« November 2007 | Main | January 2008 »
About the Thomas Crown/Redstate smear
Thomas H. Crown [1] of RedState offers a roundup of the year's events [2] that mentions me:
Second, Lonewacko Blog, if you're reading this -- and based on your obsessively repeated tirade across half the blogosphere and Wikipedia, you are: I banned you, you dirty little racist. I banned you for being a racist, and for showing us that you are a racist. I did not ban you for criticizing George W. Bush, in no small part because where you disagreed with him, I have publicly disagreed with him, you diseased piece of rhinoceros pizzle; I banned you because you decided to share your problems with brown people on this site.
As yet another example of why you can't trust what RedState says, see the archives at this site, or for a quicker read see my last post at RedState, the one that caused me to be banned by Red State.
The last post at RS was simply a quote from an article by Dan Stein of FAIR, in which he used temporally ambiguous language, referring to "illegal aliens" instead of "former illegal aliens who had been converted into legal workers." However, depending on one's temporal reference, Stein's language could have been correct: they were illegal aliens at the time of his writing and would only become legal workers should the "Gold Card" discussed in his post have been enacted. A quick glance shows that FAIR has been mentioned and linked to by RS contributors several times since then.
And, the last time I checked, RedState still has my content on their site, despite my express request that they stop displaying it (and displaying ads next to it). I was unable to find a legal right that RS has to continue displaying my content, yet they've refused my requests to delete it.
And, one wonders why they continue to display my content when Crown suggests it's offensive.
As for Wikipedia, I inserted note of my banning there, but it was deleted in October by someone using the IP address 208.34.234.180, which resolves to a Wilkesboro, NC company called Product Management Inc. with a contact person of Jim Byrd. Whether he has any link to RS is not known.
[1] t-crown.blogspot.com (whether Thomas Crown is his real name or not is unknown; I don't think I've run across him before)
[2] redstate.com/blogs/thomas/2007/dec/31/just_a_drop_of_water_in_an_endless_sea
Posted to Bloggage at 11:55 AM
Dallas Morning News/Rod Dreher names "The Illegal Immigrant" Texan of the Year
The Dallas Morning News - in an essay written by Rod Dreher - has named "The Illegal Immigrant" as their Texan of the Year (link).
In response to what was likely a barrage of emails, their Keven Ann Willey says:
I fear that many of the people upset over our choice for Texan of the Year have read only the headline of the essay and not its content. The essay makes it clear that we're not glorifying the illegal immigrant
Thankfully, the commenters at the last link have spared me from taking the article apart, including comments like this:
Your last sentence, which puts your stamp of opinion on the issue, gives your game away: "How we deal with the stranger among us says not only who we Americans are today but determines who we will become tomorrow." This is standard issue "campassionate conservative" evangelical speak...
Some suggest boycotting the DMN and their affiliated TV stations. More comments on this here, here, and here.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 02:34 PM
They graded paradise, at least the Griffith Park version
The hiking trail leading from the Griffith Park ranger station on Crystal Springs Drive up to Five Points is now open, as is the "hogsback" trail that leads from there up to Mount Hollywood. Unfortunately, as I started hiking up the latter yesterday I screamed out at the top of my lungs, "what the ##&@ did they do?" For, the wise geniuses that recently used helicopters to flock the park with a mulch compound after the recent fire (in order to prevent the natural process of erosion) have graded the hogsback trail. What that lacked in rocks it made up for in being a bit steep, including dirt steps and various other features that made it an entertaining place to engage in some trail running. It also featured unused and rusty pipes that were good for practicing balancing. That's all gone now, and it basically looks like a fire road. I don't know exactly what work they had to do that they had to bring vehicles down it (something not possible before), but the only thing that makes sense is that they wanted to build a berm in order to prevent the mulch from being washed away or to prevent a deepening of natural crevices along the sides. However, as it was the water would have run down the center, and as it is now the water will run down in a wide sheet. While that might prevent the berm they built from being breeched, I tend to think that as it was would have taken care of it. I note also that I was strongly tempted to walk cross-country at the start, but decided against it lest I displace any of their **#*@#*@#@#*@#&@#& mulch.
Posted to Los_Angeles at 05:06 PM
Julia Preston/NYT admits: border fencing, attrition works
Julia Preston of the New York Times has a brief round-up of the year's events in immigration called "Immigration Is Defying Easy Answers". After some expected NYT bias, she closes with:
The next president will still face the tricky task of negotiating not just the politics of the issue, but also some concrete realities. While border fences and immigration raids have discouraged some illegal immigrants from coming and encouraged some who are here to go home, millions of illegal workers have had families here and put down roots, and are not going to disappear.
This is somewhat of a big step for the NYT: admitting that attrition works without sneering. As for the last part of her statement, that's a very strong argument for doing even more: we can't allow people to simply move here and settle down at will, no matter what the NYT thinks.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 04:59 PM
Alan Colmes has a blog
Radio host and co-star of the Hannity & Colmes show Alan Colmes has a blog here. Please go destroy his arguments.
UPDATE: I thank Alan Colmes for sending some traffic my way. I note also that I learned about his site a few days ago and even started pointing out how he's wrong.
Posted to Bloggage at 01:32 PM
Mexico's PRD Party to establish "migrant houses" in the U.S.
According to a report in a Mexican newspaper, in 2008 Mexico's leftwing PRD Party will be establishing "migrant houses" inside the U.S. (translation here). They made the announcement in front of the U.S. Consulate in Mexico City, and the secretary general of that party (Carlos Reyes Gamiz) was accompanied by Elvira Arellano. As with Felipe Calderon, Gamiz said he was going to use U.S. non-profits to push their agenda inside the U.S.:
"The PRD has had a past presence in the U.S. territory, where a relationship has been maintained with agencies that defend human rights, and the goal is to share a work agenda, in this environment in which xenofobia and racism have a greater fervor in that country."
The PRD Party played a role in last year's illegal immigration marches in Chicago, due mainly to the efforts of one of their officials, Jorge Mujica.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:08 PM
Joy Lin/CBS News sneers at Mike Huckabee concern over possible terrorist infiltration (Pakistan)
On the topic of immigration, there are - believe it or not - people who are even worse than Mike Huckabee. One of those is Joy Lin of CBS News, who offers "Huckabee Ties Bhutto's Assassination to Illegal Immigration" (link). While Huck apparently made a few mistakes on other topics related to the situation there, one thing he said should be supported by all those who want to prevent terrorist attacks inside the U.S. Apparently that doesn't include CBS News:...After Mike Huckabee was done gladhanding with Iowans at the overcrowded Pizza Ranch restaurant, journalists grilled Huckabee on a hard right turn he took from the subject of Benazir Bhutto's assassination to illegal immigration.Yes, Joy Lin, it's a "hard right turn" and "ethnic baiting" to be concerned about possible terrorist infiltration of the U.S. The fact that he was even asked that, and had to reply "no" is completely preventable: if people went to campaign events and asked real questions about this issue - either of the candidates or of the "reporters" themselves - no "reporter" would dare ask such an incredibly stupid and irresponsible question.
In his speech today, Huckabee said it should be of concern to Americans that 660 illegal Pakistanis crossed the American border last year.
One reporter asked if that was ethnic baiting?
Huckabee went on to send a bit of a secret message, implying that he isn't concerned about illegal aliens just as long as they make some people money:
"The fact is the immigration issue is not so much about people coming to pick lettuce or make beds. It's about people that can come with a shoulder fired missile and can do serious damage and harm to us, and that's what we need to be worried about. And the unsecure borders that we have pose a real national security threat."Huckabee said he'd been briefed on a study showing that the largest category of non-Latin Americans coming over the border are Pakistanis; Lin apparently asked for the study itself, and mentions that the campaign hasn't responded. While it's good that she wants the study, the inclusion of that point seems to be an attempt by her to imply that no such study exists.
In related news, AlterNet's coverage of this is remarkably similar to that from CBS News. A post from Satyam Khanna of ThinkProgress includes the following (alternet.org/blogs/video/71880/#more):
Huckabee also seized on the Bhutto assassination to tighten up his hard-line anti-immigration stance. Yesterday, he said the U.S. should be on heightened alert from the threat posed by Pakistani immigrants.It would be extraordinarily easy for someone to discredit the Left/Dems/MSM on this issue, and only corruption prevents the GOP from doing it.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:39 AM
HuffPost breaking news alert: Laurie David stranded at Mojave desert Motel 6!
Before the advent of the Huffington Post, the only way that Laurie David could get the word out about her adventures was through things like typing out articles for the monthly Brentwood Intelligencer. Nowadays, sharing her life with the world is just a click away, as she offers "Dispatch From A Mojave Desert Motel 6" (link):If there is anyone out there wondering if I made it out of Iceland a couple weeks ago, the answer is yes. The freakish high winds finally calmed down long enough to fly home. But if you're wondering where I am right this minute you can find me in the Mojave desert at the Motel 6 in the middle of a freak wind storm!! Believe me I wouldn't make this up...I left the following comment; it hasn't been approved and it might not be. We could debate all day about the correct strategy to use in such cases. Should there just be one hidden zinger? Or, should I go whole hog and include mention of private jets? Should I include conspiracy information about powerful interests blocking Mojave wind farms? In any case, feel free to do better:
Just two hours in (two rest stops and one DVD later) the wind kicks up just past Lancaster and with it a full scale brown out sand storm! Traffic slowed to a crawl, white knuckles gripped the steering wheel and we inched forward. Then a police car blocked the way and said all roads leading to Mammoth are closed till the winds die down.
In an emergency, you have to do what you have to do! We were in a similar situation once, although the motel was a bit more quaint than those garish Motel 6es. I had my PA approach the manager and set things up, and we "bought out" those who were staying in the adjoining rooms so we could get some privacy. There were no other rooms available, and at first most of them didn't like the idea of sleeping in their cars, but as they say "money talks".UPDATE: Still no sign of my comment. Maybe we'll have to wait until she comes back from lunch at the IHOP before she approves or denies it. I note also that she's put this in their "Politics" section with the following tags: Extreme Weather, Malibu Fires, Mammoth Ski Resort, Santa Ana Winds, Weather, Breaking Politics News
UPDATE 2: I changed the title to be more dramatic, but despite that my comment looks like it's been denied. However, I did leave a new comment. At first glance this might appear too over the top. But, it is the HuffPost so this is normal:
I've been driving up 395 for years, and I've never seen the dust storms as bad as they've been during the Bush administration. I think it's even worse than we fear. Not only are they ignoring Global Warming, I think they must be engaging in some form of weather modification or something.UPDATE 3: The second comment was approved. I have nothing more to add.
Posted to Bloggage at 11:57 AM
UPI wacky news: "Athletes, migrants drinking Pedialyte" (in order to avoid dying in desert)
Here's some wacky, fun news for those humanitarians who support or enable illegal immigration, thereby playing a part in encouraging people to try to cross the desert into the U.S. with thousands having died along the way. It's so wacky that UPI has put it into their "Quirks" section under the title "Athletes, migrants drinking Pedialyte" (link):U.S. pro athletes as well as illegal immigrants are turning to drinks designed to rehydrate sick infants for a source of liquid nutrition...But, wait, it gets even better. The UPI article appears to be based on "Pro athletes, migrants turn to baby drinks/Solutions quench adult thirsts" from Chris Hawley of the Arizona Republic (link). They substituted the "quirks" treatment for some helpful tips and an attempt to portray border fences - not those like the Republic who support illegal immigration - as the culprits:
However, athletes aren't the only dehydrated people turning to the baby beverage for sustenance -- shopkeepers in Sonoran towns across the Mexican border say Pedialyte and its Mexican competitor, Electrolit, are flying off the shelves...
The rehydrating solutions help those seeking to cross the border on foot to stave off dehydration, the top cause of death in the desert.
"It is recommended that you carry oral solution with you," says a guide for migrants published by the government of Mexico's Yucatan state. "It is sold in pharmacies and contains salt."Abbott Laboratories (makers of Pedialyte) claim not to have known about these uses for their products, but their Mexican counterpart (Pisa Laboratories, makers of Electrolit) not only knows but, as might be suspected, promotes it:
Sales to migrants have increased in recent years as crackdowns and border walls in Texas and California have forced illegal border-crossers deeper into the Arizona desert, store managers said.
"The migrants are now using it instead of water," said Gabriela Flores, director of marketing for Electrolit. "The truth is, it does help them a lot."
Posted to Immigration2007b at 12:07 AM
Don't leave! Stay and watch this Academy Award-winning documentary
If you're like me, a production house that lists among it supporters Jackson Browne, Stan Goff, "Progressive Democrats of the Santa Monica Mountains" (?), "Palisadians for Peace" (?), United for Peace and Justice, Michael Moore, and the like might cause you to sprint for the exit. However, you might want to try to ignore those folks as best you can and watch one or more segments of the Panama Deception from the Empowerment Project. Someone has uploaded a copy to Youtube, and it was the winner of the 1993 Academy Award for Best Documentary and was produced by, among others, the inimitable Barbara Trent:
Click the user's name to see the other segments, and, yes, that is an interesting profile page he has.
Posted to ThePeaceMovement at 08:34 PM
Citgo uses ethnic solidarity to sell gasoline
Via this we learn that Venezuala's Citgo Petroleum has been/is running TV ads - apparently since last year - that encourage U.S. Latinos to buy their gasoline out of ethnic solidarity. An ad is here. It starts with someone playing "Take me out to the ballgame", when he receives hand signals from someone else and then launches into a salsa number. That bring the previously bored crowd - all of the same ethnicity - alive and they begin to dance as "Energia Latina" flashes on the scoreboard.
While marketing campaigns sometimes miss the mark or try to push the envelope rather than follow a trend, I'm going to guess that they know their market and know that many would heed the call. So, mark this down as yet another small illustration of the current assimilation problem.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 08:19 PM
Less than 100 supervisors arrested on immigration charges in 2007 (+Spencer Hsu's pro-Dem spin)
Spencer Hsu of the Washington Post offers "Immigrant Crackdown Falls Short/Despite Tough Rhetoric, Few Employers of Illegal Workers Face Criminal Charges". While we should be thankful for that news, he also offers some pro-Democratic Party spin.
Despite Bush administration blather (Michael Chertoff: "The days of treating employers who violate these laws by giving them the equivalent of a corporate parking ticket -- those days are gone. It's now felonies, jail time, fines and forfeitures."):
Fewer than 100 owners, supervisors or hiring officials were arrested in fiscal 2007, compared with nearly 4,900 arrests that involved illegal workers, providers of fake documents and others, the figures show... Late in the Clinton administration and early in the current administration, the number of illegal immigrants arrested in work-site cases fell -- from 2,849 in 1999 to a low of 445 in 2003 -- although there has since been a rebound. The number of criminal cases brought against employers during that period fell from 182 to four... ICE reported that the 92 criminal arrests made in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 included 59 owners and 33 corporate officials, human resources workers, crew chiefs and others in the "supervisory chain."
Doris Meissner comes by to sideways promote "immigration reform" by refering to the "chronic failure of employer enforcement under current laws".
As for the spin, Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) is quoted throughout as a supporter of enforcement, which she might just be. However, Hsu fails to note that the Democratic Party takes various steps to block enforcement, as do groups to which they're linked:
The Bush administration has said it is trying to improve its Internet-based E-Verify program, through which less than 1 percent of U.S. employers now voluntarily check new hires' Social Security numbers. It is also fighting major business, farm and labor groups in federal court to use Social Security data generated when suspect numbers are submitted to the government as a sweeping nationwide enforcement tool.
What that fails to mention is that one of the lead parties to the suit is the ACLU, and many people might miss the "labor" part; another plaintiff is the AFL-CIO. Both have degrees of influence over the Democratic Party.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 04:26 PM
MSM meme: voters ask tougher immigration questions than reporters
A subspecies of MSM reports features recounts of voters asking the presidential candidates questions about immigration- or North American Union-related matters. The reporters usually try to spin it in the best (pro-illegal immigration) light possible, frequently not offering everything that the voters and the candidates say, and frequently giving the candidates chances to "correct" "misstatements" made by the voters.These reports also reveal just how corrupt the MSM is: they're the ones who should be asking the tough questions, but instead all we get is horserace and the occasional biased recounting of what someone else asked.
The effect can be seen in a recent piece from Ron Claiborne of ABC News, and in July, Michael Luo of the New York Times reported on the candidates being asked about the NAU/NAFTA Superhighway. He allowed Giuliani to state that he had no knowledge of the scheme, when in fact his law firm is involved with the Trans Texas Corridor. Another example comes from Matt Stuart of ABC (link):
Romney faced a wide range of questions from the audiences in Coastal and Northern South Carolina today, from his stance on stem cells to the "consolidation of the North American union."The report contains nothing more about that, and just transcribes a few other comments. If Stuart had wanted to do real reporting he would have pressed Romney on the issue. So, why didn't he?
"Do you mean unifying our country with Canada and Mexico?" Romney said to the later, stating simply "No."
UPDATE: Along the same lines, see this article from Bennett Roth of the Houston Chronicle.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:09 PM
Ron Claiborne/ABC, Peter Canellos/Boston Globe help John McCain mislead about immigration
Ron Claiborne of ABC News offers "McCain Still Dogged by Immigration Issue" (link). He discusses how no matter where McCain goes he's asked questions about immigration matters; unfortunately, Claiborne didn't do his job (or at least the job I'd do) and the only questions he asked McCain about this allowed him to present his side of the matter.
And, Claiborne also allowed McCain to mislead:
He said he was often asked questions at his town hall meetings by citizens citing alarmist and usually fictitious anecdotes... Earlier that day, a woman said she had heard that some Mexican-American children in American schools were refusing to put their hands over their hearts during the Pledge of the Allegiance and other Mexican immigrants were flying the Mexican flag above the American flag somewhere... McCain wondered if these tales that people are citing are coming from talk radio where immigration is a burning issue.
I don't know about the first, but the second has happened at least twice and there have probably been more incidents. In 2006, students from another nearby school raised the Mexican flag over an upside down American flag at Montebello High School near Los Angeles. Earlier this year, a U.S. vet cut down a Mexican flag that was flying over the U.S. flag in Reno (youtube.com/watch?v=Px1PTsEdC1Y). While ABC News doesn't appear to have covered either incident, surely some editor there must have heard of those or at least should have done some research. In fact, a google search for mexican flag flying over american flag brings up several hits, including ones with that very title.
Are Claiborne and his editors incompetent, are they lazy, or were they simply trying to deceive?
Also, Peter Canellos of the Boston Globe offers "Fear of foreigners roils Iowa/Angry rural voters voicing far-fetched theories" (link) which has a very similar formulation involving those flags.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 12:52 PM
International incident involving Queen Elizabeth, David Icke, and me
There are several ways to respond to the Queen of England (Elizabeth II) putting her Christmas 2007 speech on Youtube. One can simply enjoy the spectacle and the majesty. Or, one can leave a cheerful comment on one of the copies of the speech that others have uploaded. Alternatively, one can launch into a disquisition about whether royalty has a place in that country.
Or, one can just go for the cheap laughs:
I don't know why its so hard to get a good video on the British Royal family. I've never been able to find a reptilian video on them that was really clear. I think thats why your getting 1 star.
Indeed.
Posted to WackyHumor at 12:45 PM
Steve Decosta/Standard-Times shows how to spin sweatshops (New Bedford Michael Bianco raid, WBSM)
Steve Decosta of the Standard-Times (South Coast Massachusetts) offers "Year in review: Bianco raid put SouthCoast at center of immigration debate" about the immigration raid of Michael Bianco Inc. in New Bedford. Most people admit that that factory was a sweatshop and that's not only been printed in previous reports by that paper but Decosta includes it in paragraph 21 of his "report".However, what goes before then could have equally been used to promote child labor back in the day. It also contains photos designed to provoke an emotional response, including the same picture of a crying child featured in the Urban Institute/NCLR report on "victims" of immigration enforcement; not only does Decosta mention their report, but the photo was taken by Peter Pereira from his paper.
Before the 21st paragraph where the conditions at the plant are partly described, we get things like this:
It was truly a trying year for America's tired, its poor, its huddled masses yearning to breathe free.If SouthCoastToday and the rest want to highlight their plight in their home countries, that might get a lot more support than their current tack of supporting massive illegal activity and what appears to have amounted to worker abuse.
Even as the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants were squarely in the crosshairs of law enforcement agencies and radio talk-show callers, lawmakers essentially turned their backs on their plight.
SouthCoast became the focal point of the immigrant debate — some would say debacle — after federal authorities raided a South End military contractor's factory, ripping 361 undocumented workers away from their sewing machines and from their families.
Decosta goes on to quote someone who left a comment on one of their articles using the handle "Mexifornian"; that person started off making some sense but then refered to the children affected by the raid as "collateral damage". In effect, Decosta is trying to portray the people who would put a stop to sweatshops and massive illegal activity as cold-hearted, as opposed to the warm-hearted folks who support massive government corruption and abusive workplaces. "Mexifornian" is the only person in the whole article who gives a clue that we shouldn't be supporting people coming here illegally, and it's presented only as a choice between being "sympathetic" and not.
The article also quotes "Carly Burton, a policy associate with the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition", "Rev. Marc Fallon, a caseworker for Catholic Social Services", and "Rev. Richard Wilson, pastor of Our Lady of Guadalupe Parish at St. James Church". Fallon appears to be quite a bit of work, saying:
"Every time you listen to WBSM, the vitriolic statements you hear there, there is no distinction between them and what was being said in Germany during the 1930s."I'm not familiar with that radio station, but I tend to think there's a significant distinction. Their was a relationship between the newspaper and the station, but the paper broke it off in August after they got tired of being slammed on the air (link). In March the editor of the paper, Bob Unger, defended them against charges that (as with the current piece) they were pulling at people's heartstrings in order to support illegal immigration, refering to "WBSM's on-air jihad against illegal immigrants since the raid" (link). One of the "jihadis", host Ken Pittman, organized an "America First" rally in May (link), and he certainly doesn't sound like a "jihadi" to me (link):
I have been calling for people to help feed these people while we figure out how to reunite the families but I am calling for deportation of ALL who have broken our laws. The local newspaper, The New Bedford Standard Times has decided to overwhelmingly favor the catch and release policy and let all " deserving," aliens continue to take from the taxpayer resources with equal access to Americans.He may have subsequently appeared on O'Reilly's show, but the post doesn't describe what happened. He also alludes to possible funny business involved in granting the federal contract to Michael Bianco Inc.; perhaps SouthCoastToday should concentrate on that instead.
The O'Reilly Factor of Fox News contacted me and asked me to look into the now infamous op/ed of the NY Times newspaper suggesting that the ICE raid was responsible for babies of illegal aliens being sent to area hospitals as a result of the incarcerations of their mothers (here against the law). I was able to determine from a Hospital spokeswoman and from the very woman who carried one of the two babies in question, that these poor babes were indeed dehydrated..as a result of pneumonia, something the New York Times mentioned nothing of. It didn’t end there. I was also able to learn that one of the mothers of these two actually lied about having children when the federal officials interviewed her. This kept the two separated much longer than was necessary...
Reports like this illustrate once again the impact that discrediting religious leaders who support illegal immigration could have on this debate. Publicly asking them tough questions wouldn't give hacks like Decosta as great a chance to hide behind false compassion to support illegal immigration.
1/18/07 UPDATE: John Kerry pushed for and now welcomes an investigation into the raid (link). He's interested in how they could have gotten a DOJ contract while under investigation by ICE. But, he's mainly interested in the raid's side-effects, such as sending detainees to Texas. Of especial note, he's not so interested in the fact that almost everyone agrees it was a sweatshop. If he came out in strong support of enforcement but wanted to do it the right way, that would be one thing. However, the bottom line is that he's trying to block enforcement, whether he explicitly says that or not.
Related:
Ted Kennedy, William Delahunt try blocking immigration enforcement ("Lactation Memo")
Michael Bianco Inc. workers invite lawmakers to take tour of plant (PR firm)
Carol Rose/ACLU Massachusetts compares ICE tactics to Slobodan Milosevic, ethnic cleansing
Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley's "Save The Sweatshops" movement
NYT hides behind "terrorized" illegal aliens to support massive immigration
Posted to Immigration2007b at 03:59 PM
Scottsdale: police only asking if suspects in country illegally (AP correction)
These are the moments I live for. Yesterday, the AP offered this:Police in suburban Scottsdale have begun routinely asking for proof of citizenship from every suspect they arrest and turning those who are in this country illegally over to federal immigration officials.Today comes this AP correction, which in full states:
In a Dec. 23 story about a Scottsdale Police Department immigration policy, The Associated Press reported erroneously that officers have begun to ask for proof of citizenship from every suspect they arrest.The AP would issue similar corrections for all the errors in their previous coverage, but no computer could hold that much data.
Sgt. Mark Clark, a Scottsdale police spokesman, said officers are asking people who are arrested if they are in the country illegally, but police aren't requiring that criminal suspects prove their lawful presence in the country.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 03:09 PM
Here's your Christmas present
Here's a Christmas music video I made several years ago; history described at the link.
Posted to WackyHumor at 11:55 AM
Dana Milbank lies, misleads, smears (Tancredo)
The Washington Post doesn't appear to be sore losers about the failure of immigration "reform". They recently published a vile column from Harold Meyerson and a similar editorial. Now comes Dana Milbank with "Hasta La Vista" (link) about Rep. Tom Tancredo dropping his presidential bid. The problems start with the title, a childish attempt at irony. The running theme throughout is that Tancredo is angry; in fact he uses that word four times. Why is he an "angry man"?
We know this because he has proposed dropping bombs on Mecca. We know this because he sang "Dixie" at a South Carolina gathering full of Confederate flags and white supremacists. And we know this because he wants to expel 12 million people now living in the United States.
The first sentence was only the ultimate response to nukes having gone off in several U.S. cities. The second is discussed here and here. The third might imply that he supports mass deportations, when in fact he doesn't. Milbank then goes on to mock the fact that there were only 18 supporters when he made his announcement. Then:
In response to questions, he admitted he was pulling out to help defeat somebody he dislikes more than an undocumented Mexican in the desert: former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, the new Republican front-runner here with what Tancredo called an "abysmal" record of "inviting" illegal immigrants.
I don't think Tancredo would actually "dislike" someone who's trying to cross the desert into the U.S., he just doesn't want them to do it. On the other hand, the Washington Post's support for illegal immigration plays a part in encouraging people to try to cross the desert, despite the fact that thousands have died while trying. And, of course, Huck has promoted and enabled illegal immigration such as by helping Mexico to build a consulate in his state. Then, it's on to a lie:
Never mind that Huckabee was tough enough on immigration to win the support of the border-vigilante Minuteman Project.
The support only came from Jim Gilchrist himself, not any groups using that name. After discussing an admittedly stupid video that Tancredo released (youtube.com/watch?v=n5GUCQAdlxg), it's Milbank's turn to admit why he's the one who's angry:
"It's beyond anybody's wildest expectations that we have been able to, with the help of America, really, get our national leaders to pay attention to the issue," declared Candidate Two Percent... He boasted, with some validity, that his candidacy helped lead "nearly every Republican presidential candidate to commit themselves to an immigration plan that calls for securing our borders." It's true: As his rivals coopted his nativist positions -- even if just rhetorically -- Tancredo became a victim of his own success.
UPDATE: The technicalities of the Gilchrist endorsement are described here:
it is important to note that the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (MCDC), the nation's largest Minuteman organization, is a 501(C)4 non-profit organization and cannot and does not endorse any candidate for public office. MCDC is not associated with Mr. Jim Gilchrist, who today endorsed Mike Huckabee for president. Jim Gilchrist's erstwhile Minuteman Project is itself an organization which by its own representations as a non-profit civic group cannot legally endorse candidates. It does not have any volunteers who observe illegal border activity. It has no border fence building projects. Jim Gilchrist here speaks only for Jim Gilchrist, he does not speak for the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, nor is he nationally representative of most patriots in the "Minuteman movement" – who under no circumstances could ignore the failed record nor endorse the duplicitous "plan" recently rolled out by candidate Mike Huckabee. The national media needs to recognize that Jim Gilchrist's endorsement is his own personal statement, nothing more.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:35 AM
Virginia Employers for "Sensible" Immigration Policy
A new group of businesses has been formed to oppose anti-illegal immigration laws in their state, called "Virginia Employers for Sensible Immigration Policy". One of the organizers is Julia Ciarlo Hammond, state director of the National Federation of Independent Business. They'll supposedly only focus on measures affecting employers, and they state that they want to follow the law, they just don't want undue burdens. But, don't they all.
The coalition includes some of the most influential industries in the state, including many that rely heavily on low-cost and migrant labor. The group includes home builders, contractors, hog and poultry growers, retailers, truckers, the hospitality industry and the state Chamber of Commerce.
A purported list of their members is here: raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=11853
Note that they point out that the majority of campaign contributions from the various groups are to Republicans, as the same time that many at that site play their own very small role in enabling illegal immigration through various statements such as calling those who oppose illegal activity names.
National names on the list are Pilgrim's Pride Corporation, Smithfield Foods, and Tyson Foods.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:17 AM
Linda Chavez meddles in Prince William County Virginia immigration debate
From this 12/14 article:The chairman of a federal civil rights panel clashed yesterday with Prince William Board of County Supervisors Chairman Corey A. Stewart over the recent crackdown on illegal immigrants approved by the board.As Stewart points out, Chavez is a known apologist for illegal immigration, so - surprise! - whoever nominated her to the committee knew what she was going to say.
Linda Chavez, a conservative commentator who heads a U.S. Commission on Civil Rights panel examining whether the crackdown violates federal antidiscrimination laws, said she believed the supervisors based their action largely on anecdotal evidence of problems caused by illegal immigrants...
I'll outsource the rest of this to most of the comments here.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:15 AM
Here's a keeper
Here's some raw concert footage from 1987 in Rochester, New York featuring Natalie Merchant/10,000 Maniacs performing My Sister Rose. The sound isn't that great and the video could use some post-processing, but considering the twirling I hardly noticed that:
A version of Peace Train from the same concert has better sound (link).
Posted to WackyHumor at 08:48 PM
Illinois gov. Rod Blagojevich now part of FBI's "pay-to-play" corruption investigation
From this:Federal prosecutors for the first time brought their corruption investigation to the desk of Gov. Rod Blagojevich, making public Friday the allegations of two convicted insiders who say the governor offered them state business for their political backing.Oddly enough, the Tribune appears to have pulled a background on Blago's woes that was excerpted here. I read the article on their site, but when I refreshed the page it was gone. In any case, another person involved in this issue is Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who's also linked to Obama. See the sidebar articles at the first link or this.
In a 78-page court filing that identifies the governor only as "Public Official A," federal authorities detailed the accusations of the two former political operatives who have already pleaded guilty in a shakedown scheme and are cooperating with prosecutors.
Blagojevich told one of the men he "could award contracts, legal work and investment banking to help with fundraising," according to the filing.
The other insider, Stuart Levine, described a flight home from a New York trip during which he thanked Blagojevich for reappointing him to an influential and allegedly corrupt state hospital board.
"You stick with us and you will do very well for yourself," Blagojevich replied, according to the court document.
Levine did not have a direct conversation with Blagojevich about the board activities but he understood the governor "meant that Levine could make a lot of money working with Public Official A's administration," according to the filing.
Previously:
FBI probes Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich; hiring kickback?
DOJ sues Illinois over statewide sanctuary policy (Blagojevich)
Rod Blagojevich, Luis Gutierrez, and the alleged FALN terrorist
Illinois House approves driver's licenses for illegal aliens
Will Rod Blagojevich pro-illegal immigration scheme violate law?
Illegal aliens march in Chicago, get support from Blago, Gutierrez, local media
Blagojevich-linked group agitating illegal aliens, calls for general strike
Blagojevich stands behind NOI member on Illinois hate crimes commission
Blagojevich gives illegal aliens better deal than veterans
Posted to Politics at 08:03 PM
Jay Newton-Small/Time misleads about immigration (Huckabee, Tancredo, INS)
A minor example of how Time magazine and the rest of the MSM mislead and/or don't understand immigration issues is presented in "Tancredo's Single-Issue Victory" (link):...By basics [U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo] means forcing all illegal immigrants to go home and reapply to enter the country legally if they want to return, making English the national language and denying municipal services for illegal aliens such as driver's licenses, Social Security benefits and state-subsidized education. Huckabee has come under particular fire for backing college-level grants for the children of illegal immigrants in Arkansas. "We are a better country than to punish children for what their parents did," said Huckabee, defending his stance, in a Florida debate last month...1. "forcing" would seem to imply some form of mass deportations; Tancredo actually supports attrition which might be better described as "encouraging".
Tancredo has announced he is also not running for reelection for his Congressional seat. His immediate plans, he said, are to hang out with his grandkids, stump for Romney and finish his last year in office. After that, who knows? Romney may one day need to appoint a head of Immigration and Naturalization Services.
2. I don't believe Tancredo supports ending "state-subsidized education" for K-12, especially since that was decided on by the Supreme Court (thanks to Peter Schey). He does oppose college-level discounts for illegal aliens.
3. Huck's program, as discussed at the link, was irrespective of their parents' status(es), and that misleading formulation has been used many times in the MSM. Even the WaPo has corrected that formulation.
4. Jay Newton-Small includes a quote from Huck, but as with Joseph Berger of the NYT he doesn't include the response from Mitt Romney regarding discounts being a finite resource.
5. The INS hasn't existed for over four years.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:35 AM
Mike Huckabee sued over Mexican consulate deal
A private citizen in Arkansas (Jim Parsons) is suing the former governor of that state, Mike Huckabee, over his role in helping the Mexican government establish their latest consulate there (link). The main claim is that Huckabee used public funds to offer discounted office space to the consulate, and that per AR's laws he was forbidden from doing so. The suit also contains a state Freedom of Information Act request, and raises the issue of hard drives that Huckabee apparently had destroyed on his way out the door at the end of 2006. The suit wants a refund for the cost of destroying them.
The Huckster is being sued as a private citizen; others named in the suit include current governor Mike Beebe (only in his official role), and the Mexican consulate.
Related:
More on Mike Huckabee's questionable Mexican consulate deal
Mike Huckabee defends Mexico consulate deal (businesses agreed to pay Mexico's bills; law violated?)
Thanks, Huckabee: Arkansas Mexican consul opposing immigration laws
A question you can ask Huck
Mexican consul from Little Rock encourages advocacy for illegal immigration
Posted to Immigration2007b at 03:35 PM
You can't trust what Harold Meyerson says (immigration edition)
Harold Meyerson of the American Prospect offers a vile, illegal immigration-supporting smear piece called "Hard-liners for Jesus". Pretty much everything in it is bad, including comparing the GOP to the KKK. And, he misleads about the immigration stance of all the GOP candidates and the vast majority of GOP voters:But it's on their policies concerning immigrants where Republicans -- candidates and voters alike -- really run afoul of biblical writ. Not on immigration as such but on the treatment of immigrants who are already here. [Biblical "stranger" references; those are answered here and here]Very few people want to actually punish illegal aliens. And, in fact, some such as Ruy Giuliani or Mike Huckabee are supporters of amnesty. The most that others support is attrition, which is designed not to punish illegal aliens but to reduce the jobs and benefits magnet so that many will go home and many fewer will try to come here.
Yet the distinctive cry coming from the Republican base this year isn't simply to control the flow of immigrants across our borders but to punish the undocumented immigrants already here, children and parents alike.
And, supporting illegal immigration is not humanitarian in the least.
You can leave comments at the WaPo, or send him an email explaining why he's wrong to meyersonh *at* prospect.org
However, the better option in the long term is to go to appearances by those religious leaders who make the same "stranger" arguments, publicly point out how they're wrong using the last link, and then upload the exchange to video sharing sites. If we could completely discredit someone like Roger Mahony or Jim Wallis it would prevent people like Meyerson from making similar false arguments.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:03 PM
Matt Yglesias, Ross Douthat, and Marc Ambinder at... The Table
This video of the premiere edition of The Atlantic's entry into vlogging is just too funny for words. I was laughing so hard at the intro music plus the hosts turning to the camera that I was unable to listen to the rest (probably for the best).
IT WAS ALL JUST A DREAM UPDATE: Now, SansAClue (Yglesias) says the intro was meant to be ironic. Apparently, as in, we were expecting three privileged Northeast establishment hacks and... we got something different? Despite his explanation, I'll continue laughing at them, not with them.
Posted to WackyHumor at 08:31 PM
ArnieCare: budget busting universal healthcare in California (illegal aliens, Fabian Nunez, Don Perata)
Unlike, say, Grover Norquist, I'm not a reflexive opponent of some form of universal healthcare, at least on the face of it. But, as with other things there's frequently a hidden agenda, such as people pushing UHC who have wider goals. Does anyone think Arnold Schwarzenegger, Fabian Nunez, and Andy Stern of the SEIU (pictured right) are just humble albeit misguided progressive servants of the greater good?
And, there's the matter of corporatism, as those who are some degree of crook want everyone else to pay the full and true cost for their workers. And, of course, there's the insanity of providing a huge array of public services at the same time as allowing loose borders. And, there's the insanity of threatening to declare a fiscal emergency and then just a few days later having a vote on a massive UHC plan.
Yes, the insanity I'm discussing is in California, right now. From the 14th (link):
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will declare a state of fiscal emergency under never-before-used rules that would force lawmakers into a special session to address a $14 billion deficit. The governor, touring a hospital in Long Beach, said he will declare the emergency in January when lawmakers return from recess. Under the action, the Legislature would have 45 days to find ways to plug the shortfall, including cutting spending from the current budget.Flash forward to earlier today ("California Assembly approves plan to overhaul health care system", Tom Chorneau, link):
California's Assembly approved a landmark overhaul of the state's estimated $190 billion-a-year health care system Monday, setting the stage for a vote in the state Senate in the coming weeks.The problem is that a large part of that 6.8 million are illegal aliens who should not be here in the first place. And, by offering benefits, we'll attract even more people, leading to an even greater problem. By restricting benefits (as Proposition 187 tried to do), we can reduce the number of those who shouldn't be here. That will to a certain degree reduce consumer spending and the like, but overall it will leave more for U.S. citizens and those who are here legally. If the Legislature wants UHC, they should be responsible enough to try to reduce illegal immigration in California. And, that will make the sales job even easier, as people no longer have to guess whether those pushing this scheme are in one way or another agents of or at the least useful idiots for the Mexican government. Of course, whether people like Fabian Nunez, Gil Cedillo, and others really represent U.S. interests or Mexican interests is a very open question.
The proposal, which has the support of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger as well as some key labor unions and a handful of big corporations, would require all Californians to have health insurance through their employers or government-sponsored programs, or to purchase it on the open market.
The new system, which also would require voter approval, would be financed by a new tax on hospitals, an increase in the tobacco tax, billions of new federal matching funds, and a tax on employers of up to 6.5 percent of their payrolls.
Supporters say the overhaul would reduce the cost of health care because most of the estimated 6.8 million uninsured residents, who now receive care at hospital emergency rooms, would get the benefit of regular doctor visits and preventive care once they were covered.
Whether he's playing a game or not, Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata wants a study of the costs first, apparently specifically because it has to not only be passed by the Legislature and then signed by Arnie but also be approved by the voters.
I didn't read the whole bill since it's around half a meg of text. While some parts of it seem like they might restrict benefits to non-illegal aliens, others have the opposite effect (link):
...On and after July 1, 2009, children who otherwise meet eligibility requirements for the program but for their immigration status are eligible for the program.Note also that neither the SFGate article above, nor the Mercury News version from Mike Zapler (link), nor the Los Angeles Times version ("State Assembly backs healthcare for everyone" by Jordan Rau and Patrick McGreevy, link) mention anything about immigration.
...Notwithstanding any other provision of law, on and after July 1, 2009, a child who is otherwise eligible to participate in the program shall not be determined ineligible solely on the basis of his or her immigration status.
...An individual under the age of 19 years who would be eligible for full-scope Medi-Cal benefits without a share of cost, if not for his or her immigration status, shall be eligible for full-scope Medi-Cal services under this section.
...To establish that the individual meets the immigration requirements under this section, the parent or caretaker relative shall sign under penalty of perjury an attestation that the individual is not described in any of the categories enumerated on the attestation for which federal financial participation for full-scope services is available.
Posted to California at 11:19 PM
What? Washington Post tells truth about Mike Huckabee in-state tuition
Apparently there's been some sort of cosmic shakeup or something, because the Washington Post has finally told the truth about something relating to immigration. Bearing in mind that this is probably just a fluke, Michael Dobbs' "Fact Checker" column basically agrees with my earlier assessment and says:Asked about the measure during the November 28 CNN/YouTube debate, Huckabee said that his proposal applied to students who had been in Arkansas schools from the time they were "five or six years old," were "A-plus" students, "drug and alcohol-free", and in the process of "applying for citizenship." He implied that his support was limited to these students, a point reiterated by his spokeswoman Kirsten Fedewa.He gives him "three Pinocchios" for failing to tell the whole truth.
"He did not support in-state tuition," Fedewa said in an e-mail. "He supported scholarships for students who qualified."
The distinction that Huckabee is attempting to draw is an artificial one. His original State of the State address talked about making all Arkansas high school graduates eligible for state "financial aid," not just A-plus students applying for citizenship. It is true that Huckabee was particularly interested in the scholarship part of the bill. But it is untrue to claim that he "did not support in-state tuition" for illegal immigrants.
Of course, not everything is sweetness and light in WaPo land. Michael Dobbs has also denied the NAFTA Superhighway (link). And, both David Broder (link) and Howard Kurtz (link) previously retransmitted the Huck spin.
Posted to Politics at 10:31 AM
Kay Bailey Hutchison, Dems scale back border fence
From this:[The House] last night passed a giant new spending bill that undermines current plans for a U.S.-Mexico border fence, allowing the Homeland Security Department to build a single-tier barrier rather than the two-tier version that has worked in California.Reps. Peter King (R-NY) and Duncan Hunter (R-CA) both oppose the move. The first says it "guts the Secure Fence Act almost entirely", the second says it would be a "significant step backwards". Apparently the changes are in line with what the DHS wants.
The spending bill, written by Democrats and passed 253-154 with mostly their votes...
...The 2006 Secure Fence Act specifically called for "two layers of reinforced fencing" and listed five specific sections of border where it should be installed. The new spending bill removes the two-tier requirement and the list of locations.
House Democrats said they were just adopting the Senate version, which was backed by a bipartisan group of border-state senators and passed the Senate several times this year.
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, the Texas Republican who has led the charge to change the 2006 law, said she wants to give Homeland Security more flexibility and wants local officials and landowners to be consulted...
There's also what appears to be a minor Rudy Giuliani connection to all this. His law firm (Bracewell & Giuliani) apparently donated money to Hutchison, and that firm has represented DynCorp - a "virtual fence" subcontractor - in litigation. See comments 10 and 44 here. Whether there's shenanigans involved isn't known.
Related:
Secure Fence Act: a hoax and a scam? (Kay Bailey Hutchison, DHS)
Posted to Immigration2007b at 10:15 AM
Jim Gilchrist reconsidering Mike Huckabee endorsement
Huckstered! From this:Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist says he will have to reconsider his endorsement of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee after learning the Republican presidential candidate favors allowing illegal aliens to wait only days to receive documents allowing re-entry into the U.S...He says it will be a few days before he'll have an answer from the Huckabee campaign about his concerns.
"I'm going to have to follow up on this," Gilchrist said. "I had not seen before anything in Governor Huckabee's plan where repatriation and touch-back could involve only days, not years...
Posted to Immigration2007b at 09:52 AM
Some forms of xenophobia are acceptable
Even many "liberals" would agree that some forms of xenophobia are acceptable. For instance, the Indian singer - whose name I tried and failed to find - who was playing a double guitar in a Bollywood music video while dressed as a cowboy. It's OK to be afraid of foreigners like that.
Another foreigner it's OK to be afraid of is this guy:
Posted to WackyHumor at 08:24 PM
Barack Obama: not as smart as a 5th-grader
Last week, a fifth-grader asked Barack Obama a raw question about immigration and terrorism at a stop in Iowa. Obama's response shows that he's not qualified for any political office:
Posted to Politics at 09:28 AM
Maybe she has other talents
I certainly have never taken a former supermodel turned megastar singer anywhere, much less to Disneyland Paris. So, it's only jealousy when I point out that whatever Nicolas Sarkozy sees in Carla Bruni, it's probably not her voice (link). I'm also going to rip off a commenter at that link and ask, "is that Sarkozy with the candle?"
Posted to WackyHumor at 09:25 AM
Jorge Bustamante/U.N./Notre Dame wants pro-illegal immigration boycott (earlier: dual citizenship to support Mexico's agenda in U.S.)
From this:Jorge Bustamante, the United Nations' Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants and a sociology professor at the University of Notre Dame, this week called Republican Party policies on immigration "immoral." Writing in the Mexico City daily Reforma, Bustamante said the Republican candidates share a in immigration stance that "lacks even the most minimum recognition of the demand for the Mexican migrant labor."He didn't suggest any specific companies, only suggesting an internet search. The second link describes how he met with Peter Schey of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, the National Immigration Law Center, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the California Rural Legal Assistance program in May.
He called on Mexicans to harness "the real power we have as consumers" to boycott big companies that do business in Mexico and fund Republican candidacies...
But, in 1995 he went even further. In response to a possible presidential run by California governor Pete Wilson, he said:
I'm proposing to introduce an initiative that will facilitate permanent Mexican residents in the United States to become citizens of that country, so their increasing number will translate in a real possibility of more votes against Wilson in the next elections... ...This way if a Mexican by birth acquires U.S. citizenship, that fact would allow him to vote in the United States, without loosing his Mexican nationality... ...anyone who wants to defend the interests of Mexico in whichever country they reside, augment their political power in order to make it within that country's rules...
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:17 PM
What Lawrence Downes/New York Times forgot to tell you, Part 2 (Phoenix furniture store protest)
For the backstory, see "Lawrence Downes/New York Times misleads & smears, and all to support illegal activity".In recent news, a pro-illegal immigration protester was arrested after allegedly pushing Michelle Dallacroce from Mothers Against Illegal Aliens at yesterday's weekly protest in front of the store.
And, the owner of the store has sent a letter to Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon (letter here). It includes, among other things, the following:
* We have reason to be concerned that citizen taxpayer dollars committed to subsidize [Salvador Reza]'s various operations and activities may have been used to fund his protest activities outside Pruitt's...That's certainly odd: Lawrence Downes' report only mentioned "hate speech" originating from one side, and didn't follow the money trail to see whether Reza is publicly funded and whether he's used part of that to sponsor the protests. In fact, Downes' report completely took his side of the matter. How odd.
* Reza and his affiliated "community activists" must immediately cease the smear campaign of false, misleading and reckless language against Pruitt's Furniture and the Sensing Family. Hate speech and incitement are unacceptable.
* ...your policies, decisions and actions have established a de facto day labor center in the area of [the corner with the furniture store]
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:11 PM
Rudy Giuliani will "end" illegal immigration at border; anywhere else? (Florida speech)
Rudy Giuliani gave a big speech in Florida earlier today, and his remarks as prepared for delivery are here: joinrudy2008.com/article/pr/1085[After my administration ends] We'll hand over a country where we've ended illegal immigration where it has to be done - at the border.I don't recall Rudy having stopped illegal immigration before, so I guess he's refering to his record as mayor of, what city was that again?, oh yeah, wasn't he the mayor of New York City, and on 9/11? I seem to recall him mentioning that.
And also a country who's arms are wide open to people who come here, people who come here legally and openly. We want them, we need them, we will accept them, and what we want them to do, if they want to become citizens, is meet all the requirements and then be able to read English, write English, and speak English.
Ending illegal immigration won't be easy. It requires changing human behavior – but it needs to be done for everyone's good. I have the will. I have the way to do it, the plan to do it, and I have the track record to bring safety and order and fairness to a situation that is now [our] out of control. I've done it before, I can do it again.
The second paragraph can mostly be ignored. However, the claim that he can "end" illegal immigration at the border is fantastic for at least three reasons:
1. It's physically impossible to "end" illegal immigration. The most that could be done would be to sharply reduce it.
2. Since somewhere less than half of current illegal aliens are those who came here legally and then violated the terms of their visas, just concentrating on the border won't do anything about those who'd do the same in the future. Rudy might have a plan for that, but perhaps he should include that plan in his speech for completeness' sake.
3. The idea that illegal immigration can be reduced by concentrating only on border security is false, because unless we're going to construct a tall wall along all the borders, people will keep trying to come here as long as they know they can receive jobs and benefits. Rudy certainly has a plan for the former, but it involves the precursor to a national ID card. See also this.
As for his claims, his support for illegal immigration is well known; see for instance this video (youtube.com/watch?v=QhS-Ic9JohM) - from a September 7, 2001 radio speech - where he says that NYC is "quite tolerant of illegal immigration"... and he "agrees with that."
(On a sidenote, I typed in rudygiuliani.com only to find out that it's a parked page with ads; then I typed in "rudy" in Google and found out that his site is only in second place, behind the unrelated movie of the same name at imdb.com and just ahead of the Wikipedia entry about the same movie.)
Posted to Politics at 04:42 PM
Snowman goes global: Youtube questions at World Economic Forum (Davos)
The World Economic Forum and Youtube appear to have joined forces and are requesting that Youtube users submit questions for the Davos event to be held next year (youtube.com/thedavosquestion). One or more top-rated videos will be selected and screened for the attendees, and then the attendees will deign to provide responses. The user videos should answer the following question:
"What one thing do you think that countries, companies or individuals must do to make the world a better place in 2008?"
Then, starting January first, visitors will vote for their top choice. (Since coming up with a voting system isn't that difficult, I wonder why they couldn't have had it in place for the CNN debates.)
Unlike with the questions for the U.S. presidential race, I'd be very happy if all or most of the questions are completely idiotic and then an effort could be started to vote up the absolute worst one. Maybe Hank The Angry Drunken Dwarf could join forces with the Snowman to promote World Communism, or maybe Obama Girl has a song.
Note that the spokesmodel for this effort is Lori Harfenist ("The Resident"). While easy on the eyes (youtube.com/watch?v=2zMxGgmPcHs), she's not exactly known for being a heavyweight pundit nor someone willing to ask real questions (see all her other videos, like youtube.com/watch?v=eVVHotSNR8g, youtube.com/watch?v=6Lqsc97lYlo, or youtube.com/watch?v=e3b-Xbau0nY). Note also that Chad Hurley, Youtube founder, spoke at last year's event (youtube.com/watch?v=2xXlZK5rCls).
Posted to Miscellania at 11:35 AM
Erica Vieyra/Olentangy H.S. teaches kids ignoring U.S. immigration laws is OK
Erica Vieyra is a Spanish teacher at Olentangy Liberty High School in Powell, Ohio (near Columbus and Cleveland), and one of her classes teaches children that ignoring U.S. immigration laws is acceptable behavior. The goal is to help them build "empathy" for "immigrants", but it's actually pro-illegal immigration propaganda that the school district should put an end to. The Office of the Superintendent (Dr. Scott Davis) is here, but I couldn't find an email; perhaps scott_davis *at* olentangy.k12.oh.us. Hers is erica_vieyra *at* olentangy.k12.oh.us. After reading about this case, please send them polite messages with your thoughts.This minor case also shows the danger of allowing those who put their ethnicity above our laws to obtain positions of power, whether high school teacher or an elected official.
From Holly Zachariah of the Columbus Dispatch (link):
The students had a role-play project: assume a Latino identity, build an imaginary life in your home country and develop a workable plan to immigrate to the United States.Related:
Try it legally, Erica Vieyra told her 40 senior Spanish students at Olentangy Liberty High School. Fill out the correct documents, follow the proper steps. And then, after they spent days completing the actual paperwork from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, she took out her red ink pad and stamped a big, fat DENIED across every request.
Now, she told the students, come illegally. Forge your documents, find a way across the border. Then, research real ads and find a place to live in Columbus. Figure out what it would cost, how to get food. Plan how to survive.
...Vieyra promised them that the process -- even in make-believe -- would frustrate them. But they would gain, she hoped, an understanding of what is one of the most important political and humanitarian issues facing the U.S. government today...
...But [Vieyra] cautions that the point isn't to sway the students, only to teach them a little empathy.
Brent Lueck/Cary Junior High plays "we're all immigrants"/Ellis Island game
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:31 AM
Fifth grader asks Barack Obama tougher question on immigration & terrorism than MSM; Sunlen Miller/Teddy Davis/Nancy Flores/ABC News spin
An Iowa fifth-grader asked Barack Obama a raw version of a tough question about immigration and terrorism. Instead of discussing what parts of the question the kid got right - and what parts Obama's answer got wrong (pretty much all of it) - ABC News is now covering for Barack Obama and suggesting that the threat of terrorist infiltration doesn't exist [1].Here's the question:
"When you're elected president, what if like the illegal immigrants start to take action and start bombing and stuff?"Obama should have differentiated between economic-based illegal aliens, those who are coming here to commit crimes, and those who are coming here for reasons related to terrorism. He did not, and Sunlen Miller of ABC News plays along with his misleading statements:
Obama proceded to give Bowman a social sciences lesson, explaining "Immigrants are coming into the country and not blowing things up. They are usually working in meat packing plants, or working in restaurants or working in agriculture, picking vegetables..."He didn't give him a lesson, he misled the kid. He also demagogued a non sequitur about Romney and gave an advertisement for illegal activity. And, not just the audience but ABC News ate it up.
Someone in the crowd yelled "Mitt Romney," and Obama had his straight line.
"Yeah, they are mowing Mitt Romney's yard. I forgot about ol' Mitt, who's got the gall to running all these ads about illegal immigrants."
The crowd roared in laughter but Obama stopped himself there and went on. "We've got a problem with terrorists who are trying to kill us... That's a separate problem from immigrants," Obama assured Bowman.
The first report as well as the fuller "news" report [2] from Miller as well as Teddy Davis and Nancy Flores both try to trace this back to ads from Tom Tancredo and others.
What would make me extremely happy is if someone in the audience had pointed out all the ways that Obama was being misleading, and had then posted that to video sharing sites. That would have an impact not just on Obama's poll numbers, but the MSM as well.
[1] blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/12/obama-ol-mitt-h.html
[2] abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4003240
Posted to Immigration2007b at 08:39 PM
Michael Gerson turns on Mike Huckabee, spins LULAC/Tyson Foods meeting
Bush hack turned Washington Post hack Michael Gerson - at that link trying to push for Bush's immigration "reform" by calling the GOP base names - offers "Homespun Meets Hard-Line". Like yesterday's WaPo editorial he turns on Mike Huckabee because of the latter's new (supposed) tough stance on illegal immigration. A full discussion of everything wrong with the column isn't worth the time, however I will note this:
Contrast [a Jim Gilchrist statement] with Huckabee speaking in Little Rock at a meeting of Hispanic civil rights leaders two years ago: "I would hope that no matter who we are, or where we are from, that America should always be a place that opens its spirit to people who come because they want the best for their families." And Huckabee has accompanied his choice of new friends with an immigration plan that would require 12 million illegal immigrants to return home before applying for permanent status -- a completely unrealistic approach borrowed from anti-immigration activists.
I believe the "meeting of Hispanic civil rights leaders" Gerson is refering to is the one that featured not only the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) but Tyson Foods as well. LULAC is a once-mainstream, now-radicalized racial power group. They were at the National Latino Congreso, the spoke out in favor of bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, and their national treasurer even parroted the "the border crossed us" line (basically denying the U.S.'s territorial claims). They might also end up being involved in a class action against Tyson Chicken; the attorney in that case says Gerson's "civil rights" group might have conspired with Tyson Chicken to help them hire illegal aliens.
As for Huck's plan, the 120 days is unworkable, but since releasing the plan he's stated that those who left could come back within "days, maybe weeks".
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:54 AM
Jennifer Delson/LAT gushes over departing Orange County Mexican consul (Haro; MC cards)
Luis Miguel Ortiz Haro - Mexican consul for Orange County, CA - is being reassigned, apparently as part of the Mexican government's normal process of shifting their agents around. Jennifer Delson of the Los Angeles Times says bye-bye in her own special, pro-Mexico way (link). And, oddly enough, she discusses the identity cards that that country passes out, glossing over the fact that they do so to assist illegal immigration. First, the tears:
He ran his Santa Ana office in the style of a populist Latin American patriarch, peppering his conversations with popular idioms and spending countless hours on the problems of immigrants, which fell beyond the formal scope of his job... Leaders of community organizations have streamed into his office to bemoan his departure. Employees held back tears...
Don't worry: there's more at the link (although it doesn't rise to the gush-o-meter busting level of Yvette Cabrera). Then, the part where she doesn't tell their readers the whole truth:
During his tenure, the Santa Ana office increased the number of Mexican identification cards issued. Ortiz Haro recently said that his consulate issued more of the cards, known as matriculas consulares, than any other consulate in the U.S., with the exception of Los Angeles and Chicago.
She doesn't describe that the Mexican government passes out those cards so that illegal aliens can open bank accounts and even obtain driver's licenses in some states. Nor does she go into the fact that due to massive immigration from Mexico that government has been able to obtain a great deal of political power inside the U.S.
In a way, it's like someone writing a glowing article about a union boss that most people realize works for a crooked organization. I wonder whether if we looked back we could find that these types of articles are part of a decades-long pattern of deception by the Los Angeles Times.
Posted to Immigration_consul at 07:20 PM
Brent Lueck/Cary Junior High plays "we're all immigrants"/Ellis Island game
From this:After closely examining the immunization records and marriage and birth certificates of the eighth-grade "immigrant" with a magnifying glass, Brent Lueck asked him the important question.While the Irish and other groups certainly faced a great deal of prejudice, that doesn't mean that worries about what impact importing millions of Catholics into what was then an almost competely Protestant country would have was itself prejudice. This apparently far-left event was the culmination of a three-week class and I don't know what was in the class. However, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it engaged in the logical fallacy of implying that today's immigration is the same as yesterday's, despite the conditions changing.
"You're from Ireland," he said. "Are you a Catholic?"
Lueck said he was worried that the "immigrant" might try to subvert America in the name of the pope. "I've got some issues with you, some loyalty issues."
It was just one example of the mock prejudice faced by about 120 eighth-grade students Friday at Cary Junior High [Illinois] taking part in a simulation of immigrant arrivals and experiences at Ellis Island...
Note also that he's been doing this for three years, and in 2004 I noted another example of the same thing from a town in Iowa. In that case, the logical fallacies were at least noted in the "news" report:
Students also learned how the lives of present-day immigrants mirror the struggles of new Americans from 100 years ago...
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:16 PM
Vile: Washington Post turns on Mike Huckabee to support illegal immigration
The Washington Post offers a vile, spittle-flecked editorial called "The Immigration Swamp/As the presidential campaign intensifies, so does the nativist ferocity." They turn on Mike Huckabee for changing from a strong supporter of illegal immigration into someone who (supposedly) wants illegal aliens to return home within 120 days:
The idea that 12 million illegal residents of the United States can be induced to quit the country en masse within four months is absurd on its face -- a non-starter in logistical, humanitarian, political, diplomatic, commercial and economic terms that would leave an indelible stain on this country for years. Yet that is the wrathful centerpiece of Mike Huckabee's "Secure America Plan," which the Republican presidential candidate issued the other day in the course of his party's escalating enthusiasm for nastier-than-thou prescriptions to deal with illegal immigrants.
Then, they refer to the Minuteman Project as "a group of xenophobes who spend their time videotaping and harassing day laborers wherever they find them" and a group that engages in "vigilantism". They refer to Huck's (supposed) turn to the right side of things as a "cruel campaign of immigrant-bashing".
Then, it's off to selective reading land as they quote the Pew Hispanic Center study in which people claimed to have suffered discrimination. Then:
According to the latest FBI statistics, from 2006, hate crimes against Hispanics had increased by more than a third since 2003.
Unfortunately, the FBI doesn't seem to break out the race of the offender vs. the race of the victims, but they say there were a total of 853 "anti-Hispanic" crimes in 2006 (fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/table7.html). Not only that, but when counting the offender's race they lump Hispanics as white; of known offenders, 3710 were white and 1026 were black (fbi.gov/ucr/hc2006/table3.html). But, some of those listed as white might in fact be Hispanic. And, from Earl Ofari Hutchison (link):
In fact, even though hate-crime laws were originally created to combat crimes by whites against minority groups, the majority of L.A. County's hate crimes against blacks in 2006 were suspected to have been committed by Latinos, and vice versa, according to the county Commission on Human Relations.
So, the WaPo appears to be stretching to smear. And, they make clear that their real reason for doing this is economic:
[Promotes "comprehensive immigration reform"; Huckabee's plan] suggests no realistic plan to address the economy's appetite for immigrant workers in the future, let alone those here now.
Someone should really follow the money on the WaPo; what do they or those to whom they're linked have to gain from the importation of cheap labor?
The editorial ends in as vile a manner as it began:
America has had its paroxysms of anti-immigrant fervor in the past, also accompanied by spasms of violence and persecution. Today, as in the past, the national atmosphere is subverting the discussion, drowning out reason. Look at the uproar that overwhelmed New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's sensible, safety-minded proposal to make illegal immigrants eligible for driver's licenses, and you will see logic defeated by posturing, political cowardice and the poisonous diatribes of talk radio. Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who championed comprehensive reform, is now chastened by the ferocity of the demagogues who mischaracterized it as an "amnesty"; he says he "got the message" and will now speak only of enforcement in the near term. In such an ugly environment, the best one can hope for is candidates who can appeal to the nation's self-interest as well as its better instincts; who can explain that resolving the immigration mess through a comprehensive approach is not only an economic imperative but also the only realistic way out of a political swamp.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:31 AM
AOL takes pro-illegal immigration side, spreads AILA propaganda
AOL (America Online) has created a new immigration section for their AOL Latino channel. It features a blog with a La Opinion-style slant, such as refering to the Minuteman Project as "caza-inmigrantes" (migrant hunters) [1] That post also uses phrases like "indocumentados" and "antiinmigrantes" (refering to the rhetoric of Romney and Giuliani).
They're doing this in collaboration with the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), a far-left group. Documents from that group are available, such as "The Truth About the DREAM Act" [2], which contains such very doubtful claims as the assertion that the DREAM Act wouldn't increase illegal immigration. They also provide helpful links to "GobiernoUSA.gov".
Oddly enough, AOL doesn't seem to have made room for those who oppose illegal immigration. Finding nuggets at the site is left as an exercise, but unless we're willing to start a boycott of AOL there's probably not much that could be done.
[1] aollatinoblog.com/2007/12/13/los-minutemen-ya-tienen-candidato-y-no-es-tancredo/
[2] aollatinoblog.com/2007/11/13/the-truth-about-the-dream-act/
Posted to Immigration2007b at 10:58 AM
North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley wants to allow illegal aliens to attend community college
North Carolina governor Mike Easley wants illegal aliens to be able to attend community colleges in his state as out-of-state students. The previous policy of their CC system was to allow individual colleges to decide; now they must allow illegal aliens in. While this isn't as objectionable as those who would allow them to attend at the in-state rate or obtain other discounts, and while they say that it won't cost them money even if the numbers attending quadrupled (of course, that might be a low estimate), it's probably an initial step on the slippery slope. Plus, I don't like his Dick Durbin-esque tone. Says he:
"What people are upset about, they care deeply about their citizenship. It really means something to them... All the governors allow kids – illegal immigrants – to go to community colleges because they don't want to build an underclass in their state. All the states do that... We're not talking about 50-year-olds who are jumping the fence to go to school. We're talking about little kids who've grown up here through no fault of their own. They don't know where they were born... If you slam the door on them, you lose that talent. If you don't take advantage of it, it's just kind of dumb."
I don't know whose "citizenship" he was refering to, whether that of U.S. citizens, or that of the illegal aliens. In the first case, he's implying that U.S. citizens care too much about something that apparently he doesn't value as highly. And, that even applies in the second case and his remarks appear a bit "tranzi". As for "just kind of dumb", perhaps calling those residents of your state who oppose this plan "dumb" isn't the best strategy; I note that there are over 400 comments on the article, and I'd imagine that many or most are opposed to his plan. If he were thinking of the welfare of his state, he might consider encouraging those students to repatriate themselves or ask their home countries to pick up any bills they incur. Rep. Sue Myrick is opposed to the plan, as are other Republicans. Needless to say, the governor and other supporters are Democrats.
And, he even played a part in the decision by the general counsel of NC's CC system (David Sullivan):
Mr. Sullivan said his directive was based on a 1997 opinion by the state's attorney general at the time - Michael F. Easley, a Democrat who is now governor - which said that the colleges could not impose nonacademic criteria for admission.
Note: this issue has also generated one of the dumbest editorials on this issue I've ever read:
And yes, plenty of Latino Americans have broken the law in North Carolina, as have many company owners who rely on cheap labor to keep costs down. But all of them came here for the promise of a better life for themselves and future generations. And most of them aren't going anywhere.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 03:58 PM
Joseph Berger/NYT promotes DREAM Act, largely ignores impact
Joseph Berger of the New York Times offers "Debates Persist Over Subsidies for Immigrant College Students". It's in their "On Education" section, which is apparently exempt from their "tough" journalistic standards and thus the fact that it's basically an editorial in favor of the anti-American DREAM Act isn't that much of a concern.While not a PIIPP, it does come close in that it profiles two sympathetic students, both of whom - surprise! - are high achievers. The most noteworthy aspect is that he doesn't explore the downsides of the bill, which would include letting illegal aliens take college discounts from U.S. citizens. In fact, only one sentence - a quote from Mitt Romney ("Illegals are not going to get taxpayer-funded breaks that are better than our own citizens") - discusses the downsides of the bill. Berger "forgot" to include the part where Romney tried to point out that "there's only so much money to go around" and that giving discounts to illegal aliens takes them away from U.S. citizens.
And, in fact, near the end the article turns into an overt advertisement:
When illegal immigrants do graduate from college, they still cannot find skilled jobs except underground. For the undocumented, a Social Security card would trump a diploma. That's why champions of legalization for the undocumented are staking their hopes on the stalled federal Dream Act. The bill, an acronym for Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors, would explicitly grant illegal immigrants enrolling in college six years of conditional residency that would enable them to work, drive and possibly be eligible in more states for in-state tuition. What's better, it would enable a student who completes two years of college to apply for a permanent resident’s green card.Of course it's an amnesty, because that's how it will be perceived. And, it will send a loud message to millions of people around the world that all they need to do is come here illegally and we'll provide college discounts, even if it means taking them away from our own citizens.
Given how hard two years of college can be, that bill could hardly be considered an amnesty, particularly since the students were not to blame for their illegal entry in the first place.
Please write Clark Hoyt - Public Editor with your thoughts: public *at* nytimes.com
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:04 PM
Flashback: Mike Huckabee was for amnesty in April 2007
Back on April 24, 2007, the Mike Huckabee campaign uploaded this video address, where he said he was against "amnesty", then went on to outline a plan that everyone in their right mind - voters as well as millions of prospective illegal aliens in foreign countries - would perceive to be amnesty:To address the question of what we should do about immigrants who entered the country illegally, I propose starting with the highest law of human behavior: do unto others as you'd have them do unto you.
But, that cannot mean amnesty. There must be consequences for illegal actions, for violation of our rule of law.
I propose that such individuals be required to register with state and federal authorities, pay financial penalties, and be given the choice of deportation or, undertaking the process of legal citizenship.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:01 PM
Huge warning sign: George P. Bush joins Fred Thompson team
George P. Bush ("George Prescott Bush") has joined the Fred Thompson as the National Chair of his "Young Professionals for Fred Thompson" group. This is at least the second link he has to the Bush family.
"P." is a budding racial demagogue who spoke out against the Border Patrol's use of non-lethal weapons and eventually had to backtrack. He was even scheduled to attend the major illegal immigration march in Dallas but then didn't show for one reason or another (probably would have been too obvious). And, if you think dynastically, changing the demographics of the U.S. to be more Hispanic might actually be an intentional move to make a president run by "P." easier (he might even run as a Democrat).
Unfortunately, some of the other candidates have their own links to the Bush family, and they're even conflicting. Jeb Bush Jr. is working for Rudy Giuliani as the Chairman of "Florida Young Professionals for Rudy" (joinrudy2008.com/article/pr/911) at the same time as some of his father's former workers are now with Mitt Romney's campaign. Why, it's just like dynasties of old used to do it.
Given the Bush record of the last eight years, even Hillary would be better than someone who's got Bush links.
Posted to Politics at 07:42 PM
I'm switching to Huckabee! Catch THE HUCKABOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's odd how even the mention of the name "Mike Huckabee" on a blog or similar will trigger an avalanche of glassier-eyed-than-many-Ron-Paul supporters ready to leave generic comments. Whether these are from real supporters or those who are paid to be the same, many of them have the same tenor. They're also quite busy at voting down comments that might reveal the truth.For an example of the latter, see my -6 Diggs comment here.
For a prime example of the former, see the comment here:
For those of you that like to critize and take easy cheap shots at other people instead of looking for positive things to bring the nation up, you should first take the log out of your eye before trying to take the stick out of others.That's from Matthew 7:3-5.
Americans want to experience positive change, they do not want to listen to mean spirited comments that only create division in America not unity. Those who critize are only running on ice, spining their wheels like a locomotive, but not going anywhere. It's time to hang up those old shoes of critism, and change to the positive, optimistic shoes that will bring happiness to all Americans.Couldn't he have stuck to the wood-related metaphors? I'm getting confused.
Mike Huckabee is authentic, trustworthy, caring and humble. That's why his poll numbers are skyrocketing up at supersonic speeds. THE HUCKABOOM!!!!!!It would be bad taste to even mention something about leaving the black Nikes at home, so I won't say anything about that.
NASA we have lift off, "One small step for Mike Huckabee and one giant leap for America."
Posted to Politics at 04:49 PM
SPLC tries to stifle FAIR (Mexico links, CAP)
Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center offers "The Teflon Nativists/FAIR Marked by Ties to White Supremacy" (splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846) with the news that it's "official": the SPLC has declared the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) to be a "hate group". They mention how much press coverage FAIR has received, and they include a quote from Henry Fernandez of the Center for American Progress which helps show that their goal is to stifle FAIR:
"The sad fact is that attempts to reform our immigration system are being sabotaged by organizations fueled by hate... Many anti-immigrant leaders have backgrounds that should disqualify them from even participating in mainstream debate, yet the American press quotes them without ever noting their bizarre and often racist beliefs."
I'd imagine that the MSM will just eat this up without even looking into it, resulting in fewer press mentions and a reduced voice for those of us who support our laws. I'll let FAIR speak for themselves (if they deign to do so), but I'll point out a few things:
1. The SPLC is indirectly linked to the Mexican government (see their name's link above); I've never seen that mentioned in any of the "news" reports that take them as a semi-official source. Fernandez is also indirectly linked to that government (see his name's link).
2. Part of their designation rests on the fact that FAIR has received funding from an "infamous, racist eugenics foundation." That's a reference to the Pioneer Fund; in the same decade as they gave money to FAIR they also gave money to Stanford, the Tel Aviv University, the Sickle Cell Disease Foundation of Greater New York, and others.
3. Another part is because FAIR has supposedly put forth "racist conspiracy theories about Mexico's secret designs on the American Southwest". I don't know what FAIR has said, but the Mexican government has explicitly stated that they want to meddle in our internal politics and will be using non-profit organizations to do so. That translate to obtaining political power inside the U.S. and, should that process not be stopped, some form of de jure or de facto condominium.
4. Yet another part is because FAIR supposedly has an "alternative theory alleging secret plans to merge the United States, Mexico and Canada". I guess the SPLC missed Congressional testimony from an elite group advocating for that scheme, and all the other flashing neon signs pointing in that direction.
UPDATE: FAIR responds with just some of the things the SPLC got wrong here. Note especially this:
In light of the fact that FAIR has requested the SPLC to correct these errors on at least three different occasions dating back to 2001, the publication of this erroneous information appears to be willful and malicious.
UPDATE 2: On a sidenote, the SPLC's Intelligence Report has won the 2007 "In-Depth/Investigative Reporting" award from the Utne Reader (utne.com/print-article.aspx?id=13124).
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:39 PM
Ryan Lizza: wrong about immigration
Ryan Lizza offers "Return of the Nativist/Behind the Republicans' anti-immigration frenzy". As you might guess from the author, the title, and the fact that it's in the New Yorker, it's wrong. However, thankfully, I have an intern who's read it for me, saving me the need to do so. Per him, it's a:
A classic dumbed-down Remnick-era New Yorker piece--remedial reading for U.W.S. cocooners. Lizza skips over all the wonkish aspects of the immigration debate (like whether "comprehensive" reform will actually work) as if they have nothing to do with the politics, paints opponents as unfeeling racists, ignores well-publicized evidence (e.g., from Carville and Greenberg) that Democrats might have political problems from supporting legalization, falls for the recent Pew hype and generally fits the issue into a comfortable Civil Rights template (moral moderates vs. pathetic bigots). Did I mention that it's a bad piece?
Posted to Immigration2007b at 10:27 AM
Secure Fence Act: a hoax and a scam? (Kay Bailey Hutchison, DHS)
I haven't been following the issues with the border fence*, and this article was written almost a month ago so I don't know if things have changed since then, however:...In the fall of 2006 when Congress passed and the President signed into law the Secure Fence Act, most Americans thought they understood what they were getting. The plain text of the law states that "the Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide for [at] least 2 layers of reinforced fencing, the installation of additional physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors" along a specified range of the U.S.-Mexico border. The Act then stipulated the precise regions of the border, covering a total of 854 miles...The directives gave DHS a large amount of "flexibility", which they've used to apparently only build a small part of the fence. The article goes on to give evidence that DHS doesn't want to build the fence, and Hutchison makes another appearance to give DHS yet another instance of "flexibility".
But the very same day that the Senate passed the Secure Fence Act, Senate leaders had already hatched a plan to, in essence, un-do the Act. More precisely stated, Congress passed another law giving the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)discretion over how and where the fence would actually be built. That night, after the Secure Fence Act was passed, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison rose to the floor of the Senate and expressed her concern that the Act was too restrictive and would impose too much of a burden on Texas' border communities. Hutchison then submitted into the record two letters written earlier that day. The first was a letter she had received from Majority Leader Bill Frist earlier in the day addressing Sen. Hutchison's concerns; the second, Frist's letter to House and Senate leaders issuing specific legislative directives related to Hutchison's concerns...
* My belief is that a fence covering much of the border is part "boob bait for Bubba" and to a lesser extent a boondoggle. Fencing serves a purpose in many areas, but it isn't really necessary in many others. Unfortunately, too many people concentrate on things like this rather than the more important "hearts and minds" issues. If we can get to the point where politicians, reporters, religious leaders, and others realize that supporting illegal immigration in one way or another would greatly damage their careers, the situation will solve itself. And, we get to that point by publicly discrediting those who support or enable illegal immigration by revealing their lies and inability to think things through. See, for instance, John McCain's poll numbers.
UPDATE: On a related note, Senator Joe Lieberman wants DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff to tell him why he wanted an environmental study on fencing in Texas, but waived environmental laws in Arizona: "While developing additional layers of border security is a priority for our nation, it should not impede our ability to also continue to be good environmental stewards".
Posted to Immigration2007b at 10:22 PM
Lawrence Downes/New York Times misleads & smears, and all to support illegal activity
[Update here]
Lawrence Downes offers an "Editorial Observer" article in the New York Times entitled "Showdown in Arizona, Where Mariachis and Minutemen Collide". It describes a running protest by illegal immigration supporters in front of the M. D. Pruitt furniture store in Phoenix. He had the temerity to try to keep day laborers off his property, employing off-duty sherriffs in the process. And, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has been arresting illegal aliens in front of his store:
For the last seven weeks, a sidewalk protest here by Latino immigrants has blossomed into a feverish reality show, attracting Minutemen, mariachis, children dancing in Mexican folk costumes, white racists, United Nations observers, Phoenix police officers and Maricopa County sheriff's deputies.
I'm sure that some of those attending were indeed "white racists". And, I have little doubt that with enough searching I could find brown racists who also attended. Yet, for one odd reason or other Downes didn't mention that.
[The "weekly confrontation" is] a sideshow to something even uglier: what happens when immigration's complexities are handed to local law enforcers sympathetic to the fury of one side.
He's implying that those who support our laws are motivated only by "fury", and perhaps he might want to mention that, while illegal aliens have certain rights, the position of those who want to be employed illegally is somewhat invalidated.
Then, it's on to smearing Sheriff Joe Arpaio: "hunting undocumented immigrants is his specialty." For those laws that Downes supports, can anyone imagine him refering to the police "hunting" law-breakers? He also refers to Arpaio as a "business ally" of Pruitt, implying a quid pro quo; if that's not true then hopefully Downes will be sued.
Then, he promotes the efforts of Salvador Reza of the group Tonatierra (more). His group isn't identified, nor does Downes indicate that Reza is/was involved with running a day laborer center supported by local businesses (link).
Reza is this article's "person who says what the NYT wants to say": "Mr. Reza says he can't understand why America accepts global flows of companies, money and jobs but not workers." There are a multitude of reasons, but Downes just lets him speak unchallenged.
Then:
...one informed noncombatant, the Rev. Craig Geiger, pastor of a Lutheran church across the street, agrees.
While Geiger might be a "noncombatant" in this particular case, and while I wasn't able to find any far-left outbursts from him, the church newsletter is a bit interesting; perhaps Downes should have picked one up (mountofolivesaz.org/Newsletter.pdf). It includes the news that they were a "Hydration Center" in August, which is only followed by usual Bible phrases about "welcoming the stranger" that are used as religious justification for enabling illegal immigration. No word is provided on what exactly the "Hydration Center" did or whether it was located further south. Then, in a section entitled "A little know fact for that logical side of our brain", he promotes the study from Giovanni Peri purporting to show the effects of immigration on wages. Finally, there's a section entitled "An Immigration Lesson from the land", offering yet another religious justification for supporting "immigration".
Then, it's on to a possible lie:
"Monkeys coming through!" [a Minuteman with a bullhorn] shouted. His side rushed up to drown the music out: "Born in the U.S.A.! Born in the U.S.A.! K.K.K.! Viva la Migra! January First!"
Even if we assume that Downes has the quotes right, does he have any proof that that person was an actual member of a Minuteman group, or did he just make that up?
The article ends with Reza promising economic armageddon should illegal aliens leave the state.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:53 PM
Why are my knees bleeding?
A common question! I don't know about you, but in my case it's because I was jogging down the Old Mount Wilson Trail earlier today and, after getting a little out of control running down a rock I stumbled over another rock and fell forward. I had hiked up a couple miles and around 1500' (to around the unnecessary rope handrail) and then jogged back (total time: about 1:45, but I wasn't in a big rush). While I've been concentrating on biking and haven't been doing nearly as much unassisted hiking or "trail running" as I used to, I've just recently been doing the hike-up/jog-down in Griffith Park. While that's been at dusk or at night, the trail is not as narrow or rocky.
The OMW trail isn't washed out in any places, however there were a couple small sinkholes due to the recent "storm", and the outer edge of the trail had crumbled away or was about to do so in a couple places.
Unfortunately, there were four mountain bikers using the trail, and in my estimation, while it wasn't muddy, it was too wet to be biking there. I tried to point that out to them in turn, but as they sped past they didn't seem to understand that my concern was not with their safety but rather with the trail itself and also the fact that by riding a wet trail they were making the rest of us look bad. Even after it was dark the marks they made in the trail were quite visible. All it takes is a few activist Sierra Club member types to get front range trails like that closed to bikes.
Posted to OutdoorSports at 10:18 PM
FAQ on Celebrity Politics Permanent Pass
Q. What is the "Celebrity Politics Permanent Pass"?
A. The "CPPP" is a grant given from this site that allows the celebrity recipient ("CR") of the CPPP to state virtually any political opinion without being subjected to my trademarked snarky, bile-spewing, and/or vituperative commentary. While I reserve the right to disagree, I will simply politely point out how the CR is wrong.
Q. How many CPPP's have been awarded so far?
A. One.
Q. I'm a celebrity (or a representative thereof). How do I get a CPPP for myself (or those whom I represent)?
A. Pray! Just kidding. Write your application down on a card and send it to us and we'll get back to you or something.
Q. Can you give us an example of what might invoke the CPPP?
A. Yes. Consider this snippet from a contribution by the CR, which appeared in a 1991 edition of The Nation in a special section called "What is Patriotism?" (link):
The acceptance of a common historical view may be considered the cornerstone of nationalism, yet when I consider the most broadly accepted view of history I realize that my America is quite different. In my America Columbus was not a benevolent explorer who happened upon an earthly paradise that yielded itself bloodlessly to his will. In my America the native peoples of this continent were not hostile savages, unprovoked to violence against the benign European colonialists. In my America the tobacco exports of the newborn Virginia settlement addicted a world to a powerful drug to secure a market and survival. In my America the capture, torture and enslavement of a race is unforgivable. In my America the blood and sweat of millions created an industrial power, and fortunes for relatively few.
I certainly disagree to a large extent. Few people think the conquest of the Americas was anything but a long series of wars, with - as in any other war ever fought - winners and losers. And, I will point out that those events happened many years ago and that in many ways the U.S. has been a rousing success and not just a beacon to the world but a constantly changing experiment. In general, I agree with Hank Hill. But, I digress.
Q. Who is the CR of the CPPP?
A.
Posted to WackyHumor at 10:14 PM
Huckabee admits immigration plan has revolving door (amnesty or "guest" workers)
[Mike Pence-style update below]Mike Huckabee cannot be trusted on immigration matters. I'll say that again: Mike Huckabee cannot be trusted on immigration matters.
In fact, just after releasing a plan that unfortunately took in some people, he now admitted on Fox News Sunday (link, video below) what I suspected: his plan includes a revolving door whereby former illegal aliens would leave the U.S. only to return within "days, maybe weeks" as legal workers. He didn't specify whether they'd just be coming back as "guest" workers with no chance at citizenship, but considering that he's supported a "pathway to citizenship" in the past, and in his remarks he not only didn't renounce that "pathway" but sought to explain what it meant (in Clintonian terms), one can assume that he's not opposed to putting millions on the "pathway to citizenship".
Not only that, but at one point he used the same language as president Bush, refering to people coming here illegally just to "feed their families".
Furthermore, his plan to "seal" the border is as unworkable as his plan to get millions of people to register and return home in 120 days. In fact, given his demonstrated weakness - and the inability to round up those millions of illegal aliens who won't leave within the 120 days - there'd be a mad dash for the borders.
And, his concept of slapdash background checks might let untold numbers of terrorists and criminals come here as "guests" or potential citizens.
I will once more state: Mike Huckabee cannot be trusted on immigration matters.
After being asked by Chris Wallace whether there was an "inconsistency" between his past support for a "pathway to citizenship" and his current immigration plan, Mike Huckabee responded:
"I don't think there's an inconsistency. When I said a 'pathway' I didn't say what the pathway was. [He's not the only Man from Hope]UPDATE: During the Univision GOP debate, Huck said the following:
I now believe that the only thing that the American people are going to accept and frankly the only thing that makes sense is a pathway that sends people back to the starting point. But, this idea that waiting years, no, I don't agree with that.
In fact, look, if we can get a credit card application done within hours, if we can get passports done within days, if we can transact business over the internet anywhere in the world within seconds, do a background check instantaneously, it's our government that's failed and is dysfunctional.
It shouldn't take years to get a work permit to come here and pick lettuce. So, a part of the plan that I have is that we seal the borders, you don't have amnesty and sanctuary cities, you do have a pathway that gets you back home. But, that pathway to get back here legally doesn't take years.
It would take days, maybe weeks. And, then, people could come back in the workforce. Let me tell you why that's important. Two reasons. Number one: the American people say, do something, do it now. We don't want to have this country ignoring the illegal problem. I get it. Secondly, I want people who are in this country to hold their heads up high. You know, right now there are a lot of people who really are here because they're trying to feed their families. I don't begrudge them that. I say I thank God everyday I'm in a country that people are trying to break into not break out of, but let's give them the means by which they can get here through the door legally, and when they're they don't have to hide, they don't have to keep their heads down and hope nobody catches them. They have their heads held high. Everyone living within the borders of the United States ought to do so with dignity and with a sense of pride, not a sense of fear.
If you can get an American Express card in two weeks, it shouldn't take seven years to get a work permit to come to this country in order to work on a farm. So if our government is incapable of making that process in that length of time, then we should do it in a way to outsource it.This is similar to the Mike Pence plan of having "Ellis Island Centers" in other countries.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:26 PM
John Brummett/Arkansas News Bureau falls for NPR's Soviet-style question (Dem debate)
John Brummett of the Arkansas News Bureau (arkansasnews.com) offers "Gomer Pyle and the GOP", concerning the Soviet-style question that NPR asked at their recent debate; what's in the post about Bob Herbert applies in this case as well. Unlike Herbert, he goes on to "joke" about how the GOP candidates would answer the same question. He only reserves kind words for John McCain, who he says has "behaved responsibly" on this issue.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 12:43 PM
Matt Stearns/McClatchy smears Ron Paul, joins list of NAFTA Superhighway deniers
Matt Stearns of McClatchy Newspapers offers "Out of bounds! Paul pushes NAFTA highway myth" (link):
In an anti-NAFTA radio ad that's airing in Iowa, Paul denounces "powerful elites" who "want to completely erase our borders with Canada and Mexico. These special interests threaten us with a total loss of sovereignty. The NAFTA superhighway, a part of this scheme, has threatened to force thousands off their land. Some believe the highway's path will go right through Iowa. As your president, I will stop all efforts to take away America's freedom. I have always opposed and will continue to fight against NAFTA and the North American Union."
He says that lowers Paul's credibility because:
There is no NAFTA superhighway being built or in the planning stages, and no sovereignty-busting North American Union, according to federal, state and local officials. They call it an Internet urban myth spread by nativist commentators who combine legitimate efforts to improve the nation's transportation infrastructure with their rabble-rousing conspiracies.
Gosh knows we can always believe what officials tell us; whether Stearns actually buys this or is just trying to sell it, it's clear that he has no interest in doing any sort of due diligence and reporting all sides of the issue.
There have been a spate of North American Union/NAFTA Superhighway "debunking" articles printed lately, including from the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe and Newsweek (see the last link). And, all of them attempt to portray those who bring up these issues as tinfoil hatters rather than acting as skeptical investigators. And, in all cases they're received pushback from commenters. Note also a similar smear attempt by CNN during the last GOP debate.
Why do none of those reports even remotely approach anything similar to real investigative journalism? Why do they all have the same kneejerk tone, and rely on the word of government officials? And, why do they continue to print articles like this even after receiving a large amount of pushback?
Posted to NAU at 12:15 PM
Lawrence O'Donnell smears entire Mormon religion, all members
Speaking on the John McLaughlin Group, Lawrence O'Donnell (Senior Political Analyst at MSNBC) smeared the entire Mormon religion and all adherents including Mitt Romney, calling it racist and pro-slavery in a lengthy tirade.
This post will be updated if video of his meltdown becomes available.
UPDATE: You can watch his comments here: youtube.com/watch?v=AYgp-JszZ1w
There might be some more on the previous segment: youtube.com/watch?v=W0xlS5O8kXk
There's a discussion here:
newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2007/12/08/
larry-odonnells-anti-mormon-rant-demented-racist-pro-slavery-crazy
And, Jason Linkins of the Huffington Post says he made Pat Buchanan look reasonable by comparison. Coming from the left that's quite a statement.
PUSILLANIMOUS POLTROON UPDATE: There is one religion he admits he won't criticize. Guess which it is.
Posted to Politics at 07:11 PM
Bob Herbert/NYT condemns plan no one is calling for (NPR's Soviet-style question about turning in illegal aliens)
Bob Herbert of the New York Times offers "Spies Like You and Me", in which he valiantly speaks out against plans for average citizens to turn in suspected illegal aliens. His starting point for the condemnation was the question that NPR asked at their debate.
The only problem is that no national figure is calling on average citizens to call ICE on random dishwashers and such.
In fact, NPR's question was a strawman argument and helped show that they have no knowledge of this issue. It was also akin to Soviet-style debates, in which the Politburo wrote both the questions and the answers. Anyone in their right mind would know how the candidates would respond, and they did so in the expected fashion. "Do you agree that this Five Year Plan is the greatest plan yet?" was probably never answered with a "no".
Herbert is too stupid or too disingenuous to figure that out.
Click his name at the link and then click "Send an E-Mail to Bob Herbert" to ask him to specify which it is.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 03:31 PM
Sarah Weaton/NYT misleads about Huckabee in-state tuition, shows misplaced MSM priorities
Sarah Weaton of the New York Times offers "Huckabee Immigration Plan Emphasizes Security". Most of it consists of a summary of that scheme and, since the plan itself is almost as short as the article, why not just read the source?
She also misleads about this:
Mr. Huckabee has taken heat in recent weeks from his rivals for the Republican nomination, especially after his impassioned defense at a Nov. 28 debate of merit scholarships to children of illegal immigrants while he was governor of Arkansas. In that debate, he responded to attacks on his immigration record by saying, "We're a better country than to punish children for what their parents did."
As detailed at the last link:
1. Whatever The Huckster was refering to, the bill itself, as voted on, was for all post-secondary educational benefits, not just "merit scholarships".
2. The benefits were for illegal aliens themselves, irrespective of their parents' statuses.
And, Weaton also helps show just how misplaced the priorities of the MSM are:
[Mitt Romney] endured tough questioning from reporters in Des Moines yesterday about revelations last week that a yardwork company he employed was found for a second time to be using illegal immigrants... [after being "pressed", he "grew testy".]
Even another part of the NYT admits that this question has already been asked for "like, the millionth time" (link). So, why keep asking it, knowing you're going to get the same response?
And, of course, perhaps the NYT should actually try to analyze Huck's plan and get expert input and then subject him to "tough questioning" about his actual policy proposals. Apparently that's too much for those "reporters".
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:30 PM
Oklahoma state Sen. Harry Coates complains about immigration law; family owns roofing company
Oklahoma state Senator Harry Coates is complaining about a new Oklahoma law (House Bill 1804) that tries to prevent illegal immigration in that state.Oddly enough, his family owns a roofing company (coatesroofing.com/satis_cust1.htm). This page says he was the owner, but his current status is unknown. And, of course, there's no indication that that company employs illegal aliens. From this:
Sen. Harry Coates on Thursday called fellow Republican Rep. Randy Terrill, author of Oklahoma's controversial immigration legislation, "a mad scientist and Oklahoma is his laboratory."
...At a state Capitol news conference, Coates called for repeal of sections of House Bill 1804, whose primary author was Terrill, R-Moore. Coates said he has both economic and moral concerns about the bill, portions of which went into effect Nov. 1.
"What people don't seem to realize is that the chilling effect of this law has resulted in the loss of both documented and undocumented employees," Coates said. "These are good jobs and they pay good wages, but few American workers are willing to take them."
Jack Gray, whose Oklahoma City roofing company has been in business more than 100 years, said he hasn't lost any business, "but we will not be able to bid on any future business. There are not enough Americans who are willing to work construction."
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:51 AM
Felipe Calderon explicitly wants Mexican consuls to meddle in U.S. immigration debate (non-profits)
The only thing shocking about this is that he'd openly admit it:[Today, Mexican president Felipe Calderon] asked his diplomatic representatives in the U.S. to participate in the public debate on immigration by appearing at public events, talking more to the media and working with nonprofit groups to promote Mexican immigrants' role in supporting the U.S. economy.Several non-profit groups have direct or indirect links to the Mexican government, such as the ACLU, SPLC, AFSC, and MALDEF via membership in a group headed by Peter Schey, someone with a long list of links to that government. He also heads the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, which has been an occasional quote source for the MSM.
"The key is to neutralize this strategy of confrontation and discrimination that forms part of U.S. society's mistaken perception, and be able to newly focus arguments on the complimentary aspects of our economies," he said [to the consuls].
Another group is the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, whose president serves on an advisory council to the Mexican president. That group helped organize some of last year's illegal immigration marches, and is in turn linked not just to Rod Blagojevich but also to the Blue America PAC (run by some bloggers).
Another frequent quote source, the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, has a direct albeit somewhat minor link to the Mexican government.
New Haven's Junta for Progressive Action is/was collaborating with that government and sued to block immigration raids. Kica Matos, their former president, now works for that city and pushed through their efforts to give ID cards to illegal aliens. And, she's married to Henry Fernandez of the Center for American Progress.
Needless to say, there are many others.
In fact, it's difficult to find a non-profit involved in immigration matters that doesn't have some sort of a link, whether direct or first or second-level indirect. When nonprofit groups are involved in immigration matters in the future, it will be even more difficult to tell whether they're speaking for the Mexican government or not, and it will be even more important to attempt to call them on any links they have. In some cases their public funding should be eliminated, and if it applies they should be requested to register under the DOJ's Foreign Agents Registration Act.
Also:
Calderon's instructions came two days after he accused U.S. presidential candidates of "swaggering, macho and anti-Mexican" posturing. He also warned the U.S. Congress not to impose conditions on a $1.4 billion anti-drug aid package.Related:
Mexican diplomats meddling in our internal politics
"Mexico's Defense of Illegal Immigrants"
American Jewish Committee collaborates with Mexican government to support illegal immigration
Mexican consul meddling in Irving Texas (Matricula Consular cards to prevent arrests)
New York Times alludes to Mexican meddling via consulates (Little Rock)
Ramos/Compean trial transcripts; meddling Mexican consuls initiated case?
Nancy Pelosi didn't meet the meddling Mexican congressmen?
Dianne Solis, Alfredo Corchado, Dallas Morning News downplay Mexican meddling
More meddling by Mexican consuls
"Bush Bill Would Aid Mexico's Meddling in U.S."
"Mexico is meddling in US military"
Posted to Immigration_consul at 12:52 PM
Howard Dean to GOP: "stop scapegoating immigrants" (supports illegal immigration)
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean fully supports illegal immigration. Why do I say that? For many reasons, but the latest proof comes here:[Dean] said Republicans are targeting immigrants and told the Republican presidential candidates that the tone of their debates on the issue has become "outrageous."The top GOP contenders are mostly concerned about illegal immigration, with only minor proposals relating to legal immigration. And, all of them pretend to be opposed to illegal immigration. When Howard Dean falsely implies that what they're doing is "scapegoating", he's trying to prevent a debate about illegal immigration and he's enabling more illegal immigration. Thus, I don't think it's unfair in the least to say that he fully supports illegal immigration.
"Stop scapegoating immigrants and stop using immigration as a wedge issue."
In his conference call, Dean also said that the legally-correct phrase "illegal aliens" - used in the U.S. Code - is an "outrageous phrase".
And:
Asked repeatedly by reporters about the split in his party [between those who support enforcement first and those who support "reform"], Mr. Dean sought to marginalize the enforcement-supporting Democrats, calling them "very, very few" and saying they aren't representative of his party.Dean brought along Luis Cortes Jr. from Esperanza USA.
"All the Democratic presidential candidates are clear" in supporting a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, he said, adding that the presidential nominee will set the party's position.
"You can take your cue from that," he said.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 10:44 AM
Why Rep. Tom Tancredo won't appear at the Univision Spanish-language GOP debate
He explains why here, and it's pretty good.Any political debate is aimed at citizens. It is about issues of concern to the entire community, not a segment of the community. It is vital that all political debates and discussions take place in the public square, not in separate enclaves. Our democracy does not need different messages broadcast to different audiences in different languages that are not heard or understood by other groups...
The United States has a special need to have a common language because of the very diversity of its immigrants. Our parents and ancestors who were immigrants spoke many different languages on arrival. But they came here to become Americans, and as Americans, we conduct our political affairs in English.
Is it not a little bit insulting to our new citizens who were born in Cuba or Mexico or Peru to suggest that political debates need to be translated into Spanish for them to understand what is going on? Is it smart for the Republican Party to implicitly endorse the notion that newly naturalized citizens are not able -- or do not desire -- to understand speeches and debates spoken in English?...
Posted to Politics at 10:41 AM
Michael Kinsley: simple-minded thoughts on immigration
Michael Kinsley offers "Kidding Ourselves About Immigration" in which he tries to present an argument for conflating all types of immigration together. You can click his name at the article to let him know what you think. The bottom line is that he's a sheltered Beltway insider who isn't familiar with this issue:
Saying that you oppose illegal immigration is like saying you oppose illegal drug use or illegal speeding. Of course you do, or should.
What he fails to mention is that many politicians claim to oppose illegal immigration, and then take steps to encourage and enable it, such as by giving benefits to illegal aliens or trying to block enforcement.
Another question: Why are you so upset about this particular form of lawbreaking? After all, there are lots of laws, not all of them enforced with vigor. The suspicion naturally arises that the illegality is not what bothers you. What bothers you is the immigration. There is an easy way to test this. Reducing illegal immigration is hard, but increasing legal immigration would be easy. If your view is that legal immigration is good and illegal immigration is bad, how about increasing legal immigration? How about doubling it? Any takers? So in the end, this is not really a debate about illegal immigration. This is a debate about immigration.
To a certain extent that's true. However, what Kinsley doesn't understand is that the illegallity is a vital part of the issue. While we shouldn't expect every law to be fully prosecuted, when millions of people are allowed to enter the U.S. illegally despite the wishes of the American public, one might wonder what's going on. Unfortunately, Kinsley doesn't seem to have figured out that massive illegal immigration is evidence of massive government corruption. Instead of doing their job, many politicians have decided to allow illegal immigration in some way so that they, their party, or their donors can benefit.
He then demonstrates yet more Beltway Cluelessness by saying that giving driver's licenses to illegal aliens is an "arcane" issue. Then:
On the Republican side, the candidates take turns accusing one another of committing some act of human decency toward illegals, and indignantly denying that they did any such thing.
That's certainly cute, but there are strong public policy arguments against doing things like giving in-state tuition to illegal aliens, and enabling illegal immigration is not a "decent" or humane thing to do.
Then, somewhat surprisingly, he admits that we have a right to determine how many are allowed to immigrate here and that "[t]here is no obligation to be fair to foreigners". Then, it's back to Cluelessland:
To characterize illegal immigrants as queue-jumping, lawbreaking scum is seriously unjust... [we're all immigrants drivel]
Most illegal aliens are, I'm sure, nice people. Unfortunately, massive illegal immigration has had a cultural impact that Kinsley doesn't discuss or doesn't know about. Many illegal aliens are used to buying fake documents and engaging in other sorts of illegal activity, and many don't see a problem with that ("If work is a crime, accuse me of committing a crime." and others). If legalized, would they suddenly forswear activity of that sort? Or, would they cut corners when it's convenient for them?
And, some of those coming here have no respect for our laws or our territorial claims. Or, in the case of Elvira Arellano, invent justifications for coming here illegally.
Then, it gets even worse, where he says that illegal aliens would win in an "American-values contest" against past immigrant groups. Considering that most illegal aliens are from Mexico, and considering that, per Zogby, a large majority of Mexicans think the U.S. Southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico, I'd say that Kinsley has no idea what he's talking about.
Let me suggest that Kinsley hires an interpreter and goes out and asks twenty or thirty Mexican illegal aliens whether they'd sign on to the statement "I didn't cross the border, the border crossed me." And, he can find out from the same number of illegal aliens from all countries whether they think things like identity theft are major crimes. Then, he can engage his brain and get back to us.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 10:10 AM
Mike Huckabee's immigration plan announced
[UPDATES below] Mike Huckabee has released his immigration plan (link). It has as few details but isn't as strong as Mitt Romney's immigration plan. It's also not as detailed nor as strong as Fred Thompson's immigration plan. Last things first, the end of the plan says the following:This plan is partially modeled on a proposal by Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies. ("Re: Immigration: Ten Points for a Successful Presidential Candidate," National Review, May 23, 2005.)Reading that first might be a good way to start; this shout out might have been a mistake on The Huckster's part if Krikorian has issues with the scheme.
Like others, Huck wants to build the fence (by 2010) and increase the numbers of Border Patrol agents. Like Rudy, he also wants a virtual fence. Then, things get complicated:
3. Prevent AmnestyFirst, the INS hasn't existed for over four years. So, I'm going to guess that whoever drew this up didn't really know what they're talking about. Second, I can just see how this plan would play among the current supporters of illegal immigration, from the New York Times to far-left racial power groups. In fact, I can practically hear the chants of "ethnic cleansing!" and see the images of boxcars right now.
Policies that promote or tolerate amnesty will be rejected.
Propose to provide all illegal immigrants a 120-day window to register with the Immigration and Naturalization Service and leave the country. Those who register and return to their home country will face no penalty if they later apply to immigrate or visit; those who do not return home will be, when caught, barred from future reentry for a period of 10 years.
And, I wonder whether those who do go home will then, in a similar fashion to the Mike Pence or Flake-Gutierrez plans ("touchback"), be able to immediately re-enter with a changed immigration status, i.e., amnesty. While there are many good questions this plan engenders, asking about that would be a good first question. And, someone more familiar with the specifics can discuss how under current law illegal aliens can likewise be barred from future reentry for 10 years.
And, I can imagine that millions of illegal aliens would not return home. What exactly does Huck plan to do in that case?
Then:
Employment is the chief draw for most illegal immigrants and denying them jobs is the centerpiece of an attrition strategy.OK, except what's outlined above isn't an "attrition strategy". It's a "mass exodus which will inflame the left and cause endless lawsuits by the ACLU et al" strategy.
Then, something that might turn into a national ID card, although no details are provided:
Institute a universal, mandatory citizenship verification system as part of the normal hiring process.This section has an asterix which references the recent no-match suit brought to us by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the ACLU:
Prevent the IRS and the Social Security Administration from accepting fraudulent Social Security numbers or numbers that don't match the employees' names.After supporting the Fair Tax and the Clear Act, Huckabee gets ironic:
Reject Mexico's "matricula consular" card, which functions as an illegal-immigrant identification card.In fact, Huckabee enabled Mexico to pass out thousands of those so far this year due to him pushing for a consulate to be built in Arkansas.
On the bright side, he says he wants to discourage dual citizenship; that may be similar to current attempts to discourage that.
And, he also says he wants to support legal immigration, end the visa lottery, cut back on chain migration (adult brothers and sisters), and increase high-skilled immigration.
Some of it sounds good, but the mass exodus part is doomed to fail and would probably end up being amnesty. And, of course, there's Huckabee's horrendous record to consider.
So, thanks, but no thanks.
UPDATE: Via this we learn the Mark Krikorian likes the plan. Unfortunately, I have to disagree. While parts of it are certainly good, I have little doubt that it won't be long before the usual suspects start weighing in on the mass exodus plan which, even if those here illegally wanted to take part in would be a logistical nightmare. Choosing a round figure of 12,000,000 illegal aliens over 120 days is 100,000 people per day (or more than 10,000 per working hour, since they'd have to register). And, somewhat less than half of those would be from countries other than Mexico. And, once again, there's everything Huckabee has said and done on this issue which would result in him providing a lot of leeway in his plan.
UPDATE 2: It took a while, but the left is starting their chants. New Democrat Network (Simon Rosenberg) says (ndnblog.org/?q=node/1584):
No matter how you feel about the morality of the plan, or its practicality, it is amazing that the man who may win the GOP nomination is calling for the forced expulsion of 5 percent of the current American workforce. The economic and societal chaos these kinds of plans would create is almost unimaginable."Booman" links to that (boomantribune.com/story/2007/12/8/112236/031) and goes even nutrootier, saying that Huck is vying (with Joe Biden's Iraq partition plan) for the "Adolf Eichmann Mass Relocation Award".
Posted to Immigration2007b at 08:45 AM
Top law firms unite to hamper immigration raids (Soros link)
Via this we learn that attorneys from top law firms such as Dechert LLP, Wilson Sonsini, Skadden-Arps and Orrick, Herrington & Suttcliffe are forming a "task force" to prevent ICE supposedly over-stepping their bounds when conducting immigration raids. All told there are 60 lawyers from 14 firms, and they're doing it pro "bono". Says Andrew Thomases of Dechert:
"All individuals have constitutional rights, and we want to make sure the rights are not violated, and the government is not violating the Fourth or Fifth Amendment when doing searches and seizures."
For their part, ICE says they abide by the law. While it's hard to criticize those who want to defend the Constitution, I don't see those same lawyers rushing to the defense of citizens whose rights are affected by illegal immigration.
The coordinator of the effort is Mark Silverman from San Francisco's Immigrant Legal Resource Center, a group that's received funding from George Soros and which was last seen appearing at a Rep. Barbara Lee event.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 04:46 PM
Banned by Crooks and Liars
The site Crooks and Liars (Crooks & Liars, crooksandliars.com) has banned me from posting comments there. I've twice tried to comment on a recent entry, only to be confronted by a popup saying that I've been banned. I haven't left too many comments there, and a couple have been deleted in the past. Commenting there is usually pretty useless because of all the noise, but, I have lots of domain names and I don't have to provide a domain name, so...
The last comment I left remains ("TLB") in place, so perhaps they've just been too busy to do a full airbrushing:
crooksandliars.com/2007/11/12/
tancredos-psychotic-ad-shuler-should-be-ashamed-to-align-himself-with-him
Note: C&L has an indirect link to the Mexican government through the Blue America PAC.
The growing list of sites which can't handle the heat starts in this post about Kevin Tracy deleting a comment. Other sites engaging in that activity include "Sister Toldjah", New Haven Independent, Think Progress, Kevin Drum and/or Washington Monthly, and many others. And, of course, I was banned by RedState.
Posted to Bloggage at 03:27 PM
CNN/Youtube censored video replies on CNN debate
Youtube and/or CNN censored the list of video replies to their raw footage of the recent CNN/Youtube GOP debate.
On November 29, 2007 I uploaded two highly critical videos about the previous night's debate, and added them as replies to two of the CNN/Youtube-provided videos. My videos were in the list of replies for between one and three days, but then sometime on or before December 1 were deleted from the list. (Note: the videos themselves weren't deleted; they were only deleted them from the list of replies).
The videos are here and here. Full story here.
Posted to Politics at 11:55 AM
Katie Couric to finally bring tough questions to the presidential race
Perky Katie Couric [1] has decided to do something about the MSM's complete inability to call the presidential candidates on their endless lies and misleading statements, and will be asking them a series of tough questions in the coming days ("10 Tough Questions For 10 Top Candidates", link). And, I applaud her for her efforts [2].
So far, the MSM has almost completely refused to discuss important policy matters, prefering to concentrate on horserace, smears, and so forth (extreme example: link).
Now, Perky Katie is going to change that, with questions like the following:
* "If you were elected president, what one book - besides the Bible - you would bring with you to the White House?"
* "Besides your family, what are you most afraid of losing?"
* "Who is the single most impressive person you've ever met?"
[1] Disclaimer: I have to admit that this video really humanizes her, turning her from a robotic Democrat partisan into someone that I'd frankly like to get to know. I only watched the first part, and I guess she says or does something anti-Dan Rather on it. But, all I could concentrate on was other, baser thoughts running through my head.
[2] I will point out, however, that there are 16 GOP and Dem candidates. While I understand the symmetry of it all - "10 Tough Questions For The 16 Major Party Candidates" just doesn't roll of the tongue as well as their title - would it really have cost CBS that much more to simply increase their producers' workload by a mere 60% and thereby give the other candidates just a little TV time?
Posted to Politics at 08:25 PM
NPR Democratic debate: weak questions on immigration, logical fallacies
NPR held a Democratic debate earlier today, and it currently looks like they asked a few incredibly weak questions on immigration that simply allowed the candidates to give their stock speeches. Not only that, but the questions appear to have been designed to make the candidates look slightly reasonable by comparison. Rather than asking questions that would have revealed the downsides of their plans - such as the ones I submitted as the second comment here - they went for the strawman arguments.
I'll wait for the transcript to discuss the specifics, but see this, this, or NPR's summary here.
UPDATE: The transcript is here. While the unnamed moderator pressed Edwards and others on a couple issues, I'm struck by how weak the questions were and how many lies and misleading and incomplete statements the moderator let slip by them. There were six basic questions:
...Some citizens in Marshalltown turn in illegal immigrants; some take them in. There's actually a person who's been indicted for sheltering immigrants, which raises a question that I'd like to put to you. What obligations do American citizens have when it comes to illegal immigrants? Would you [Obama] expect Americans, if you're president, January 2009, immigration reform, whatever you want hasn't happened yet, would you expect Americans to turn in illegal immigrants when they come across?
No national figure is calling on people to turn in random illegal aliens. While the question then goes in to what public agencies should do, that doesn't excuse the stupidity of this question.
Senator Edwards, in a recent debate, you said, as I'm sure you've said many times, that illegal workers are exploited, that they're paid less, if they try to report problems, they're asked about their immigration status. But you have also said that you do not believe that illegal immigration is driving down wages. If they're being paid less, how can they not be driving down wages? [...response...] I just want to follow up, Senator Edwards, on something that you said. I've had the pleasure at a debate setting in front of you twice within the last week. And, at the debate on Saturday, you noted that undocumented immigrants are punished if they complain about unsafe conditions, if they speak up. And you noted that these workers would have rights, they would be looked after in an Edwards administration. What rights do immigrants have if they're working without proper authorization?
The moderator pressed him a couple times; the second time he appears to be supporting enforcing wage and workplace safety laws (just not immigration laws).
You [Hillary Clinton] said in a debate on Saturday night that you support people who are, as you put it, Yes, undocumented, but also working hard, trying to support their families. That's why they're here. In the same answer, you said you want to crack down on employers. Is there a contradiction there? If you crack down on employers, doesn't that mean you're telling employers to put these hard-working people, as you define them, out of work?
She went on to give her stock speech about "comprehensive immigration reform". She also gave the standard false choice between that mass deportations (something that, once again, no national figure is calling for). And, as a bonus, she referenced the extremely flawed Center for American Progress "study" about the cost of mass deportations. The moderator didn't call her on any of that.
But are you [Edwards] saying that, for you it's a matter of fact-finding, to see which way you would go on H1B visas, or have you already made up your mind that they should be limited or they should be increased?
I'll let someone familiar with that topic discuss how bad NPR bungled that part of the "debate".
And, finally, an issue that, while important in some ways, is of a much lower priority than other questions that should have been asked, and they didn't ask about the more important aspect of it but simply allowed the candidates to make speeches:
Will you remove the question about what language we speak when we call any U.S. government office?
That allowed Clinton to give a stock speech, and then Kucinich began to hum Kumbaya ("I see the world as one. I see the world as being interconnected and interdependent and there being an imperative for human unity.")
Finally, another incredibly weak question:
Anybody here willing to say directly that immigration, because of the millions and millions of people involved, is going to change American culture as it has in the past? American is not going to be the same kind of place it is now.
Obviously, there are cultural downsides to massive immigration, yet that question just allowed the candidates to, once again, give stock speeches.
Posted to Politics at 01:45 PM
"NAFTA Superhighway" confirmed by Manitoba government
On November 20, 2007, the Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Manitoba, Canada (John Harvard) opened the session with his Speech from the Throne (gov.mb.ca/throne.html, cached), and in it he confirmed the existence of what he called a "Mid-Continent Trade Corridor". The only difference between that and the "NAFTA Superhighway" appears to be the name:...In addition, Manitoba has been working with the Canadian government and state governments in the U.S. to protect and enhance our access to key trade markets. In response to U.S. border security measures, Manitoba will begin offering an enhanced driver’s licence as an affordable and secure form of identification for travelers. The new licence will be available in the fall of 2008.I wonder exactly what the NAU/NSH apologists will say now; will they pretend it's just an "interplanetary" conspiracy theory as Stephen Harper and George Bush did at the recent SPP summit?
Manitoba is also taking a major role in the development of a Mid-Continent Trade Corridor, connecting our northern Port of Churchill with trade markets throughout the central United States and Mexico. To advance the concept, an alliance has been built with business leaders and state and city governments spanning the entire length of the Corridor. When fully developed, the trade route will incorporate an "in-land port" in Winnipeg with pre-clearance for international shipping...
The video here contains the part of the speech above, and juxtaposes it with excerpts from the SPP meeting.
12/08/07 UPDATE: Jerome Corsi picks up on this with "Canada openly proclaims NAFTA Superhighway/Readers bombard Newsweek with evidence after adverse story on Ron Paul":
A Destination-Winnipeg trade group website [destinationwinnipeg.ca/98] identifies the Mid-Continent Trade Corridor as "the northern gateway of this vast Corridor, a network of highways and railways linking the business community with cities to the south, through the U.S. and into Mexico."Also see infratrans.gov.ab.ca/2760.htm and infratrans.gov.ab.ca/2766.htm
The Canadian government's Canada Transport website [wd.gc.ca/mediacentre/1999/mar05-1a_e.asp] describes the Mid-Continent International Trade Corridor as a rail and highway network which stretches from Manitoba to Mexico...
"We have had that map with the NAFTA Superhighway on our website for 5 years or more," Jerry Bellikka, director of communications for the Alberta Ministry of Infrastructure and Transportation told WND in a telephone interview...
"No," Bellinkka answered directly [when asked whether they're going to get rid of the map on their site]. "We have no plan to change the designation of NAFTA Superhighway on our website."
Posted to NAU at 12:29 PM
Revised SCHIP still has loophole allowing illegal aliens to receive benefits
From this:The revised children's health insurance bill that Congress is about to send to President Bush still has loopholes that both illegal aliens and ineligible legal immigrants could exploit to join the program, a new Heritage Foundation analysis shows.
Under the bill, those applying for the State Children's Health Insurance Program would not have to prove citizenship. Instead, they only would have to provide a valid Social Security number — something most legal immigrants and many illegal aliens already have, said Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, whose analysis is being released today...
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:01 AM
Clueless Peter Beinart: driver's licenses for illegal aliens is "trivial" issue
Peter Beinart (a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations) offers "A Non-Story Remakes the Race". While it contains several other of his "thoughts", this one is relevant to this category:
In recent weeks, the Democratic primary campaign has frequently revolved around small, even trivial, issues -- driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, rumors of planted questions at town-hall meetings and dirty tricks -- that supposedly testify to the character of the candidates.
As the posts in this category will show, driver's licenses for illegal aliens is not a "trivial" issue. File this away under "Beltway Cluelessness".
Posted to Immigration_dls at 10:57 AM
Black and Brown debate features childish race card tricks (Richardson as Hillary's VP?)
The "Iowa Brown and Black Forum" was held yesterday. Edwards gave a shout out to Obama and said he wants to raise the minimum wage to $9.50; B. Hussein Obama agreed. Then, the card games began, with Obama saying:
"When America gets a cold, black and brown America get pneumonia, and we've got pneumonia right now... We're moving in that direction, and we've got to do something about it. We've got to strengthen our unions. We have to raise the minimum wage and make sure it's not every 10 years, but it's keeping pace with inflation. It's got to be a livable wage."
Then, Bill Richardson:
"As the only brown member in this debate, is there any chance we could have civil rights equity and have the brown guy get a little more time?"
Horror writers alone could imaging what it would be like to have him as president or vice president. Would playing the racial victim card help him with North Korea or Iran? Looks like Hillary Clinton is stupid enough to want to find out:
A few minutes later, the governor got his chance to question another candidate and turned to Clinton to ask whether she agreed that governors, such as himself and former president and governor Bill Clinton "make great presidents." Sen. Clinton was clearly ready for him, smiling as she shot back: "I think they also make good vice presidents."
Then, Joe Biden said:
"This is not a zero-sum game... I was offstage hearing about 'black' and 'Hispanic.' Look, that's what white boys have done a long time - banging people against one another. Let's get this straight, it has nothing to do with black versus Hispanic: There's plenty of opportunity for both."
Do I need to add that if Barack Obama had said the same thing even many "liberals" would consider him a racist?
Then, asked an apparently weak question by Ray Suarez about driver's licenses for illegal aliens, Hillary responded again with a call to pass "comprehensive immigration reform". She could save herself from saying the same thing over and over by just holding up a sign.
Posted to Politics at 08:11 PM
NPR Democratic radio debate December 4, 2007
[UPDATE: I didn't listen, but it looks like NPR did a CNN on immigration.]
On Tuesday, December 4, NPR will be holding a radio-only presidential debate featuring the Democratic candidates from 11am to 1pm Pacific, so be sure a leave a note on the dash of your Volvo. A GOP version remains to be scheduled.
And, they're soliciting questions from listeners, such as at this entry seeking questions about immigration. One will note that the second comment is from yours truly. Unfortunately, many of the other questions given by others are rather weak; even if their somnolescent hosts ask anything remotely similar to one of my questions, they'll probably just accept what the candidates say at face value and move on. But, you never know. The audio will be made available, and if anything interesting happens or if NPR lets lies slip past them I might make videos from it.
Posted to Politics at 08:03 PM
David Broder wants McCain-Huckabee ticket (because of immigration; retransmits Huck lie?)
David Broder offers the completely clueless "Republicans would be wise to tab McCain and Huckabee" (link). He wants that ticket explicitly due to their immigration stances. And, Broder not only fails to do his job but he may be spreading Huckabee misinformation and he's being misleading about a program Huckabee supported:
What sets McCain and Huckabee apart is most evident in the way they treat the contentious issue of illegal immigration. Both of them have been burned by it - Huckabee in a losing battle with his Legislature over tuition breaks for children of illegal immigrants; McCain, for his sponsorship of President Bush's comprehensive immigration reform. Both now acknowledge - as everyone must - that the failure of the federal government to secure the southern border has produced broad public outrage.
As detailed at the last link, those tuition breaks were for illegal aliens themselves, irrespective of the statuses of their parents. Originally I thought this formulation might just be sloppiness, but the more I see it the more I think it must be an attempt to mislead.
Then, Broder lies, calling Rep. Tom Tancredo "rabidly anti-immigrant". And, he (perhaps unknowingly) supports a Darwinistic immigration policy:
Huckabee and McCain always remember that those who struggle to reach the United States across the deserts or rivers of the Southwest are human beings drawn here by the promise of better lives for their families.
As for those who don't make it, and the business of human smuggling, well, I guess that's what Emma Lazarus had in mind. Or something.
Then, Broder a) fails to do his job, and b) may be helping Mike Huckabee lie.
Huckabee was asked to defend a bill he sponsored that the questioner said "gave illegal aliens a discount for college in Arkansas by allowing them to pay lower in-state tuition rates." The former governor corrected him. The bill, he said, "would have allowed those children who had been in our schools their entire school life the opportunity to have the same scholarship that their peers had, who had also gone to high school with them and sat in the same classrooms. ... It wasn't about out-of-state tuition. ... "
By including the "corrected him" bit, Broder is himself assuming responsibility for the following statement; he is calling the following statement correct.
And, it appears that what Huckabee said wasn't correct. Can Broder provide proof of its correctness? Or, did he simply fail to do his job and verify whether it was correct or not?
And, of course, it is about out-of-state tuition and much more: if Huckabee had gotten his way, foreign citizens who are here illegally would have gotten a better deal than, among others, U.S. citizens recently arrived from out of state. It's not just a matter of fairness, bills like the one that Huckabee supported are a direct attack on what it means to be a U.S. citizen. Further, because there are only limited resources, every discount going to an illegal alien means one less available to a U.S. citizen.
Mitt Romney made that point, but obviously it takes a lot to sink through the Beltway "journalism" of David Broder.
Posted to Politics at 02:53 PM
Tim Rutten: CNN is "corrupt"; wrong about immigration (GOP debate)
Tim Rutten of the Los Angeles Times offers "CNN: Corrupt News Network". He calls CNN "corrupt" for spending so much time on immigration matters, explicitly saying it was an attempt to boost Lou Dobbs' ratings. More on that mostly unbelievable charge below.
...this most recent debacle masquerading as a presidential debate raises serious questions about whether CNN is ethically or professionally suitable to play the political role the Democratic and Republican parties recently have conceded it... ...In any event, CNN has failed in its responsibilities to the political process and it's time for the leaders of both the Republican and Democratic parties to take the network out of our electoral affairs.
While he's right about that, he falsely believes that immigration isn't an important issue, either per se or to the GOP base. In fact, it's one of the most vital issues the U.S. faces, and if Rutten can't see that it's because he's stuck in his MSM cocoon. And, even if he could see it, his paper's history of covering up for far-left illegal immigration supporters throws into doubt whether the L.A. Times would cover it. And, needless to say, the MSM frequently lies or misleads about the issue, so taking their accounts at face value might explain some of his confusion.
If this was a promo for Dobbs, I'd tend to think that he or his producers would have been involved in selecting the questions in some way. Would the other parts of CNN decide to do a good turn for Dobbs and then not consult him or someone from his staff? While that's certainly possible, I'd doubt it.
And, I tend to doubt that, if he were asked, Dobbs would have selected the questions that were asked. While I understand that Dobbs can't go for the jugular with each guest, since he wants to still get people to come on his show. But, I have trouble believing that he would have selected the question about amnesty, which was directed at just two candidates, including John McCain. Everybody who follows this issue knows that amnesty supporters - like McCain and others - have a habit of lying and not calling what they support "amnesty", prefering to use euphemisms. And, McCain and other candidates have denied that he supports amnesty countless times. So, why ask him to deny it again?
And, the in-state tuition question was almost as weak. I'd be very surprised to learn that Dobbs wouldn't immediately jump on the same points I did; in fact, his January 22, 2007 show featured a segment he introduced talking about the very same federal law as discussed at the previous link (transcript; do a find for "1623").
And, the previous CNN Democratic debate included a CNN-approved lie that slammed Lou Dobbs; I assume that was office politics. Dobbs apparently has his own production staff separate from the rest of their "news" staff; at least one profile of Dobbs indicated that there was tension between the two.
Let me suggest that Rutten learns much more about immigration matters, and then starts looking a bit deeper.
Posted to Politics at 03:46 PM
Max Blumenthal lies about Tom Tancredo
Max Blumenthal offers "Tom Tancredo Hired Illegal Laborers to Renovate His McMansion" (alternet.org/story/69391). It's so full of misleading statements and lies it's difficult to know where to begin. However, the title itself contains a lie: Tancredo contracted with Creative Drywall Design of Denver; he didn't hire illegal aliens directly as the title states, the president of that company claims he thought they were legal workers, and lawyers advised of the case stated he didn't break any laws [1].Then, we move on to the subhead:
Anti-immigration zealot and GOP presidential candidate Tom Tancredo hired what he often refers to as "criminal aliens" to renovate his Colorado house.There's a difference between illegal aliens and criminal aliens, and I strongly suspect that the workers were just the former and not the latter. And, of course, he's not "anti-immigration".
Then, from the article:
When Tancredo hired a construction crew to transform his drab basement into a high-tech pleasure den in October 2001, however, he did not express concern that only two of its members spoke English. Nor did he bother to check the workers' documentation to see if they were legal residents of the United States. Had Tancredo done so, he would have learned that most of the crew consisted of undocumented immigrants, or "criminal aliens" as he likes to call them. Instead, Tancredo paid the crew $60,000 for its labor and waited innocently for the completion of his elaborate entertainment complex.1. As stated above, he contracted with a contractor [1].
2. He probably would have violated several state and federal laws if he had inquired about their status; in that case (as with Mitt Romney), the far-left would be accusing him of racial profiling and discrimination.
3. As stated above, Tancredo knows the difference between those who are just illegal aliens and those who are criminal aliens. He doesn't call the former with the latter term unless it applies.
During the renovation process, two illegal workers hired by Tancredo were alerted to his reputation for immigrant bashing. They went straight to the Denver Post to complain. Tancredo "doesn't want us here, but he'll take advantage of our sweat and our labor," one of the workers complained to the Post on September 19, 2002. "It's just not right."1. Once again, Tancredo didn't "hired" them directly [1].
2. An interesting question is who exactly "alerted" the workers; was it a setup?
3. The Post article followed and coincided with the Jesus Apodaca incident, in which the Denver Post collaborated with the Mexican consulate to push giving college discounts to illegal aliens. See the September 29, 2002 letter Tancredo wrote to the Post (link). They apparently wrote 24 stories about the issue... over nine days. More response here.
...Then defiance gave way to vitriol as the congressman dubbed undocumented immigrants, "the face of murder."Blumenthal is being extremely misleading; Tancredo wasn't refering to all "undocumented immigrants", but to coyotes, drug smugglers, and terrorists [2].
It continues, this time with mere smears (I didn't bother clicking to the second page to see if there are more lies):
Down on the border, Tancredo announced his support for the Minutemen, providing the anti-immigrant militia with a veneer of respectability while its pistol-packing members hunt for brown-skinned evildoers.Obviously, the use of the word "militia" is meant to convey an incorrect portrayal of their actions, as is the word "hunt", and of course, they're interested in evildoers of all skin colors.
UPDATE: Howie Klein linked to the Blumenthal article (downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2007/12/heath-shuler-joins-tom-tancredo-know.html), and I left a one-sentence comment linking to this post; the comment appeared and was then deleted. He's really afraid that his readers will learn the truth, isn't he.
UPDATE 2: I'm not going to bother registering to comment, but Pam Spaulding links to the article in the falsely-titled post "Tom Tancredo hired 'criminal aliens' to build his family's rec room" (pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3807). She reposted that at Pandagon; let's see if they approve the comment I left: pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/12/02/ tom-tancredo-hired-criminal-aliens-to-build-his-familys-rec-room/
Footnotes in the extended entry.
[1] The article Blumenthal refers to is "Illegal labor aided Tancredo Workers say they redid basement for immigration critic" by Michael Riley, September 19, 2002. A copy is here.
Undocumented immigrants helped remodel U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo's Littleton basement, two of the workers told The Denver Post. The workers said they were among a crew of five or six people who labored for contractor Creative Drywall Design of Denver, creating a home theater with terraced seating, a billiards table and game area, and a bedroom for Tancredo, a Republican and one of the nation's most vocal immigration critics.[2] From a September 18, 2002 House floor speech (link):
All but one of the crew were undocumented immigrants from Latin America, according to two of the workers. The Denver Post is not naming the employees because of the possibility that identification might lead to legal proceedings against them.
Tancredo didn't break any laws, according to immigration lawyers briefed on the case. He never asked whether the workers - only two of whom spoke English - were in the country legally, said Eric Givan, project manager for the company.
The company's president said he believed all of his workers were in the country legally and that he had documentation from them on file. The two workers said their documentation was false...
As the contractor's client, Tancredo had no legal obligation to ask if all the workers were documented. In his floor speech Wednesday night, he said he couldn't legally ask that question.
"You can be sued under the Civil Rights Act if you go out and ask people who have been hired by someone else if they are here illegally or not," he said.
But a Justice Department lawyer disagreed. "If a person wants to feel more comfortable by asking a contractor to sign something assuring them that everyone who works for them is legal, they can do that because (the contractor) has that obligation in the first place," said the lawyer, who declined to be identified.
Creative Drywall owner J.J. Fukunaga said he has documents on file showing that each of the company's 15 employees is legally entitled to work in the U.S. The documents vary by employee but in some cases include copies of Social Security cards and driver's licenses, he said. When asked to show copies of those documents, he declined...
..."Tom Tancredo is no more breaking the law by having his basement refinished by a company that employs undocumented workers than anybody who goes into a McDonald's and gets served a Big Mac" by an undocumented immigrant, said Laura Lichter, a Boulder immigration attorney...
...What is the most discouraging or disconcerting aspect of this whole thing is that when trying to characterize and personify the illegal immigration issue by using the Apodacas, what you do is ignore another face of illegal immigration that is much, much uglier, much nastier. That is the face of illegal immigration that you confront on the borders of this country, both the Canadian border and the Mexican border. It is the face of murder, it is the face of infiltration into the country of people who are coming to do us great harm, it is the face of drug smuggling. It is the face of rape and robbery, because coyotes who often bring these people, in this case from Mexico, into the United States, they charge them sometimes $1,000 or $1,500 to bring them into the United States illegally, and when they get to the borders they rape the women, they steal the money, they force the people into the United States into some of the most inhospitable parts of the country in terms of the desert, and they die out there. This is an ugly thing...
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:50 AM
