« December 2007 | Main | February 2008 »
Barack Obama misleads, does sales job on illegal immigration (CNN Democratic "debate")
At tonight's CNN/Politico/Los Angeles Times Democratic "debate" (link), per lightweight illegal immigration supporter Marc Cooper (link):
The candidates also cautiously sparred on the potentially explosive issue of immigration with Obama rejecting a moderator's question that assumed that African-Americans were suffering because of illegal immigration. America's working poor were feeling economic uncertainty "before the latest round of immigrants showed up," Obama said. "We should not use immigration as a tactic to divide," he said.
Apparently Obama lives in a fantasy world where millions of low-wage, low-skill illegal aliens don't have an impact on our own low-wage workers. If the MSM weren't completely corrupt they'd ask him to explain the large percentage of those who are permanently unemployed, especially blacks. And, the last part is an attempt to end debate about this issue by calling those who question importing millions of low-wage workers "dividers".
CNN also asked about driver's licenses for illegal aliens, something that Obama strongly supports. However, CNN's tack was just to gin up controversy regarding possible flip-flops, it wasn't to have an actual adult conversation about whether giving foreign citizens who are here illegally driver's licenses is good public policy.
In an appearance earlier in the day, Obama corrupt nature on this issue was on full display (link):
"We have to stop letting those in power turn us against each other. No place do I see this more than in our immigration debate. I am tired of people of people using this as a political football... ...My father when he came here, he didn't look like you know - he didn't look like he stepped off the Mayflower. But we have to remember the history of immigration in this country. When the Irish first came, people were anti-Irish, when the Italians first came, people were anti-Italian and so we've got to remember our own past history... And let me remind everybody that not everybody who came in through Ellis Island had their papers in order."
There are a lot of things wrong with that statement, it's too bad there wasn't a real reporter around to call him on it (instead of CBS News' Maria Gavrilovic).
1. Once again, Obama is trying to excuse illegal activity because he's a corrupt and he wants to obtain political power.
2. He plays the race card.
3. He engages in a logical fallacy: today's immigration is not like yesterday's.
4. The bit about Ellis Island makes no sense at all, since EI was an official entry point, not an unofficial entry point such as our southern border. Everyone who made it through Ellis Island had their papers in order by definition; those who arrived at Ellis Island had no official papers to begin with (other than those related to the steamship passage).
The part she doesn't mention showed even more explicitly that he's a demagogue (link):
"What I don't like are people focusing on just south-of-the-border immigrants... I don't hear about immigrants from Ireland or Poland. It's very important that we have an intelligent debate about immigration not tinged with attitudes about what people should look like."
He's not just playing the race card, he's doing it in an extremely sleazy fashion. Most of our illegal aliens do come from Mexico, and many people have commented on Irish illegal aliens, for instance pointing out that one of their advocacy groups is partially funded by the Irish government. And, needless to say, anyone who pretends the issue is what illegal aliens "look like" is not interested in an "intelligent debate".
UPDATE: Here's another report from the last event:
[BHO] quoted a woman he'd met on the campaign trail who had despaired of getting her daughter's school to remedy a problem and who told him, "schools aren't designed for people like us. Health care isn't designed for people like us," Obama continued, "the economy isn't designed for people like us. This is our country," he said, his voice rising, "America should be designed for people like us!"
Harold Meyerson was foolish enough to think "people like us" referred to people like him.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 08:10 PM
Matt Corley/Think Progress misleads about Juan Hernandez (McCain's Mexico-linked staff member)
Matt Corley, Research Associate for Think Progress (run by the Clinton-linked Center for American Progress) offers "Glenn Beck's Rants Against 'Juan McCain' Would Not Be Welcome At RedState.com" [1]. The first thing to note is that we might be getting an inkling of how the left/Democrats deal with the issue of Juan Hernandez, the John McCain staff member who's a former cabinet-level official with the Mexican government. To wit, pretend that the issue is only his ethnic background and not his former employment, his dual citizenship, and his obvious divided loyalties:
Discussing last night's GOP debate on his radio show today, Glenn Beck and fill-in host Pat Gray mocked Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) by derisively calling him "Juan McCain." Beck, who considers McCain's sponsorship of a comprehensive immigration bill and the Mexican background of his national director of Hispanic outreach to be "an audacious slap in the face to the American people," proudly advertised the segment in his daily e-mail to listeners today...
Of course, the issue isn't his "Mexican background", but with the other issues mentioned above. According, I suggest reviewing everything Corley says in the future for accuracy and completeness.
The post also involves yet another set of rules at RedState, this to prevent people from using names like "Jorge Arbusto". Per Leon Wolf: "If you think you've really zinged someone by calling them by a Latino name, that's a pretty reliable (nearly infallible, in fact) indicator that you don't like Latino people." Of course, the question then becomes why Leon Wolf thinks having a "Latino name" is per se a negative. Let me suggest that Wolf is projecting.
The post even mentions the "We Can Stop The Hate" group.
[1] thinkprogress.org/2008/01/31/beck-juan-mccain/#comment-4250369
[2] redstate.com/stories/miscellanea/and_now_a_word_for_our_commenters
Posted to Immigration2008a at 07:39 PM
We Can Stop The Hate: Mexico-linked groups try silencing opponents of illegal immigration
The extremist-funding National Council of La Raza has started a new effort called We Can Stop The Hate (wecanstopthehate.org) which is attempting to silence those who support our immigration laws by highlighting what they call examples of "hate". Three of their cohorts in the effort have at least indirect links to the Mexican government. Note that that government has explicitly stated that they're going to be using U.S. non-profits to push their agenda, but whether they're involved in the effort isn't known.
The groups involved:
* Anti-Defamation League
* Center for American Progress
* Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
* Media Matters for America (has received money from George Soros)
* Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
* Southern Poverty Law Center
Their targets include Lou Dobbs, Glenn Beck, Pat Buchanan, and others, and a video from them is here.
The easy way to defeat their effort is to go to public appearances by their representatives and ask them about their constituent groups' links to the Mexican government and whether they're receiving any help from that government. And, engage them in a debate designed to show that they're lying about "hate" and just trying to use it as a smokescreen for their support for illegal activity.
UPDATE: See the related entries Ariel Alexovich/New York Times lies about Tom Tancredo, misleads about NCLR and Janet Murguia/National Council of La Raza: throw the First Amendment away to protect illegal immigration?
UPDATE 2: The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) supports the campaign (link).
UPDATE 3: See National Council of La Raza gave award to racist professor ("eliminate the gringo", Jose Angel Gutierrez)
UPDATE 4: The American Jewish Committee has joined their campaign.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 11:34 AM
Mark Pera: help from Mexico-linked ICIRR, money from immigration lawyers (Illinois)
Mark Pera is trying to unseat incumbent and fellow Democrat Rep. Dan Lipinski (link) (D-IL) in Illinois' 3rd district. I strongly urge voting for anyone other than Pera, due to his links to a few interesting groups. While Lipinski might have his problems (link), I doubt whether they rise to Pera's issues. Those include receiving help from a Mexico-linked group, receiving money from immigration lawyers, and receiving the endorsement of a racist linked to the Mexican government.
I'm going to send an email to Pera asking him whether he's going to reject the support of these groups, but I suspect he won't:
1. Via Howie Klein [1] we learn that the Mexico-linked Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights has been working on his behalf. That group's president, Juan Salgado, has a few links to the Mexican government.
2. From this: ...Carlos Heredia of the Latino Organization of the Southwest criticized him for being a no-show at two neighborhood meetings called to discuss comprehensive immigration reform... the Mexicans for Political Progress yesterday announced their support for Lipinski's chief opponent, democrat Mark Pera. Members of the group --among them Juan Salgado, president of the ICIRR board; Fabian Morales, advisor of the Institute for Mexicans in the Exterior (IME); and Salvador Cervantes organizer of Resurrection Project – said MXPP endorses Pera because of his support of pro-immigrant proyects, such as the Dream Act...
The IME is part of the Mexican government, and, as discussed at his name's link, Morales said this recently:
"Because the enemy is not at home, but outside, he is of white complexion, he thinks differently than us, they are the Minuteman, and those are the ones that we should attack."
Note also that the "Mexicans" part of "Mexicans for Political Progress" should be a misnomer, in that "Mexicans" can't vote (in the U.S.), only "Mexican-Americans". Obviously, they don't see it that way. Even MALDEF uses "Mexican-American" and LULAC has "Citizen" in their name.
3. Pera has received money from Immigrants' List, a group whose board members are all immigration attorneys.
4. "ICIRR sponsored a voter's forum with over 400 Mexican and Muslim immigrant leaders that was attended by Pera and another challenger, but not by their own congressman." [1]
5. The Mexican and Muslim communities have collaborated on fundraising for the Pera Campaign, bringing in thousands of dollars locally and using the money to open a second campaign office and to hire two experienced immigrant organizers to mobilize Mexican and Muslim voters. [1] (as above, "Mexican" isn't the same as "Mexican-American", and I suspect Klein means it the way he wrote it)
6. The Campaign for Community Change (associated with the Center for Community Change) sent out a mailer attacking Lipinski. [1]
[1] downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2008/01/pissing-off-immigrant-community-in.html
Note that Klein's Blue America PAC has also collaborated with the ICIRR before on another project, and thus he and they have an indirect link to the Mexican government.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 07:27 PM
John McCain bumpersticker: "Fewer Jobs. More Wars."
While some might look on in dismay at the chance of John McCain being selected as the Republican nominee, my plan to soften the blow is to try to sell as many of the following bumperstickers and other products as possible, and then move to Australia. It reads "Fewer Jobs. More Wars", and other slogans shall be forthcoming.
Click here to purchase it from CafePress.
Posted to Temporary at 03:20 PM
Vote No on Prop 93 (bogus term limits proposition would keep Fabian Nunez, Gil Cedillo in office)
I urge all Californians to vote No on Prop 93, the term limits proposition. It's an obviously deceptive measure that pretends to limit term limits for legislators, but which in fact would allow people like Fabian Nunez, Don Perata, and Gil Cedillo to remain in office instead of being termed out.
In fact, if the proposition passes, Nunez could remain Speaker until 2014 and Perata Senate president until 2012. For more information, see the opposition site at stopprop93.com.
Those who will be termed out also include such worthies as Lloyd Levine, Paty Berg, Mervyn Dymally, Betty Karnette, Mark Leno, Sheila Kuehl, and Gloria Romero. A full list is in the PDF available here. Unfortunately, Tom McClintock would also be affected, but at least temporarily depriving the rest of their power is worth it.
Those who are pushing the proposition (link) include the CA Democratic Party, former governor Gray Davis, Rep. Barbara Lee, San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom, and various union, business, racial power, and environmental groups such as the Sierra Club of California. Needless to say, those groups have power over many of the legislators who would be affected.
Another pusher is Arnold Schwarzenegger, who offered "Reform term limits" (link) earlier this month and even appears in an ad for the measure (link). Oddly enough, he doesn't mention that the measure is obviously intended to deceive and would keep people like Nunez and Cedillo in power.
Related to that:
But state Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, the only other Republican holding statewide office in California, suggested Schwarzenegger agreed to back Proposition 93 to get concessions from legislative leaders on other issues... "That's my conclusion after looking at all the facts I have," said Poizner, a wealthy former Silicon Valley businessman who has contributed $1.5 million of his own money to the anti-93 campaign. "I'm disappointed and not too surprised that in this type of environment that the governor got pushed into a corner where he thought he had to make this kind of a deal in order to make progress with legislative leaders." ...Schwarzenegger is seeking legislative support this year for a $14 billion health care reform plan, a constitutional amendment to change the state budgeting process and massive upgrades to the state's water system.
Posted to California at 04:11 PM
Leticia van de Putte delivers Democratic SOTU response (Spanish language version)
Texas state senator Leticia van de Putte delivered the Spanish-language version of the Democratic Party's response to the Bush State of the Union address. Republicans and even most Democrats might want to pay closer attention to what Democratic leaders are saying behind their backs (example from Senator Bob Menendez), yet I don't think this will get much play. The transcript is at Nancy Pelosi's very own site here, and here's the part about immigration:
And on issues specific to our community, the President has allowed extremists to dominate the rhetoric on immigration, disrespecting our rich history, and the contributions immigrants have made to strengthen our country. Senate Democrats fought to reach a compromise bipartisan immigration reform bill and brought it for a vote 3 times, but were blocked by the anger of the far right, and Republicans who prefer to use it as a campaign issue than to actually address it. The same happened with the DREAM Act, critical for immigrant children who grew up in America to achieve their dreams of a higher education.
Needless to say, immigration isn't specific to one "community", and dividing countries into "communities" is what's done in cheerful places such as the Balkans. And, Bush has indeed allowed "extremists to dominate the rhetoric on immigration": extremists like Michael Gerson, Linda Chavez, Daniel Griswold (inspired Bush's original "guest" worker scheme), and so forth and so on. Meanwhile, Bush has tried to silence, marginalize, and lie to those Americans who support our laws, which includes many Democrats among the ranks of those who are supposedly "far right". And, as discussed here many times, the DREAM Act would allow illegal aliens - citizens of other countries - to take college discounts and slots from U.S. citizens. Addresses like this make clear that the Democrats have little regard for fundamental concepts such as U.S. citizenship.
On a related note, the English-language response from Kansas governor Kathleen Sebelius didn't mention immigration at all (link).
Posted to Immigration2008a at 07:44 PM
Bush 2008 State of the Union continues immigration charades
One paragraph of tonight's State of the Union address concerned immigration:
America needs to secure our borders - and with your help, my Administration is taking steps to do so. We are increasing worksite enforcement, we are deploying fences and advanced technologies to stop illegal crossings, we have effectively ended the policy of "catch and release" at the border, and by the end of this year, we will have doubled the number of border patrol agents. Yet we also need to acknowledge that we will never fully secure our border until we create a lawful way for foreign workers to come here and support our economy. This will take pressure off the border and allow law enforcement to concentrate on those who mean us harm. We must also find a sensible and humane way to deal with people here illegally. Illegal immigration is complicated, but it can be resolved. And it must be resolved in a way that upholds both our laws and our highest ideals.
First, as with the Clinton's, it's necessary to define terms. "Securing" the borders, to me, doesn't mean completely preventing all illegal crossing since some people will always be able to get through. I believe that that's the way that Bush means that to mean, although I could be surprised.
The question then becomes: why Bush hasn't secured to borders until now? He's had seven plus years, so why are they still "taking steps"?
And, I'll bet Bush could secure the border in a few weeks if he really needed and wanted to. In that light, the third sentence above holds the U.S. hostage to some sort of "guest" worker program, otherwise Bush won't do his job. The economy would hardly collapse if we secured the borders, but some small group of people would lose some money.
And, while the great majority of illegal aliens don't "mean us harm", they do form a political power base for racial demagogues and the Mexican and other governments, and that does harm the U.S.
And, it's hardly "humane" to allow 14% of another country's workforce to move to your country and prop up the corrupt government of that country.
As for the rest, they've certainly increased worksite enforcement a bit, but I'd imagine there are even Clinton years with higher rates.
The DHS is certainly building fences, but whether they're pushing as hard as they could is definitely an open question.
Checking how many "other than Mexicans" have been released back in to the U.S. rather than being deported immediately and whether the DHS is in line to double the numbers of agents is left as an exercise.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 07:02 PM
Barack Obama reiterates support for driver's licenses for illegal aliens (Carolyn Lochhead)
Carolyn Lochhead of the San Francisco Chronicle offers this:Sen. Barack Obama easily won the African American vote in South Carolina, but to woo California Latinos, where he is running 3-to-1 behind rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, he is taking a giant risk: spotlighting his support for the red-hot issue of granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.She's actually right about most of that, but she forgot to include New York governor Eliot Spitzer in her list of casualties. It also isn't clear from her article who exactly is renewing Obama's support for those who've broken our laws; no quotes from Obama or an official spokesman are provided.
It's a huge issue for Latinos, who want them. It's also a huge issue for the general electorate, which most vehemently does not. Obama's stand could come back to haunt him not only in a general election, but with other voters in California, where driver's licenses for illegal immigrants helped undo former Gov. Gray Davis.
It's also not entirely true that "Latinos... want them". Latinos who are here legally can already get them. As for those who put their race ahead of the best interests of their country, see page 14 of the 2007 Pew Hispanic Survey (pewhispanic.org/files/reports/84.pdf). Respondents were asked whether there should be a check for immigration status before granting a license. 85% of non-Hispanics said yes, as did 40% of all Hispanics. A majority of native-born Hispanics (56%) said yes, but a majority of foreign-born Hispanics (66%) said no. Whether any of the latter included illegal aliens isn't clear.
So, just as long as Obama goes for the foreign-born Hispanics (perhaps including illegal aliens), he's got it made. It's only the other 75%+ of American citizens he needs to worry about.
The article also quotes Gil Cedillo and former Clinton administration official Federico Pena, who's now a supporter of Obama. In 2006 he led a group that tried to thwart a Proposition 187-style measure in Colorado and the spokeswoman for that group was the vile Polly Baca, meaning that Pena is linked at least tangentially linked into the Western Union gravy train.
More on Obama's immigration issues here.
Posted to Immigration_dls at 01:58 PM
John McCain would sign his own amnesty bill as president; tries co-opting attrition
Yesterday, Tim Russert asked John McCain:"If the Senate passed your bill, S.1433, the McCain/Kennedy immigration bill, would you as president sign it?McCain replied:
"Yeah. But look, the lesson is, it isn't - one, it isn't going to come. It isn't going to come."Video here.
In other news, McCain is now trying to pretend to embrace the attrition concept, whereby we'd enforce our laws and reduce non-emergency services now to encourage many or most illegal aliens to go home voluntarily. However, he only presents it as a side-effect of an amnesty rather than suggesting it as an alternative to amnesty. And, he's discussing it as yet another attempt to fool people into supporting his amnesty:
[McCain said:] "I would propose, once the borders are secure and the borders stay government-certified, then I would have [a] tamper-proof biometric-document system so that the only people that can work are those who have that. And that would cause many more to leave this country,"In other words, he's just slightly changing tactics in order to get the amnesty that he and those he's linked to want.
...The program's host, Jorge Ramos, asked Mr. McCain if that meant no legalization program "for the first two or three years," and Mr. McCain seemed to concur.
"I am saying that in the first year or two years at the present pace we can get the border secured, and then we can address the other part of it. The American people want the border secured first, and that is what we have to do," Mr. McCain said, according to an English transcript provided by the network.
It's also quite fitting that, as described at the link above, Ramos is a Mexican citizen by choice despite having lived and worked in the U.S. for over a decade.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 11:06 AM
John McCain asked about Juan Hernandez, doesn't denounce his views
Via this, someone went to a John McCain appearance in Florida and asked him about his Hispanic outreach director Juan Hernandez, a dual citizen who's also a former official with the Mexican government. While she got some good information about him out there in her question, she didn't note that he's a former official with the Mexican government.
Here's McCain's reply:
He's on my staff because he supports my policies and my proposals and my legislative proposal to secure the borders first. [...] I don't know what his previous positions are or other positions are, he supports mine. I have nothing to do with his. He has volunteered to help me with outreach to our Hispanic citizenry as I outreach to every citizen in America. [...] I have no idea but I will check in to the information you've given me. [...]
According to a McCain spokesman, he was just an unpaid volunteer. However, McCain himself says he's on his staff, and there would seem to be a conflict between their descriptions of his roles. McCain also claims to be clueless about Hernandez' previous positions, something that's difficult to believe considering that Hernandez is a Senior Fellow at the McCain-linked "Reform Institute". But, if he isn't lying, that indicates a strong lack of judgment. And, I doubt whether McCain's attempts to disclaim responsibility for the opinions of a member of his staff would wash if that person held opinions that the MSM considered out of bounds.
The thing to do now is for others to hound him at future appearances, pointing out that Hernandez used to work for a foreign government that encourages illegal immigration to the U.S. and that he's now "outreaching" to U.S. citizens and voters on McCain's behalf. And, ask him whether he's had a chance to check in to Hernandez' positions, why he wasn't aware of them before, and whether he's going to request that Hernandez leaves his "staff". The MSM can also be asked why they aren't looking in to this, such as by asking them in person (noting their names) or by posting comments at MSM sites that discuss McCain.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 10:03 PM
Flor Crisostomo: the new Elvira Arellano (sanctuary at Adalberto United Methodist Church)
Via this we learn that Reverend Walter "Slim" Coleman's Adalberto United Methodist Church continues the struggle for in effect open borders with the announcement that they'll be giving "sanctuary" to another illegal alien, Flor Crisostomo. That church grabbed headlines recently for hosting Elvira Arellano, before she was arrested and deported to Mexico, where she remains.
Crisostomo's statement says in part:
"I am taking a stand of civil disobedience... I believe with all my heart that the United States and Mexico must end the system of undocumented labor."
Obviously, "civil disobedience" requires one to be a citizen; when foreign citizens do it it's something else. And, most Americans would also like to end the "system of undocumented labor", just not in the way she wants.
Crisostomo was arrested in an immigration raid at IFCO Systems in Chicago in 2006. More on that raid here, here, and here. In November of last year she held a hunger strike and protested in front of Rahm Emanuel's office, claiming he wasn't being "democratic" enough for her. That protest may have been the one organized by the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, which is headed by someone linked to the Mexican government.
Rep. Bobby Rush (D-IL) offered a private relief bill for her, Arellano, and several others (H.R. 2182, link). She was part of the May 1, 2007 pro-illegal immigration march and was part of the Centro Sin Fronteras delegation that joined with the March 10 Movement to organize that march; one leader of the latter group is an official with Mexico's PRD Party (Jorge Mujica). Regarding that march:
Flor Crisostomo wants everybody to know she's in this country illegally. So does Maria del Carmen Santana... The two immigrants from Mexico share the in-your-face attitude that marks preparations for Tuesday's immigration march in downtown Chicago... "Our community is very angry, very, very angry," said Crisostomo... Crisostomo is helping to organize Tuesday's march, making signs and joining in a hunger strike. She decided to speak publicly, she said, "so the greater community can understand we're not here to live on welfare or to not pay taxes. We're part of a bigger problem that needs to be fixed." ...
It also says she had a fake ID, obviously a very common occurrence. Whether it also involved identity theft isn't known. Other reports from People's Weekly world (link) and Socialist Worker (link).
Posted to Immigration2008a at 03:14 PM
Is Barack Obama a Muslim who practices Islam and who attended a madrassa?
Is Barack Obama a Muslim who practices Islam and who attended a madrassa (madrasa) in Indonesia? Despite whatever emails you might have received, it appears that the answer to that is no. According to him, he's a "committed Christian" (link). His church is the Trinity United Church of Christ, whose pastor has made some rather questionable statements.
However, according to this:
An investigation of Mr. Obama by political opponents within the Democratic Party has discovered that Mr. Obama was raised as a Muslim by his stepfather in Indonesia. Sources close to the background check, which has not yet been released, said Mr. Obama, 45, spent at least four years in a so-called Madrassa, or Muslim seminary, in Indonesia... The sources said the young Obama was given the name Hussein by his Muslim father, which the Illinois Democrat rarely uses in public... Although the background check has not confirmed that the specific Madrassa Mr. Obama attended was espousing Wahhabism, the sources said his Democratic opponents believe this to be the case—and are seeking to prove it...
On the other hand, CNN visited the school and say they "debunked" the story, and there may be some confusion over terms (link).
The unfortunate thing about this story is that it isn't really necessary to lie about Barack Obama because the truth about him is bad enough. A new TV ad from him highlights his endorsements from Linda Sanchez and even Gil Cedillo (link). He recently named as a national campaign co-chair Maria Elena Durazo, who took part in a pro-illegal immigration media event. His campaign has pledged to avoid using the term "illegal alien", despite it being the proper legal term. He's acknowledged the possibility of terrorist infiltration over the borders, but, instead of taking actions to prevent that immediately, he's among those holding the country hostage to the slim possibility of yet another amnesty for illegal aliens. He supports driver's licenses for illegal aliens. He's also endorsed the California DREAM Act, which lets illegal aliens take college discounts from U.S. citizens. And, perhaps most disturbing of all, he marched at the May 1 2006 Chicago march in support of illegal immigration. The main organizers of that march have a long series of links to the Mexican government.
UPDATE 2: As of March 3, here's the latest on NAFTAGate. Earlier, Obama campaign co-chair Maria Elena Durazo met with Mexican president Felipe Calderon on his recent tour of that country's outposts in our country. Obama has indicated his support for Bush's SPP (spp.gov), aka "NAFTA on steroids". And, he did so in a fundamentally dishonest fashion by speaking in code. For a supposed constitutional scholar, he doesn't seem to understand the 14th Amendment. He did a sales job on illegal immigration. He wants a global tax on the U.S. And, here's even more dirt on Obama involving his links to Exelon, Tony Rezko, William Ayers, and Rashid Khalidi.
Posted to Politics at 12:33 PM
John McCain, his campaign manager Rick Davis, & the questionable Russian billionaire
From this:[Rick Davis, John McCain's current campaign manager and current or former president of the McCain-associated Reform Institute] helped arrange an introduction in 2006 between McCain and a Russian billionaire [Russian aluminum magnate Oleg Deripaska] whose suspected links to anti-democratic and organized-crime figures are so controversial that the U.S. government revoked his visa...More dirt here and here.
There is no evidence that McCain did anything for Deripaska after they met at a social gathering over drinks and dinner. Deripaska was grateful for the introduction, writing a thank-you note to Davis and his partner and offering to assist them in a subsequent business deal, according to a copy of the note...
...Deripaska is one of the richest men in Russia and a close ally of President Vladimir Putin. McCain has been one of Putin's sharpest U.S. critics, calling for Russia to be kicked out of the Group of Eight industrialized nations because of Putin's anti-democratic activities. The Arizona Republican has also repeatedly complained about the negative impact of Kremlin-linked oligarchs such as Deripaska.
When Deripaska met McCain, Davis was part of Davis Manafort, a lobbying firm that was being paid to provide political advice to pro-Russian and oligarch-funded candidates in Ukraine, according to interviews and news accounts. At the same time, McCain was publicly supporting those candidates' Western-oriented democratic rivals...
Posted to Politics at 02:57 PM
Thought experiment: how was Feist protected? ("I Feel It All" video)
Canadian songstress Leslie Feist has a new music video for her Welthit "I Feel It All" (link). And, it's hard not to watch it without cringing. There are several reasons for that, but the specific one having to do with the video itself is the thought of what could have gone wrong.
The video was shot in one take, and as she ran around tapping barrels containing fireworks, all I could think of was this. So, as a retread of my much better "thought experiment" involving a 2002 Gap ad, let me present some precautions they should have taken:
1. Painstakingly paint "fireworks" into each frame of the video.
2. Dunking her in fire-retardent chemicals and hiding a fire suit under her striped shirt.
3. Include a clause in her contract stating that Canadians are well known to be resistant to fire and disclaiming all responsibility.
4. Positioning a giant fire extinguisher above the set which, at the first hint of problems, would immediately douse the entire area with fire retardant. Artist rendition of the first milliseconds after activation below.
5. Instead of using real fireworks, use miniature, self-powered, computerized laser cartridges which, acting in concert, would appear to be fireworks.
I believe the last has the most merit. The cartridges would not have to "fly", they could move along pre-positioned titanium wires that would both be strong and nearly invisible. The cartridges would move - perhaps via magnetic or electrical force - along the wires, and could even be powered by the wires themselves. The weight of the cartridges could also be used to give a fireworks style effect. Alternatively, they could be charged with a capacitor initially, and then as it lost charge the light they emit would fade as with real fireworks. I believe that Industrial Light & Magic could pull something like that off with ease.
"Ah", you're thinking: but how would Feist be protected against falling cartridges? Well, first of all, the ends of the titanium wires would contains stops. However, some might yet fly over the stops, and because of that the cartridges would be designed to be as large and light as possible so as to minimize any possible harm. In addition, Feist would wear a helmet during the filming which could be fairly easily Photoshopped out of each frame.
Posted to WackyHumor at 11:53 AM
Ask John McCain about his Hispanic outreach director, Juan Hernandez (former Mexican government official)
John McCain's Hispanic outreach director [1] is Juan Hernandez, a U.S.-Mexico dual citizen and former Mexican government official who said the following in 2001 about Mexican immigrants to the U.S.:"I want the third generation, the seventh generation, I want them all to think 'Mexico first.'"He also said [2]:
"We must not only have a free flow of goods and services, but also start working for a free flow of people."Now, he's working for John McCain.
However, what McCain knows is that no one in the MSM is ever going to question his
So, that means it's up to you. If you want to sink McCain's candidacy, go to his campaign events and read those quotes to him and ask him to renounce them and
More on this here, here, here, and here.
Hernandez was previously Director of the Office for Mexicans Living Abroad until there was apparently some sort of falling out involving him or someone else. That office then became the Institute for Mexicans Abroad, with several of their members involved in pushing Mexico's agenda in the U.S. An Illinois state senator, Democrat Martin Sandoval, even serves on their board while at the same time pretending to serve U.S. interests.
UPDATE: Jerome Corsi offers this:
McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers emphasized to WND that Hernandez is "a non-paid volunteer to the campaign, and he does not play a policy role."Let's hope he stands by him a little longer, but even if he throws him overboard you can still ask him what he was thinking.
"Juan works with us to reach out to the Hispanic community to meet with the folks in the various states," Rogers said.
Asked if the McCain campaign has repudiated Hernandez's "Mexico first" declarations, Rogers did not give a direct answer.
UPDATE 2: More on this here.
A roundup of his cable TV greatest hits is here; it includes him promoting a North American security cordon - just not a Union - as well as cheap vegetables. So-far-unwatched videos that might have something are here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. If he says something on those that can be incorporated into an anti-McCain video, please leave a comment.
You can hear his 2001 Nightline quote here.
From 2001 (link):
"I never knew the border as a limitation. I'd be delighted if all of us could come and go between these two marvelous countries," Hernandez, 45, said in a recent interview...From 2002:
"Those who don't like [my activities with the Office and his dual citizenship], I'm sorry. But there are 20 million of us," Hernandez said. "There are 20 million people that have one foot here and one foot there."
...Hernandez has lobbied to make life easier for Mexican migrants in the United States. He has worked to cut the costs of money transfers, helped win lower tuition at Texas state universities and urged U.S. states to loosen restrictions on drivers' licenses [in addition to less controversial proposals]...
Writing in National Review (October 12, 1998) Jorge Amselle (like Linda Chavez, a pro-immigration Latino Republican) warned that, "The Mexican government through its promotion of bilingual education and of dual nationality and voting is actively subverting the assimilative process of Americanization…."UPDATE 3: Someone went to a McCain event and asked him about this; the question wasn't as good as could have been but at least it might have started the ball rolling. And, Mark Krikorian raises the possibility that Hernandez could be stripped of his U.S. citizenship due to working for the Mexican government, and also quotes from the oath that Vicente Fox gave; whether Hernandez' was the same or similar isn't known (link).
Amselle was referring to the official Mexican government policy of acercamiento ("getting closer" or "establishing a bond") to "Mexican communities abroad," meaning both Mexican citizens living in the United States and Mexican Americans who are U.S. citizens. This policy was started by the old PRI regime and has been considerably expanded by Fox. The spirit of this policy is exemplified by Juan Hernandez, a Texas-born Mexican-American dual citizen, who is Fox's cabinet minister for Mexicans Abroad...
...Two years ago, before Fox became president, his current national-security adviser, Adolfo Aguilar Zinser, advocated a policy in which the Mexican government would work politically with the "20 million Mexicans" in the U.S. to advance Mexican "national interests." In El Siglo de Torreon on May 5, 2000, Zinser attacked American attempts to stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border. He declared that "Mexicans are subjected every day to mean-spirited acts and their rights are permanently threatened by ambitious politicians who are hunting for the Anglo vote." After disparaging the "reactionary Senator Jessie Helms," Zinser recommended that Mexico "find allies in the U.S. political system" particularly among "Liberal Democrats, labor unions, civil rights organizations, and social movements."
UPDATE 4: The backstory of Hernandez' office being replaced with the IME is here, including a few more quotes from him.
UPDATE 5: Even as he works for McCain, Hernandez serves on the U.S. Council of Mexico's PAN Party (National Action Party): link, link.
[1] welcome-vote-2008.blogspot.com/2007/11/fiestas-mccain.html
[2] juanhernandez.org/index-37.html
[3] Let's take John McCain's spokesman at his word that Hernandez is a "non-paid volunteer" to the campaign. Being very precise will also help avoid McCain trying to obfuscate the issue. Note that, as pointed out at the first link in UPDATE 2, Hernandez is a Senior Fellow at the McCain-linked Reform Institute, and I'd imagine he's receiving some money for that. However, if you ask McCain about this craft the question in such a way that he can't raise minor points.
Posted to Politics at 10:28 AM
Bill Clinton, Arnold Schwarzenegger promote corruption, try to fool people about "unbanked" program
Bill Clinton and Arnold Schwarzenegger join forces to offer "Beyond Payday Loans". The two promote plans to help the "unbanked" (those without checking accounts), and in so doing completely mislead about the seemy underbelly of their proposals: the San Francisco program they mention is designed in large part to give banking services to illegal aliens. They don't even hint at that:...[The American dream] is harder to achieve for millions of Americans because they spend too much of their hard-earned money on fees to cash their paychecks or pay off high-priced loans meant to carry them over until they get paid at work.They also mention that the William J. Clinton Foundation's Economic Opportunity Initiative will be helping spread the San Francisco scheme to other cities.
...This year, California will become the first state in the nation to launch an effort to help unbanked residents open starter accounts -- the first step into the financial mainstream...
In coordination with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, we will partner with financial institutions to increase the supply of starter accounts that work for unbanked consumers and banks. We will form regional coalitions of financial institutions, mayors and community groups to market accounts and help the unbanked build financial literacy. And we will build on work already being done in San Francisco, where city officials, working with banks and credit unions, have already signed up 11,000 individuals who previously had no checking or savings account...
The San Francisco scheme boils down to the FDIC trying to help banks profit from money that was earned illegally. Instead of fighting against such government corruption, Bill Clinton and Arnold Schwarzenegger are promoting it. Pardon me if I have difficulty thinking of both of them as little more than crooks.
UPDATE: Please contact Arnie and let him know what you think: gov.ca.gov/interact or better yet give his office a call and select the option to speak to a live person: 916-445-2841. And, per a note here, Kevin James of KRLA AM 970 will be discussing this on his show tonight (9:00 - 11:00 pm PST).
Posted to Politics at 02:06 PM
Senator Bob Menendez floated as Hillary Clinton's vice presidential candidate
From this:John F.X. Graham, one of Hillary Clinton's National Finance Co-Chairs, thinks that... New Jersey Senator [Robert Menendez] would make a great choice if Clinton wins the Democratic primary.I shouldn't need to add that encouraging people to vote for their race is not good public policy. Those are the actions of racial demagogues, which is a defining characteristic of the modern Democratic Party.
Graham fired off an email this morning to Clinton Campaign Manager Terry McAuliffe listing politicians who would make good vice presidential material, including the choices most often brought up: Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, John Edwards and Joe Biden. But Menendez, a Clinton campaign national co-chair, would be the "most intriguing" choice, Graham wrote.
..."The name Richardson does not exactly sound Latino," wrote Graham. "The Latino voting block is becoming the most influential in this election, especially with the immigration and other economic issues confronting our prosperity. For a lack of a better term, he is the Latino Barack Obama with the experience."
Graham says the idea is his alone, and then the article is kind enough to point out that Sen. Bob Menendez is still involved in an FBI corruption probe.
On the one hand, as a couple people point out at the link, this would be a wonderful shot in the arm to the GOP candidate. On the other hand, Hillary is too smart to select him, so I suggest discrediting him at every opportunity that presents itself. You can see my attempt to do so here:
bigthink.com/policy-politics/2885
Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:58 PM
Western Union store owner indicted on money laundering (human smuggling)
From this:
A Scottsdale man who ran four Western Union stores in Phoenix and Mesa was indicted Tuesday on 80 counts of money laundering and other crimes that are suspected of financing human smugglers and drug dealers [in a] ...four-year-old, $56.8 million money-laundering scheme... [it] was unraveled by the Arizona Financial Crimes Task Force, which includes ICE, the Phoenix Police Department, the Department of Public Safety and the Attorney General's Office [run by Terry Goddard].
His exact relationship to Western Union isn't known: he might have been a franchisee, or something else. However, if there's any possibility that those higher in the food chain knew about this hopefully that's being pursued. Even the New York Times has hinted at highly questionable activity by WU itself.
See also ICIRR in suit against Terry Goddard over Western Union wire transfers; the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights received donations from WU and then later, oddly enough, sued to block Goddard's attempts to pursue cases like the current one. In addition to the ICIRR, WU is deeply linked into the "illegal immigration lobby", including having a link to Hillary Clinton campaign co-chair Raul Yzaguirre.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 08:55 PM
Brave New Films immigration documentary will lie to you
Robert Greenwald's Brave New Films is apparently going to make one or more documentaries about immigration, attempting to strike at those who support enforcement of our laws. An email sent by Jorge Mursuli of Democracia USA (part of People For the American Way) says:Democracia USA has been approached with an exciting opportunity to advance the immigration debate, and I'm writing to ask for your help.They want footage, and they say the documentary will be released next month or in March. I have little doubt that it will contain several lies and misleading statements, but I won't know exactly what those are until it appears. Their past efforts have been quite popular, and when the video appears I suggest visiting the sites of those who promote the video and leaving comments pointing out the lies in the video or the lies by those bloggers. The goal is to discredit the retransmitters. The same goes for MSM reporters who mention the documentary.
The Brave New Foundation, a non-profit that specializes on producing documentaries on progressive issues, is putting together a short documentary on the virulent anti-immigrant attacks by Right Wing politicians and media personalities.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 08:45 PM
Hillary Clinton voted to grab guns during emergencies, Barack Obama voted against it
One-sixteenth of a cheer for Barack Obama! For, back in 2006 he voted for an amendment that would prevent the federal government from spending any money on gun confiscation during a declared state of emergency. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton voted against it (i.e., on the gun grabbing side).Details on the amendment that was added to HR 5441 here. Those joining Hillary on the wrong side included a constellation of worthies, such as Charles Schumer, Robert Menendez, Barbara Mikulski, Carl Levin, Teddy Kennedy, Daniel Akaka, Christopher Dodd, and the two prides of California, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein.
And, another Friend of Hillary (link):
One of its strongest opponents was Dick Durbin - Obama's fellow Illinoisan and the first senator to endorse his White House campaign.
During the debate, Durbin sharply reminded senators that the amendment would even bar police from seizing guns they believed to be used in previous crimes.
"What are we thinking?" Durbin, the Democrats' No 2 leader, asked. "Why would we do this to the men and women in law enforcement, to the National Guardsmen, or to innocent victims, which could be you or me or people we love, in a disaster they cannot even anticipate?"
Posted to Miscellania at 03:17 PM
Dov Charney/American Apparel: wrong about immigration
Dov Charney of the L.A.-based American Apparel is running pro-illegal immigration ads that are almost certianly a publicity stunt. This post gives the campaign a little help in that direction, but hopefully some in his target market will read this and decide to get clothing from some other company, whether based on his past history (see the links above) or on the current ads.
The ad can be seen here; it features two Guatemalans together with a few paragraphs of text. The latter includes a quote from our own beloved illegal immigration supporter, president Bush. The rest of the copy says that "no serious political voice calls to send them back to their previous countries"; that's a true statement as long as you ignore the plans of at least three Republican presidential contenders, dozens of House members, and, of course, our own laws. It also complains about an "apartheid" system; the only way such a comparison would be valid is if current illegal aliens were citizens or had been brought here involuntarily. Neither of those are the case. The ad also conflates all forms of immigration together. Hopefully his customers aren't as stupid as Charney appears to think.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 07:56 PM
A study in demagoguery: Chelsea Clinton, America Ferrera do Nevada
I'm afraid I'm going to have to leave a full analysis of the following video to professional media critics, but I know there's a lot of stuff there. It features America Ferrera - flash-in-the-pan star of Ugly Betty - campaigning prior to the Nevada caucuses with to-the-manor-born Chelsea Clinton. And, it features plenty of gender-based demagoguery, with various women informing us one way or another that Hillary is, in fact, a woman. Three black men and one black woman confirm that they are, indeed, voting for Hillary. It also features Chelsea speaking at a cosmotology school, with their mirror as a backdrop. Reflected in the mirror the largely non-white students seem more than a bit bored and one might imagine that that's the only occasion on which the daughter of a former president would have ever graced their school with her presence. One might imagine them not treating her as she no doubt became accustomed at Stanford if she had, for instance, just wandered in off the street to ask for directions. It also features Chelsea at a bar with a glass in front of her, matching a dream I had once. Note also that almost half the 54,000+ views are courtesy of Perez Hilton, who's now a supporter.
P.S. If you're just joining us from a foreign land or another planet, this is not a joke. This is the U.S. presidential race, 2008-style.
IT'S THE SCREENS THAT GOT SMALLER UPDATE: The Clinton 1A administration's inaugural ball in 1993 featured performances by Michael Stipe of REM, Don Henley, a Fleetwood Mac reunion (link), and the 10,000 Maniacs shortly after they had a #1 single and before Natalie Merchant left the band (link).
Posted to Politics at 10:53 AM
Allez Obama! (the blogs are alive with sock puppets)
There seem to be a large number of sock puppets (per Wikipedia an "online identity used for purposes of deception within an Internet community") running loose on various blog sites and leaving comments supporting various candidates such as Barack Obama, Mike Huckabee, and occasionally others. Now, certainly, many or most of those supporters might not be socks, but it's awful strange to find at least three white women around 50 years of age who suddenly showed up at a thread by Atlantic blogger Marc Ambinder about a Barack Obama speech and identified themselves by their race, gender, and age and indicated their support for the speech.An even odder example comes from September of last year at the barely-visited TAPPED (link), also about an Obama speech:
The tide is starting to swell.The coal is getting stoked. The blinders are being removed. The chant of a few is becoming a chorus of thousands.People all over this country are learning that there is still hope for our great country.Obama 2008.Odd, very odd.
All of these remind me of many things, but most of all this bit of pro-Sun Microsystems propaganda from 1997, about a developer's meeting where things (according to the account) went south for their rival, Microsoft (link):
You would not believe it but the crowd started booing and hissing [at the Microsoft presenter], granted that it wasn't a smart thing to do, and then silence again even on a bewildered stage, until somebody yelled "Go Java!" (which in french sounds like: "Allez Java!") and the whole room started cheering and applauding... the guys on stage physically stepped back and were obviously stunned that it would backfire like that.Someone from Sun also posted a doubly-forwarded tale from an unnamed student of an unnamed professor about installing Microsoft's competitor to Java on his laptop, leaving it inoperable. Despite the fact that these were clearly either outright lies or highly inflated accounts, many people seem to have bought them.
It was beautiful.
And then the people started leaving the room, at first one by one and then massively over the course of an hour. The guy on stage could not believe his eyes and the poor devil couldn't find his words, he was actually pathetic when he squirmished a "I have to finish this..." as people were leaving right under his nose.
Posted to Politics at 10:29 PM
CNN Democratic debate January 21, 2008: one weak immigration question
Tonight's CNN "debate" (link) was as worthless as all the others have been, featuring just one very basic, very weak question about immigration matters. Joe Johns - CNN "reporter" who left whatever little journalistic integrity he had back in Jena, LA - asked:
Senator Obama, we all know what universal health care is, as Senator Clinton just said, sort of the idea that everybody deserves health care. And I have not been able to sort of zero in on your position on this one question: Does your plan cover the estimated 12 million or so illegal immigrants in the country?
Obama said it wouldn't, and then replied:
Well, because I think we've got limited resources. And it is important for us that, when we've got millions of U.S. citizens that aren't yet covered, it's important for us to make sure that they are provided coverage.
How very munificent of him. He then launched into his stock speech about universal healthcare, without disclosing that he supports "comprehensive immigration reform", and under that plan millions of former illegal aliens would be almost instantly converted into legal workers and would thus presumably be eligible for his plan.
At least John Edwards was honest enough (OK, that's not a logical explanation, but there must be some sort of explanation) to include that in his reply to the same question:
And if that is married to comprehensive immigration reform, so that people who are living here undocumented actually have a chance to become American citizens, then I think they've got the opportunity to become part of the plan.
Somehow millions of low-wage workers would be magically transfored from a drain on our limited resources one day to fully partaking in both their plans the next, and the hacks at CNN aren't even willing to suggest that there might be an issue there?
If you'd like to do something about this, please go to campaign appearances, ask tough questions, and upload the responses. That will not only inject policy into the presidential campaigns, it will help show just how bad a job the MSM does.
UPDATE: Now, lightweight and biased "reporter" Soledad O'Brien hosts a roundtable on immigration featuring four political consultant types, two black, two Hispanic. Oddly enough, all of them appear to be supporters of amnesty. Why, it's almost as if CNN doesn't want a real debate about this issue or something.
Posted to Politics at 08:27 PM
Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon uses MLK speech to promote trackable 'work visas'
Intellectually dishonest illegal immigration supporter Janet Murguia of the NCLR isn't alone in trying to tie illegal immigration in to the Civil Rights movement. Another instance occurred in Phoenix, Arizona on Friday at the Martin Luther King Jr. "Living the Dream" awards breakfast, featuring appearances by governor Janet Napolitano and Phil Gordon, mayor of Phoenix. News report here, and from his speech (link)Recently, right here in Phoenix a uniformed United States marine -- a man who fought for his country -- was told by "pretend patriots", that he was a disgrace to his uniform -- and that it was a shame he didn't die in the war. Moments later, a woman and her young daughter -- both American citizens -- were intimidated by these same people. Why the anger at a United States Marine? Or a mother and daughter?Needless to say, we don't know the details of the case because Gordon doesn't provide footnotes, and there might have been other factors involved. It also goes without saying that such incidents are quite rare and if not for that incident Gordon would have had to stretch to find something similar.
Because all three were Hispanic. That's the only reason. This wasn't about citizenship it was about color. This wasn't about green cards. It was about brown skin.
Then, he goes on:
So in the spirit of Dr. King, let us make our voices heard.And, if local laws allow it, I urge resident of Phoenix to start a recall campaign. If not that, go to his public appearances and point out any lies and misleading statements he makes, and then publicize that on video sharing sites and similar.
Let Congress know that reforming immigration in this country IS their responsibility. Tell them to enact a practical and effective immigration policy that provides new, trackable "Work Visas" for millions of honest, hard-working people who help strengthen our country -- and grow our economy.
Tell Congress NOT to wait another year. Tell Congress not to wait another day.
That's what I'm doing. I'm getting on a plane next Tuesday and I'm walking the halls of Congress. And whether I have an appointment or not -- I'll be knocking on as many doors as I can -- and telling every Member of Congress I can find:
DO NOT WAIT.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 11:27 AM
Janet Murguia/NCLR: keynote speaker at Martin Luther King Unity Breakfast (+AP spin)
Janet Murguia, president of the extremist-funding group National Council of La Raza, will be the keynote speaker at Monday's Martin Luther King Unity Breakfast in Birmingham, Alabama.
Part of the story involves some spin from the Associated Press. An AP story that says at the bottom "Information from: The Birmingham News" contains this paragraph:
Organizers said they chose [her]... because of her message of unity and her opposition to a resurgence of hate speech in the immigration debate.
Now, let's take a look at this paragraph from Erin Stock of the Birmingham News itself (link):
Janet Murguia... is speaking Monday morning at the 22nd annual event. She is bringing a message of unity and denouncing what she said is a resurgence of hate speech in the immigration debate.
Clearly, the AP lifted the "resurgence" bit from the Birmingham News. However, BN's Stock made it clear that that "resurgence" was only Murguia's opinion. The AP article gives the impression that it's an accepted fact.
And, from the NCLR's press release [1]:
Murguia will urge members of the Hispanic and the Black communities to renew their commitment to realizing Dr. King's dream of civil rights for all Americans. She will challenge the two communities to confront injustice, specifically the recent rise in hate speech in the media and in the presidential primaries surrounding the issue of immigration.
It should be obvious to anyone that there has been no such "hate speech" in the media (unless she considers obscure talk radio personalities "the media"). And, none of the presidential candidates have engaged in "hate speech". Some supporters who are unaffiliated with the campaigns might have engaged in something that a far-left panel at a far-left university might consider "hate speech", but I suggest that we don't make that our gold standard. And, I'm sure that if we looked into the supporters of the NCLR we'd find a lot of interesting people, and not just in the U.S.
So, her complaints about "hate" won't wash. She's just trying to hide the NCLR's support for illegal immigration behind the dodge of calling those who support our laws "haters".
And, I wonder exactly how she defines "Americans". In the Civil Rights era that only meant U.S. citizens, yet I'd imagine that in her view the definition is a bit broader and her goal is bringing civil rights to those who are neither citizens nor here legally.
[1] nclr.org/content/news/detail/50151/
Posted to Immigration2008a at 03:59 PM
Did Latinos vote for pro-amnesty candidates in Nevada?
Here's a chart showing the differences between the entrance poll percentages for the Republican candidates in the Nevada caucus for whites and Latinos (link) vs. the percentage of the vote they received with 95% of reports in (link).Each number is the entrace poll percentage minus the near-final result. Those who can be described as "pro-amnesty" are bolded: McCain and Giuliani.
On the one hand, McCain and Giuliani did better among Latinos than whites; on the other, Duncan Hunter - someone associated with not just immigration issues but also military issues - did better. Romney, Paul, and Thompson did worse for an unknown reason. Huckabee did slightly better. If there were a large pro-amnesty vote one might expect McCain to walk away with it and for Huckabee to do worse; despite being horrible on immigration in the past he recently signed on to NumbersUSA pledge.
Spin away!
| Romney | McCain | Huckabee | Paul | Giuliani | Hunter | Thompson | |
| Whites | 0 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 0 |
| Latinos | -11 | 11 | 2 | -6 | 4 | 5 | -6 |
Posted to Politics at 03:18 PM
Julia Preston/NYT whines (mixed-status families; doesn't realize NYT is part of problem)
Julia Preston of the New York Times offers yet another in the very long line of NYT articles designed to make people feel bad about enforcing immigration laws ("Facing Deportation but Clinging to Life in U.S.", link).
It begins:
She is a homeowner, a taxpayer, a friendly neighbor and an American citizen. Yet because she is married to an illegal immigrant, these days she feels like a fugitive...
That and the other situations would never have arisen if people had not ignored our immigration laws expecting it to somehow work out OK. The NYT's implied solution is "immigration reform", i.e. a massive amnesty. Yet, that will encourage more illegal immigration, leading to more such issues. And, that will lead to the New York Times' hack du jour writing weepy "news" reports designed to set us up for yet another amnesty. The only way to prevent such unfortunate situations is to either stringently enforce our immigration laws, or declare completely open borders and let anyone come here at will. The NYT does not support the former, working overtime to block even minor enforcement efforts.
Perhaps the NYT should be honest enough to admit that they support something akin to open borders rather than trying to wheedle their readers into supporting amnesty over and over.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 02:16 PM
Occasional Cable TV Liberal Talking Head Babe of the Week: Alexandra Acker
Whenever I spot the smiling visage of Alexandra Acker of the YDA (Young Democrats of America, not to be confused with Students for a Democratic Society, Young Pioneers, or related groups) out of the corner of my eye I immediately lunge for the remote, unmute the sound, and gaze in rapt attention. I don't believe anything she says, but I do enjoy the view:
Posted to WackyHumor at 01:21 PM
New York Times editorial mind reads the "immigrant vote", gets it wrong
Earlier today, the New York Times offered "The Immigrant Vote" [1], promising wrath and ruin upon those who dare stand in the way of corrupt businesses profiting from illegal activity:
Nevada is the first state on the election calendar with a sizable Hispanic vote, and among them will be a substantial number of immigrants. We don't know who they'll choose, but we do know they are anxious. They have endured the racially tinged rhetoric used to sink immigration reform; they have witnessed Republican candidates exploiting the xenophobic nastiness. Families have been torn apart as illegal immigrants have been deported, leaving their citizen children behind.
According to the exit entrance polls from the Nevada caucuses (link), among Republicans identifying themselves as Latinos: Mitt Romney got 41%, followed by Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee with 9% each, Rudy Giuliani with 8%, Duncan Hunter with 6%, and Fred Thompson with 1%. The only openly pro-amnesty candidate, John McCain, got 25%. Rudy supports an amnesty, he just doesn't push it that much. But, to be fair let's add them together and come up with around a third selecting someone who's in favor of amnesty. And, other factors may have come in to play with that third.
Meanwhile, over on the Democratic side, among Latinos Hillary Clinton got 64% vs. Barack Obama's 24%, and he's slightly more pro-illegal immigration than She [2] is. Unlike Her, he supports driver's licenses for illegal aliens, and he also marched at 2006's pro-illegal immigration march in Chicago, the one that was organized by several people linked to the Mexican government. Of course, other factors which are not to be discussed may have played a role with some number of those who voted for Hillary. And, Bill Richardson is apparently still on the ballot and got 0%.
UPDATE: Numbers are crunched here.
[1] Generally speaking, there should be no such thing as the "immigrant vote", since anyone who can vote (at the federal level at least) must be a citizen and thus, even if they're a naturalized citizen they're no longer an "immigrant". A minor point? Well, yes. But, it goes to the already abysmal credibility of the New York Times.
[2] I'll be using the royal capitalization from here on out.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:54 PM
Sorry, Robert Nix: Judge Correale Stevens cleared (expressed opinion on immigration)
From this:The Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board has dismissed an ethics complaint filed against a state court judge for publicly stating that local authorities need more power to deal with illegal immigrants.The complaint was filed by Robert Nix, chairman of the Pennsylvania Hispanic Republicans and also on the board of the Hispanic Bar Association of Pennsylvania. Previous issues involving him here and here.
The Superior Court judge, Correale Stevens, also said that county judges should be given deportation authority. Judge Stevens made the comments during a September 2007 event, sponsored by several Pennsylvania legislators, at the state capitol in Harrisburg...
Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:30 PM
"Amnesty Truth Express" follows John McCain around South Carolina
White vans festooned with "Amnesty Truth Express" signs have been following John McCain and his "Straight Talk Express" to his appearances in South Carolina. It's sponsored by the "American Council for Immigration Reform" (link), which says:Vans outfitted with Amnesty Truth Express signage will serve as mobile offices and as props to attract media coverage. Volunteers will be identified by their T-shirts that say "Amnesty Truth Squad." The volunteers will fan out and offer an information packet to those coming to the candidate's events. Some will carry protest signs and others will talk to the press.Obviously, their strategy hasn't worked, at least as far as the last is concerned. There are only three MSM reports with the "ATE" name, and they've already been doing this for a few days. Leonard Doyle of the Independent calls them a "hit squad" and lumps them under the "sharp end of the anti-immigrant movement" banner (link).
And, Charles Hurt of the New York Post says:
Supporters of the Arizona senator listen to the rant [from someone from ACIR] before heading on in.Now, certainly, handing out flyers with background information might sway some small number of voters, and those might sway others. However, if they want to have a real impact they need to expose McCain's lies and misleading statements by asking him tough questions and then uploading his response to video sharing sites.
These die-hard loyalists have heard it all before, and most don't disagree with man on the sidewalk.
They're convinced that McCain has seen the error of his ways, yet also admire him for sticking to his positions.
Do that enough times and not even his "die-hard loyalists" will be willing to support him, nor will "reporters" be willing to lie or mislead on his behalf.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 07:58 PM
Mexican legislators worry about their citizens repatriated due to Arizona illegal hiring law
From our "Irony on the Border" file comes this:A delegation of nine state legislators from Sonora traveled to Tucson to make the case against Arizona's new employer sanctions law,They apparently met on Wednesday with AZ state Hispanic legislators, but no names are given.
The lawmakers say it will have a devastating affect on the Mexican state.
At a news conference Tuesday, they said Sonora cannot handle the demand for housing, jobs and schools it will face as illegal Mexican workers in Arizona return to their hometowns without jobs or money...
"How can they pass a law like this?" asked Mexican Rep. Leticia Amparano Gamez, who represents Nogales. "There is not one person living in Sonora who does not have a friend or relative working in Arizona," Amparano said in Spanish...
Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:44 PM
Lionel Sosa/MATT.org, corporations to collaborate with Mexico on multimillion dollar pro-amnesty ad campaign?
From this transcript:
[Casey Wian reports] Lobbying groups for the U.S. construction, agriculture and other industries with large illegal alien work forces are funding a series of pro-amnesty TV ads scheduled to air after this year's presidential conventions. And Mexican funding for the ad campaign is quote, "a very, very strong possibility", says the executive director of matt.org [Lionel Sosa], Mexicans and Americans thinking together. It is hoping to raise $100 million for the ad campaign.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:39 PM
Scared New York Times tries scare-mongering attrition
Apparently "attrition" - the plan to enforce our immigration laws and thereby encourage many or most illegal aliens to go home and discourage future illegal immigration - has the New York Times scared, namely because they think it would work. And, they're ratcheting up the scare-mongering about it in the NYT editorial "One Argument, 12 Million Holes" (link):
Making it work would require far more government intrusion into daily lives, with exponential increases in workplace raids and deportations. It would mean constant ID checks for everyone — citizens, too — with immigration police at the federal, state and local levels. It would mean enlisting bureaucrats and snoops to keep an eye on landlords, renters, laborers, loiterers and everyone who uses government services or gets sick... Worst of all, it's weak on law and order. It is a free pass to the violent criminals we urgently need to hunt down and deport. Attrition means waiting until we stumble across bad people hiding in the vast illegal immigrant haystack. Comprehensive reform, by bringing the undocumented out of the shadows, shrinks the haystack.
Sheesh. Did Tamar Jacoby write this for them? It sounds like something she'd try to sell. While what attrition means obviously depends on how it's implemented, it certainly doesn't have to be done in that fashion, and were it done as described I'd think that something else was going on: either it was being done that way as just an expression of authoritarianism, or it was being done that way in order to generate opposition and scuttle the plan. An honest implementation of attrition would involve things like strongly discouraging mayors from having sanctuary policies, fighting against laws that would give illegal aliens non-emergency benefits, several high-profile prosecutions of those who employ large numbers of illegal aliens, and so forth.
And, attrition doesn't mean that we'd stop sending teams out to arrest fugitive and criminal aliens. And, "comprehensive reform", in addition to being an unworkable mess, would simply temporarily reduce the size of the "haystack"; it would quickly begin growing again as new illegal aliens arrived here because they wanted to take part in that or future amnesties.
Unfortunately, there's more:
Even if you accept the Republicans' view of immigration policy as warfare against illegal immigrants, their tactics are the rejects of history, starting with that Vietnam-evoking "attrition." The border wall is right from Monsieur Maginot's playbook — fortifying just one of two international borders even though at least 40 percent of illegal immigrants arrive perfectly legally and then overstay their visas.
Obviously, the NYT is lying about the "warfare" bit, and while the last part is true the solution to that is not "comprehensive reform" but to stop giving visas to people who have a strong risk of overstaying them.
They also falsely state that the "attrition fantasy is now, by default, the national immigration strategy". Our default policy is to allow almost anyone who makes it over the border to stay here, and that's been brought to us thanks to corrupt politicians. They also decry the SAVE Act and mention that "Mike Huckabee one-upped [Fred Thompson] by signing the "No Amnesty" pledge of the nativist group NumbersUSA". Then, they end with this:
The Republican stance on immigration leaves an opening that opponents could drive a truck through. The Democratic candidates have the better position but approach the subject with eggshell timidity. They should stand up for a real debate, and a better country, by forcefully challenging the Republicans on this issue.
Bring it on. After seeing them in debates, I'm not exactly comfortable with Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson being able to decimate the Democratic position on this issue, but I'm sure that others who might be brought in to the debate could do so.
Desperate New York Times immigration editorial plays race card; afraid attrition might work?
NYT editorial: supports illegal activity; acknowledges attrition; "pest control"
Julia Preston/NYT admits: border fencing, attrition works
Posted to Immigration2008a at 11:14 AM
Mayor Mike Bloomberg wails against xenophobia strawman
In yesterday's State of the City speech, New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg stood on stage with five immigrant families from Flushing, and said:
I wanted to invite these families today, and a number of others in the front rows, because the diversity they represent is what makes our town special. This is New York City... Their presence is a two-way street. New York gives them unlimited opportunities and these families help make New York the nation's economic engine, its financial hub, its fashion center, its media mecca, and its cultural capital. And that's one of the messages I've been speaking out on, to those who are wailing against immigration, to those politicians who, all of a sudden, have embraced xenophobia, I say: open your eyes... "Take a look behind me. This is what makes America great. This is New York City. This is Freedom. This is Compassion, and Democracy, and Opportunity.
For those who are new to this issue, Mayor Mike was engaging in a strawman argument. No one is "wailing against immigration" in general; many are concerned about massive illegal immigration or massive immigration from one country or region. Being concerned about, say, giving the Mexican government even more political power inside the U.S. is not "xenophobia". I wonder whether Mayor Mike would have dared give his speech at a popular illegal crossing spot on the Mexican border; perhaps if there's video available someone could make something like that. And, perhaps the "two-way" street is a little nod to reality, such as avoiding allowing people in mean us harm or who have divided loyalties or none at all (link, copy here).
He also, of course, mentioned a few of his nanny state proposals.
Related:
Michael Bloomberg, DHS against Spitzer illegal aliens driver's licenses plan
Bloomberg links illegal immigration "crackdown" to tourism
Michael Bloomberg: possible illegal alien taxi drivers isn't dangerous
Mayor Mike Bloomberg, "The Open Borders Mayor"
Mayor Mike Bloomberg's "Immigrant Muddle"
Mayor Mike has an immigration plan for you, Citizen
Posted to Immigration2008a at 10:55 AM
Barack Obama's extremist church? (Trinity United Church of Christ)
Does Barack Obama belong to an anti-white, far-left church? Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ certainly appears to have made some interesting statements (link, link, link). The last includes excerpts from Obama's book. The candidate to a certain extent responds here, for instance saying that the "Black Values System" of the church "Must Be Understood as a Whole". He also lets us know that his middle name is not Mohammed (thanks, MediaMatters!) In fact, it's Hussein.
Needless to say, if he were a Republican or he were white, there would be many more MSM articles on this issue than the NYT's from last April.
Posted to Politics at 01:53 PM
Mike Huckabee signs Numbers USA no-amnesty pledge
Mike Huckabee has signed Numbers USA's no-amnesty pledge; news report here, and background here. What he signed is this:I pledge to oppose amnesty or any other special path to citizenship for the millions of foreign nationals unlawfully present in the United States. As President, I will fully implement enforcement measures that, over time, will lead to the attrition of our illegal immigrant population. I also pledge to make security of our borders a top priority of my administration.Prior to the news conference, his aids signed on to the details:
1. The 12 million illegal aliens now here will have to go home.Obviously, this is a strong point in favor of Huckabee and somewhat nullifies my prior strong criticism of him. However, many's the slip and one wonders exactly what recourse anyone would have if he became president and then violated the pledge. Would anyone in the MSM even ask him about it? Could he use other issues to mitigate any damage violating the pledge would do? Is it really possible for someone who's said so many very questionable things about this issue to then follow through? And, there are of course other reasons to oppose a Huckabee candidacy, such as his various semi-theocratic notions and his "FairTax" plan.
2. They will not get any legal status while here that allows them to remain long-term.
3. Once in their home countries, they may apply for re-admittance to the U.S. as immigrants, visitors or temporary workers through normal channels.
4. But they will not receive any special privileges on the basis of their having been in the U.S. illegally, such as being put to the front of a line.
5. There will be no new categories or programs through which they may re-enter.
6. There will not be an expansion of green cards in any existing categories that will speed up their movement to the front of the line.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 01:19 PM
Fabian Nunez has healthcare activists arrested at California Capitol?
I haven't researched this, but Jamie Court of the "Foundation For Taxpayer and Consumer Rights" (and founder of an anti-Arnold Schwarzenegger site) says:Even I was shocked to hear that California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez directed the California Highway Patrol to prevent our consumer group and an uninsured Massachusetts teacher from speaking out inside the Capitol against mandatory health insurance. The Capitol's famous rotunda is routinely used for press conferences by lobbyists and politicians...UPDATE: Nunez spokesman Steven Maviglio - or at least someone using his name - posts in comments an alternative view of the incident. This doesn't appear to have been covered by the MSM, and no video is provided by Jamie Court.
Though they complied with the California Highway Patrol's order to leave the building, my colleagues Jerry Flanagan and Carmen Balber were later informed they are being written up for misdemeanors. They were also told our consumer group would not be able to speak to the press in the rotunda in the future. Nunez and the CHP will be hearing from our lawyers soon...
Posted to California at 05:38 PM
Lou Dobbs for President?
I'm not 100% completely a fan of Lou Dobbs for various reasons, mostly because he doesn't seem that willing to end the careers of some of those he interviews by relentlessly hammering them on their lies. On the other hand, he still has to get guests so I can understand why he might not go for the jugular each time. Nevertheless, a Lou Dobbs candidacy is probably something I would support. And, at the very least, the foaming at the mouth from both "liberals" as well as cheap labor conservatives would be something to see.
Now, ALIPAC has launched a new, unofficial site designed to encourage him to run: loudobbsforpresident.org. It includes a form you can sign pledging how much you'd donate to his campaign should he decide to run.
Posted to Politics at 01:17 PM
Mexico to roll out biometric ID cards for migrant workers in Mexico
Louis E. V. Nevaer offers "Digital Immigration Card Shows Mexico's Progressive Views on Immigration" [1]. As one might expect, it extols the Mexican government, but the larger issue is that in March 2008 that government will be handing out digital identification cards containing biometric information to migrant workers from other countries who are working in Mexico. The cards will contain at least their fingerprints and also some form of RFID chip (see also "RFID implants for "guest" workers?") I'm not familiar with any related or similar U.S. programs [2], but I would expect that Mexico would add selling the ID card for migrants from that country to their push for "reform" or some form of "guest" worker scheme, probably with the assistance of Fifth Columnists (why beat around the bush?) inside the U.S.
The article also contains this:
Mexican officials, for more than a quarter century, have been frustrated by the recalcitrant attitude taken by U.S. authorities. American companies take out ads on Mexican radio telling Mexicans of "high paying" jobs waiting for them in the meat packing plants in the Midwest and Southeast, while the American government takes out other ads warning them of the dangers of attempting to make desert crossings. That the United States is incapable of implementing a coherent policy is another matter. While Mexico is rolling out 21st century technology in the first quarter of 2008, the United States - after spending tens of millions of dollars on similar cards - cannot use them, since U.S. border inspectors are not equipped with the scanners necessary to read them.
If anyone can upload one of those ads with or without a translation that would be most helpful. And, have a bag ready for this:
Mexicans believe that the United Nations can similarly help the United States. Mexicans argue that the time has come for the United Nations to begin a process of bringing the estimated millions of people living in the shadows of American society into the light. There is no reason why the United Nations cannot be brought in to assist Homeland Security and the Census Bureau to complete the years-long task of securing the United States's broken borders, and regularizing the millions of immigrants who have, one way or another, managed to find their way to the United States.
It'd be great if some of our leaders would propose such a plan, because I'm sure it would end their political careers.
[1] news.newamericamedia.org/news/
view_article.html?article_id=083e0b4728d31cd23a57533cf02c46c5
[2] See travel.state.gov/visa/temp/types/types_1266.html or the Real ID program.
Posted to Immigration2008a at 12:58 PM
Brian Williams/Tim Russert/MSNBC puffball Democratic debate (1/15/08 edition)
Yet another Democratic debate was held yesterday on MSNBC, featuring Brian Williams and Tim Russert as moderators (transcript link). It was as ripped-from-the-Soviet-archives as we've come to expect from such debates, only this featured even more questions solely about process and horserace and even fewer about issues. It also featured three extremely lightweight questions about immigration, with the first not being necessary at all. Brian Williams asked:
Senator Edwards, in touching on immigration here, let's go to something that a lot of people have found to be a disconnect between the Democratic Party and majorities of voters in a lot of states. What would be the problem with English as an official language, as a bedrock requirement of citizenship?
There's a huge difference between "an official language" and "the official language", and I suspect that Williams and Edwards know that. And, knowing English is in most cases already a citizenship requirement. And, the major "disconnect" is because all the Democratic candidates support amnesty
Edwards simply responded with his stock speech about "immigration reform"; Williams briefly interrupted him before Edwards continued and made the extremely brave comment that "I think that [learning English] should be a requirement for becoming an American citizen." Such fortitude! Neither moderator pointed out that he'd come out for a policy that, except for certain minor exceptions, is already the law.
Then, Tim Russert tries baiting:
Senator Clinton, one of your pollsters was quoted in The New Yorker magazine as saying this: "The Hispanic voter has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates." Does that represent the view of your campaign?
Parsing her reply is left as an exercise, but it started with "No, he was making a historical statement" and ended with everyone working together towards a progressive future or something.
Then, Barack Obama lends some credibility to the John McCain campaign:
I think that John and myself and Hillary may agree on the broad outlines of where we need to go [i.e., amnesty], but two years ago I stood with Ted Kennedy and John McCain and took on this tough issue, and have consistently been involved in making sure that we've got the kind of comprehensive plan that makes us a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.
Then:
That's the kind of leadership that I've shown. And when Latino voters read or hear about that leadership, then they know that they're going to have an advocate even if it's politically tough.
Except, he wasn't really advocating for those who were at the time Latino voters; he was advocating for foreign citizens who are here illegally. There are certainly large numbers of mixed-status families containing both voters and illegal aliens, but supporting illegal family reunification isn't good public policy. And, there are other Hispanics who support illegal activity due to racial solidarity, but granting their wishes is not good public policy either.
If Russert and Williams weren't corrupt hacks they would have made those or similar points, and they would have asked better questions to begin with.
Please go to public appearances by the candidates, ask them the questions that MSM hacks won't ask, and then upload the responses.
Links to previous coverage are in the post about the Charlie Gibson/ABC/ WMUR/Facebook/USSR Democratic/Republican debates.
Posted to Politics at 10:53 AM
San Fran Nan brings gourmet touch to Congress (Nancy Pelosi, comrades grab baguettes on way to barricades)
While John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama tour the countryside telling prospective voters just how bad things are, some people in Capitol City are living it up: those lucky few who get to dine at the U.S. House of Representatives' own eating establishments. Thanks to Nancy Pelosi's "Greening the Capitol" plan (link), plucky leftwingers can fight for peace and freedom while dining on such staples as:
Peruvian Purple Potatoes, apple wood bacon, champagne vinaigrette, and shallots... vine ripe tomatoes, mozzarella, and basil... Sustainable Seafood dish: pan seared Chesapeake Rock Fish, sweet potato fennel hash, and yellow pepper relish [a steal at $6.95!]... fruit and cheese side dish with two small wedges of brie and cheddar, six grapes, two saltines and one strawberry [just $4.95!]... pan-roasted Chesapeake rockfish with sweet potato fennel hash and yellow pepper relish. Pears with Stilton cheese and watercress. Cumin-scented leg of lamb with almond couscous. There are vegetables with funny names, like bok choy, arugula and jicama. There are baked goods with Italian names, like biscotti, focaccia and frittati.
No one ever said the revolution didn't have to be scrumptious.
In 2004, I highlighted what John Kerry and John Edwards pretended to eat at a Wendy's in Newburgh, New York. I was a bit confused why Tuh-ray-zuh's plate was so empty, until I figured it out. Then, I made fun of them even more. And, if the GOP had any sense they'd try the same tack with San Fran Nan's Grand Plan.
Posted to Politics at 12:45 PM