to attend state public colleges at the same reduced in-state tuition rates as other state residents, or should they pay higher tuition?

52% say they should pay the in-state rate, with 39% saying the higher rate. However, that question is highly misleading, since the issue is that the children themselves are illegal aliens, not just the parents. And, they don't note that every discount that goes to an illegal alien is one that was taken away from a citizen.

If they had correctly stated the issue - and informed the respondents of everything involved in this issue - no doubt the result would be very different. Of course, that applies to most of the other questions in the poll as well.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:41 PM

We're all birds today

Posted to WackyHumor at 05:31 PM

LHF: Bush won't do job, shows how the Senate illegal immigration amnesty would fail miserably

Criticizing Bush's endless stream of blather on immigration is just about the lowest hanging fruit possible, but let's look at his latest stream of semi-consciousness [1]. First, he sounds like Howard Dean ("scapegoating immigrants") when he accuses his opponents of targeting illegal aliens. Then, he enters his peevish/defensive mode with the next four sentences. Then, he offers a non-sequitur for the last:

...It's easy to hold up somebody who is here and working hard as a political target. I would like to get this bill done for a lot of reasons. I'd like to get it done because it's the right thing to do. I'd like to get it done because I happen to believe the approach that is now being discussed in the Senate is an approach that will actually solve the problem. I'd like to get it out of politics. I don't think it's good to be, you know, holding people up. We've been through immigration debates in this country, and they can bring out the worst, sometimes, in people. We're a land of immigrants.

Is this "land of immigrants" a verbal tic or something? Why exactly would he add that on at the end?

Before that, he showed a) he's willing to mischaracterize the positions of his opponents, b) that like Michael Chertoff he's not willing to do his job, and b) how "reform" would fail miserably:

A tough issue, of course, is what do you do with the people already here? Anything short of kicking them out, as far as some people are concerned, is called amnesty. You can't kick them out. Anybody who advocates trying to dig out 12 million people who have been in our society for a while is sending a signal to the American people that's just not real....

He goes on to define amnesty in his own special way. As for the last sentence, the "reform" he supports has provisions designed to "dig out" people who come here as "guests". Those "guests" will be here "for a while", and it's trivially easy to imagine corrupt politicians like Bush or Kennedy saying the exact same thing about "guests".

[1] whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070524.html

Posted to Politics at 01:10 PM

Sleazy Robert Novak on "immigrant-bashing" and "anti-immigration"

Robert Novak offers "Immigration trap for GOP candidates/Immigrant-bashing divides rather than unites Republicans":

Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia were booed at their respective state party conventions Sunday for supporting a compromise immigration bill. Their specific sin was collaborating with the liberal lion Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. But behind the catcalls was GOP rage over undocumented foreigners, a sentiment GOP lawmakers must appease or risk dire consequences.

Why are the party faithful so incensed by immigration? When I asked Graham, he quoted from a federal government report on the new arrivals to this country, "largely unskilled laborers" and heavily illiterate: "The new immigration has provoked a widespread feeling of apprehension as to its effect on the economic and social welfare of the country." The report, by the U.S. Immigration Commission, was dated 1911.

Of course, Novak and Graham are too much sleazy lightweights to realize the huge differences between then and now.

...This nation of immigrants has greeted successive waves of newcomers with apprehension stoked by demagogues. It has overcome such past xenophobic impulses. But that will be more difficult in an era of Internet bloggers and radio talkers, with the Republican Party in trouble and seeking a unifying issue at the grass roots and with the Democratic Party sensing their adversary's weakness and moving in for the kill.

...Graham was not happy with his junior South Carolina colleague, Sen. Jim DeMint, for playing to the convention crowd with anti-immigration oratory... Many Republicans reach for an anti-immigration lifeline because of the party's plight... But immigrant-bashing divides rather than unites Republicans. In a recent closed-door meeting of the House's conservative Republican Study Committee, Rep. Bob Inglis of South Carolina raised the danger of resembling South Africa's National Party advocating apartheid.

The only ones advocating that are Novak and the corrupt Senators who support illegal immigration and "guest" workers.

I'm outsourcing the rest of this to The Derb:

Novak comes out with every creaky old tune in the songbook of the open-borders nutsos, and garnishes it all with a big greasy dollop of huddled-masses sentimentality... ...He ignores **everything** that immigration wonks have been thrashing out for years...

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:58 AM

Chertoff: won't do job; going after bloggers; will stage show raids to inflame left

DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff, in a meeting with the editorial board of USA Today, admitted that he's not going to do the job he's supposed to be doing, said that the White House will be creating a "rapid response" team to counter criticism from the MSM and from bloggers, and implied that those immigration raids that he'll be conducting in the future will be designed to inflame the left and other illegal immigration supporters.

Bottom line: Congress should try to get him fired. Since it's clear that he has not and will not do his job, that should be easy. Except, of course, most of them appreciate the fact that he's not doing his job.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said Wednesday that Republican conservatives working to block an immigration bill risk endorsing a "silent amnesty" by insisting on deportations that are "not going to happen."

Chertoff also leveled criticism at liberal immigrant rights advocates, saying they could prolong the anguish of immigrant families by withholding support for legislation that could make them legal.

...a "rapid response" team is countering critics, not only in the conventional media but, for the first time, on Internet blogs, said White House communications director Kevin Sullivan...

Chertoff acknowledged that there is "a fundamental unfairness" in a bill allowing illegal immigrants to stay. But trying to force them to leave would be impossible, Chertoff said, "We are bowing to reality."

Trying to force many of them to leave would not be impossible if we had a DHS Secretary who was willing to do his job, together with a president who would make sure that he was doing his job.

..."[Responding to attrition:] You're not going to replace 12 million people who are doing the work they're currently doing," Chertoff said. "If they don't leave, then you are going to give them silent amnesty. You're either going to let them stay or you're going to be hypocritical."

[Rep. Brian] Bilbray said his idea hasn't worked because "there's been a conscious strategy of not enforcing the law."

Chertoff, whose department has staged a number of recent raids that have resulted in mass roundups of illegal workers and sharp protests from religious groups, warned there will be more if the workers don't get a chance to become legal. "We're going to enforce the law," he said. "People all around the country will be seeing teary-eyed children whose parents are going to be deported."

I've suspected that some of the high profile raids which appeared to have been flubbed were intentionally managed in a way to generate the most negative publicity, and Chertoff has just almost confirmed my suspicions.

[Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez says:] "The reality is, we don't have enough people," said Gutierrez, adding that many of the USA's economic competitors, such as France, Germany, Japan and China, will be facing a similar demographic shift. "The big challenge of the 21st century is: Who gets the people? Who gets the immigrants?" he said. "We don't appreciate today that these people are coming in for free."

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:17 AM

Philip Dine/St. Louis Post-Dispatch: North American Union just "urban legend"

Philip Dine of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch offers 'Urban legend of "North American Union" feeds on fears'. That appears to be the original title, it doesn't appear to have been printed in his own paper, and it's accompanied by a handy chart listing other "urban legends". The latter are obvious ones, such as the perennial favorite about a rebate from Microsoft. (They use Snopes.com as a source for those "legends", despite that site not being known for their accuracy or ability to admit their mistakes.)

While Dine does provide the anti-NAU side, and he isn't as much an apologist as Michael Medved, and it's good to see the MSM at least mentioning the scheme, the tone of the article is dismissive. It starts like this:

Forget conspiracy theories about JFK's assassination, black helicopters, Sept. 11, 2001. This is the big one.

There's a summary of the rest from Cliff Kincaid:

On another front, White House spokesman Tony Snow calls the North American Union (NAU) a "myth," despite the abundant evidence of White House involvement in the development of a North American identification card and security strategy. This is how the subject of national sovereignty gets marginalized and dismissed. In this case, our "adversary press" meekly accepts the White House line. Echoing Snow, Philip Dine of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch has written an article saying the NAU is based on an Internet "rumor" with a "few grains of truth" that has led people to "an unsubstantiated conclusion." It is apparent that he didn't attend the "North American Law" conference which I covered, featuring wide-ranging discussions on how the North American Free Trade Agreement is leading to the integration of the economic, legal and political systems of the U.S, Canada and Mexico.

There are more things the "debunkers" fail to mention here.

In the article, other "debunkers" are:

"There is absolutely no U.S. government plan for a NAFTA Superhighway of any sort," said David Bohigian, an assistant secretary of commerce. Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., a powerful member of committees that would authorize and pay for a North American Free Trade Agreement Superhighway if one were being planned, dismissed the notion as "unfounded theories" with "no credence."

...Matt Englehart, spokesman for the Commerce Department's International Trade Administration, said the North American partnership "is absolutely not a precursor" to a loss of American sovereignty...

Michael Barkun, a Syracuse University political scientist who specializes in conspiracy theories, said a major theme long has been "that schemes are being hatched to destroy American sovereignty."

"The only thing that's new here is that it appears in the guise of a North American Union," he said. "Previously it appeared in the guise of U.N. domination. I think whatever appeal this has may derive from the fact that there are pre-existing concerns about trade that have been around since the creation of NAFTA, and even more strongly the immigration issue in the sense of border security. So in a way it becomes an issue onto which all kinds of anxieties and concerns can be projected."

Doug Thomas, professor of communications, technology and culture at the University of Southern California, said the advent of the Internet has made conspiracy theories widely available.

"It's the speed and the distribution," he said. "People are able to join in and flush them out a little quicker, so everybody can add a piece to the puzzle."

Well if two Commerce Department officials and two quite possibly corrupt academics say it ain't so, it ain't so. But, as a capper, Robert Pastor, the American University professor to whom conspiracy theorists point as "the father of the NAU" says:

On one recent day alone, Pastor said, he received 100 e-mails on the topic. "They get turned on by [CNN's] Lou Dobbs and [Fox's] Bill O'Reilly, who are fearful that Mexicans and Canadians are about to take over our country," Pastor said, adding that such claims are a product of "the xenophobic or frightened right wing of America that is afraid of immigration and globalization."

Posted to NAU at 12:06 AM

"Bush grants presidency extraordinary powers" (in emergency; undercuts Congress)

From this:

President Bush has signed a directive granting extraordinary powers to the office of the president in the event of a declared national emergency, apparently without congressional approval or oversight.

The "National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive" [whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html]was signed May 9, notes Jerome R. Corsi in a WND column.

...The directive establishes under the office of the president a new national continuity coordinator whose job is to make plans for "National Essential Functions" of all federal, state, local, territorial and tribal governments, as well as private sector organizations to continue functioning under the president's directives in the event of a national emergency.

It's a National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD-51) and a Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD-20) and it creates a national continuity coordinator who would be Frances Townsend.

"Catastrophic emergency" is loosely defined as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."

Corsi says the president can assume the power to direct any and all government and business activities until the emergency is declared over...

The directive also makes no reference to Congress and its language appears to negate any requirement that the president submit to Congress a determination that a national emergency exists...

Much more at both links, and in case you think this would only be for continuity of government, note that it apparently supercedes the more Constitutionally-correct National Emergency Act, which explicitly involves Congress. Also note this May 2005 story:

The Bush administration periodically put the USA on high alert for terrorist attacks even though then-Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge argued there was only flimsy evidence to justify raising the threat level, Ridge now says.

Posted to Politics at 10:31 PM

Bill Richardson still "special envoy" for Organization of American States

In response to my query, Bill Richardson's communication director informs me:

Governor Richardson has never "worked" for the OAS.

Last year he was appointed a special envoy to the Secretary General for Latin America. That means the SG could call on the Governor to assist, on a purely humanitarian and voluntary basis, if he felt there was a situation that required diplomacy from someone like the Governor, who has extensive experience with and ties to Latin America.

From that I assume that BR continues in his status as a "special envoy". Snippet from the press conference where his appointment was announced here.

As for the Clintonian objection to my asking whether he was still "working" for them, not all jobs are paid, and I knew and have stated that it was an unpaid position. In any case, I'll abide by their apparent wishes and just refer to it as an appointment.

Shouldn't a candidate for president resign all such appointments, so that those who know about this issue don't question whether they have divided loyalties? Have any past presidential candidates been in such a situation? Can we get a list of the "situations" where Bill Richardson has represented the OAS? Has he done so while on the campaign trail, or perhaps when supposedly working for the residents of New Mexico? Does this being an "appointment" - or the fact that the OAS is apparently domiciled in the U.S. - mean that he doesn't have to register as a Foreign Agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act?

Posted to Politics at 04:29 PM

Senate immigration amnesty bill: the downsides

The concept of amnesty is bad, and almost everything in the Senate's illegal immigration amnesty bill is bad as well. It's fairly obvious to just about everyone that this is an extremely flawed piece of legislation, so what I'd suggest is using it to further discredit its supporters. However, please don't lose sight of the forest: we need to stop amnesty in general, not just this particular piece of legislation. You can do that by following these steps.

There's a top ten list in "Rewarding Illegal Aliens: Senate Bill Undermines The Rule of Law".

There are seven more reasons here, including the provision regarding the "United States-Mexico Border Enforcement Review Commission". I actually scanned that section earlier, but I failed to note this:

Members from the law enforcement community will be balanced out by members from "academia, religious leaders, civic leaders or community leaders" (read: the open-borders lobby).

For an example of how that would work, note that Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich's "New Americans Immigrant Policy Council" includes an organization which is headed by someone linked to the Mexican government (Juan Salgado).

David Frum has also discussed the downsides. In this post, he discloses that Bush has apparently never heard the pro-enforcement side of the argument. No big surprise there. And, from this:

With this immigration bill, the GOP is telling hard-pressed workers: Go look to somebody else to help you... ...the deal also identifies the GOP as a party that in the crunch puts employers' interests first... ...The president and the senators have now managed to divide and demoralize their party even further... ...The deal has wounded all three of the GOP front-runners... ...this White House's first instinct when faced with dissent in the ranks is to insult and abuse its strongest supporters... ...And unfortunately the White House's second instinct when confronted with dissent is to revert to incompetent spin. Unlike the Clinton administration, which lied with a fluency and bravado that will impress PR hacks for decades to come, the Bush administration stumbles, flusters, and eventually disheartens even its staunchest supporters... ...Republicans have done so well because until now, the highly diverse Hispanic population has not voted as an ethnic bloc. Now we ourselves are forcing that to change. It's as if this Republican president and these Republican senators have said, "Hmm. Can we invent an issue that will teach Cuban-American doctors, Honduran day laborers, and Mexican-American army officers to think of themselves as a unified ethnic group? Can we then provoke a fight that all of them (whatever their diverging practical interests) will treat as a symbol of acceptance in American society? And can we then stage-manage this fight to ensure that two-thirds of our party will have no choice but to fall on the wrong side of it?"

And, Hugh Hewitt - often described here as a Bushbot - has done yeoman work by reading the bill and posting several of its downsides here.

There's an online version of the bill here.

National Review calls it a "Bipartisan Fantasy".

And, Heather Mac Donald says "Don't Be Fooled", highlighting the provision that grants immediate legitimacy to former illegal aliens.

UPDATE: Sen. Jeff Sessions says "Immigration Bill Is Worse Than You Think".

UPDATE 2: Some of the downsides are in this segment from the Lou Dobbs show. Apparently illegal aliens would have first dibs on federally-funded legal aid for their applications for citizenship.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 01:41 PM

Dick Morris: "Republicans should back immigration compromise"

In case you were wondering why I erupted into peals of laughter moments ago, your answer is here. Of course, then I wondered, "Is he still working for the Democrats, or Mexico?"

The Republican Party would be self-destructive (not for the first time, either) if they did not let the immigration compromise negotiated by Sens. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) pass and become law. The hopes of the entire Latino community are pinned to immigration reform and, if the GOP is seen as blocking it, the consequences for the indefinite future will be horrific. The Republican Party will lose Hispanics as surely as they lost blacks when Barry Goldwater ran in 1964 against the civil rights bill (even though a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats backed the bill in each house).

The "entire Latino community"? That's certainly a false statement. I doubt whether most Puerto Ricans, for instance, really care all that much about allowing Mexicans and Mexican-Americans to import their relatives here via endless chain migration. Of course, some may do so out of pan-Hispanic solidarity, but surely Republican - or at least conservative - principles say that should be discouraged and fought against, rather than encouraged. Wait, what was I thinking assuming that Dick Morris even knows what principles are?

If the Hispanics are not massively turned off by a Republican rejection of immigration reform, they will drift into an increasingly pro-Republican orientation just as Irish and Italian Catholics did before them. Already Protestant evangelicalism has converted a third of the American Latino population, a clear precursor of GOP political support.

Of course, those who realize the dangers inherent in the GOP becoming a vassal of religious fundamentalists might not approve of the tack Morris implies: delivering the bread and circuses via gay marriage, abortion, and other red meat social issues.

Related:
Dick Morris still wrong; Hispanics, unprincipled GOP, religious conservatives
House offers border security bill; Dick Morris, liberals
Base responds to Dick Morris' Base Desires
Dick Morris' idiotic thoughts on immigration
Dick Morris offers thoughts on Bush and immigration

Posted to Immigration2007a at 01:24 PM

Bill Richardson isn't running exclusively as a Hispanic (wink, wink); would support amended Senate amnesty

From "Richardson enters '08 race by letting Latinos know he's 1 of them":

Democrat Bill Richardson has officially entered the presidential race with a naked appeal to Hispanics, saying in an interview that it's "rudimentary politics" to make sure the country's fastest growing voting bloc knows he's one of them.

Richardson announced his candidacy in both English and Spanish from the heart of the U.S. Hispanic population and the nation's most delegate-rich state [i.e., Los Angeles]...

Richardson told The Associated Press that he's not running exclusively as a Hispanic, but as the American governor of New Mexico who is proud to be Latino.

"One of my potential problems is that one of my potential bases - Hispanics - don't know that I'm Hispanic, so I'm trying to change that. It's just rudimentary politics," Richardson said in an interview. "When my name recognition among Hispanics is below 10 percent, I've got to accentuate it, because it's a potential base for me."

Likewise, John Edwards could stress that he's white, Hillary Clinton could stress that she's a white woman, right? Just trying to reach out to their base. I'm sure an ethnic nationalist like Bill Richardson wouldn't have a problem with that.

In both English and Spanish, Richardson criticized the immigration bill under debate in Congress, which he said would separate families by requiring illegal immigrants who are heads of households to return to their home countries before gaining legal status. But he said the proposal is a "step in the right direction" because it would establish a path to citizenship and because it increases border patrols.

In an interview later at the exclusive Regency Club, where he was holding an evening fundraiser, Richardson said he would vote for the bill if he were in Congress. But he said he would try to amend it to make improvements, including an elimination of the required return to home countries and the creation of a 370-mile border fence.

Note that Bill Richardson is or was working for the OAS as their "special envoy" to encourage discussion on immigration matters. He's not getting paid, but if he were he'd be earning his keep.

The article ends with a disputed conversation he had concerning a Marine who was killed in Iraq; whether that will become yet another one of his scandals isn't clear.

If you want to sink his candidacy, follow these steps.

UPDATE: From this:

"I am saying 'It's Bill Richardson Lopez and I am one of you and I would like you to consider me, not because I am Hispanic but because I have the best program for the country'," he told Reuters in an interview late on Monday.

Obvious translation provided here.

UPDATE 2: Flip, flop, flip, flop. The AP article above is from Tuesday morning, and the interview presumably took place Monday evening. Now, from this:

Mr. Richardson initially said he would support the immigration compromise announced earlier this week. But on Wednesday, he said that after reading it in detail, he had decided to oppose it, saying the measure placed too great a burden on immigrants — tearing apart families that wanted to settle in the United States, creating a permanent tier of second-class immigrant workers and financing a border fence that Mr. Richardson had long opposed.

Maybe the OAS called and told him this was one of those "situations".

Posted to Politics at 12:25 PM

Wikipedia deletes, locks North American Union article

Continuing our long series of discussing how nothing in Wikipedia can be trusted and how - because it appears at the top of search results for nearly every term - it's little more than a disinformation source, plug the following into your browser:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Union

You'll find yourself at the "Independent Task Force on North America" entry with a note at the top saying, "North American Union redirects here". On the talk page, we read comments from various parties:

...The related article "North American Union" was previously deleted after being inaccurately characterized as a hoax/conspiracy theory in its AFD debate. While it is true that some WP editors did add questionable or biased material to the article, it is a very real proposal which does merit a properly-written article... I'm going to list this for NPOV review to ensure that the article sticks to the relevant and verifiable facts...

...North American Union is the only topic I've searched at Wikipedia that was deleted and locked... I find it strange that a topic COULD be locked in that way. I don't know the history and didn't see the entries that caused it to be locked, as even the discussion was deleted and locked--wtf is up with that?--stopping discussion? On the surface, it makes it appear that a conspiracy exists to prevent there being a North American Union entry...

...Yes, I was also surprised that a topic like this could be deleted and locked...

OTOH, the SPP article is not only still there, but all of the links I added to the Criticisms section are also still there:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_and_Prosperity_Partnership_of_North_America

It's certainly odd that they'd wipe everything from the record like that, and it certainly makes me wonder who could have done it.

7/15/07 UPDATE: What is purported to be the pre-deletion version of the NAU article is here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wisepiglet/North_American_Union

I don't know if that's the full article and what date/time it's from however.

Posted to NAU at 10:47 AM

Rasmussen: only 26% favor Senate illegal immigration amnesty

According to Rasmussen Reports, only 26% of those polled favor the Bush/Senate illegal immigration amnesty:

...The enforcement side of the debate is clearly where the public passion lies on the issue. Seventy-two percent (72%) of voters say it is Very Important for "the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration." That view is held by 89% of Republicans, 65% of Democrats, and 63% of unaffiliated voters.

Advocates of "comprehensive" reform have taken to arguing that those who want an enforcement-only policy must explain how they would deal with the 12 million illegal aliens already living in the country. The public reaction to that question appears to be "Why?" Only 29% of voters say it is Very Important for "the government to legalize the status of illegal aliens already in the United States."

...Still, 65% of voters would be willing to support a compromise including a "very long path to citizenship" provided that "the proposal required the aliens to pay fines and learn English" and that the compromise "would truly reduce the number of illegal aliens entering the country." The proposal, specifically described as a compromise, was said to include "strict employer penalties for hiring illegal aliens, building a barrier along the Mexican border and other steps to significantly reduce the number of illegal aliens entering the United States."

All "reformers" have to do is post a bond that would guarantee that their plans would truly reduce illegal immigration (rather than increasing it as seems almost certain), and their "reform" would pass. Surely, they wouldn't hesitate to do that, right?

Posted to Immigration2007a at 09:52 AM

New York Times alludes to Mexican meddling via consulates (Little Rock)

Randal Archibold of the New York Times offers "Debate Raging, Mexico Adds to Consulates in U.S." about Mexico's latest outpost, this one in Little Rock, Arkansas. Somewhat to my surprise, they actually include some of the downsides and question some of Mexico's motives although, of course, they don't go far enough. This is just a fly-in report, not investigative journalism:

Increasingly, [Mexico's consulates] are also acting as influential free agents in a broken immigration system that Congress is trying to overhaul. As the consulate that opened last month in Little Rock illustrates, the Mexican government is following its citizens far from the border into the growing quarters of Latino migration, much of it illegal...

...Consulate officials in Little Rock acknowledge that the 6,000-square-foot piece of Mexican territory occupying a former medical clinic serves all Mexican citizens, regardless of immigration status...

...The [Matricular Consular card] is honored in the United States by many police agencies, employers and - most important - by banks, which are used by countless immigrants to send billions of dollars home every year. But it is a lightning rod for critics of illegal immigration, who see it as a demonstration of the Mexican government's helping its citizens live in the United States illegally...

...There are 539 foreign consulates in the United States, and Mexico has more than any other country. (After Mexico, Canada has 19, Japan 17 and Britain 12)...

...[Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies] said Mexico went further than other countries that issue such cards, including the United States, by lobbying banks and law enforcement agencies to recognize the cards as valid identification, knowing full well that most legal residents would not need such a card...

...The [Matricular Consular card] was "one of the major areas of activity" at consulates, he said, adding, "The point being to 'document' the undocumented and make an end run around Congress."...

Previously: over two years ago I first mentioned the planning for the outpost (with a Mike Huckabee link) and a month ago I posted about its grand opening.

Posted to Immigration_consul at 09:37 AM

Samuel G. Freedman helps show how New York Times would scuttle "reform"

Samuel G. Freedman of the New York Times offers "Immigration Raid Leaves Sense of Dread in Hispanic Students":

[...Eleven highly emotional paragraphs describing the feds picking up two illegal aliens from the house of two legal immigrants...]

Such was the triumph of Operation Cross Check, the federal raid against illegal immigrants that went on for four days last month in this community of about 18,500 people. To the Department of Homeland Security, the operation was a success, catching a convicted sex offender and several welfare cheats among its 49 arrests. In a news release announcing the toll, an immigration enforcement director for Minnesota said, "Our job is to help protect the public from those who commit crimes."

Yet more than half of those arrested had committed no crime other than being in the United States illegally, doing the jobs at Jennie-O that prop up the local economy. And, as the experience of Alex Sorto demonstrates, the aggressive, invasive style of the sweep instilled lasting fear among Willmar’s 3,000 Hispanics, many of them students born or naturalized in the United States. These young people are the political football in America’s bitter, unresolved battle about immigration.

One thing is clear: the New York Times opposes immigration raids. Can anyone see Sam Freedman changing his tune if "comprehensive immigration reform" passes? Won't he just continue to say these same things over and over about the raids that are supposedly part of "reform"? And, won't that tend to water down "reform" and continue to allow illegal immigration to occur?

Once again, the NYT should just come right out and admit that they want a loose borders system, where anyone who makes it over the border and can stay here for a while gets to become a citizen.

Posted to Immigration_piipps at 09:29 AM

Amanda Marcotte can't even get smears straight (Lou Dobbs, SPLC)

John Edwards' former blogging star, Amanda Marcotte, offers [1] "Lou Dobbs really, really hates Mexicans":

David Neiwert has a follow-up on the issue of Lou Dobbs trotting out numbers on national TV about Mexican nationals spreading leprosy that he got from a white supremacist group that pulled the numbers out of their asses. It's fucking disturbed that this man has a national microphone to promote racism like this. And his nastiness is getting nastier.

Actually, there are two smears involved here, and she's confusing them. The "white supremacist group" is the CCC, and Dobbs did use a graphic of Aztlan they supplied during his show. That was certainly a mistake, and they should have made one of their own or found it from another source. The leprosy issue is another matter entirely, and Dobbs has since issued a retraction.

I left a comment yesterday and it was moderated despite the only links it contained being in bare tinyurl format. Oddly enough - just like the last comment I left at Pandagon - it didn't show up. So, I'll post a belinked version here and send a trackback:

Meanwhile:

1. Dobbs wife is Mexican and she not only supports his reports she thinks he doesn't go far enough.

2. The SPLC is indirectly linked to the Mexican Government.

3. The DN claim that "the whole Aztlan thing is basically something concocted by Glenn Spencer" is pretty funny. I wasn't aware the Spencer started MEChA.

4. Is that Spencer on the right, with the Aztlan map? (Make sure and check that one out).

5. Who ultimately benefits from such smears of Dobbs? (Hint: crooks who employ illegal aliens and the Mexican Government, among others).

UPDATE: The trackback didn't work since my IP address is blocked by Pandagon's servers. Gotta keep that message control in control.

[1] pandagon.net/2007/05/22/lou-dobbs-really-really-hates-mexicans/

Posted to Bloggage at 09:12 AM

Texas State Rep. Roberto Alonzo lies in Democratic radio address (immigration "reform")

Oddly enough, the Democratic Party doesn't seem to be crowing about Teddy Kennedy's massively successful Senate immigration amnesty bill. Rather, they're concentrating on pointing out Mitt Romney's flip-flops from when he used to support the previous version of McCain-Kennedy (link), highlighting the unimportant McCain F-you quote (link), highlighting McCain's latest quip (link), and generally acting like ThinkProgress.

However, they do have an example of outrageous demagoguery regarding immigration. Texas State Representative Roberto Alonzo gave the Hispanic Democratic radio address on Friday or Saturday (link), and said something that even a far-left loon like Cardinal Roger Mahony would consider a lie:

Two years ago a very different debate on immigration began than the one we see today. Under the Republican Congress, the debate began by scapegoating immigrants for political gain and even went as far as trying to criminalize clergy.

The last is quite simply a lie. And, of course, "scapegoating immigrants" is Democrat code for "opposing widespread illegal activity".

He goes on to support foreign citizens marching in our streets, making a show of force and demanding rights to which they aren't entitled. This shouldn't come as a suprise, considering the links between various Democrats and the organizers of some of the illegal immigration marches; some of those organizers are linked to the Mexican government and Mexican political parties:

The hundreds of thousands of people who marched for peace, opportunity, and hope during the last two years helped put a human face on the issue of immigration.

He does allow us one thing:

Real reform has to protect our borders. That's the duty of any country.

Then, he goes on to support massive, endless legalization for those here now and those to come:

But the reform must also protect workers, reunite families, and allow hardworking people who obey the law and pay taxes to have the opportunity to apply for the responsibilities of citizenship. This earned path to citizenship should also be available to workers who would come in the future to help meet our economic needs and help improve our communities.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:44 PM

"Immigration Bill Would Make Taxpayers Pay Legal Bills of Illegal Aliens Seeking Amnesty"

From a press release (link):

[Ken Boehm, Chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC)] said, "If passed, this bill will make taxpayers pay the legal bills for illegal aliens seeking amnesty. Tucked away on page 317 is a provision that would allow lawyers in the federally-funded legal services program to represent illegal aliens, which they are presently barred from doing."

John Carlisle, NLPC's Director of Policy, said, "Many taxpayers will be chagrined to learn they may soon have to provide a lawyer for illegal aliens who should not be here in the first place. Activist lawyers, illegal aliens and government money are a bad mix."

The federally-funded Legal Services Corporation (LSC) supports a network of lawyers in hundreds of communities in the country to provide civil (not criminal) day-to-day legal help to poor people. This year, LSC will receive $330 million. Since it was founded in 1974, LSC has received over $6 billion...

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:38 AM

Farmers Branch: Federal judge issues TRO over anti-illegal immigration ordinance

From this:

The Farmers Branch city ordinance banning apartments from renting to illegal immigrants won't go into effect Tuesday as planned because a federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order stopping the city from enforcing the ordinance.

Voters on May 12 by a 2-to-1 ratio said that they wanted the law, which requires apartment managers or owners to obtain proof from prospective tenants that they are U.S. citizens or in the country legally. But lawyers representing three groups of plaintiffs challenged the ordinance in federal court last week seeking the temporary restraining order to stop enforcement...

Now that the judge has issued the restraining order, a hearing must be held within 10 days to determine if the order would be lifted, or if a temporary injunction would be put in place to halt the city from implementing the law until the case goes to trial, attorneys on both sides said...

Previously: Farmers Branch: 68% vote for anti-illegal immigration ordinance; ACLU, MALDEF file TRO

Both groups involved have the same, indirect link to the Mexican government.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 03:01 PM

Senate immigration amnesty bill: the supporters

Outside a number of Senators, there aren't too many who support the Senate's immigration amnesty/"guest" worker plan. This post will keep track of them, and I urge everyone to hold those below accountable whether the bill passes or not. I also urge everyone to keep calling Congress, but, even more importantly, follow the steps previously outlined to help stop amnesty.

The supporters:

* Of course: president Bush, Sens. John McCain and Ted Kennedy

* From "Few senators support the illegals bill" (link):

Sen. Arlen Specter, one of the Republicans who helped craft the deal, said it's the best they could do... "It will treat the 12 million undocumented immigrants in a constructive way. It is not amnesty. They'll have to pay a fine. They'll have to earn their way to citizenship," he said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "It's better than what we have now." ...in Georgia, Sen. Saxby Chambliss, one of the secret negotiators, was also booed [like Lindsey Graham] at that state's Republican convention... ...Meanwhile, Republicans' chief negotiator in the closed-door sessions, Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, wrote a column for the Arizona Republic newspaper yesterday saying he won't support the bill if major changes are made during the floor debate... "If the consensus we reach is not accurately reflected in the final legislative language, or is seriously undercut by amendments in the Senate or House, it will lose support, including from me," he wrote... ...Seven Republicans, including the party's chairman, Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida, Mr. Chambliss and Mr. Kyl, the Senate Republican Conference chairman, were at the press conference announcing the bill...

* DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff meanwhile challenged critics to offer alternative solutions instead of simply saying "this isn't good enough." (link; the obvious answer is, of course, that he should do his job)

* [Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez says] "I have the impression that perhaps for some people, the only thing that would not be amnesty is mass deportation... We don't think that's practical, we don't think that's logical, we don't think that's humane and that would hurt our economy. So it's not amnesty."

* [Sen. Lindsey Graham says (ibid)] "To my colleagues who have come on the floor to tear this bill down with no alternative, you're not doing this country a service and I will push back... If you’ve got a better idea and you can lead us to a better solution, I'm all for it. But if all you're going to do is embrace the status quo, I’m going to be your biggest critic.

* The Wall Street Journal editorial board offered "Immigration Opening" on Saturday (link), which was followed by several reader letters almost all denouncing the bill (link). Today, John Fund offers "Don't Run for the Border - America needs immigration reform, but not a law enacted in haste" (link), perhaps as an indirect acknowledgement of the bill's failings.

* Even deeper inside the compound, we find Tamar Jacoby, who's profiled in "An Advocate Rallies to Unify GOP" (link)

Last week after a deal was reached in the Senate, Jacoby held a conference call with 20 business owners Friday to explain the politics of the overhaul... [She's praised by] Randel Johnson, a vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce... ...Jacoby sat at a table in the Senate Chef last week surrounded by two Texas bankers, a cattle rancher and a guy who represents Rio Grande Valley orange growers, all of whom had flown in to put a last-minute press on their congressional representatives... "The most important thing is the temporary-worker program," Jacoby told them. Lawmakers "are going to go all out to cut it in half and unless business goes all out, like D-Day, they will surely win." ...She is willing to work with religious and civil rights groups, including the Roman Catholic Church and the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy group, to achieve the goal... ...the leader of a Latino civil rights group tapped Jacoby on the shoulder. Brent A. Wilkes, national executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens...

* Safely outside the compound, Michael Barone phones in to say that he supports the bill, despite not having read it.

* In the basement of the compound, Captain Ed decides to be even more like Hugh Hewitt than Hugh Hewitt, saying today [1] that

"Conceptually, I think it could work -- but the bill doesn't quite match the concepts outlined in the announcement, either."

In a previous post [2], he offered this stock talking point:

Everyone agrees that the system is broken; in fact, that's about the only agreement to be found.

* In the subbasement, Dafydd ab Hugh shows how little he knows about this issue and continues to support some form of "regularization" (the same word the Mexican government uses) [3]

UPDATE: NAU apologist Michael Medved comes out in favor of it (link):

the bi-partisan Senate bill makes a point of rewarding only good behavior... ...And speaking of rewarding good behavior, and punishing the bad: those courageous conservatives (Senators Kyl, Graham, Isakson and, yes, McCain) who have worked constructively and seriously on immigration reform deserve our support, not our rage, while those politicians and media figures who have demagogued this issue in a way that only makes it worse, in no way merit our encouragement.

UPDATE 2: I knew this would come sooner or later. Instapundit says [4]:

WHY PEOPLE WHO HATE THE IMMIGRATION BILL SHOULD BACK THE IMMIGRATION BILL: Okay, I had this thought last night as I was drifting off to sleep. But the Nyquil wore off and I still think it may make sense. Lots of people think that the immigration bill stinks, and want to punish the GOP by staying home in 2008. Fair enough. But if you plan to punish the GOP in 2008, then you might want to support the immigration bill now. Why? Because if the Democrats win the White House and Congress in 2008, you'll get a bill that you like a whole lot less! So if you plan to punish the Republicans later, you should encourage them to pass their bill now... There's got to be something wrong with this analysis, I just can't figure out what it is. Anyone? Kaus? Anyone?

UPDATE 3: Here's another Chertoff quote:

"You know, Wolf [Blitzer], first, I understand there's some people who expect anything other than capital punishment is an amnesty. The reality is the proposal here requires people who came in illegally who want to stay to pay a penalty. Like a fine. That's a punishment. That's not an amnesty."

UPDATE 4: Jorge Mursuli, National Executive Director, Democracia Ahora (a project of People For the American Way) offers "Senate's Immigration Proposal Needs Work, but Is Salvagable".

UPDATE 5: Dick Morris: "Republicans should back immigration compromise"

UPDATE 6: Sen. Trent Lott says:

"Is the current situation in America with legal and illegal immigration intolerable and unacceptable? Yes. Everybody would agree. Is this bill better than the current law? Without a doubt, yes. Are we going to have another opportunity to do this better next year or the next year? The answer is no. We've got to do it. We've got to do it as good as we can. We've got to do it right now."

UPDATE 7: Sen. Mitch McConnell says he'll support the bill, and also says:

"This is a divisive issue... I don't think there's a single member of either party next year who is going to fail to be re-elected over this issue."

SPECIAL HACK UPDATE: Hacks - not all of whom specifically support the Senate bill - have started their rampage of smears against those who oppose massive illegal immigration: Linda Chavez, Michael Gerson, and Robert Novak.

SPECIAL "LIBERAL" HACK UPDATE: Eleanor Clift offers "Bush Is Right—On Immigration, Anyway". She and the preceding hacks aren't that much different. Let's count the lies:

Just as [Pete Wilson]'s anti-immigrant [lie] policies turned California into the bluest of Blue States [misleading if not wrong], the angry, racist and xenophobic rhetoric emanating from the Republican right [smear and largely false] is turning the fastest-growing voting bloc in America against the GOP... Seeing a way to rally the base and respond to the growing anti-immigrant sentiment [lie], House Republicans pushed and passed legislation that was racially divisive and punitive [lie], cracking down on those who aided illegal immigrants - even church groups [lie]. The bill sparked massive rallies across the country against the Republican Congress [some of the organizers of those rallies were Mexican political parties and those linked to the Mexican government]. Rosenberg's New Democrat Network monitored ads in 25 states picturing a Mexican immigrant side by side with an Islamist terrorist. [Chuck Schumer created a similar TV ad]

[1] captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/010025.php
[2] captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/010020.php
[3] biglizards.net/blog/archives/2007/05/regularization.html
[4] instapundit.com/archives2/005448.php

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:40 AM

NYT editorial: Senate bill bad; "Know-Nothings" hate illegal aliens

The New York Times offers the editorial "The Immigration Deal". Summary: they're going even further around the bend.

They divide provisions of the bill into "good", "bad", and "awful", with the "guest" worker provisions in the latter camp. If the bad parts aren't removed, they say that no bill is better than the current one.

And:

It is painful, for many reasons, to oppose this immigration deal. It is no comfort to watch as this generation's Know-Nothings bray against "amnesty" from their anchor chairs and campaign lecterns, knowing that it gives hope to the people they hate.

Truly a sleazy paragraph, implying that those "anchors" (presumably Lou Dobbs) and politicians (presumably Tancredo, Hunter, Paul and maybe others) oppose illegal immigration because they're "Know-Nothings" and motivated by hatred.

They also take a swipe at Lou Barletta and others:

Congress's dithering has encouraged the rise of homegrown zealots: mayors, police departments, county executives and legislators who take reform into their own hands, with cruelly punitive measures.

Of course, pulling a business' license when that business fails to follow the laws isn't exactly cruel, and being closer to the people those local officials realize the impact of the policies that the NYT espouses.

And, it's interesting that they'd put amnesty in quotes, since just last month they seemed to acknowledge that "comprehensive immigration reform" is in fact amnesty:

Americans want the immigration issue solved, and they strongly favor "amnesty," whether you call it that or not.

And, of course, their editorial contains the seeds of its own destruction:

The millions without documents live in constant fear: a campaign of federal raids has spread panic and shattered families.

But, isn't tough enforcement a part of the current and past amnesty bills? And, won't that mean raids in order to prevent future illegal immigration? And, won't any amnesty encourage even more illegal immigration, resulting in even more mixed-status families? If an amnesty bill passes, won't the NYT simply use the same line against enforcement mandated by that bill?

Shouldn't the NYT be honest enough to just come right out and admit that what they really want is a loose borders system, where anyone who makes it over the border and can stay here for a while is allowed to become a citizen?

Related:
NYT hides behind "terrorized" illegal aliens to support massive immigration

Posted to Immigration2007a at 02:15 PM

LULAC, Raza radicals: Senate bill "unworkable", "this is our land!", "border crossed us"

A couple days ago, Mickey Kaus suggested one way to scuttle the Senate's amnesty bill: get radicals to support an even worse version, and perhaps even utter "reconquista" style statements. It looks like he's got his wish. From this:

[Jaime P. Martinez, national treasurer of the League of United Latin American Citizens] preached from the podium of a small chapel at Primera Baptist Church flanked by U.S. and Mexican flags, his message one of defiance - not of turning the other cheek.

"We must not sell out, and we must fight for the rights of our people that have been here!" he shouted, a crowd of 50 or so cheering and applauding as the short speech closed. "This is our land and we're going to fight for just and humane comprehensive immigration reform!... ...We did not cross the border, the border crossed us."

...Most of those at the town hall meeting hosted by LULAC, the National Council of La Raza and the Service Employees International Union oppose the bill, in part because of provisions to fine each head of household $5,000 and require them to return to their home countries before seeking permanent residency.

The latter may or may not be true: under the Flake-Gutierrez version, they only have to go to a "Point of Entry", which could be in Canada or Mexico. I don't know what's in the Senate bill, but I'd imagine that eventually any tough provisions would get whittled down to going to a local major airport inside the U.S. Apparently the person who said they'd have to return to their home countries is U.S. Rep. Charlie Gonzalez, who was also at the meeting.

Those at the church, almost all Hispanic and some of them immigration activists, weren't in the mood to compromise. La Raza, LULAC and the union issued a news release announcing the town hall meeting that was an ultimatum. They said U.S. Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn, R-Texas, were "on notice" that "we want workable reform and we want it now!"

The release went on to say the groups are seeking legislation "that balances stronger border security with common-sense reform — including family reunification, respect for worker rights and a pathway to citizenship."

...[A member of the crowd] said Mexicans have an absolute right to live in the United States — either as residents or citizens. U.S. residents, he said, had the same right to live in Mexico... "The only borders that we used to recognize are the natural borders of rivers, mountains, lakes, deserts, not these international boundaries that this colonial government has set up by dividing our land," he said.

Note that the latter quote source's affiliation wasn't given and his thoughts were apparently not explicitly echoed by LULAC or NCLR, even though they are somewhat similar.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 09:59 AM

Senate amnesty could cost over $2.5 trillion dollars

The Senate's illegal immigration amnesty bill could end up costing the U.S. over $2.5 trillion dollars. Trillion, with a "t".

From May 17 testimony by the Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector before the House Judiciary Committee (PDF file):

In FY 2004, the average low skill immigrant household received $30,160 in direct benefits, means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services from all levels of government. By contrast, low-skill immigrant households paid only $10,573 in taxes in FY 2004. A household’s net fiscal deficit equals the cost of benefits and services received minus taxes paid. The average low-skill household had a fiscal deficit of $19,588 (expenditures of $30,160 minus $10,573 in taxes).

At the state and local level, the average low skill immigrant household received $14,145 in benefits and services and paid only $5,309 in taxes. The average low skill immigrant households imposed a net fiscal burden on state and local government of $8,836 per year.

The fiscal burden imposed by low skill immigrant households is slightly greater at the state and local level than at the federal level. The annual fiscal deficit for all 4.54 million low skill immigrant households at the state and local level in 2004 was $49.1 billion. Over the next ten years the state and local fiscal deficit caused by low skill immigrants on state and local governments will approach a half trillion dollars.

Current federal immigration policy permits a massive inflow of both legal and illegal low skill immigrants to enter and reside in the U.S. This imposes a massive unfunded mandate on state and local government which much bear the costs of that immigration flow.

Giving amnesty to illegal immigrants would increase the costs outlined in this testimony. Some 50 to 60 percent of illegal immigrants lack a high school degree. Granting amnesty or conditional amnesty to illegal immigrants would, overtime, increase their use of means-tested welfare, Social Security and Medicare. Fiscal costs would go up significantly in the short term but would go up dramatically after the amnesty recipientreached retirement. Based on my current research, I estimate that if all the current adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. were granted amnesty the net retirement costs to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.5 trillion.

Recent proposed immigration legislation in the Senate and House will raise costs on the taxpayers at all levels of government. By granting amnesty to illegal immigrants (who are overwhelmingly low skilled) and creating massive new “guest worker” programs which would bring millions of additional low skill families into the nation, such legislation, if enacted, would impose massive costs on the U.S. taxpayer...

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:42 AM

"Mexico welcomes U.S. immigration pact"

From this:

The Mexican government said on Friday that the immigration pact reached by U.S. Democratic and Republican senators is a positive step to achieve an integral immigration reform that will benefit millions of Mexicans.

[Mexican Foreign Ministry Spokesman Victor Aviles says:] "The Mexican government expects a substantial migratory reform will be discussed with practical and realistic solutions... Mexico expects everyone to contribute objectively and positively to overcome the ongoing disagreements, respect sensitive aspects of the bipartisan proposal..."

UPDATE: The following was also in the statement released by Aviles:

"The Mexican government has been in permanent communication with distinct actors in the debate and has expressed its points of view on the subject, in a climate of respect for the U.S. legislative process."

Posted to Immigration2007a at 08:31 PM

Jorge Bustamante/United Nations, MacArthur Park riot, CRLA, Peter Schey, NILC, ACLU...

And Teresa Watanabe too! From her report "Human rights expert examines migrant issues in L.A." comes this:

In the first broad international scrutiny of U.S. treatment of migrants, a United Nations human rights expert [Jorge A. Bustamante, U.N. "special rapporteur on the human rights of migrants"] took testimony about worker abuse, government raids, family separations and other issues as he wrapped up a two-day visit to Los Angeles on Thursday... [it was] undertaken at the invitation of the U.S. government.

"There is concern in the United Nations human rights community about rising anti-immigrant sentiment in the United States," said Bustamante, who will present his report to the world body in the next year.

..."The way the local police physically abused marchers [at the MacArthur Park riot] represents right there a violation of human rights," he said... Bustamante, a University of Notre Dame sociology professor who splits his time between his native Mexico and the United States... ...But Bustamante said he was concerned that the U.S. was not in actual compliance with some of its laws...

...At the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, immigration attorney Peter A. Schey told Bustamante that new migrant protections passed by the Republican-controlled Congress in 2000 still have not been implemented because of bureaucratic delays. Those protections would offer visas for migrant crime victims who cooperate with law enforcement in the investigation.

Watanabe forgot to mention that Schey has at least three links to the Mexican government, including collaborating with them on a project related to those visas.

Bustamante also met with the National Immigration Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union, who took the U.S. to task for detention centers. He also met with Jeffrey Ponting, "an attorney with the California Rural Legal Assistance program", as well as histrionic community activists.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 08:17 PM

John Edwards is going to help stop amnesty

Imagine what would happen if an amnesty supporter were forced to endure an hour-long, nationally-televised interview just about immigration matters where they were asked a series of tough questions about amnesty and forced to defend what they support.

As long as the questions were tough enough, and they were asked follow-up after follow-up, their lies and misleading statements would be revealed. That would almost certainly result in them losing a great deal of credibility and it would almost certainly have a significant impact on their political careers.

And, that would go a long way towards ending any chance of amnesty, as all the other supporters realize that their arguments could similarly be exposed and they would lose credibility as well.

So, how do we get something like that? The mainstream media is definitely part of the problem: they're completely corrupt and instead of trying to expose the lies by asking tough questions, they work to cover up the lies that politicians tell.

But, there is a way to do an end-around, and I urge everyone who wants to prevent amnesty to take part:

1. Choose a politician who supports amnesty, then go to their public appearances and ask them one or more very tough questions designed to reveal exactly how they're wrong and forcing them to defend what they support.

2. Publicize their answers (via Youtube, blogs, forums, press releases, Digg, Reddit, etc. etc.)

3. Repeat the first two until the politician loses credibility and support.

While you can choose others, I'm recommending concentrating on John Edwards, with Bill Richardson a possibility as well. While Edwards has "concerns about parts of the [latest Senate bill]", he supports amnesty in general. Richardson doesn't appear to have spoken out about the Senate bill, but he too supports amnesty in general. We might force John Edwards to come out whole-heartedly against the Senate scheme, but at the least we'll sharply reduce the credibility of those who support any form of amnesty. You can find Edwards' campaign schedule here, and Richardson's is here.

Here are a few questions to start with:

"Senator Edwards: you've falsely claimed that there are only three options to deal with illegal immigration: the status quo, massive legalization, or massive deportations (listen). You forgot to mention a fourth choice: simply enforcing the current laws and thereby encouraging many illegal aliens to leave voluntarily over time. That would also reduce future illegal immigration. Do you agree that it's misleading to omit that fourth choice? Why didn't you push for the fourth choice when you were in the Senate? In 2003, just four (4!) companies were fined for immigration violations. Why weren't you pushing the Bush administration to enforce the laws when you were in the Senate, in order to help avoid the current situation?"

"Senator Edwards: no matter what it's called, won't millions and millions of people around the world see any form of 'comprehensive immigration reform' as an amnesty, and won't they try to come here to take part in that amnesty or in future amnesties? And, doesn't the federal government's failure to enforce the laws over the past decades strongly indicate that any provisions designed to keep those new prospective illegal aliens from coming here will not be enforced or will be watered down?"

"Senator Edwards: you voted for the DREAM Act (link), which is also part of the latest Senate amnesty bill. In addition to being an amnesty of its own, that Act lets illegal aliens attend college at the in-state rate. Since there are only a finite number of college discounts available, every discount that goes to an illegal alien is one that is taken away from a U.S. citizen. I would like you to tell us exactly what you would say to a U.S. citizen who can't go to college because of the legislation you supported. Please bear in mind that, once again, there are only so many discounts available, and every one that goes to an illegal alien deprives a U.S. citizen of a discount."

Feel free to offer your own questions in comments, and please leave links in this or future posts if you go out and ask him some tough questions.

UPDATE: Here's another one:

"Senator Edwards: In Congressional testimony, Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation estimated (quote) 'that if all the current adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. were granted amnesty the net retirement costs to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.5 trillion.' You might disagree on that estimate, or you might not. But, could you give us a ballpark figure as to the net cost of legalization that you would consider too high? Do you consider a net cost of $1 trillion too high? $2 trillion? $3 trillion? Please give us a ballpark figure, bearing in mind that we're discussing the net cost.

UPDATE 2: The positions of various candidates are given here, including this:

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson also praised the immigration bill... "This legislation makes a good start toward re-securing our southern border," Richardson said Friday... But, like other Democratic candidates, he expressed concern about a temporary worker program and rules governing family unification.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:33 AM

Tan Nguyen cleared by California Attorney General

From this:

A state investigation has found that Tan Nguyen's congressional campaign committed no crime last year when it mailed 14,000 letters telling immigrants they could be jailed for voting, the Attorney General's Office said Wednesday.

However, the U.S. Department of Justice confirmed that its voting-rights section is still investigating the incident.

..."We could not prove that there was an intent to intimidate lawfully registered voters," [Senior Assistant Attorney General Gary Schons] said. "There's no doubt there was an intent to intimidate unlawfully registered voters."

...Schons said the investigation found that despite his claim to the contrary, Nguyen knew about the letter before it was mailed.

Nguyen said again Wednesday that he did not know of the mailer until afterward, but was otherwise pleased with the news.

...Schons said a key in the decision to close the case stemmed from the Spanish word "emigrado." He said the original draft of the letter – in English – warned those in the country illegally and those with green cards that they could face jail or deportation if they voted.

Schons said "those with green cards" was translated into "emigrado," which can be interpreted as meaning noncitizens with work permits. However, when "emigrado" was translated back into English after the letters were mailed, it became "immigrant," which carries no connotation of being a noncitizen with a work permit.

Previously:
Tan Nguyen: Sanchez did first translation; given heads-up on raid
"Clarification" letter sent to Hispanics (Tan Nguyen, MALDEF, NCLR, NALEO)

Posted to Politics at 10:08 AM

GOP talking points on their immigration bill capitulation

[UPDATE: See this for how to block the amnesty.]

The Senate Republicans have released a set of talking points on the immigration bill that they're getting close to "compromise" on: link.

As a sign of just how bad this is, the person who got the talking points was arch BushBot Hugh Hewitt... and he's refusing to talk them! Instead he calls them "four pages of crap" (link). As previously pointed out, Hewitt is in the "stress the border fence as cover for the amnesty that the GOP leadership wants" camp, and he's upset that the fence has been pared in two, down to just 370 miles.

Let's look at some of the TPs:

1. Republicans insist that border security improvements must be completed before other reforms can occur. Democrats blocked any "triggers" in last year's bill.

As mentioned several times, the triggers in the White House proposal and other bills - and most likely in the current version - only specify planning and funding, not actual measurable improvements. They claim otherwise below, but the Bush administration isn't exactly trustworthy.

Enforcement at the workplace. Republicans are insisting on a meaningful, effective, and workable electronic employment verification system that will prevent employers from hiring illegal workers and eliminate the "magnet" that attracts so many illegal aliens... [from draft]... The bill will create an Electronic Employment Verification System ("EEVS") so only legal workers can get jobs... Once the EEVS is in place (the administration predicts 18 months), illegal aliens without the right to work will find it extremely difficult to gain any legitimate employment... Another Trigger: Republicans also insisted that this new EEVS be fully operational before reforms such as the temporary worker program or status adjustment for illegal aliens occur... ...because of the tough new workplace enforcement mechanisms, they will not be able to be employed in any legitimate business enterprise...

I.e., a national ID card. We already have a pilot program employers can use to verify SSNs, but... it's voluntary. Due to racial profiling - and the inevitable suits - it's not possible to have an effective work authorization program that's split into two parts: one for "guests" and another for citizens. It will either be ineffective (as illegal aliens use SSNs and pretend they're citizens) or it will result in extensive lawsuits (as newly-naturalized citizens with foreign accents are assumed to be illegal aliens).

Merit-based future immigration system and end to "chain migration." Republicans are insisting on eliminating "chain migration" and transforming our immigration system so that all future efforts are focused on attracting those immigrants (and their immediate, nuclear families) who have the combination of job skills, education, and English language proficiency that will make them productive Americans.

I'm absolutely positive the that racial power groups - and the Democrats that they control - will not try to water that down.

The Republicans fail to note that they're thinking in current terms, when they should be thinking of the future. A decade or less from now, those groups that have "virtual veto power" over the Democratic immigration proposals will have vastly more race-based power than they do now. If they're able to control Teddy Kennedy now, imagine what it will be like after they have several million more potential voters ready to take the word of the National Council of The Race or MALDEF. At that point in time, all of the "tough" provisions will be on the chopping block.

A truly temporary worker program. Republicans insist that a temporary worker program be for a limited period of time and not serve as a path to citizenship. Temporary workers must truly be temporary.

As pointed out many times, after a "guest" has their first U.S. citizen child, it will be extremely difficult to deport them when their time is up. And, of course, we're currently being told we have to legalize illegal aliens who've "put down roots in this country". Won't the same line be used about "guests"? Won't the Dems and others go to work to give a "path to citizenship" to "guests"?

Strict limits on processing of illegal aliens. Majority-party Democrats made legalization of illegal aliens a non-negotiable priority, but Republicans refused to allow automatic amnesty or a guaranteed path to citizenship for illegal aliens. Republicans insist that all green card applicants must (1) go to the back of the line behind those who have followed the law, (2) pay higher fines than in last year's bill, (3) pass a criminal background check, (4) show a nearly perfect work history, English proficiency, and familiarity with American civics. If they cannot do so, they will be subject to removal... [from the draft section] Second, Republicans insisted that all illegal aliens seeking permanent residence must get in line behind the legal applicants for permanent residence who did not enter the country illegally. And they must return home to make the formal application.

Past proposals didn't send them to the back of the line, but put them in front of those waiting in foreign countries to come here. And, of course, the line is never-ending: there are always people joining the line, and anyone who joins will inconvenience those behind them, including future applicants for legal immigration. And, of course, it will either take an extremely long time to do background checks of 12 to 20 million people or there will be little checking at all. Past terrorists have tried to game our immigration system, and the same would take place here. The USCIS won't have a fraud management system in place until 2011; before he was apparently "gotten to", the Director of the USCIS said the timeline of the previous Senate bill was not "practical". And, of course, if we're going to do thorough checks that means we're going to be asking foreign countries for their input, something that's extremely problematic. Is Mexico really going to tell us the truth about someone? Does Mexico really have the infrastructure to help us? Are we going to be sending agents to Mexico to check up on whether someone is really who they say they are, and not, for instance, an Islamic extremist who's able to pretend to be a Mexican?

Or, by "criminal background check" do they just mean checking a few databases? If the latter, aren't the chances fairly high that future "Fort Dix Six"-style terrorists would be legalized and thus have an even greater ability to carry out attacks inside the U.S.?

And, of course, the administration that has shown little ability or willingness to deport people from the interior cannot be trusted to deport those who didn't pass the requirements. And, if the requirements are tough enough, many fewer will try to join the program.

And, the last line refers to touchback. Between Luis Gutierrez' peels of laughter, he described how someone would only have to be out of the country for an hour.

Democrats wanted last year's permissive Senate bill, which allowed illegal aliens to jump to the front of the line and did not require illegal aliens to continue to work.

They may indeed mean the actual end of the line (after all the current legal applicants), but see the discussion above: the line is constantly being refreshed with legal applicants.

Republicans have championed greater border enforcement in order to better protect us against terrorist, drug smuggling, human trafficking, and illegal immigration.

On George Bush's watch, thousands of people from "Special Interest" countries - including at least two Hezbollah members - have snuck over the border.

More from the draft section:

Temporary workers must return home after their work period expires. Failure to depart on time will result in criminal penalties and a permanent bar on participating in any U.S. immigration programs, i.e., the worker could never gain an American green card.

Tell me another one. A substantial number of former "guests" will build up and demand citizenship, just as the current illegal aliens are. Let a million Elvira Arellanos bloom!

Due solely to Republican efforts, illegal aliens will not gain an automatic right to stay in this country indefinitely... If Republicans had not fought for these limits, Democrats would have passed an automatic amnesty bill without any of the restrictions that Republicans have now guaranteed.

GOP Pride! Of course, if the GOP were doing their job, they could have blocked this completely. The Bush administration and crooks in the Senate fought tooth and nail for this amnesty, not against it. The Democrats have even explicitly stated that they need GOP support to get the amnesty that the Dems want.

Instead of doing what's in the best interests of the U.S., they're harping on how they were able to restrain the Dems from completely selling out the country. Thanks to the Republicans, it's only a 99% sellout.

[UPDATE: See this for how to block the amnesty.]

UPDATE 2: More cold water here:

In short order, the system will be overwhelmed. Whatever minimal fraud detection and prevention safeguards might be erected won’t last long in the face of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of applications and petitions to be adjudicated. What that means is the information provided on those applications and petitions, and whatever supporting documents they may have (if any), will essentially be taken at face value... And those names of the applicant aliens...those aliens who, for whatever time period they have been "undocumented" (illegal) in the United States, wherein so very many have procured and utilized false and fraudulent identification documents often in false identities...suddenly the Government will accept as true whatever those applicant aliens tell the Government on those applications and in those interviews. An undocumented alien who procured and used false documents would lie? Well, not when applying for genuine status in the US...right?

Posted to Immigration2007a at 08:22 PM

La Raza, MALDEF have "virtual veto power" over immigration bill

From the article "Latino Groups Play Key Role on Hill/Virtual Veto Power in Immigration Debate" (link):

When Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) declared last week that unnamed "stakeholders" would decide whether Congress overhauls immigration law this year, Latino organizations in Washington understood exactly what he meant.

After laboring in obscurity for decades, groups such as the National Council of La Raza, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the National Immigration Forum are virtually being granted veto power over perhaps the biggest domestic issue coming before Congress this year. Organizations that represent what is now the nation's largest minority group are beginning to achieve power commensurate with their numbers.

The NCLR (the LR part means "The Race") has links to and funds extremists. MALDEF has at least an indirect link to the Mexican government.

...Such groups were practically in the room yesterday, maintaining contact as Democratic and Republican senators tried to hammer out a new immigration bill...

...A deal on ["guests" and family reunification] could depend on the assent of Kennedy's "stakeholders," Democratic negotiators agreed...

They go on to quote William Ramos from the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO has a direct link to the Mexican government) and Brent Wilkes of LULAC (League of United Latin American Citizens).

...LULAC, MALDEF, La Raza and the National Immigration Forum are part of a broad network of immigrant rights groups that hold nightly conference calls and strategy sessions on the legislation. The groups speak daily with top aides in Reid's and Kennedy's offices.

...The White House held a meeting 2 1/2 weeks ago with Latino advocates, labor unions and civil rights organizations in which an adviser outlined an administration's policy based on increased border security and a temporary-worker program. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez have also met with some of the groups.

..."Power is not handed over. To get your place at the table, you have to fight for it," Wilkes said.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 04:51 PM

Corrupt crypto-Dem Watch: Arnold Schwarzenegger endorses "comprehensive immigration reform"

California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has sent a letter to Sens. Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell urging them to pass "comprehensive immigration reform": ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2007,0517-schwarzenegger.pdf

It's the usual swill: the system is broken, we need a "guest" worker program, we need border security, we need to deal "realistically" with current illegal aliens, etc. The swill is of the southwest-governor-variant, demanding that the Feds pay for the costs associated with massive immigration, including the SCAAP program (refunds states for incarcerating illegal aliens). There's also a tiny shout out to assimilation.

It also contains the seeds of its own evisceration:

However, it is also important that any new program for immigrant workers not become an endorsement of illegal immigration. While we are a country of immigrants, we are also a nation of laws.

Any form of "comprehensive immigration reform" will reward massive law-breaking by both illegal aliens and employers, and will not only strongly endorse illegal immigration, it will lead to even more of it.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 03:14 PM

Reuters on global warming: ice no longer cold, sunbathing in Arctic

Remember the infamous shot of the polar bears "trapped" on a "melting" ice floe? I do, since I made a satirical video about it (link) that few seem to have realized is satire.

The latest example of picture propaganda comes with the story "Arctic islands invite tourists to see climate woes" by "Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent":

Caption:

Climate activists Lesley Butler and Rob Bell (R) "sunbathe" on the edge of a frozen fjord in the Norwegian Arctic town of Longyearbyen, April 25, 2007. The remote chain of Arctic islands is advertising itself as a showcase of bad things to come from global warming.

I'd say a bit more context is necessary here, perhaps pointing out that this was just a posed shot and that if they were really "sunbathing" in such an environment they would most likely have ended up with frostbite and other medical complications.

Posted to Miscellania at 12:37 PM

AVWatch: Antonio Villaraigosa, Fabian Nunez at MacArthur Park candlelight vigil?

[SEE THE UPDATE BELOW]

According to this [1]:

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Speaker Fabian Nunez and radio host El Piolin are billed as participants in a Thursday procession and candlelight vigil for immigration reform at MacArthur Park. They gather at Immanuel Presbyterian Church at Wilshire and Berendo about 5:30 pm and begin walking about 6:40.

However, the page they link to doesn't say anything about those three, only including a flyer listing the organizers:

CARECEN, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA; possible Mexico collaborateurs), COFEM, Garment Worker Center (GWC), Instituto Popular de Educacion del sur de California (IDEPSCA), Koreatown Immigration Worker Association (KIWA), Los Angeles Archdiocese Social Justice Committee, Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, Multi-ethnic Immigrant Worker Organizing Network (MIWON), Pilipino Worker Center (PWC), SEIU 1877, We Are America Coalition

UPDATE: From this:

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez are expected to join immigrant-rights protesters Thursday at a rally denouncing police behavior during a May 1 immigration rights rally...

"The LAPD denied our community both a political and physical space to nonviolently claim our rights to legalization for all undocumented immigrants and a fair immigration reform for the country," said the event's organizer, Mexican American Political Association President Nativo Lopez. "Political leaders and organizations throughout the country stand solidly with us."

...[Police Chief William Bratton], who will be at the LAPD's assembly area at Thursday's rally, according to his office, told KPCC-FM on Wednesday that the ranking officer who was in MacArthur Park during the May 1 melee [Deputy Chief Cayler "Lee" Carter Jr.] has decided to retire rather than continue on home duty pending an investigation.

But, wait, it gets even better:

LAPD officials will distribute fliers to people at the staging areas of Thursday's immigration march and rally at MacArthur Park, assuring participants that officers want to work cooperatively with them.

The flier, written in English, Spanish and Korean, reads:

"Procession for Justice

"The Los Angeles Police Department is committed to working in cooperation with the event organizers [ed: as the links show, some of the organizers have questionable links and positions] to protect your right to free speech. We wish to allow you to engage in marches, demonstrations, protests and rallies in the city of Los Angeles to freely express your opinions.

"The goal is to provide you with an atmosphere that is safe and in harmony with your right to free speech. We appreciate your cooperation in assisting us in our ability to ensure that you have a positive experience."

[1] laobserved.com/archive/2007/05/back_to_macarthur_park.php
[2] la.indymedia.org/news/2007/05/198666_comment.php

UPDATE: An audio snippet of Alcalde Villaraigosa speaking - all in Spanish - at the rally is in this MP3 file. Whether he said anything at any time in English is not known. He promotes a path to citizenship, lists several religious and ethnic groups saying they're all Americans, and at the beginning and the end says, "we're here and we're not leaving."

And, from this related article:

...A coalition of civic leaders, legal advocates and newspapers is seeking all internal LAPD records involving the clash between police and protestors during May 1 immigration reform rally.

The group is requesting copies of videotapes of the incident, policy documents, the names of officers involved, communications on the use of force at the event, and memos between elected city officials.

Peter Schey of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law says the information will help prevent any cover up.

Schey has at least three links to the Mexican government.

Posted to Los_Angeles at 12:18 PM

Leftwing illegal immigration supporters still after Lou Dobbs (SPLC)

As the immigration "debate" picks up, various leftwing sources are trying to smack down Lou Dobbs in what may be an effort to counteract his opposition to any "reform" or what may be just a general attempt to support illegal immigration.

There was, of course, the recent Lesley Stahl/60 Minutes lame hit piece. And, the Southern Poverty Law Center - a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government - has run an open letter advertisement in the New York Times and other unknown papers demanding that CNN provide a correction to what appears to have been an inaccurate report that there had been 7000 cases of leprosy in the U.S. in three years. The apparent ad is in this PDF file: splcenter.org/images/dynamic/main/dobbsnew.pdf The letter is dated May 9, but when it appeared isn't known. A discussion of it is here. They take Dobbs to task for having "attacked" Mark Potok of the SPLC on his May 7 show; here's the transcript:

First of all, I've never said anything remotely resembling what you suggested. And of the numbers of reports, the hundreds and hundreds of reports we've done on the issue of illegal immigration on this broadcast over the past four and a half years, well, I decided to find out, and I asked our staff to compute how many of them dealt with disease or other illnesses and illegal aliens... By the way, the number, Mr. Potok, is three. That's three over a period of four and a half years. What happened to your "day in and day out"? ...And by the way, Mr. Potok, three of our reports covered rape or sexual predators in the context of illegal immigration in this country...

What an "attack". The letter also says:

[Dobbs] has repeatedly given legitimacy to individuals and groups who make unsupported claims like the Aztlan conspiracy theory, which asserts that Mexico is involved in a secret plot to "reconquer" seven states in the American Southwest.

Obviously, Mexico has an agenda, and - like any other state would - if we allowed them to gain political power inside our country, they'd take advantage of it. And, of course, they are taking advantage of our weakness in that regard. And, of course, it isn't clear which "individuals and groups" they're refering to, and Dobbs' reaction to their statements.

Minions are also involved, with "Obsidian Wings" taking Dobbs to task here, and Steve Gilliard's site offering a sleazy and violent parody here.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:55 AM

Possible Senate amnesty deal, Part 2 (Z Visas, Captain Ed)

From this:

Senators negotiating a bipartisan immigration reform bill have settled on the details of a plan that would immediately grant legal status to all illegal immigrants currently in the United States... ...The plan to award legal status to all illegal immigrants who meet certain qualifications would occur only after other "triggers" are met. These triggers would require that certain border security and work-site enforcement measures be in place before other aspects of the overhaul go forward.

The triggers are most likely a sham involving funding or planning, rather than actual results.

The Z visa plan would start with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States going on a probationary legal status. If the triggers are met — a process that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) estimated would take 18 months — then illegal immigrants who qualify could get Z visas. Those who have committed felonies would not be eligible, Graham said, and all participants would have to pass security checks, pay a fine and a processing fee and pass an English proficiency test.

Doing security checks for 12 million people is going to take, what, a couple months at most, right? Especially since we can trust Mexico to help us determine whether someone has a history.

Z visa holders would be able to apply for legal permanent resident status, a step toward citizenship. But at some point, the heads of households with Z visas would have to return to his or her home country and then reenter the United States. They would have to take their Z visa to the U.S. Embassy or consulate and would be guaranteed reentry. The Z visa would include a photo and fingerprints, Graham said.

In the Flake-Gutierrez scam, the head of household would only have to be out of the U.S. for one hour. Most likely this is the same.

...Unresolved issues include the terms of a guest worker program for future immigrants. Republicans are adamant that any program that imports labor should be temporary and not allow participants to become citizens.

That'll work out just fine... until the next amnesty.

In other news, "Captain" Ed Morrissey, says:

Conservatives don't get everything they want, of course, but we don't control Congress any more, either. While one could argue that no bill beats a bad bill, this compromise does not look all that bad.

Now you know why I've tried to take him to task (and appear to have been banned from his site for my efforts).

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:00 AM

Amnesty deal imminent?

Various sources are whispering that an illegal alien amnesty/"guest" worker scheme is imminent:

A highly-placed senate source confirmed to me this afternoon that a deal on a Senate immigration bill is expected tonight. Closed-door meetings continue... At issue now is the issue of "chain immigration."... ...Call your senators now. Each can be reached through the Capitol switchboard, 202-224-3121. Call now, call later, and keep calling.

Slightly less "hopeful":

Republicans and Democrats were nearing a deal Tuesday on a sweeping immigration overhaul that would give millions of illegal immigrants a chance at legal status but strictly limit future arrivals from staying in the United States.

Senators and White House officials negotiated through the afternoon and into the evening and said an elusive compromise was in sight. But with details changing rapidly, it was unclear whether the talks would result in a breakthrough or a meltdown.

"Eighty-twenty!" said an upbeat Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of the key players in the talks, giving strong odds of a deal he said could be announced as early as today.

In a hopeful sign for a potential deal, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., postponed until Monday a vote that had been scheduled for today on bringing up an immigration measure that passed the Senate last year.

Whatever they do, there's a very effective way to stop any bill in its tracks.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:40 PM

Farmers Branch: 68% vote for anti-illegal immigration ordinance; ACLU, MALDEF file TRO

Last week, Farmers Branch (outside Dallas, Texas) passed a city ordinance requiring landlords to check the immigration status of renters. It passed with 68% voting for it, and it has "exemptions for minors, seniors and some mixed-status families".

Needless to say, illegal immigration supporters are up in arms, and MALDEF (the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund; indirectly linked to the Mexican government) and the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union; also indirectly linked to the Mexican government) have asked for a temporary restraining order in an attempt to block the ordinance:

"It is unfortunate that the residents of Farmers Branch have chosen to implement a law which is not only bad policy, but is likely also unconstitutional," said Lisa Graybill, legal director for the ACLU of Texas. "Now the issue will have to be resolved in federal court."

Related:
ACLU, LULAC, ACORN, SVREP endorsed Dallas April 1 illegal immigration march
Pro-illegal immigration loons descend on Farmers Branch
Farmers Branch ordinance blocked on technicality
Pro-Farmers Branch editorial
Charlie Gibson promotes illegal immigration on ABC Nightly News
Farmers Branch: will Hector Flores violate fair housing laws?

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:28 PM

GOP 5/15 debate live coverage

Rudy playing terrorism card, discussing Fort Dix Six... imagine the fake terror alerts we'd have if he were president...

America suddenly realizes: someone named "Tommy Thompson" is running for president...

Note to self: be sure to check gilmoreforpresident.com tomorrow...

HILLARY ALERT! Rudy plays "At least I'm not Hillary" card...

I have to say, the questions this time are better, although they haven't gotten around to immigration matters AFAIK...

John McCain just lied: he supports amnesty.

He may have lied again, saying that the Fort Dix Six "came here on visas that had expired". [UPDATE BELOW]

Chris Wallace calls Giuliani on his explicitly welcoming illegal aliens to NYC...

Overall, this was much better than the Chris Matthews embarrassment, but even so their questions about immigration didn't go much beyond the superficial talking points. Grilling Giuliani or McCain about their positions could have driven them out of the front range of candidates.

UPDATE: John McCain was wrong about the Duka brothers, unless he knows something that he's not telling us. However, I'm going to backpeddle a bit on calling him a liar on that issue, since they might indeed have had some form of visa at some time. According to this 5/12 article, three of the six Fort Dix suspects (the non-Dukas) were legal U.S. residents. However, the status of the three Duka brothers is unknown, other than that they were brought over the Mexican border as children:

What is known is that the brothers, from the town of Debar in what is now Macedonia, arrived as children with their parents in 1984. A lawyer representing one of the brothers said the family entered across the Mexican border. They spent time in Texas and Brooklyn, N.Y., before moving to Cherry Hill in 1996.

It is unclear whether they sneaked into the country, applied for asylum, or entered on a visa.

But some immigration experts say it would be unusual for the family to have sneaked into the United States more than 20 years ago without being legal - or at least trying to legitimize their status - at some point.

"My guess is they have had some kind of complicated immigration history," said Linda Bosniak, a professor at the Rutgers University School of Law at Camden, who teaches immigration and citizenship law.

UPDATE: Tell me more about this... Tommy Thompson person. He just took liberal fool Alan Colmes to task for his Democratic talking point that the immigration status of the Duka brothers doesn't matter because they came here when they were children, arguing with Colmes that they had been detained and even arrested several times. Unfortunately, Sean Hannity cut him off before he'd had a chance to reduce Colmes' already low credibility even further.

Posted to Temporary at 05:23 PM

Nerve hit: Bill Richardson supporters respond to his ethnic nationalistic comment

In March I put a Bill Richardson video on Youtube (link) containing audio of him saying the following:

"We have to band together and that means Latinos in Florida, Cuban-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Puerto Ricans, South Americans - we have to network better - we have to be more politically minded - we have to put aside party and think of ourselves as Latinos, as Hispanics, more than we have in the past."

The audio is from this page, and I have absolutely no doubt that that is indeed him speaking.

I appear to have struck a nerve, and one or more Youtube commenters are trying a cute trick:

* That isn't even his voice!!!! Seriously, are people stupid enough to belive this. Show me a video with him actually caught saying that not just audio.

* First, I dont believe its him, I agree it doesnt even sound like him.

* I am anti-illegal immigration and everything, but c'mon, that was the worst Bill Richardson impression I've ever heard. If you're going to undermine a good man's political campaign like a Bushie, at least try to do it well.

Whether those are all the same person isn't known, and Youtube isn't exactly known for highbrow debate, but it is pretty funny.

Related:
Fabian Nunez denies making racist speech (Prop. 187)

Posted to Politics at 03:37 PM

Popular Mechanics names favorite tool

Here he is:

In previous tool news:
Fred Thompson: illegal alien amnesty supporter?
Instapundit makes a shocking confession
Tancredo may run for president; Chris Cannon begins smears?
Sleazy Glenn Reynolds, John Podhoretz smear Pat Buchanan

Posted to Bloggage at 11:04 AM

"National ID: Biometrics Pinned to Social Security Cards"

From this:

The Social Security card faces its first major upgrade in 70 years under two immigration-reform proposals slated for debate this week that would add biometric information to the card and finally complete its slow metamorphosis into a national ID.

The leading immigration proposal with traction in Congress would force employers to accept only a very limited range of approved documents as proof of work eligibility, including a driver's license that meets new federal Real ID standards, a high-tech temporary work visa or a U.S. passport with an RFID chip. A fourth option is the notional tamper-proof biometric Social Security card, which would replace the text-only design that's been issued to Americans almost without change for more than 70 years.

A second proposal under consideration would add high-tech features to the Social Security card allowing employers to scan it with specially equipped laptop computers. Under that proposal, called the "Bonner Plan," the revamped Social Security card would be the only legal form of identification for employment purposes...

Posted to Privacy at 11:01 AM

1994: Rudy Giuliani explicitly welcomed illegal aliens to New York City

The unremarkable and as-could-be-expected-biased "Top GOP Hopefuls Keep Distance on Immigration" by Michael Shear discusses how John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Rudy Giuliani are backing off from "comprehensive immigration reform", aka amnesty.

However, it does contain this:

[Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum] remembers watching in awe as Giuliani faced the cameras in 1994 to defend illegal immigrants, declaring: "If you come here and you work hard and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you're one of the people who we want in this city." ...Giuliani "was a god in the mid-1990s on this issue," Sharry said this week.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:56 AM

Deja moo: Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform on Capitol Hill May 15

Didn't I read this press release a few months ago? Yet, it's got today's date on it, and tomorrow the "Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform" will be meeting with "Senator Larry Craig [R-ID] and Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA)" [sic] to advance their cheap labor agenda:

A group of lawmakers and farmers will gather to ask Congress to pass responsible immigration reform. Labor shortages are being reported on American farms across the country, leaving crops rotting in the field. Agriculture Needs Action Now from Congress to secure access to a legal and stable workforce.

Those coming by include:

Maureen Torrey of Torrey Farms, Elba, NY;

Phil Glaize of Fred Glaize Inc., VA;

Elia Vasquez, a strawberry and herb grower from Watsonville, CA;

Mike Gempler of the Washington Growers League (WA) and National Council of Agriculture Employers from Yakima, WA;

Tom Nassif, President of Western Growers Association.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 08:48 PM

Senate amnesty debate this week; how to stop it

On Wednesday, Harry Reid (D-NV) is throwing down the gauntlet (link,link), having scheduled a vote to determine whether the Senate is going to try to pass last year's illegal alien amnesty/"guest" worker bill.

In the past, I've suggested calling your Senators and letting them know what you think. Please do so in this case.

However, a much more effective way to block amnesty and reduce support for illegal immigration is to publicly embarrass a well-known amnesty supporter by asking them tough questions. If someone who supports amnesty loses a great deal of credibility, that will send a loud message to all the others who support the same thing. It will also help show just how corrupt the media is for their failure to ask tough questions.

Here are three worthy candidates:
- Bill Richardson
- John Edwards
- Jim Wallis

The latter is probably the best choice due to his pretense that his support for amnesty is "humanitarian". If he were asked a series of questions that showed that his support is not humanitarian, and the questions and answers were widely promulgated, that would take a great deal of the wind out of the sails of the amnesty movement. However, the first two might actually be more approachable. You can find out where Richardson and Edwards are appearing here.

At some future date I'll be putting together a flyer with a series of questions, but in the meantime here are some question tips:
- Is it a question? (Not just a rant)
- Is it short? (Put your details on flyers which you can hand out)
- Is it difficult to evade? (Specifically state you want them to answer the question)
- Does it reveal them to have lied or made misleading statements or have failed to think things through?

After asking your question, upload it to Youtube and other video sites, post it to blogs and forums, and use Digg and Reddit to promote it.

We just need one well-known person to be asked a series of tough questions, and then for that to be publicized for the rest of the amnesty supporters to get the message.

For some samples, see my Barack Obama video. And, here's my Bill Richardson video. Here's another question for Bill Richardson. And, for John McCain. And, of course, I stumped Tamar Jacoby.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:49 PM

Mexican agent? IL Sen. Martin Sandoval wants loans for illegal aliens

From this:

Illegal immigrants with "B" averages would be eligible for state-backed student loans if a controversial Senate proposal becomes law.

Sen. Martin Sandoval (D-Chicago) has called for the state to establish a taxpayer-funded student loan fund from which Illinois residents -- regardless of their citizenship -- could borrow to pay for their academic careers.

"Whether you're a citizen or a permanent legal resident or an immigrant, you . . . should have a right to an education," Sandoval said.

Sandoval's loan program fell one vote short of passage Thursday but was kept alive through a parliamentary move...

What Whitney Woodward forgot to mention is that Sandoval - a Democrat - serves on a Mexican government advisory council. In fact, you can see his name on this list of their advisors:

www.ime.gob.mx/ccime/directorios/dir_ccime_06_09.htm

Exactly which country is he representing with this proposal?

Please write the Sun Times' Managing Editor and suggest they include his affiliation next time: dhayner *at* suntimes.com

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:35 AM

Rudy Giuliani still braindead on immigration

Chris Wallace interviewed Rudy Giuliani earlier today, and got asked questions about his decision to put New York's emergency response center in the World Trade Center and other topics, including his immigration stance. Regarding the sanctuary policies he took the feds to court for, he says the standard thing: he wanted the INS to do their job but since they didn't he had to do something. Be that as it may, let's fast forward to his current "thinking":

...we need a tamper-proof I.D. card.

We need to know who's in the United States. We need to know everyone who's in the United States that comes in here from a foreign country. And we have to separate the ones who are dangerous from the ones who aren't.

To accomplish that, we need a fence. We need a technological fence. We need a border patrol. We need people to come forward who are working so they'll get identified, get fingerprinted, get photographed.

And then we should focus our attention on the people who don't come forward. And there's where you're going to find the drug dealers. There's where you're going to find...

A very good question Wallace could have asked is exactly how Rudy Juliani intends to focus on those who don't "come forward". How exactly is he going to find them? Unlike other foreigners, by definition they won't have a "tamper-proof I.D. card", but will most likely have a fake SSN or similar. Oops! In order to "focus" on that category of people, you're going to have to strengthen SSNs in some way... oh what could that be... why, how about requiring everyone to have a "tamper-proof I.D. card"? Wouldn't that work? Wouldn't you feel all warm and safe knowing that President Giuliani has everyone's name and retinal scans on file? I know I would!

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:32 PM

WTF: ADL's "No Place for Hate" campaign

Via this we learn that the Anti-Defamation League has been conducting a "No Place for Hate" campaign in New England with the Massachusetts Municipal Association since 1999 [1]. Cities in New England and elsewhere can join the program ([2][3][4]), and, as long as they conduct three events designed to show they're free of hate and that they respect diversity, they get a nifty sign that they can attach to a post (not provided) at the entrance to their town. Of course, as the second link above shows, the ADL has a rather flexible definition of "hate", with one required to support illegal immigration in order to rid oneself of all vestiges of "hate".

Campaigns like this are an attempt to enforce far-left ideology, and their effectiveness can be seen from the news story:

When Ralph Filicchia came across a "No Place for Hate" sign on a pole outside Town Hall, he was, to put it in his own words "offended."

On Tuesday, he came before the council with a message and a plea to take down the sign and rescind a Town Council proclamation honoring Watertown as a "No Place for Hate" community.

"The proclamation is discriminatory and a violation and infringement upon my civil rights as an American citizen," he said. "I want the right to speak out without being guilty of a hate crime."

Such campaigns are designed to make one wonder what exactly Filicchia could object to. Is he a... hater? Is he a... racist? There isn't that much difference between this and cities that would declare themselves to be "No Place for Satan", then define or imply that all those who aren't fundamentalist Christians are Satanists.

Note that the ADL has a related "Communities of Respect" program (both NPFH and COR are trademarked by the way). Sugar Land, Texas was the latest to be converted, including asking his residents to sign an oversized "Resolution of Respect." [5] Earlier, a "Rally for Respect" was held; choose 'view image' on the center picture to see schoolkids holding up "Respect" signs. [6]

[1] mma.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=13&id=131&Itemid=416
[2] ci.lexington.ma.us/NoPlace4Hate/noplacefohate.htm
[3] lowellma.gov/community/npfh
[4] marshfield.net/npfh.html
[5] adlsouthwest.org/view_article.php?article_id=226
[6] adlsouthwest.org/view_article.php?article_id=207

Posted to MultiCultiCult at 03:42 PM

Meet Fabian Nunez, Hillary Clinton's campaign co-chair

On this uninteresting April 30 video (link), you can see Hillary Clinton introduced by California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, one of her campaign's co-chairs.

Meanwhile, back in the 90's, Nunez was just a bit more radical than that video might suggest. On this video (link) from an anti-Proposition 187 rally in Los Angeles:

Fabian Nunez is seen on stage introducing Juan Jose Gutierrez of the SEIU to make a speech to the crowd. To the right stands a Mexican trumpet band. Behind the stage is a large colonial-era American flag, signifying a U.S. at its original 13-state size. After Gutierrez's speech, the band performs a droning rendition of the American national anthem while Nunez, Gutierrez and Kevin de Leon stand on stage talking to each other. After the U.S. anthem is finished, with chants of "Mexico, Mexico" from the crowd, the band begins an enthusiastic performance of the Mexican national anthem - and then Nunez, de Leon and Gutierriez all snap to attention and salute.

Posted to Politics at 01:09 PM

Univision conducts citizenship drive with Mexico-linked group (NALEO)

The Spanish-language TV network Univision is encouraging their eligible viewers to become (U.S.) citizens. The initiator of the campaign (NALEO) has at least one link to the Mexican government, nominating the recipients of Mexico's Ohtli award. Granted, nominating award recipients isn't as big a link as others have, but it still helps indicate where they and Univision are coming from:

During news shows, anchors pop questions from the civics test that applicants for citizenship are required to pass, such as "How many stars are on the U.S. flag?" Against a backdrop of stars soaring through the U.S. flag and the Statue of Liberty, a ticker counts down, from a goal of one million for the L.A. area, the number of persons who have applied for citizenship since the campaign started in Southern California. On Saturday mornings, a 30-minute program is devoted to teaching viewers the ABCs of becoming a U.S. citizen...

...The citizenship drive is the brainchild of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund, a nonpartisan outreach group known as Naleo. Last year, Naleo officials gathered representatives from Univision, Spanish-language newspaper La Opinion, Spanish-language radio, unions and dozens of community groups to hatch a plan for drawing more Hispanics into the U.S. political process.

The result is the largest campaign ever to convert eligible Hispanics into citizens and, ultimately, voters. "This is about increasing the participation of Latino immigrants in U.S. civic life," says Marcelo Gaete, a senior director of Naleo. "They can change the political landscape."

The citizen-application hotline, operated by bilingual volunteers at the headquarters of the Naleo Educational Fund in Los Angeles, receive hundreds of calls each day from California, Texas and Arizona. Callers who require special legal assistance are referred to immigration lawyers who have partnered in the effort. In the field, Hispanic community-based organizations are providing "citizenship packages" partly prepared by unions, including the Service Employees International Union, or SEIU. Meanwhile, the Web sites for Univision stations in L.A. and other cities, as well as Naleo's site, feature a wealth of information to guide applicants...

Related:
Alfonso Aguilar/U.S. Office of Citizenship promotes "guest" workers (LULAC, NALEO connection)
"Clarification" letter sent to Hispanics (Tan Nguyen, MALDEF, NCLR, NALEO)
"The Fastest Way To [profit from illegal immigration]"

Posted to Immigration2007a at 04:10 PM

Sanctuary policies: Fort Dix Six arrested multiple times

Not only were three of the "Fort Dix Six" illegal aliens, but they had multiple arrests and sanctuary policies - or lack of DHS funding combined with unwillingness to deport people - may have played a role in allowing them to remain here. According to this, Howie Carr says they had 54 previous arrests, although that number seems too high and might include traffic stops:

Suspect Dritan Duka has past arrests on charges of disorderly conduct and possession of drugs and drug paraphernalia. He also has six separate speeding and driving with a suspended license infractions, records show.

Shain Duka has past arrests on charges of obstruction of justice, hindering apprehension and making physical threats. He also has five separate traffic infractions. Eljvir Duka has past drug counts and at least two motor vehicle infractions.

The three brothers are accused of helping lead the plot to shoot soldiers at Fort Dix. They are being held without bail. The fact that at least three of the suspects had past run-ins with the law and are in the United States illegally was brought up on Capitol Hill Thursday.

California congressman Elton Gallegly pointed out Mohammed Atta, one of the Sept. 11 hijackers, was stopped by police for a traffic violation weeks before the attacks. Atta was also in the United States illegally, having overstayed his visa. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told the panel that many local law enforcement agencies do not check the immigration status of a driver during traffic stops.

In related news, professional ethno-booster Linda Chavez plays cards:

If the police had thrown the men in jail and checked their legal status, perhaps this whole plot could have been averted. I wonder whether the police would have been more diligent if the men had hailed from, say, Mexico or Guatemala, rather than Macedonia.

Posted to Immigration_terror at 11:23 AM

Tamar Jacoby's lunatic semi-permanent "guest" worker tryout points system

One of our favorites, Tamar Jacoby, returns with "'Temporary is temporary' won't work for all immigrants":

...[an] unrealistic faction of Republicans, though willing to admit an extra 400,000 workers a year, is insisting that they stay only temporarily - that no matter how well they do in this country or what kind of roots they put down here, every single one of them must go home at the end of a three-year work stint... These Republicans' mantra is "temporary is temporary," and the reasoning behind it isn't entirely wrong... But what about the foreigners who do so well here — rising up the economic ladder, putting down roots and falling in love with the United States — that they want to settle permanently and, like generations of immigrants before them, become citizens? We need a system that can accommodate them too... One possible compromise: Allow foreign workers to enter on temporary visas, then use a point system [see: Chuck Hagel's scheme] to determine who can stay... Far better to admit an array of temporary workers, skilled and unskilled, and then after a few years use a point system to screen them for permanent visas: a system that rewards not just skill and education but hard work, job advancement, abiding by the law, learning English, putting down roots and investing in your community — the things we want to see in U.S. citizens... "Temporary is temporary" makes a good sound bite, but as a one-size-fits-all policy, it's not a workable answer. A system like that would deprive us of our most able, enterprising newcomers. Even worse, many of them probably would not go home when their work stints were done, but instead would burrow underground, creating another generation of illegal immigrants.

My response is in parable form: once upon a time there was a farmer named Farmer Bob, who decided to try some new seeds in his garden. He figured if they didn't work out, he could always dig them up and send them back, and he decided to decide which to send back based on the depths of their roots. The plants struggled as hard as they could to develop deep roots. Then came decision day. By that time, the plants had formed the National Council of The Plants, who held candlelight vigils fighting tooth and nail to prevent Farmer Bob from sending back even those plants who had turned out to be complete epiphytes. They complained about his criteria, they planted news stories about sympathetic plants, the plants even marched through his field demanding amnesty! Eventually Farmer Bob just threw up his arms and decided to let them all stay. Boy was he angry at the seed saleswoman who'd sold him that bill of goods!

Nowadays, Farmer Bob wishes he'd read her brochure more closely and had realized that it carried the seeds of its own destruction.

In recent related news:
Tamar Jacoby now Los Angeles Times contributing editor
Florida businesses join to support immigration "reform" (Laura Wides-Munoz, Laura Reiff)
"Stop chasing that busboy"
Tamar Jacoby reiterates pro-busboy, pro-gardener stance

Posted to Immigration2007a at 07:00 PM

Assimilation? Schoolkids chant "Mexico! Mexico! Mexico!" to Minutemen in Santa Ana

Hacks and others continue to pretend that the assimilation of millions of Mexicans isn't a problem. Here's one of the most striking counter-examples. On May 1, a group of protesters from the Minuteman Project protested in Santa Ana, CA as part of an illegal immigration rally (report). Across the street, young schoolchildren climbed on top of playground equipment and began chanting, "Mexico! Mexico! Mexico!"

It seems like the MMP members were protesting the Mexican consulate, and the school was just coincidentally across the street. On the video their chant appears to have started spontaneously rather than being deliberately provoked.

Even taking into account that they're children, their choice of a chant is very revealing and should be very disturbing. Rather than all the other choices - the usual leftwing smears, or chanting for "reform", or simple name-calling, or all the other choices they had - they chose the name of what is almost certainly to them their country. Also disturbing are the comments on the video by Mexicans - including those living here - supporting the children's choice (links).

When you see a hack hand-waving away assimilation problems, please send them the video link.

The school involved is the Orange County Educational Arts Academy (OCEAA), a charter school at oceaa.org. They've released a statement linked to from oceaa.org/English/oceaa_board.htm:

During the second lunch period, a group of OCEAA students stood on the play structure and chanted "Mexico" while demonstrators protested at the Mexican Consulate across the street. When an administrator was notified of the students' actions, he went out to the playground to redirect the students, but they were already returning to the building for class... The Board has received emails indicating that members of the public believe the students were brought to the playground by their teachers, and that the school explicitly sanctioned this demonstration. We wish to assure our school community and the general public that this is not the case. The students were at lunch recess; they were not on the playground during instructional time. We learned from a demonstration organizer who visited OCEAA Wednesday morning that the group moved to the Consulate spontaneously. Likewise, the students' chanting was impromptu, not part of a pre-planned counter-demonstration. We regret that the recess supervision staff did not quickly recognize the need to shelter students from media exposure and from hostile protesters... In addition, we wish to express unequivocally that OCEAA does not require nor expect students to participate in political demonstrations, much less express a particular viewpoint...

Posted to Immigration2007a at 05:25 PM

Luis Gutierrez laughs at touchback: it's a "symbolic rebooting", a "gesture"

Sleazy U.S. Congressman Luis Gutierrez appeared on CSPAN apparently earlier today to promote the Flake-Gutierrez STRIVE ACT amnesty, and the video-only replay is here (warning: video might begin playing immediately).

First, I only watched as much of it as I could stand, so someone might have asked him a direct question later on. There were a couple people who gave good rants about the issue of immigration, but he was able to weasle out of their complaints because they did not ask him direct questions about specific policies. If anyone gets CSPAN and can call in, please only ask short, direct, specific questions. Feel free to preface it with "I would like you to directly answer this specific question."

Second, he confirmed that the "touchback" provisions of their bill are, literally, a joke:

LG: "...everything [to prepare for legalization and citizenship is] done here in the United States of America... security check in the U.S... [they get a] biometric visa... at some point during those six years, the head of the household leaves and comes back... For example, you live in Chicago, travel six hours to Detroit, cross the border into Canada, stopping at a coffee shop and be back home that evening... ...It's really a rebooting, a symbolic gesture..."

MODERATOR: [How long would they be out of the country?]

LG: [They'd] "stay in canada for an hour"

MODERATOR: [Why?]

LG: "There are those who want that symbolic rebooting... [you need to ask Rep. Flake why...] "...Jeff Flake says that in order to get republicans [to sign on they need the touchback...]

MODERATOR: [Does that make any sense?]

At that point, Gutierrez starts laughing at "touchback". Unfortunately, right now the joke's on us.

But, then again, if enough people ask him and his sleazy friend tough questions, maybe we can be the ones smiling.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 01:38 PM

Robert Pastor wants a North American Community, not a Union

Responding to his critics who say he's a guiding light behind the North American Union, Robert A. Pastor of the American University takes to the pages of WND offering his own rationalization for his plans:

Third, I do not propose a North American Union; I propose a North American Community. They are very different. A Union – like the United States – is a merger of states into a unified central government. A Community is composed of three sovereign governments that seek to strengthen bonds of cooperation. Each government – according to its constitutional procedures – retains the power to decide whether and how to cooperate. A "North American Union" could not be created by "stealth," as some fear. Indeed, any significant initiative to strengthen cooperation would require a wide-ranging and public debate and approval by Congress of all three countries.

Of course, the Bush administration is currently trying to do everything in its power to integrate the three countries. There's much that Bush can do alone; witness the recent U.S./EU pact. And, Congress has completely failed in its oversight duties.

Note also that the WND article has about thirty links appended to all the other articles they've written about the "Community, not a Union".

Posted to NAU at 11:10 AM

169 illegal aliens in tractor-trailer gassed by police!

Breaking news... last month, police stopped a tractor-trailer filled with illegal aliens. They refused to leave the trailer, so police gassed the trailer, forcing all 169 to exit...

The illegal aliens were from El Salvador and Guatemala, and included 26 children... one of the 15-year-olds was 5 months pregnant...

Various human rights groups are trying to learn more, and have issued strong declarations opposing this human rights violation... complaints are being filed with the U.N., the OAS, and the World Court...

Updating... this just in... this actually occured in Chiapas, Mexico... the police were Mexicans... the human rights groups have retracted their criticisms and complaints to the U.N., the OAS, and the World Court... never mind...

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:04 AM

The "anti-immigration movement" charted! (Bill O'Reilly, Lou Dobbs, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, VDare...)

Solana Larsen (whose name rings a bell for some unknown reason) is the president of "PuertoDansk" and a contributor to opendemocracy.net and other sites. At the site of the North American Congress on Latin America, she offers "The Anti-Immigration Movement: From Shovels to Suits" [1]. If you read the recent Max Blumenthal interview, you already know what she's going to say and how wrong she is. In fact, she and Son of Sid recently appeared on a panel together [2].

But, unlike Baby Max, she's got visual aids! Her multimedia extravaganza includes a handy chart showing the "movement", ranking them by "politics", "think tanks", "grassroots", and "media" on one axis, and from "mainstream conservative" to "hate groups" on the other.

There are several familiar names, particularly in the lower center and right of the chart: National Review, Michelle Malkin, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, VDare, and Lou Dobbs. In fact, they've put Dobbs perilously close to the right edge, where the "hate groups" live.

There are two effective responses to smears like this:
1. Point out factual errors in their reasoning (see the interview link).
2. Discredit those leaders who support illegal immigration.

[1] news.nacla.org/2007/05/09/the-anti-immigration-movement-from-shovels-to-suits
[2] nyc.indymedia.org/or/2007/05/85772.html

Posted to Immigration2007a at 01:42 PM

Sen. Lindsey Graham: America just an idea, "we're going to tell the bigots to shut up"

The video here shows Sen. Lindsey Graham speaking at an event sponsored by the extremist-funding group the National Council of La Raza ("The Race") and saying:

An American is an idea... no group owns being an American... nobody owns this...

The charitable interpretation of his comment is that he means that no racial group "owns being an American". The less charitable interpretation would point out that American citizens own being an American, something that Lindsay Graham appears to have forgotten.

I want to thank John McCain for being a leader... I don't do this much, but I want to thank Ted Kennedy... because those two gentlemen got this thing [immigration "reform"] started and the rest of us are trying to figure out how to get there...

...we need to find a way to get people right with the law... we also need to understand that if the law means anything, you have to have a just result...

...as a nation we have looked the other way... we have welcomed the workers to do the things the economy needs to do... all of a sudden, we start talking about how bad this problem is... we've all let it get out of control and all of us have to fix it...

Not so fast. Our "leaders" like Graham as well as corrupt businesses and racial power groups like NCLR are the ones who've let it get out of control, not the rest of us.

[...homoerotic interlude deleted...]

On behalf of the Dan Garzas of the world, we are going to solve this problem... we're not going to run people down, we're not going to scapegoat people... we're going to tell the bigots to shut up, and we're going to get this right.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:59 PM

Fmr CBP Chief Robert Bonner criticizes Ramos/Compean sentences

From this:

The former commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, who helped organize the agency in 2003 as a part of the Department of Homeland Security, says the lengthy prison sentences handed two U.S. Border Patrol agents for shooting a fleeing drug-smuggling suspect were excessive.

Robert S. Bonner, a former federal judge and veteran prosecutor who also headed the U.S. Customs Service and the Drug Enforcement Administration, is the highest ranking current or former Homeland Security official to publicly criticize the prosecution and conviction of agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean.

"The sentences were way too severe," Mr. Bonner told The Washington Times. "I hope that they will be substantially reduced."

Note: he's unrelated to T.J. Bonner of the Border Patrol agents union.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:36 PM

Fort Dix Six terrorists: entered illegally over border, or stowaways?

Per this:

The three brothers being charged as part of the alleged Fort Dix terror plot may have been smuggled across the border, FOX News has learned.

Dritan "Anthony" or "Tony" Duka, 28; Shain Duka, 26; and Eljvir "Elvis" Duka, 23, were in the United States illegally. Federal investigators were exploring whether they were smuggled into the country or entered as stowaways.

Because the three men entered the United States without inspection, there is no legal record of their entry...

Posted to Immigration_terror at 12:34 PM

Rockford IL: Red Cross lets Mexico pass out ID cards for illegal aliens

Mexico operates mobile Mexican Consulates that travel from town to town passing out ID cards, especially to their citizens who are here illegally. One of their visits was to the Rockford, Illinois branch of the American Red Cross.

You might want to contact your local branch and tell one of the leaders there that you won't be donating any money to them until their national headquarters repudiate this practice.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:23 AM

Janet Napolitano vetoes anti-Matricula Consular bill

Continuing a trend of supporting illegal immigration, Arizona governor Janet Napolitano has vetoed a bill that would have helped prevent the use of Mexico's Matricula Consular ID card. That card is usually an indicator that the bearer is an illegal alien; legal immigrants have no use for such a card. The bill would have blocked the state and cities from accepting the card; in the past the Mexican government has lobbied localities to accept them, and they're allowed to travel from town to town passing them out to their citizens regardless of their immigration status.

Napolitano said the bill would have hindered law enforcement officers' ability to confirm the identities of foreign nationals, including those pulled over for traffic violations "or stopped for any reason." ...Without the cards, foreign nationals are more likely to try to obtain forged documents that are accepted by the state, she added. "The state is better served by having foreign nationals use identification that accurately identifies them as foreign nationals."

"Foreign nationals" who are here legally for whatever reason have other documents they can provide, such as visas or green cards. And, of course, governments shouldn't try to prevent illegal activity (obtaining forged documents) by encouraging foreign governments to paper over someone's immigration status. She is implicitly and explicitly encouraging IDs for illegal aliens.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 09:58 AM

Chertoff tells locals to lobby against border fence

Val Verde County Sheriff A. D'Wayne Jernigan and other border sheriffs went to Washington to speak to DHS chief Michael Chertoff:

"When we met with Secretary Chertoff, he assured us there would be no action taken on the fence along the border without conferring with local officials... The Secretary told us that he believes that in some areas there does not need to be a fence, especially in places where there are natural borders like the ones we have here in Val Verde County. We told him that the only thing he is going to do by building a fence here is create a firestorm of controversy..."

...Jernigan said Chertoff told the border sheriffs their best route to quash the fence plan is to keep in close contact with their elected representatives in Washington.

"He told us, 'I'm under mandate by that law that says I have to build a fence.' And what he said was, that we need to start lobbying and we need to start informing our legislators so they can change the law..."

Certainly, in some areas the fence might not make sense or might not be necessary due to the local topography. However, I suspect that Chertoff isn't just thinking of those cases.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 09:54 AM

New Haven Independent deletes another comment (John DeStefano + Mexico)

Melissa Bailey of the leftwing New Haven Independent informs us [1] that that city is renewing discussions on issuing ID cards for various uses from the mundane (paying parking fines) to the not-so-mundane (apparent substitute for driver's licenses for illegal aliens). As could be expected from those familiar with issues in that city, mayor John DeStefano and the "city's social-services chief" Kica Matos - former leader of "Junta for Progressive Action" - are involved. The latter group is collaborating with the Mexican government [2].

I left a comment on [1], which appeared immediately. It's since disappeared, so I left it again. Let's see if it sticks this time. This is the second time they've deleted a comment I left on such stories, the first deletion is detailed at the second link above.

It was such a short comment too:

Since Matos' group is collaborating with the MexicanGovernment, does anyone have any information on what role if any that government is playing in this effort?

Obviously, I made one minor error: it's Matos' former group; she now works for the city. However, I have no doubt that she maintains close contact with her former collaborateurs.

If anyone in their area wants to jump into the vacuum that the NHI is leaving in the reporting field, feel free to try to answer my question.

UPDATE: They deleted the second comment, so I left this:

Could the NHI explain why it keeps deleting my comments, especially since the content of my comments was based on a previous NHI article? You can see the comment I left here.

Since the NHI apparently doesn't want to do real reporting on this issue, I urge everyone else to fill the gap.

[1] newhavenindependent.org/archives/2007/05/city_unveils_a.php
[2] newhavenindependent.org/archives/2006/10/id_for_life.php

Posted to Immigration2007a at 09:19 PM

100+ Hispanic groups send letter supporting illegal immigration, opposing raids

The National Council of La Raza ("The Race") has led the charge to send a letter to president Bush (cc'ed to Michael Chertoff and Julie Myers) complaining about the recent workplace raids [1]. The list of "grassroots" organizations involved is in the extended entry, and some are "interesting": CASA of Maryland, Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition, Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials (one of whose founders marched alongside a former Mexican consul general in an illegal immigration march), the odious Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (their president is linked to the Mexican government), Instituto del Progreso Latino (their executive director is the president of the ICIRR), the
Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, and the Southern Poverty Law Center (indirectly linked to the Mexican government).

Obviously, a letter that's sent now could simply be repurposed and sent again a year or two after "comprehensive immigration reform" passes. There's no assurance that these groups wouldn't send a similar letter in order to weaken future, "reform"-mandated enforcement, and that's one of the ways that the current amnesty would become like past amnesties.

We, the undersigned Latino organizations, write to express our outrage and deep concern over the manner in which workplace raids have been conducted all across the United States in the past few months. As organizations that work closely with the communities that are directly impacted by these raids, we are often the first to respond to the immediate humanitarian crisis that occurs when a raid is conducted. Particularly, we are concerned about the raids' short- and long-term impact on children. There are approximately 3.1 million U.S. citizen children who have at least one undocumented parent, and there are 1.8 million undocumented children in the U.S. We believe that the U.S. must take the needs of these children into account and fix the broken immigration system that separates them from their parents.

The parents and those who encourage illegal immigration are at fault, not the system. Why aren't they taking the needs of the children into account?

...Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick correctly characterized the recent raids as a "humanitarian crisis." ...The time is long overdue for our nation to stop tearing apart these hardworking families and bring about real, comprehensive solutions to our immigration problems...

Patrick was shown not to be telling the whole truth in that case, and hopefully the same will happen here. Obviously, what they support - out of purely racial grounds - will make the situation far worse.

[1] nclr.org/content/news/detail/45751

The signatories:

Academia Cesar Chavez – Saint Paul, MN
Acercamiento Hispano de Carolina del Sur – Columbia, SC
AltaMed Health Services Corporation – Los Angeles, CA
Bridge Academy Charter School – Bridgeport, CT
Calexico Community Action Council – Calexico, CA
CARECEN – Washington, DC
Carlos Rosario School – Washington, DC
CASA of Maryland – Silver Spring, MD
CASA of Oregon – Newberg, OR
Center for Hispanic Policy & Advocacy – Providence, RI
Center for Training & Careers/WorkNET – San Jose, CA
Centro Campesino Farmworker Center, Inc. – Florida City, FL
Centro de Amistad – Guadalupe, AZ
Centro de la Comunidad – Baltimore, MD
Centro de Residentes Bolivianos – Madison, WI
Centro de Salud Familiar La Fe – El Paso, TX
Centro Hispano of Dane County – Cambridge, MA
CentroNía – Washington, DC
Centro Presente, Inc. – Cambridge, MA
Cesar Chavez Academy – Pueblo, CO
Cesar Chavez Dual Language Immersion Charter School – Santa Barbara, CA
Chicano Awareness Center – Omaha, NE
Chicano Federation of San Diego County – San Diego, CA
Coalition for New South Carolinians – Columbia, SC
Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition – Denver, CO
Colorado Rural Housing – Westminster, CO
Committee for Hispanic Children and Families, Inc. – New York, NY
Community Child Care Center of Santa Clara County – San Jose, CA
Conexión Américas – Nashville, TN
Congreso de Latinos Unidos – Philadelphia, PA
Council for the Spanish Speaking – Milwaukee, WI
Del Norte Neighborhood Development Corp. – Denver, CO
Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation – Detroit, MI
Dolores Huerta Preparatory High School – Pueblo, CO
DRAW Academy – Houston, TX
East Las Vegas Community Development Corporation (ELVCDC) – Las Vegas, NV
El Centro de la Raza – Seattle, WA
El Centro de las Americas – Lincoln, NE
El Pueblo, Inc. – Raleigh, NC
Emigrantes Sin Fronteras – Phoenix, AZ
Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center – Miami, FL
Florida Immigrant Coalition – Tallahassee, FL
Gads Hill Center – Chicago, IL
Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials (GALEO) – Atlanta, GA
Hands Across Cultures – Española, NM
HELP – New Mexico, Inc. – Albuquerque, NM
Hispanic American Student Association (HASA), University of Central Oklahoma – Edmond, OK
Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Minnesota – Minneapolis, MN
Hispanic Coalition of Florida – Miami, FL
Hispanic Committee of Virginia – Falls Church, VA
Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama – Birmingham, AL
Hispanic Women’s Organization of Arkansas – Springdale, AR
HOLA – Hispanas Organizadas de Lake y Ashtabula (OH) – Painesville, OH
Hyde Square Task Force – Jamaica Plain, MA
Idaho Community Action Network – Boise, ID
Kentucky Coalition of Immigrant and Refugee Rights – Lexington, KY
Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights – Chicago, IL
Information Referral Resource Assistance Inc. – Edinburg, TX
Instituto del Progreso Latino – Chicago, IL
La Casa de Esperanza – Waukesha, WI
La Casa Health Network, Inc. – Little Rock, AR
Latin American Coalition – Charlotte, NC
Latin American Community Center, Inc. – Wilmington, DE
Latin American Research and Service Agency – Denver, CO
Latin American Youth Center – Washington, DC
Latino Community Development Agency – Oklahoma City, OK
Latino Economic Development Corporation – Washington, DC
Latino Family Services – Detroit, MI
Latino Leadership – Orlando, FL
Latino Memphis, Inc. – Memphis, TN
Latinos for Education and Justice Organization – Calhoun, GA
Latinos United for Change and Advancement – Madison, WI
Law Offices of Navarro & Associates – Santa Ana, CA
Mary’s Center for Maternal and Child Care – Washington, DC
Mississippi Immigrant Rights Alliance (MIRA) – Jackson & Biloxi, MS
Montebello Housing Development Corporation – Montebello, CA
Mujeres Latinas en Acción – Chicago, IL
NAF Multicultural Human Development Corporation – North Platte, NE
National Association of Latino Independent Producers – New York, NY
Near Northside Partners Council, Inc. – Fort Worth, TX
New Jersey Immigration Policy Network – Newark, NJ
NEWSED CDC – Denver, CO
Parent Institute for Quality Education – San Diego, CA
Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund – New York, NY
Repertorio Español – New York, NY
Rural Opportunities, Inc. – Rochester, NY
Salem/Keizer Coalition for Equality – Salem, OR
San Diego County SER/Jobs for Progress, Inc. – Oceanside, CA
SEA MAR Community Health Centers – Seattle, WA
Servicios de La Raza, Inc. – Denver, CO
Siete del Norte CDC – Embudo, NM
Southern Poverty Law Center – Montgomery, AL
Southwest Key Program, Inc. – Austin, TX
Spanish Speaking Citizens’ Foundation – Oakland, CA
St. Matthew Immigration/Detention Committee – Baltimore, MD
Tejano Center for Community Concerns – Houston, TX
Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition (TIRRC) – Nashville, TN
United Dubuque Immigrant Alliance (UN DIA) – Dubuque, IA
United Hispanic Americans, Inc. – Fort Wayne, IN
University of Wisconsin Latina/o Law Student Association – Madison, WI
Vecinos Unidos – Dallas, TX
Washington State Migrant Council – Sunnyside, WA
Watts/Century Latino Organization – Los Angeles, CA
Western Colorado Justice for Immigrants Committee – Grand Junction, CO

Posted to Immigration2007a at 05:17 PM

Fish were tainted with melamine too

Continuing our proud tradition of linking to one of the few worthwhile posts to appear at the Huffington Post, we hereby link to this.

Melamine-tained fish meal made its way to U.S. and Canadian fish farms, and thus likely into the U.S. food supply. Previously it was announced that millions of tainted chicked had been eaten, and pork products have also been involved, although quarantines may have been involved.

Further:

The tainted "wheat gluten" and "rice protein concentrate" at the center of the pet food recall, was actually misrepresented as such. Further tests have determined that it is wheat flour, adulterated with melamine.

Posted to Miscellania at 03:02 PM

June 24: illegal immigration rally at Hollywood and Vine

According to this, the ANSWER-linked Juan Jose Gutierrez - director of Latino Movement USA - is planning yet another illegal immigration march, this time for June 24 at the famous corner of Hollywood and Vine:

"All of us here today are united in expressing in the clearest voice possible that our community will not be intimidated into inaction... The struggle for democratic rights and democratic immigration reform will continue."

Posted to Los_Angeles at 02:38 PM

AP/White House/Senate latest amnesty scam to emphasize triggers

The AP report "Secure Borders Trump Deal on Immigration" by Julie Hirschfeld Davis is perhaps intentionally confusing:

The Bush administration and key senators are working on a deal that would delay a sweeping immigration overhaul until the border is fortified and leave illegal immigrants waiting up to 13 more years to gain legal status...

...As contemplated, the proposal would delay the process of giving legal status to undocumented immigrants and guest worker visas to new arrivals until the administration beefs up border security and implements a high-tech identification system for temporary workers. Such measures are expected to take up to two years.

She's clearly talking about some form of legalization plan (i.e., amnesty), the only difference is that the trigger mechanisms would be highlighted. Somehow I get the impression that she, the White House, or the Senators are trying to portray this as a grand concession, when it really isn't: at the end of the day (or the years) there's still an amnesty. The "overhaul" is indeed being "delayed", it just isn't being shelved.

I also feel the need to help them understand numbers:

Even then, officials said it would take up to 13 years — along with large fines and a trip to their home country — before the 12 million men, women and children estimated to be in the U.S. illegally could get permanent legal status, or green cards. The government would spend eight years clearing visa backlogs for immigrants currently waiting in line, and then spend about five years processing those here illegally.

Unless they're going to halt legal immigration, in the first eight years, a million or more potential legal immigrants would enter the queue each year. Meaning that a backlog might exist during or at the end of those eight years, around about the time we were going to start processing current illegal aliens.

In other words, like all the other grand schemes, it has "unfeasible" written all over it in big red letters.

UPDATE: In related Orwellian news, Arlen Specter says:

"We have come to an agreement on what we call a 'grand bargain,' which is the outline of an immigration bill... There is no doubt that we want to secure the border and stop illegal immigration as the first item."

...The senator added that the group has decided to put discussion of a guest-worker program on hold until steps are taken to secure the borders. The committee is "rejecting the idea of amnesty for the 11 million undocumented immigrants," he said.

"We are trying to structure a temporary-worker program that is temporary," he added. But he said that illegal immigrants would be given a pathway to citizenship that includes paying back taxes, learning English and providing an extensive work history in the U.S.

It's not an amnesty, it's just a "pathway to citizenship"!

Posted to Immigration2007a at 01:29 PM

John Edwards: deer in the headlights of the 9/11 Truth Movement

The following video shows John Edwards being asked about the WTC 7 by one of those who apparently believes in the 9/11 Truth/MIHOP/LIHOP theory. The reason this is here isn't because of the topic, but to remind everyone that it's not that difficult to ask politicians non-standard questions and then put the answers on youtube, blogs, forums, and other sites.

If even just a few people publicly asked politicians tough questions about immigration matters and promoted their lame responses, that would go a long way towards quashing amnesty. Of course, in this case the question itself was lame, only asking whether Edwards was familiar with the issue. While he looks a bit like an expensively-coiffed deer in the headlights for a moment, he quickly recovers and fobs the questioner off on an assistant.

In the case of immigration, you'd need to point out flaws in his policies in order to show that he hasn't thought the subject through (or supports something different from what he claims).

Posted to Politics at 12:33 PM

The side of the MacArthur Park illegal immigration riot you didn't see

Via this comes the following report from a pro-illegal immigration protester. Contrasting with the video of the LAPD beating up a camerawoman, it shows the LAPD with some restraint and it also shows some demonstrators hanging back to taunt the cops. In one case one is brandishing a long stick. Not exactly a deadly weapon, but what's shown on the video has not as far as I know been mentioned by the Triumverate of Loons (Villaraigosa, Bratton, and Mahony).

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:51 AM

"Bush OKs 'integration' with European Union"

From this:

President Bush signed an agreement creating a "permanent body" that commits the U.S. to "deeper transatlantic economic integration," without ratification by the Senate as a treaty or passage by Congress as a law.

The "Transatlantic Economic Integration" between the U.S. and the European Union was signed April 30 at the White House by Bush, German Chancellor Angela Merkel – the current president of the European Council – and European Commission President José Manuel Barroso...

...The current U.S. head of the new Transatlantic Economic Council is Allan Hubbard, assistant to the president for Economic Policy and director of the National Economic Council.

The current EU head of the council is Guenther Verhuegen, vice-President of the European Commission in charge of enterprise and industry...

Posted to NAU at 11:42 AM

Professor sends link to Pat Buchanan website, gets put on leave

But, it wasn't just any old link:

The Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD) has placed a professor on forced administrative leave and has recommended that he be terminated for e-mailing a Thanksgiving message to his colleagues last November. On the day before Thanksgiving, Professor Walter Kehowski sent out the text of George Washington's "Thanksgiving Day Proclamation of 1789" and a link to the webpage where he'd found it—on Pat Buchanan's web log. After several recipients complained of being offended by the e-mail, MCCCD found Kehowski guilty of violating the district's Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) policy and technology usage standards. Kehowski then contacted the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) for help...

...On November 22, 2006, tenured mathematics professor Walter Kehowski at Glendale Community College—part of the MCCCD system—sent an e-mail containing Washington's "Thanksgiving Day Proclamation of 1789" to all MCCCD employees using a district-wide listserv designated for "announcements." Within weeks, five MCCCD employees filed harassment charges against Kehowski, claiming his message was "hostile" and "derogatory" because it contained a link to Buchanan's website, where the conservative Buchanan had also posted his criticisms of immigration policies.

Feel free to contact them and let them know what you think:

Rufus Glasper, Chancellor, Maricopa County Community College District: 480-731-8100; r.glasper@domail.maricopa.edu

Velvie Green, President, Glendale Community College: 623-845-3012; velvie.green@gcmail.maricopa.edu

Posted to MultiCultiCult at 10:22 PM

Swampland, but without Wonkette (Ana Marie Cox)?

I continue to be amazed that Time Magazine has stooped to the National Inquirer level of employing Ana Marie Cox - formerly with Wonkette - as their Washington Editor and a contributor to their blog Swampland.

Now, there's something you can do about it!

Simply use Firefox with the Greasemonkey extension, together with this handy-dandy script that will remove all posts by Wonkette from Swampland. This is unsupported and barely tested, but it seems to work. Simply copy it into a file named something like 'wonkette.user.js', and drag that file into a Firefox window and choose to install it. Of course, you need to install GM first. Then, when you visit the site her posts will magically disappear.

Don't worry, you won't be missing anything.

// Remove Wonkette posts from Swampland
// Version 0.0.1
//
// Copyright (c) 2007 LonewackoDotCom
// Released under the GPL License
//
// Removes posts from Time's Swampland blog that are
// written by Wonkette (Ana Marie Cox)
//
// ==UserScript==
// @name Wonkette Bye Bye
// @namespace http://24ahead.com/
// @description Remove Wonketteishness from Swampland
// @include http://time-blog.com/swampland/*
// @include http://*.time-blog.com/swampland/*
// ==/UserScript==

var spans = document.getElementsByTagName( "span" );
for ( i = 0; i < spans.length; i++ ) {
span = spans[ i ];

if ( span.className == "postedby" &&
span.innerHTML.match( "Ana Marie Cox" ) ) {
span.parentNode.parentNode.style.display = "none";
}
}

Posted to Bloggage at 08:34 PM

Comments too hot for ShopFloor.org (National Association of Manufacturers)

Yesterday, Carter Wood of the ShopFloor.org blog (run by the National Association of Manufacturers) posted a content-free anti-Lou Dobbs post entitled "Running for President on the Fist-Pounding Ticket". I left a couple comments which were moderated and which have not been approved, and I doubt whether they will be. First, the post:

Lou Dobbs for president, eh? Well, there's always room for an angry populist to stoke the fires of protectionism and the class struggle... True, most of the celebrities like Dobbs who talk about running for office are more interested in gratifying huge egos and boosting sales of whatever they're selling at the moment... At least a Dobbs' candidacy would invite some scrutiny, accountability, for the contradictions and economic illiteracy [links to this post] he spouts. And surely it would pose at least a minor political conundrum to Democrats who share his views, folks like Senators Byron Dorgan or Sherrod Brown, for example: Support the cause or the party?

My comments weren't the best, but it is interesting that they don't want to approve them:

The Drezner link is certainly interesting, since no examples of "contradictions and economic illiteracy" are presented, only a locution nit. Other than a bad link and a smear attempt (the implication he's trying to sell books) do you have any sort of counter-argument to his positions?

More on tonight's 60Minutes smear at the link; I found the medical journal article LesleyStahl's crack producers couldn't find.

And:

My earlier comment didn't go through, but let's try again.

You imply that Dobbs has a financial interest in running: self-promotion.

What financial interest does NAM or its members have in opposing Dobbs? How many of your members have a, er, "immigrant" work force?

Posted to Bloggage at 04:07 PM

AVWatch: Villaraigosa, Bratton "send message" on MacArthur Park immigration riot

Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and LAPD chief William Bratton is currently holding a press conference pledging a "comprehensive review" of the May 1 MacArthur Park immigration riot. Bratton is demoting two leaders of the Central Division. Tony Villar is offering his remarks in both English and Spanish.

In earlier demagogic news, Louis Sahagun of the Los Angeles Times offered "L.A. mayor vows action against guilty officers":

In a show of solidarity with families confronted by police during Tuesday's immigrant rally at MacArthur Park, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa told Cinco de Mayo audiences around Los Angeles on Saturday that action would be taken against officers found to have violated the law.

The mayor stepped up to a downtown pulpit Saturday night and vowed, "There will be consequences... There will be an investigation into what occurred," Villaraigosa said in Spanish, assuring about 300 parishioners at Immaculate Conception Catholic Church that "not even police are above the law."

...Earlier, during the Mass, Villaraigosa, who was seated in the front pew, rose and walked down the center aisle toward the back of the church, grasping people's hands and hugging parishioners. He then returned to give his speech at the end of the hour-long service.

During his 10-minute address, he told the parishioners, "It doesn't matter to me whether you have papers or not. You came to work. We all have the same dreams. We want peace and decent jobs."

Posted to Immigration2007a at 03:41 PM

Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform

Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform is a new group headed up by Jim Wallis, and they're wrong. In order to promote legalization for all as well as a "guest" worker program, they'll be conducting an ad campaign, letter writing effort, and most likely advocating from the pulpit.

First, they're selectively quoting the Bible; see the links here. Second, what they support will make things far worse for all concerned; see this and this for starters.

The solution to their problem is simple, but unfortunately I'm not aware of anyone having done it: go to public appearances by these pastors and point out to everyone else exactly how they're wrong. You can't point out that you just disagree; you need to show that their arguments have no merit.

You can see a list of their signatories here, read about their press conference here, and you can see one of their sleazy ads in this PDF file. It features a staged shot of a little weeping Hispanic girl being led away by two Border Patrol agents, and the ad itself shows that they aren't able to think things through. In almost all instances the Border Patrol would have contact with her only if she were trying to cross the border; ICE would deal with her in other instances. And, it presents BP agents as thugs. And, the religious "leaders" appear to have forgotten about parental responsibility. What were her parents thinking to bring her here illegally, or have a child here while living here illegally? And, it's ironic that the policies the CCIR supports would lead to even more such cases.

If you're a member of one of the CCIR churches, I urge you to hold your "leaders" responsible.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:24 PM

Lesley Stahl/60 Minutes tries lame hit piece on Lou Dobbs

Tonight's 60 Minutes featured a profile of Lou Dobbs by Lesley Stahl entitled Lou Dobbs, "Advocacy" Journalist? In the World of CBS, biased reporters - such as the dozens exposed in the entries here as well as Stahl herself, Ed Bradley, and Steve Kroft - are real journalists, but only Dobbs blurs the lines. Apparently if you're biased in the right way, it's OK.

Dobbs is "less Walter Cronkite than Bill O'Reilly"; good ol' leftwing Uncle Walty is apparently a journalist, while Dobbs is more a BOR-style firethrower.

She spends most of her time unable to fathom why anyone would care about illegal immigration, sidewise implying that Dobbs is a racist for opposing illegal immigration, and also spending an inordinate amount of time on apparently the only gotcha moment they could find: that one of his correspondents told him that "there have been 7,000 cases of leprosy in the U.S. in the past three years". From this:

Rep. J.D. Hayworth, R-Ariz., told the Business Journal of Phoenix. "For example, in 40 years, only 900 persons were afflicted by leprosy in the U.S.; in the past three years, more than 7,000 cases have been presented."

That statement appears to have been obtained from the article "Illegal Aliens and American Medicine" which, according to this, says:

Leprosy, also known as Hansen's disease, was so rare in America that in 40 years only 900 people were afflicted. Suddenly, in the past three years America has more than 7,000 cases of leprosy.

Did Stahl see that report? Why didn't she - the good journalist - mention where the figure was from?

Then, it's over to Mark Potok, "who monitors hate groups for the Southern Poverty Law Center." In addition to that, the SPLC is indirectly linked to the Mexican government (a fact not disclosed by Journalist Stahl).

Potok charges that Dobbs is a fear monger. "The impression you get, pretty strongly I think, day after day, is that sort of all 11 million illegal aliens are bringing leprosy, they're bringing crime, they're bringing all these terrible things to the United States," he explains.

"If these people have come into this country illegally, what is so wrong with somebody taking it up as an advocate?" Stahl asks.

"But that does not sort of give one the go-ahead to say that, you know, 'These are a group of rapists and disease-carrying people who are coming to, you know, essentially destroy the culture of this country.' You know, I think that’s a long leap," Potok says.

Obviously, the one leaping is Potok.

Then, Stahl once again shows her ignorance by saying that he "seems to suggest that all illegals should be rounded up." He corrects her, saying that while he's never advocated that it would be possible if we wanted to. She persists, gamely pushing the Bush/Chertoff line:

"We can't even find them," Stahl points out. "How're you going to round them up? I'm serious. If you think it's possible. How's it possible?"

Then, Dobbs has kind words for migrant workers:

If that pat on the back is surprising, given the tone of his show, there's something even more surprising, something he never brings up: the fact that his wife Debi is Mexican-American.

In no way, shape or form is anything Lesley Stahl does journalism.

UPDATE: Our fair trade reporter, David Sirota, discusses the piece here. While he doesn't defend or oppose Dobbs' immigration stance, he does defend him because of his outsourcing stance. And, he points out even more Stahl biases.

UPDATE 2: Dobbs responds to the interview here, fingering Cosman for her report (linked above). And, regarding Potok's claims, he says:

...You just took a plunge from the facts.

First of all, I've never said anything remotely resembling what you suggested. And of the numbers of reports, the hundreds and hundreds of reports we've done on the issue of illegal immigration on this broadcast over the past four and a half years, well, I decided to find out, and I asked our staff to compute how many of them dealt with disease or other illnesses and illegal aliens.

By the way, the number, Mr. Potok, is three. That's three over a period of four and a half years. What happened to your "day in and day out"?

And by the way, Mr. Potok, three of our reports covered rape or sexual predators in the context of illegal immigration in this country...

UPDATE 3: From this:

In an email, a CNN spokeswoman attributed the claim to a 2005 article by medical historian and anti-illegal immigration activist Madeleine Cosman in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. That article stated, "Leprosy, Hansen's disease, was so rare in America that in 40 years only 900 people were afflicted. Suddenly, in the past three years America has more than 7,000 cases of leprosy." Ms. Cosman, who has since died, attributed those numbers to a 2003 report in the New York Times, but it appears she misrepresented the wording of that report. The Times article said, "While there were some 900 recorded cases in the United States 40 years ago, today more than 7,000 people have leprosy, or Hansen's disease, as it is now called." The Times wording suggests that the 7,000 figure represents total patients, not just new diagnoses — and doesn't support Ms. Romans's claim on the Dobbs show that "there were about 900 cases of leprosy for 40 years." ...The Times article didn't identify the source of the numbers. A spokesman for the paper said he would look into it but hasn't yet gotten back to me. If he does, I'll update this post... "Lou Dobbs Tonight" was certainly not the only media outlet to publicize the leprosy numbers as part of a broader argument that illegal immigration poses health risks. Since the Times article in 2003, the stats have appeared on Fox News and in newspapers' news pages, opinion columns and letters to the editor — often with similar confusion about the timeframe, to make the increase seem more marked.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 07:41 PM

MacArthur Park immigration riot: "safe spot" for journalists

Los Angeles, home of sun-baked people and half-baked ideas, is truly a magical place:

While [LAPD Chief William Bratton] met with journalist groups, [Antonio Villaraigosa] was speaking at Cathedral Our Lady of the Angels downtown where Cardinal Roger Mahony was celebrating a Mass of consolation and healing.

In other news, Bratton continues throwing his employees under the bus, including threatening to move some officers from the "elite" Metro Division elsewhere ("Some of this will be career-impacting"). This is also the first time I've heard of this:

Journalist organizations asked why officers ignored LAPD policies toward the news media worked out after reporters were assaulted during the 2000 Democratic National Convention... A 2002 agreement with media organizations and the American Civil Liberties Union called for, among other things, designation of a safe spot for reporters covering news events. LAPD spokeswoman Mary Grady acknowledged reporters were not given "a designated safe spot" at MacArthur Park.

Once again: I'm no great fan of what the LAPD did, and they have a history of doing things like this. But, perhaps Bratton should consider not completely going over to the side of loons like Villaraigosa and Mahoney.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 04:58 PM

Fred Thompson: illegal alien amnesty supporter?

Presumed presidential candidate Fred Thompson spoke in Orange County, CA on Friday:

[He said] "border security" must be the first priority in reforming immigration.

But he also made clear that he would tack closer to the middle on the issue by adding that "the 12 million [illegal immigrants] here aren't as much as a concern as the next 12 million after that."

The first line – border security – won immediate head nods, murmurs of "m-hmm," and applause. His downplaying of the status of the illegal immigrants in the country now drew silence.

I'll break the silence: his "middle" stance might turn out to be as radical as that of Bush and most of the current GOP candidates. He didn't oppose an amnesty for illegal aliens, and if he doesn't think having 12 to 20 million foreign citizens living here illegally is an issue there's a strong possibility that he's a supporter of some form of amnesty. Whatever it's called, it will be seen as an amnesty by millions of prospective illegal aliens around the world, and they'll come a-running.

I note also that harping on border security is the stock Bush partisan line employed by worthies such as Hugh Hewitt and Captain Ed. I note also that he's being pushed by RedState and Instapundit, both of which are very strong warning signs.

I'm certainly willing to give him a hearing, but as for now I'm a very strong skeptic.

UPDATE: Fred Thompson: Globalist? refers to unnamed "Nashville news editors" who are creating a "supernova" around his candidacy. And, it says that he was a NAFTA supporter, he voted for the McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill, he voted to "relax the rules on migrant farm workers", and "most of his time is spent in Manhattan and Hollywood". And:

Although it's true that Ol' Fred drove a red pickup truck to campaign appearances when he ran for Al Gore's vacated seat in the U.S. Senate, it's also true that Fred only drove that truck a few blocks at a time before it was put on the flatbed hauler until the next campaign speech.

When I heard about the red pickup truck on one of the political talk shows, my first thought was that they'd probably use a flatbed to move it around. It's good to see that confirmed.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 04:14 PM

Chris Matthews is a Beltway Hack (Ron Paul, "Oh, God", Lou Dobbs as moderator)

Via this, Chris Matthews muttered "Oh, God" under his breath after Rep. Ron Paul responded to a question he asked during the May 3, 2007 GOP debate. If you want to have real debates featuring real questions, sign the petition urging Lou Dobbs to moderate at least two debates: one for all the Democrats, and one for all the Republicans.

Here's audio of that segment of the debate:

Note: the audio was taken from this page. Click "Watch the debate". It's after the 2:00 mark in the "Candidates respond to online questions" segment. You can also hear it at the end of this.

Posted to Politics at 03:51 PM

Maria Hinojosa/PBS Now interviews Chris Simcox

Maria Hinojosa of PBS Now interviews the founder of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, Chris Simcox, here. I didn't listen to the interview, and I have a neutral position on Simcox and his group [1]. However, I find their choice of links quite interesting.

They give the game away by linking to the CFR, specifically the illogical, not comprehensively economic "The Economic Logic of Illegal Immigration" by Gordon Hanson.

They also link to what is probably a hit piece from the SPLC, a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government.

As, as a capper, they link to the Kathy Kiely USA Today article offering a highly misleading reading of a Gallup poll.

[1] I interviewed him a few years ago and, while he didn't seem as loony as he had been portrayed in hit pieces, one of his compadres did not leave a good impression and I never wrote it up. Part of that was because he failed to comply with my request that he provide examples of how the MSM has misrepresented him. He couldn't point to specific examples, prefering instead to repeat his talking points. There's also some controversy over a fence they're building and the funding for it, and of course his group is apparently separate from Jim Gilchrist's current and former groups with similar names.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 01:02 PM

Fabian Nunez: LAPD officers set out to do "target practice" on "immigrants"

California Assembly Speaker and Hillary Clinton co-chair Fabian Nunez, speaking about the MacArthur Park mini-riot, says today:

"There are no excuses, a simple apology is not going to suffice... To say we are outraged is an understatement. We want those responsible in the highest levels of the LAPD to pay consequences."

What he said yesterday is far, far worse:

[Nunez] said police deliberately led troublemakers back to the peaceful marchers before beginning their assault.

"The only logical conclusion I can come to is that somebody wanted it to bleed into the march so that they can do some target practice on some of the immigrants that were marching," Nunez said.

If you assume as I do that Nunez simply represents Mexico and its citizens, everything he says and does makes perfect sense.

Related:
AVWatch: Villaraigosa promoting allegedly Mexico-linked group

Posted to California at 05:44 PM

National Institute for Latino Policy gets CNN to remove link from Lou Dobbs site

Lou Dobb's CNN page used to have a link to Small Town Defenders, aka the City of Hazleton Legal Defense Fund. From this:

An advocacy group, the National Institute for Latino Policy, protested that Dobbs’ on-air advocacy was expanding to include an endorsement of raising money for an organization. After getting a letter from the group, CNN chief executive Jim Walton agreed to remove the link, CNN spokeswoman Christa Robinson said Friday.

The NILP was formerly affiliated with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, one of the groups involved in suing... Hazleton.

CNN certainly has a right to add and remove links at will, and since the linked site solicits donations they might have journalistic concerns. On the other hand, they might want to consider having the balls to stand up to racial power groups.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 05:16 PM

AVWatch: Villaraigosa promoting allegedly Mexico-linked group

Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa rushed back from his supposed trade mission to Central America and Mexico to deal with the aftermath of the MacArthur Park mini-riot.

Now, that he's back in our country, he's holding a press conference. While he says he believes in due process, he's implying that it doesn't apply in this case since it's so obvious that the police overreacted. He also didn't say anything about those who were throwing things at police.

He's also suggesting that people call CHIRLA (Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights in Los Angeles) for more information. That group has allegedly collaborated with the Mexican government.

Related:
Fabian Nunez: LAPD officers set out to do "target practice" on "immigrants"

Posted to Los_Angeles at 05:13 PM

"Special use permits" used to silence anti-illegal immigration protesters

Russ Dove is a fringey Tucson anti-illegal immigration protester. He was trying to use a bullhorn to counter-protest an illegal immigration march, when Tucson police told him that the noise was bothering someone else and that he'd be arrested if he didn't stop using the bullhorn. Apparently this involves the type of permit the marchers received. More here; see the long video here; background from the other side here.

I don't know whether his First Amendment rights have been violated or not, but I certainly don't expect the ACLU or the MSM to look into it either.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:55 PM

Rudy Giuliani linked to NAFTA superhighway (Cintra)

From this:

...At the center of negotiations for multiple legs of the Superhighway Corridor throughout Texas, is none other than Rudolph Giuliani's law firm which landed the Comprehensive Development Agreement for a widening of Interstate-35, now referred to as the TTC-35, in addition to the Master Development Plans for State Highways 121 and 130 among other legs of the TTC. All negotiations for Cintra were and are presently handled by the law firm, Bracewell & Giuliani, LLP, of which Republican Presidential candidate, Rudolph Giuliani, has been a senior executive partner since March 2005. His law firm is the exclusive legal counsel for Cintra. Bracewell & Giuliani is comprised of 400 attorneys, based in Houston, TX with offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., London and Kazakhstan.

Cintra joined with San Antonio, TX-based Zachry Construction Corp. to help land the contracts, in which Zachry owns a 20% interest. The Cintra-Zachry proposal for TTC-35 includes a private investment of up to $6 billion in upfront payments for the complete construction, design and operation of a 316-mile toll road between Dallas and San Antonio, giving Cintra the right to set tolls and keep toll road profits for a period of 50 years, as it will for each road it has contracted...

Posted to NAU at 12:33 PM

The Politico/MSNBC/Chris Matthews lightweight GOP "debate"

The Politico and MSNBC are holding a GOP debate tonight, moderated by super lightweight Chris Matthews; subject to other factors, a live discussion of the "debate" follows.

Summary: Tonight's debate was extremely lightweight and a complete waste of time. The questions were extremely general, largely pointless, and Matthews rarely had follow-ups. A fifth grade class could have asked better questions and done a better job at getting to what the candidates really support and the flaws in their arguments. If you want to help do something about this, sign the petition.

Two puffball questions on immigration so far: asking John McCain whether he's like to see Tom Tancredo heading up the INS (an agency that hasn't existed for four years), and asking all of them whether they would change the Constitution to allow Arnold Schwarzenegger to become president.

When candidates keep answering other questions in their answers, that's a good sign you're asking dumb questions.

Bush has a "centrist" position on immigration per one of the questioners who is, quite simply, a liar. His name to follow. (Jim VandeHei?)

Stupid question asking for a letter grade on Bush's handling of Iraq. Grade schoolers could figure out how to wiggle out of that question, as Huckabee just did. Reporters who wanted a real answer would have made it more specific.

Finally, something's happening: Tom Tancredo is asking for an immigration debate free of the usual BS (he was probably looking at Matthews when he said that).

"Do you believe in evolution?" What an absolutely idiotic question to ask.

Apparently Giuliani was told to be prepared for the "what's the difference between a Shia and a Sunni? question. He flubbed it, but not that bad.

Now Giuliani is promoting a national ID card and a database, which, as I discussed earlier would end up being for everyone, not just "guest" workers. And, Romney is joining the promoting, as is McCain. At least Brownback is opposing it.

Later - after Ron Paul gave an eloquent opposition - Giuliani and Romney clarified that the ID would just be for "foreigners". Chris Matthews sounded relieved. In fact, I already knew that was their position, but obviously Matthews did not. Then, he acted suprised and dropped that line of questioning.

A real reporter would have instead asked a follow-up, like this: "Due to racial profiling concerns - and probable ACLU lawsuits - wouldn't the ID card eventually be required for everyone in the U.S.? Won't some recent naturalized citizens with accents - who don't have theforeigner-only ID card - be refused work because they're unable to present their foreigner-only ID card, and won't that lead to suits, and won't that lead to the ID card being for everyone?"

That's certainly a complex question, but it would have revealed that Giuliani and Romney have not thought this whole thing through.

I note also that none of the several tough immigration questions I submitted were asked and, in fact, none of the second round questions concerned immigration matters. Yet, that's where almost all of the candidates are weakest, and discussing that topic would have revealed that Giuliani, McCain, Brownback, Huckabee, and most likely Romney are not qualified to be president. Instead, all we got was fluff.

Politico and MSNBC should be ashamed of being involved in such a disgrace.

Posted to Temporary at 05:24 PM

Max Blumenthal feverishly uncovers the "anti-immigrant" movement

Max Blumenthal - aka "Son of Sid" - was interviewed by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! about the "anti-immigrant" movement with predictable results:

...there are several components of the anti-immigrant movement in this country, and they're all working very closely together. They have a longstanding program to forcibly remove the twelve million undocumented immigrants in this country, and they're specifically targeting brown-skinned immigrants, people who come from the third world. That's what their target is. So they're actually not a xenophobic movement. They're a nativist movement...

Tom Tancredo is allegedly at the "top" of the movement. And, of course, very few people are talking about forcibly removing all illegal aliens. I'm also not aware of any even slightly mainstream groups specifically targeting either "brown-skinned" people or "immigrants". He follows with the stock SPLC discussion of John Tanton, originator of FAIR, CIS, and other groups. Including, of course, this perennial favorite:

FAIR, took $1.3 million from the Pioneer Fund, a group that advanced Nazi propaganda in the 1930s and which exists to fund the science of Hitlerian eugenics.

Henry Ford had some interesting thoughts as well, yet the Ford Foundation tends to fund a large variety of far-left groups. Both have the same level of relevance. Pioneer has also donated to major universities, including Stanford and one in Tel Aviv. That appears to have been left out of his analysis. While I don't know whether they supported "Hitlerian eugenics" in the 30s, I highly doubt that they do now; in fact, I hope the Pioneer Fund sues him for slander. See their explanation for more information on this and other smears.

Then:

You have people like Lou Dobbs, who works very closely with Tom Tancredo's office, who works closely with these think tanks, and he advances extreme conspiracy theories, like the idea of a North American Union, which came from the far shores of the right, from groups like the John Birch Society.

Obviously, Bush could give a televised speech promoting the NAU and people like Blumenthal would still seek to deny it.

Then, it gets even worse. Baby Blumenthal tries to tie those who oppose illegal immigration into the KKK, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the recent arrests of loony militia members in Alabama.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 04:10 PM

Amy Goodman ignores Mexico links of illegal immigration march organizers

Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! interviewed two illegal immigration march organizers (link) without mentioning that at least one of them has a highly questionable link to Mexico. Per her:

To help recap and look ahead to what's next, we're joined by organizers of the day's two largest protests:

* Angelica Salas, Executive Director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights in Los Angeles.

* Jorge Mujica, former journalist and union organizer and one of the lead organizers for immigrant rights protests in Chicago. He has worked for La Raza, Univision, and Telemundo, and has been involved in union organizing in both the US and in Mexico.

As did Peter Prengaman, she fails to note that the first group has allegedly collaborated with the Mexican government. The second person is an official with the Mexican political party PRD.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 04:05 PM

Lawsuits, etc. over MacArthur Park illegal immigration riot

The National Lawyer's Guild is now saying that they're going to file a class action lawsuit against the LAPD and the City of Los Angeles over the riot which occured at yesterday's illegal immigration march in MacArthur Park. Apparently a group of protesters is currently holding a press conference; they're wearing masks and waving a Mexican flag as well as the flag of the FMLN (El Salvador's Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front). They were previously a guerilla organized but they've morphed into a semi-mainstream political party.

UPDATE: One of those at the press conference is Ron Gochez.

UPDATE 2: To make this clear, it wasn't clear whether those at the press confab were actually with the FMLN or just supporters.

There are police scanner intercepts in these MP3 files: 1, 2. Per this:

...In part one you will hear the cops talking about being pelted with rocks and bottles at around the 11 minute mark. People were throwing stuff from apartments too. At around the 14 minute mark someone starts a fire. Note that the media ignored many of these facts... In part two the rowdiness starts around the 05:30 mark. Some jokes around 10:50. At around 14:10 there is talk of people throwing bottles at cars. At 16 minutes they start going after some of the mobsters.

In other news, far-leftie Pasadena City College teacher Leslie Radford offers "Police Terror in the Park":

la.indymedia.org/news/2007/05/197899.php

Meanwhile, another person offers "LAPD tries to crush immigrant rights movement":

la.indymedia.org/news/2007/05/197816.php

And, "May Day 2007; A Report To Correct The Balance":

la.indymedia.org/news/2007/05/197854.php

Burn, baby, burn writ small, as some trash or similar was alighted three blocks from the scene:

la.indymedia.org/news/2007/05/197907.php

There are a couple videos from the incident currently at this link:

telemundo52.com/video/index.html

UPDATE 3: Los Angeles Times reporter Jill Leovy describes the melee from her perspective here:

a small group of young protesters, including several wearing bandanas over their faces, had been hovering near the police on this side of the park. Unlike the rest of the protesters, who mostly ignored officers, this group had appeared quite focused on the police throughout the march -- watching them, filming them at close range, hollering at them, etc... [later on] When the police had driven the last of the press and protesters to the northwest corner of the park, an order came specifically directed at the press: "Members of the media" were told they were there illegally by an officer on foot... ...A block west of the park on 6th, a couple dozen young men and middle-aged men threw plastic garbage cans into the street. They formed a barricade of garbage cans blocking traffic and also threw material at passing cars. A large metal truck hubcap was sent spinning into the street toward people. An older man began hitting a Metro bus pulled up to the curb with a large piece of wood. A dozen men stood in the middle of the street taunting the advancing police line...

Bonus sub-text: "established" press vs. "self-styled grassroots reporters" and "self-appointed journalists". The former are obviously upset.

There's also video shot from inside a bus driving through the protest here.

UPDATES:
AVWatch: Villaraigosa promoting allegedly Mexico-linked group
Fabian Nunez: LAPD officers set out to do "target practice" on "immigrants"

Posted to Immigration2007a at 05:42 PM

Orwell Alert: Temporary Protected Status extended 18 more months

From our Orwell Alert/'When "Temporary" Means "Permanent"' file comes this:

Central Americans who are legally in the U-S because their countries were slammed by natural disasters are getting an 18-month extension.

The Department of Homeland Security is allowing the added time for citizens of Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador who have Temporary Protected Status.

Salvadorans have had the status since early 2001 after two earthquakes killed 12-hundred people. Nicaraguans and Hondurans have had the designation since Hurricane Mitch in 1998.

From this USCIS PDF:

"Although Honduras, Nicaragua, and El Salvador have made significant progress in their recovery and rebuilding efforts, each country continues to face social and economic challenges in their efforts to restore their nations to normalcy," said USCIS Director Emilio Gonzalez. "This 18 month extension reflects the United States' commitment to continue assisting our Central American neighbors on their road to recovery."

Related from Feb 2006: "Temporary" Protected Status extended; preview of "guest" worker schemes

Posted to Immigration2007a at 04:36 PM

Cook County illegal alien sanctuary policy loses

From this:

The Cook County Board rejected Tuesday an attempt to make the county an immigrant-friendly government by forbidding its employees from investigating or asking about anyone's immigration status.

Cook County Commissioner Roberto Maldonado, who has championed the resolution for more than a year, looked visibly upset after the resolution failed on a tie vote with three abstentions.

"I'm not going to give up," Maldonado (D-Chicago) said. "I'm going to bring it back. ... When we fought for civil rights legislation, it did not happen overnight."

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:08 PM

Ken Mehlman, your hat sir, thank you, good bye

Former RNC chief Ken Mehlman offers "Hispanic outreach crucial to GOP" which, as you might guess, is wrong. And, just how wrong he is is pointed out to him forcefully in the comments; while he was interviewed by John & Ken a couple years back, a few of the comments are even more devastating to his position. One wonders whether he's ever actually heard people say these things before or whether, like Bush, he's been ensconced in his own bubble.

The first comment is from me (aka Immigration2008DotCom), but two other comments are even better, specifically the one from KDaddy and also the one from Buehford.

Note also that the article is from May 1, and it was linked from Politico's home page yesterday. Now, it's not on the home page at all, not even linked from their "Ideas" listing. You need to go to that page to get the link to the article. I have a suspicion that he asked them to take it off the front page, but one never knows.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:54 AM

The Wit And Wisdom of Illegal Immigration Marchers

No, the pages aren't blank, but something else is. In all these reports, the listed quotes and all the rest are presented completely unopposed. No one is around to point out to them some extremely basic facts: a) they weren't kidnapped and brought here against their will, b) they're already citizens, just not of this country, c) they're welcome to leave at any time, and d) U.S. citizenship is a privilege, not a right.

* "Us not being in school is showing the government they're going to lose money if they send us all back to Mexico." [1]

* "They should help them get their papers, they're out here working and they're giving them a hard time about it." [1]

* "You break the law out of necessity, and then you have years here of contributing to the government, and if they don't help people, the country does not progress." [2]

* [chanted:] "Bush, listen, the people are in a struggle." [3]

* "We're like a gadfly. We're going to spray Congress into action." [4]

* "This used to be our land, anyway. This used to be our country... At least let us work in it." [4]

* [Known airhead L.A. City Councilwoman Janice Hahn:] "We're going to elect a new president of the United States next year and 'she' may be the person to bring us together around the issue of immigration." [5]

* "I think it is not right to send all the immigrants back. I believe they should have rights just like everyone here. They work and pay taxes like everyone. I think they should be treated the same." [6]

* "After working 22 years here, paying taxes and being a good citizen, I think it's fair they give me residency... It's not fair we don't have documents." [7]

* [chanting:] "Zapata Vive!" [8]

* "We put food on Bush's plate, but he doesn't like us anymore." [8]

* [sign on a pet Chihuahua] "No work, no taco. Yo quiero taco." [8]

* "This is a country based on immigrants - it isn't right to see people not treated equally. No human is illegal." [9]

* "They need the same opportunities and are asking for the same rights to work and live in this country... And they're very proud to be in America." [10]

* "We serve this society, so it must give us opportunities... We're all citizens of the world; there is nothing called an illegal citizen. No one is illegal before God." [11]

* "We ask for the government to be open to understanding the immigrants... The immigrants are a strong work force." [12]

* "Not having your residency makes things very difficult... The fact that people work, and later do not get paid and do not get a legal status, that has to end." [13]

* "I have a lot of family who don't have their papers... I think we need to give working people a chance because the United States is made up of immigrants." [14]

* "We gave Nixon amnesty. We might as well give people who are working hard and honestly amnesty and compassion rather than prejudice."[15]

[1] ksby.com/Global/story.asp?S=6455864
[2] origin.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_5792927
[3] kdhnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=15665
[4] origin.insidebayarea.com/sanmateocountytimes/ci_5793002
[5] presstelegram.com/news/ci_5797248
[6] wsws.org/articles/2007/may2007/immi-m02.shtml
[7] cbs2.com/topstories/local_story_121214138.html
[8] origin.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_5797122
[9] dailybulletin.com/news/ci_5796995
[10] southbendtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070501/News01/70502001
[11] sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/02/IMMIGRATION.TMP
[12] citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200770502001
[13] preview.tinyurl.com/yqdx9r (palmbeachpost.com)
[14] ocregister.com/ocregister/news/local/santaana/article_1677536.php
[15] rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0%2C1299%2CDRMN_15_5515865%2C00.html

#4 also has this:

One group of young, African-American bystanders gathered along International Boulevard [in Oakland] this morning had mixed feelings about the immigrant marchers. They supported them, they said. But they felt they should get the same attention for the issues they share. "I think we need to be looked out for, too," said one young woman who only gave her first name, Lavon. "We've asked for the same thing for centuries. And we never got it." Earl Bennett said African-Americans might also like to march for their rights in Oakland. But he said he doesn't think they would have police blocking roads and directing traffic for them, as they did for today's march. "If it was a bunch of black folks, they would be taking us to jail (and asking), 'Where's your I.D.?"'

#14 also mentions that one of the Santa Ana rally organizers is Mike Gonzalez, "president" of the Institute for Mexicans Abroad. He's actually president of the Orange County delegation to that Mexican government advisory council.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:49 PM

May Day 2007 illegal alien marches odds and ends

Good crowd shots, including a Mexica Movement banner, lots of red and a sign saying "{peace sign} does not require intelligence":

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2007/05/197741.php

Good people shots with poor resolution:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2007/05/197721.php

Hyped up recounts of the MacArthur Park riot:

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2007/05/197806.php
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2007/05/197797.php
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2007/05/197720.php

Report from Denver.

In Houston, a cameraman from the local NBC affiliate had a Mexican flag on his camera.

Reconquista shirts.

From Santa Rosa.

A group of students in Las Vegas respond with racial insults here, although they were baited a bit.

Via this comes Freedom Folks' encounter with fun, peace-loving leftist thugs:

UPDATE: Here are some pictures showing how the MSM spun the day's events.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:34 PM

Los Angeles illegal immigration march turns violent

Per Eric Leonard on KFI, the second, more militant illegal immigration march in MacArthur Park in Los Angeles has turned violent, with protesters throwing rocks at police, and the police responding with rubber bullets. A couple reporters were hit by the bullets. Breaking...

UPDATE: UPI says:

Witnesses said police wearing riot gear and wielding batons gave no warning before firing at rally participants gathered at MacArthur Park, CNN reported. Police said a protester knocked down a motorcycle officer, the news channel said.

However, the Los Angeles Times says:

Around 6 p.m., after police tried to disperse a group of demonstrators who had moved off the sidewalk into Alvarado Street, some of the few thousand participants still in the park started throwing plastic bottles and rocks at officers. Then, several dozen riot police, clad in helmets and carrying batons, started clearing the park, firing a few dozen volleys of foam bullets into the crowd... Several people -- including 15 police officers -- were hurt, but most, if not all, of the injuries appeared to be minor. However, late Tuesday, a staff member from Telemundo's newsroom confirmed that one reporter and three camera operators from the Spanish language TV station had been injured and were taken to a hospital by police. There was also a report that a Fox 11 reporter and camera operator had been injured... ...Another confrontation cane around 6:50 p.m., still well before nightfall, when a police car blazing its lights was bombarded by bottles and clothes as it passed. A line of officers fired several volleys of the 37-millimeter to 40-millimeter "less-lethal munitions" -- police parlance for foam or rubber bullets -- from wide-barreled launchers resembling shotguns. People started running, while also throwing things -- from plastic bottles to palm fronds -- at Metro buses. One took a piece of wood and hit a bus...

The first few pictures here concern this incident.

The LAPD isn't exactly known for their restraint and other features, so I wouldn't be surprised to learn that they overreacted. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that a small number of anarchist/communist/reconquista loons were deliberately trying to provoke such a reaction.

Here's video from CNN:

UPDATE 2: Christina Gonzalez - now apparently with MY13/KCOP or whatever it is - was one of the reporters caught up in the LAPD's riot line, and they have a video of her pleading with the LAPD to stop roughing up one of her cameramen or producers. That's one of them in the third picture from the LAT slideshow above. Tony Valdez - now apparently on the same station - is incensed.

UPDATE 3: Here's video of Telemundo crew being surprised by the riot line. It includes shots of demonstrators throwing rocks.

UPDATE 4: Here's video from the local Fox affiliate.

UPDATE 5: Here's part 2 of this post.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 06:24 PM

Rudy Giuliani is braindead on immigration

Rudy Giuliani has laid out his immigration plan to something called the "Latino Coalition". Assuming the article is correct, it's clear to me that he and/or his advisors aren't able to figure things out, and he is simply unqualified to be president:

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) told members of the Latino Coalition on Tuesday that U.S. immigration policy demands a complex answer that should include tamper-proof ID cards for new immigrants, a border fence and a pathway to citizenship for undocumented workers.

Leaving aside all the other issues (such as an amnesty encouraging future illegal immigration), one wonders exactly how we could have "tamper-proof ID cards" that would just be for "new immigrants". Due to racial profiling concerns and the related lawsuits from people like the ACLU, the "tamper-proof ID card" would eventually be something that everyone, not just "new immigrants", would be required to have.

"We have to look at illegal immigration from the point of view of what makes America more secure," Giuliani said.

His plan would encourage further illegal immigration as new illegal aliens came here to take part in future amnesties. Some of those might be terrorists and criminals. And, giving the Mexican government even more political power inside the U.S. does not make us more secure in the least.

He also wants a database of "immigrants", something oddly similar to Mitt Romney's Census of the Immigrants dodge.

...Giuliani wants undocumented workers to come forward and claim citizenship "if they're making an honest contribution." He added that adherence to American ideals is what makes an American citizen, and that those who have come to the U.S. to make an honest living should be afforded official citizenship.

Once again, he has no real clue. Just because someone is making an honest living here doesn't mean they'll make a good citizen. There are plenty of people here who are making honest livings who have allegiances to foreign countries. Perhaps he should concentrate on those who want to come here to be Americans, not just to make money.

"Of course we shouldn't have amnesty," the former mayor said. "People here legally should be at the front of the line."

That quote is truly braindead. First, of course, like Bush and others he's pretending that something that will be widely perceived as amnesty is not amnesty. And, of course, the citizenship line starts here in the U.S., but it ends in foreign countries where people are waiting to come here legally. And, there will always be people waiting overseas to come here, meaning that legalizing millions of illegal aliens will have some impact on that legal flow, and will most likely have a very serious impact. And, of course, newly-legalized illegal aliens will get to stay here while all the while millions are waiting overseas for their chance.

5/2/07 UPDATE: Russell Berman of the NY Sun falsely claims "Giuliani Adopts Moderate Stance on Immigration", a claim that's contradicted by a quote he provides:

The Republican presidential hopeful told reporters afterward that his thinking had not changed since his days as mayor, rejecting recent reports that he had veered to the right on immigration. "My view on immigration is exactly the same," he said. "It's always been the same."

The rest of the article has even less than The Hill article, and doesn't provide any other statements that change my verdict above.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 05:28 PM

Up to 3 million melamine-tainted chickens were eaten

From this:

In a conference call with media this afternoon, USDA Assistant Administrator Kenneth Petersen revealed that as many as 3 million chickens, contaminated with melamine from a single Indiana feed mill, have already been slaughtered, distributed and eaten. An additional 100,000 breeder chickens are currently being voluntarily quarantined by farmers...

Posted to Miscellania at 03:18 PM

Howard Dean: illegal immigration supporter, cheap labor pimp (May Day; against STRIVE Act?)

Laura Wides-Munoz offers this:

Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean called the immigration bill currently before Congress "insane" because it would require many of the nation's 12 million illegal immigrants to return home before applying for citizenship.

..."This is a government that can't find a six-foot-four terrorist. How is it going to find 12 million people?" he told a group of more than 100 party supporters at Miami's Parrot Jungle Island. And if all those individuals decided to go home on their own, "imagine what will happen to our economy?" Dean added.

If Wides-Munoz can be trusted - an open question - he's refering to the Flake-Gutierrez STRIVE Act and its "touchback" provisions, not to Bush's scheme. Note that this contrasts with the Peter Prengaman story.

Thus, Dean is coming out against a Democratic scheme backed by, for instance, the House Hispanic Caucus. Obviously, there's not a lot of reporting going on in this report, and if Wides-Munoz had done her job she would have tried to find out what he does support. I can only assume that he supports a very "liberal" scheme somewhat akin to self-service citizenship for all.

Dean was also scheduled to speak to an illegal immigration rally in Florida, but he backed out due to supposed scheduling conflicts.

And, of course, we also get editorializing from the "reporter":

...Roman Catholic Bishop Felipe Estevez also planned to speak. The church is among a number of religious groups that support the latest immigration bill, which would put some illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship but would require hefty penalties, trips back home and long waits. Many conservatives call this proposal overly permissive.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:56 PM

May Day 2007: Peter Prengaman ignores Mexico links

Peter Prengaman of the AP has a habit of not revealing the material affiliations of those he quotes. The latest instance comes in the much-updated "Protesters Press for Path to Citizenship":

..."If we don't act, then both the Democratic and Republican parties can go back to their comfort zones and do nothing," said Angelica Salas, director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. "They won't have the courage to resolve a major situation for millions of people."

..."They announced the decision first and then they called us to consult us," said Jorge Mujica, a spokesman for Chicago's March 10 Movement group. "It doesn't make sense."

The first group has allegedly collaborated with the Mexican government. The second person is an official with the Mexican political party PRD.

UPDATE: The endlessly-updated story returns again. The Houston Chronicle uniquely names their version "U.S. flags wave at immigration rallies". Mujica is out in this version, with a new source in Jerry Gonzalez of the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials. He's a former MALDEF official, and one of the GALEO founders is GA state Rep. Pedro Marin, someone with a highly probable but unexplored link to the Mexican government. He marched alongside a former Mexican consul general in a march last year.

UPDATE 2: Note this from the second version:

The [NYC] event is a response to a White House immigration reform proposal in March, said Chung-Wha Hong, executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition... That plan would grant illegal immigrants three-year work visas for $3,500 but also require them to return home to apply for U.S. residency and pay a $10,000 fine. It has been roundly criticized by immigrant groups... Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean called the bill "insane" because it would require many illegal immigrants to return home before applying for citizenship.

The Bush plan isn't a "bill" and, according to Laura Wides-Munoz, he was refering to the STRIVE Act, not the Bush scheme.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:11 AM

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)

• Ezra Klein, useful idiot
• Joe Klein/Time Magazine: just a sleazy liar
• David Leonhardt/New York Times: illegal immigration supporting hack
• Chicago alderman's father target of document forgery investigation
• voceunidas.org is now the Swift Raid Collaborative (Mexico-linked Peter Schey)
• Is immigration reform an elaborate practical joke? (Chertoff USA Today interview)
• Minor immigration debate reveals fundamental issue (Dianne Feinstein)
• Bush attacks immigration "reform" opponents, taps out literary allusions
• Steve Lopez: up with illegal immigration propaganda, allegedly Mexico-linked CHIRLA
• Natalie Merchant is not having a good day
• "North American union plan headed to Congress in fall"
• Bill Richardson Lied about the Border Fence
• Janet Napolitano endorses Senate immigration bill; "silent amnesty"
• ACLU has "concerns" about Senate immigration amnesty bill
• Trent Lott's question for voters: "Is the current immigration situation intolerable?"
• Linda Chavez: opposition to amnesy is just about racism, xenophobia
• Michael Chertoff: Mexicans aren't encouraging illegal "migration"; Senate bill is "straight with the American public"
• Sleazy Bush proxy Michael Gerson attacks "nativists" in GOP base over immigration
• False choice alert: NYT/CBS poll says "Majority Favor Changing Immigration Laws"
• We're all birds today

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