Immigration News Archives

This is a very large file. For the full smaller digest version, click here.

Gabrielle Giffords' first immigration speech

I've been told that one of the big blogging stories of 2006 was all the hacks, er, bloggers who were hired by campaigns. Well, guess what! This blog has just been hired by a politician you've probably heard of, and you'd never guess I'd be working for her, but I am.

Finally today I can announce: I've been hired to give the plain English, BS-free version of Gabrielle Giffords' speeches. The plucky Arizona legislator beat Randy Graf in November, sparking the massive Graf/Hayworth canard, and one of her top goals is finally "solving" the immigration crisis.

Here's my maiden attempt for "Gabby" (from the apparent transcript here):

Mr. Speaker, we have made some major accomplishments this week, but one area that particularly pertains to my district and to the State of Arizona has not been addressed and that's the crisis in illegal immigration. For too long Congress and Washington have failed to act and we must secure the border now.

(Gabby is saying all this to show that she's tough. Heck, some people might buy it so it's worth it.)

We must move this year with a sense of urgency to pass a comprehensive immigration reform package that's tough, effective, and practical.

(Here, Gabby is expecting the word "tough" to shine like a diamond in a lump of something or other. Of course, those "in the know" know that "comprehensive immigration reform" means a massive amnesty, but many of her constituents will only hear "tough". And, those "in the know" also realize the "sense of urgency" is needed because the natives are getting very, very restless.)

We need to increase border security using modern-era technology radar, drones, electronic surveillance. There must be more border patrol agents and more support for those border patrol agents.

(More "boob bait for Bubba", this of the "virtual", Bennie Thompson kind. Those "in the know" already ignored that paragraph or laughed how her omission of the real fence probably passed over the heads of the lumpen proles.)

We also need tough employer sanctions for those employers who are knowingly hiring people illegally and a guest worker program so that people can come in and work legally, safely, and return back to their home country.

(Of course, those "in the know" know that those sanctions would be as vigorously enforced as the current ones are: only when politically necessary and reluctantly at that. And, of course, Gabby lied: everyone knows most of our "guests" will never go home.)

Working to pass such measures will be my priority in this 110th Congress, and I look forward to working with members on both sides of the aisle on this important issue.

(Of course, the only ones excluded from that list of collaborators are a small number of Dems and a larger number of GOP House members who support what's in the U.S.'s best interests.)

Posted at 07:59 AM | Comments (0)

Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman is a strong supporter of illegal immigration

But, you already knew that.

Further evidence comes from his pledge to oppose state Rep. Glenn Donnelson's attempt to repeal Utah's law giving illegal aliens discounted college educations:

"I'm going to fight it," said Huntsman, who added that he would "very seriously consider vetoing" a repeal.

Oddly similar: Texas Gov. Rick Perry made a similar pledge a couple days ago. Perhaps they're sharing notes or the same people are telling them what to do.

Posted at 02:48 AM | Comments (0)

MMP sues Compton

Something called the "Pro-Family Law Center" is helping the Minuteman Project sue Compton over that fine, peaceful city's refusal of a MMP attempt to use a room at Compton Community College before the election to hold a "Town Hall Meeting":

The purported reason for the denial was that Compton Community College does not authorize nor permit the use of its facilities by specific special interest or advocacy groups, nor for the advancement of specific candidates for public office.

They then used the Public Records Act to determine that:

Compton Community College's facilities have been used by/for (1) The Farrakan Event, (2) The Multi-cultural Youth Peace Summit/Registration Drive, and (3) The Black Student Union and Muhammad's Mosque Peacemakers.

Posted at 04:30 PM | Comments (1)

Deval Patrick rescinds Mitt Romney's DHS partnership agreement

Massachusetts' new governor, Deval Patrick, has shown himself to be a true Democrat by rescinding an agreement arranged by Mitt Romney with the feds that allowed state troopers to arrest illegal aliens.

His alternate plan is to allow officials at two state prisons to determine the immigration status of prisoners and then somehow recommend them for deportation. They would probably need to do that through ICE or similar.

Whether his alternate plan is just a dodge is not known, but Patrick supported both discounted college educations and driver's licenses for illegal aliens in the campaign.

Posted at 11:21 AM | Comments (5)

Texas Gov. Rick Perry strongly supports illegal immigration

Texas governor Rick Perry is closely following the George Bush playbook as he came out against attempts to prevent illegal aliens from taking Texas college tuition discounts from U.S. citizens. Some in Texas want to repeal the law he signed six years ago, and he's pledged to oppose their efforts. And, he's also revealed he's a liar:

"The only way that you can be eligible for that in-state tuition is if you are in the process of getting your citizenship. If you're not in the queue, working towards getting your citizenship, you're not eligible for it," Perry said.

"I think that's been highly overlooked in this debate."

However, under the law, students do not have to actually have applied for citizenship - they only have to promise that they will.

But, wait, there's more:

On other immigration-related issues, the governor repeated his vow to seek $100 million to strengthen security along the border, urged the federal government to enact a guest worker program and said he opposes legislation to remove citizenship rights from the Texas-born children of immigrants.

The first is not only a drop in the bucket, it's also most likely just "boob bait for Bubba". The perils of "guest" worker schemes have been detailed here numerous times. And, he also thinks attempts to end birthright citizenship is "unconstitutional". Not exactly. If a state law is brought before the Supreme Court then we might know for sure. And, of course, Congress could deal with it as a federal matter.

Posted at 05:12 AM | Comments (1)

EWIC, U.S. C of C blocked DHS "no-match" regulation?

Via this Dan Stein says:

Representatives of the Essential Workers [Immigration] Coalition (see their member roster) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have asserted that they have successfully sabotaged implementation of a proposed DHS regulation which would require employers who receive 'no-match' letters from the Social Security Administration to correct the discrepancy, or be considered to have "constructive knowledge" of unlawful hiring of illegal aliens at their business.

On a January 11, 2006 teleconference for immigration lawyers sponsored by the American Bar Association, Laura Reiff, a former INS attorney representing low-wage employers who hire large numbers of illegal aliens, said that the Chief Counsel of Customs and Border Protection (CBP)* Alfonso Robles, told her at a meeting at U.S. Department of Homeland Security headquarters in late December that his office was giving low-wage employers "a little Christmas present" by not sending the proposed regulation to the Office of Management and Budget at the White House. Failure to send a regulation to OMB effectively kills the proposed reform bureaucratically, out of the public eye...

More at both links.

Posted at 12:27 AM | Comments (0)

Farmers Branch ordinance blocked on technicality

Farmers Branch is one of those cities trying to enact a Hazleton-style anti-illegal immigration ordinance. And, of course, they've been legally assailed by those on the other side. Earlier today State District Judge Bruce Priddy agreed with two FB residents and blocked the ordinance for 14 days. The identity of those residents is not known, but their suit appears to be different from the one brought by MALDEF and the ACLU, both of which have indirect links to the Mexican government.

Posted at 11:11 PM | Comments (2)

California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation making signs for day laborers?

Is part of the mandate of the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation - funded by the federal agency the Legal Services Corporation - to help day laborers make signs? This slightly incoherent article briefly discusses a counter-protest of "Minutemen supporters" by about a dozen day laborers, and:

The laborers said they had assistance in sign-making from four representatives of the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation.

Note also that CRLAF is/was one of the endorsers of the AgJobs amnesty.

Posted at 10:02 PM | Comments (0)

Video: John McCain and Asa Hutchinson

Two horrific tastes that belong together join in this campaign video from last year.

Posted at 02:19 PM | Comments (0)

Alberto Gonzalez strokes Laredo over border violence

From this:

U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales toured the World Trade Bridge on Wednesday, announcing a new effort to fight drug traffickers on the border. "We're concerned about violence in Mexico spilling into the U.S.," Gonzales said...

...He was scheduled to meet with his Mexican counterpart later Wednesday. Gonzales said Mexico's new government presents an opportunity for progress and early signs indicate that the country is moving in a positive direction. Cuellar also said he is optimistic that President Felipe Calderón is headed the right way...

...Gonzales touted the success of existing task forces...

...Gonzales said he wants to secure the border in a way that allows trade between Mexico and the U.S., and he also said the DOJ is focusing on workplace enforcement of immigration laws in the interior of the country...

Everything is getting better and better, and the Bush administration is hard at work solving problems. Just wait! Hope, growth, and opportunity! Every day in every way the Bush administration is getting better and better! The "decider" has a plan!

Meanwhile, Gonzalez pledged the whopping sum of $300,000 on a new task force and ignored the families of kidnap victims who protested his visit.

Posted at 01:06 PM | Comments (2)

Dairy farmers learn about immigration... in Mexico!

WHAM 13 can now reveal that:

Upstate New York dairy farmers are heading to Mexico to better understand what drives their workers thousands of miles to find jobs in our neighborhood.

Willow Bend Farm in Clifton Springs started 50 years ago with just one employee and a few cows. As the cattle grew into the thousands, the need for help grew, and in the 1990s the Mueller family turned to immigrant workers from Mexico for farm hands.

...John Davies is headed to Veracruz next week in a trip organized by Cornell Cooperative Extension to help dairy farmers relate to their workers. The farmers will spend a week in Mexico, learning about traditional farming, customs and life in their workers' home villages...

What WHAM won't reveal is that this program - and the associated articles - are highly similar to one in Wisconsin promoted by fellow dairy farmer John Rosenow. Are such programs and the associated propaganda simply a coincidence?

Posted at 12:55 PM | Comments (1)

Fight the AgJobs amnesty (precursor to full amnesty)

As previously discussed, yesterday various amnesty supporters in the House and Senate reintroduced the AgJobs bill that would give amnesty to up to 1.5 million illegal alien farmworkers. In addition to the names previously mentioned:

Last year's chairman of the House immigration subcommittee, Indiana Republican John Hostetler, staunchly opposed guest-worker bills. He was not re-elected in November. This year's immigration panel chair, California Democrat Zoe Lofgren, explicitly supports the agricultural guest-worker legislation.

Likewise, the skeptical GOP chairman of the House Judiciary Committee — James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin — has been replaced by a sympathetic Democrat, Rep. John Conyers of Michigan.

And, those behind the current push are apparently working on full "comprehensive immigration reform" akin to last year's Senate bill. Please contact all your representatives and urge them to oppose AgJobs, whether alone or included in a broader amnesty.

Posted at 10:45 AM | Comments (0)

Maricopa County Attorney wants inquiry on National Guard border incident

From the AP:

A prosecutor plans to ask state and federal lawmakers to investigate why National Guard members backed off from armed men who were near them at the Mexican border.

Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas said he was troubled by the retreat and questioned whether the rules the National Guard members operated under at the border were appropriate...

...Meanwhile, a state legislator said he will interview Maj. Gen. David Rataczak, head of the National Guard in Arizona, in a hearing of the new Homeland Security and Property Rights Committee soon.

"Why would this be allowed to happen?" asked Rep. Warde Nichols, the committee's chairman. "Why do we have National Guard running from illegals on the border? Are they (National Guardsmen) armed? Do they have bullets in their guns? We need some answers to some of these questions."

Rep. Russell Pearce, the Legislature's strongest voice on border security, said two National Guardsmen who work on the border told him their weapons do not have bullets.

Pearce said the unarmed soldiers are in harm's way and called the situation "absolutely outrageous."

Posted at 05:45 AM | Comments (4)

Congressmen still fighting Ramos/Compean conviction

From this Lou Dobbs transcript:

CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Texas congressman Ted Poe led a group of lawmakers demanding the Justice Department not oppose a request that former Border Patrol agents Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos remain out of prison while their convictions for shooting an illegal alien Mexican drug smuggler are appealed. As we've reported, Ramos and Compean received 11 and 12-year sentences, while the Bush administration gave the wounded, allegedly unarmed drug smuggler, immunity from prosecution.

REP. TED POE (R), TEXAS: And our federal government had the choice to make of being on the side a drug dealer who was bringing in a million dollars worth of drugs, or the side of two border agents that apparently were just enforcing the rule of law.

WIAN: Among issues expected to be raised during the agents' appeal, the grant of immunity and other benefits given to Oscar Aldrete-Davila, who was caught again smuggling an even bigger load of dope into the United States. And allegations of jury misconduct.

Texas federal judge Kathleen Cardone (ph) is expected to rule later this week on the agents' request to remain free until the appeal is heard.

REP. ED ROYCE (R), CALIFORNIA: It would be a grave miscarriage of justice if they were to be sent to prison for simply doing their job. Out of concern for their safety, they should not go to prison and should remain free on bond, pending their appeal.

WIAN: They're scheduled to surrender next Wednesday.

REP. DUNCAN HUNTER (R), CALIFORNIA: In this case, we'll have two of our best Border Patrol agents put in confinement with the very people that they brought to justice. That's like sending our soldiers or our Marines who have been -- who have been prosecuted into a confinement with al Qaeda.

WIAN: LOU DOBBS TONIGHT has learned the Justice Department will not oppose the bail request. Still, lawmakers are outraged President Bush refuses to intervene.

REP. WALTER JONES (R), NORTH CAROLINA: I am very, very disappointed in the indifference by this White House as it relates to these two men and their families.

Others involved are Reps. Tom Tancredo and Dana Rohrabacher.

Posted at 02:41 AM | Comments (0)

"Explosive" border intrusion story confirmed?

This post has an update to the story linked here:

Also, this morning, there is finally official acknowledgment of my article. Joe Westmoreland, a congressional liaison for Customs and Border Protection, issued a statement this morning confirming that the Mexican paramilitary force was in uniform, and wearing ballistic vests, helmets, carrying automatic weapons, and moving in an aggressive military formation. Exactly as I'd reported on Monday.

Westmoreland appears to work/have worked for Nathan Deal (R-GA), but his remarks don't appear in Google News or on Deal's site that I can see. He probably said it, but where and when might be helpful to know.

Posted at 10:27 PM | Comments (1)

"LULAC leader blames Americans for crimes by Mexicans"

From this:

After a federal study revealed that a look at 100 illegal immigrants previously arrested and released for breaking state or local law had on an average been arrested six times, the president of the Dallas chapter of the League of United Latin Amercian Citizens (LULAC) made a controversial remark that has been the talk of the town.

Jesse Diaz, the LULAC leader, said while the report is flawed, he stands by his comments that if Americans want to blame anybody, they need to blame themselves.

"Now that they come to the United States, they're picking up those bad habits of shooting [and] drinking drugs," he said...

... But what Diaz said worries him the most is that the study only looked at 100 who broke criminal laws, but cast a cloud over the millions whose only crime is crossing the border illegally

"It teaches them to hate immigrants, and the majority of these immigrants are good people," he said...

Posted at 09:33 PM | Comments (4)

Pew propaganda: Generation Next more "tolerant" of "immigration"

The Pew Research Center has held a poll of "Generation Next", those 18 to 25 years old. Let's take a look at their only immigration-related question. Respondents were given a choice between:

A. Immigrants today strengthen our country because of their hard work and talents

B. Immigrants today are a burden on our country because they take our jobs, housing and health care

52 of GNers said "A", compared to 39 of those older. Those responding "B" was about equal: 38 and 42. The "Neither/Both equally" choice was selected by 6% of GNers compared to 15% of those older. In effect, some of those older said neither/both instead of "A".

Pew casts this as:

In their political outlook, they are the most tolerant of any generation on social issues such as immigration, race and homosexuality.

Will Lester of the AP rewrites that as:

Have more liberal views than other generations on questions of race and homosexuality and immigration.

First, an alternate explanation is that - no offense to those included - those under 25 simply don't have enough knowledge and experience to understand everything involved in "immigration". And, of course, there's the matter of Pew's choice of words. What would the response be if they had asked about illegal immigration? What would the response be if they had asked about specific effects of different types of immigration? That we don't know, because all they asked is one extremely broad and almost unanswerable question.

And, of course, there's also the assumption that immigration is solely a "social issue" and that support for massive immigration is "liberal" or indicative of "tolerance".

Perhaps Pew should start over and this time concentrate on finding what people think rather than trying to push them into saying things Pew apparently wants them to say.

Posted at 05:32 AM | Comments (1)

Feinstein, Larry Craig to push AgJobs (illegal alien farmworker amnesty)

Garance Burke of the AP swallows grower propaganda till, tractor, and plow in "California farmers gear up to champion new guest worker bill". She also reveals that CA Senator Dianne Feinstein and Idaho Senator Larry Craig will be introducing a new farmworker amnesty scheme tomorrow. It appears to be a new version of AgJobs, and:

The bill would create a pilot program allowing people who have worked in agriculture for at least 150 days a year for three years, or 100 days per year for five years, to apply for a green card. It would grant legal status to no more than 1.5 million workers over five years, some of whom could apply for citizenship.

The rest of the article consists of growers making unopposed statements that strain credulity; see the "crops rotting in the fields" series for past examples. It also contains this statement that's wrong for one reason and raises questions for another:

Growers and farm worker advocates don't agree on how to fix a system that has allowed an estimated 12 million immigrants to enter the country illegally.

First, as the list of AgJobs endorsers (fourth link above) shows, those two nominally opposed forces have found common ground with this massive amnesty. Second, the "fix" needed are investigations of donations made to politicians and whether those have any bearing on those politicians then refusing to enforce our laws or supporting efforts not to enforce them. Whether Burke realizes this, or whether she thinks that new legislation would solve the problem isn't clear.

Then, we get this Feinstein quote:

"Virtually everybody agrees that agriculture is an industry that cannot do well without the undocumented worker... And the people are coming to the realization that there won't be a comprehensive immigration bill. The first step was taken with the border security bill. (A guest worker program) is the next logical step."

It's good to see that she's admitting defeat on "comprensive reform". However, her first statement is shown to be false (intentionally?) by the next paragraphs:

In the meantime, Chiesa has already started pulling up some of his peach trees and replanting rows of almond and walnut trees, which can be harvested by machines instead of people.

Maybe Feinstein should lead the way towards reviving research into mechanization rather than encouraging the importation of a third world serf class.

UPDATE: This apparent rewrite has more on those involved:

Among those supporting the bill are Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., a chief architect of last year's Senate immigration bill, and Sens. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and Mel Martinez, R-Fla... Reps. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, and Howard Berman, D-Calif., are sponsoring the House version. It has the backing of House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn. and Rep. Adam Putnam of Florida, a member of the Republican leadership team.

Posted at 02:37 PM | Comments (1)

LULAC beginning amnesty/immigration "reform" push

The League of United Latin American Citizens, the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project, the Hispanic Federation, and America Votes are starting an astroturf campaign to push the Dems into support immigration "reform", aka amnesty.

America Votes (take a deep breath) has direct or indirect links to - among many others - the SEIU, Carl Pope and the Sierra Club, ACORN, EMILY's List, League of Conservation Voters, MoveOn.org, NAACP, NARAL, and People for the American Way.

And:

Hispanic leaders are making two clear statements: Reform should include a path to legal residency for the 12 million illegal immigrants now working in the U.S., and a guest-worker program supported by President Bush, which would require foreign workers to return home after several years, is inadequate. They also oppose the building of a fence along the Mexican border intended to stem the flow of immigration.

There's certainly the strong possibility that they actually think those "guests" would somehow be sent home when their time is up. However, the Senate bill allowed "guests" to apply for legal permanent resident status at four years, and - as pointed out here many times - it's going to be difficult to deport "guests" who've had U.S. citizen children.

I suggest that everyone contacts their representatives in an attempt to counteract LULAC's push.

Posted at 05:34 AM | Comments (1)

Questions the MSM won't ask about Arnold Schwarzenegger's "healthcare for illegal aliens" plan

Arnold Schwarzenegger - California's Bush-resembling, Mexico-pandering, Rove/Kennedy/Mexico-linked governor - has announced some of the details of his universal healthcare plan, and it includes healthcare for all residents regardless of immigration status.

Thus, these questions that need to be asked and answered, but which will not be. I strongly urge everyone in California to go to any event where this plan is promoted or Arnold or an Arnold-linked person speaks and try to publicly ask these or similar questions. Don't be shy and don't hold back: try to end political careers if you can do it.

1. Won't this increase illegal immigration?

2. Won't this increase corporatism, with businesses being able to pay an effectively lower-than-market wage with the other costs being paid for by the state?

3. Won't this be yet another benefit that the Mexican government will send their people north to get? Won't we increase that country's dependence on the U.S. and decrease the chance that they'll reform?

4. What role, if any, did Arnold's campaign advisor who's linked to the Mexican government play in all this? For gosh sakes, he's listed right on a Mexican government website (ime.gob.mx/ccime/comisiones/asuntos_politicos.htm). Did Arnold take any advice from him when crafting this scheme?

UPDATE: Here's the start of a script that someone could use:

"If the manager of a donut shop puts out a sign saying, 'Free Donuts' but doesn't first determine how many people will come for the free donuts, how many donuts are available, and what happens when the donuts run out, then I'm sure we can agree that the manager is incompetent and has no right to be running a donut shop. With that in mind, I'd like you to provide me detailed answers to these questions:

1. Have you estimated how many new illegal aliens will come here to take advantage of this plan (yes or no)? If so, what is that number?
2. Have you estimated how many new illegal aliens it would take before the plan is negatively impacted (yes or no)? If so, what is that number?
3. What do you intend to do if large numbers of illegal aliens come here in part because of this plan and have a negative impact on the scheme?"

Posted at 09:13 PM | Comments (0)

"Mexican Gunmen Involved in Arizona Border Incident Actually Uniformed Mexican Force"

I'm not entirely sure of this report, but:

The incursion into U.S. territory last week by "Mexican gunmen" was not a chance confrontation between the Arizona National Guard and untrained illegal immigrants, but a deliberate "perimeter probe" by an infantry-trained, uniformed Mexican force, officials say.

Euphoric Reality has learned in exclusive interviews with high-ranking sources within both the Arizona National Guard and the U.S. Border Patrol that the incident the mainstream media calls a “standoff” was in reality a military-style operation, carried out by a unit of Mexican troops dressed in military uniforms, flak jackets, and armed with AK-47s in an apparent operation to probe the border defenses and test the limits of the National Guard troops. Using easily recognizable infantry movement tactics (such as arm and hand signals and flanking maneuvers), the Mexican unit deliberately moved in a military formation across the border from Mexico, where they were picked up by National Guard surveillance...

One of the statements that leaves me less sure of it is the claim that the Mexican force was inside the U.S. - or at least being observed by the National Guard - for three hours before the incident. I don't know exactly how far inside the U.S. it occured, but that seems to conflict with the claim that they could retreat quickly back over the border.

Posted at 07:54 PM | Comments (1)

Illegal aliens joining the U.S. military

Esther J. Cepeda of the Sun-Times offers "Illegal to serve?"

...recruiters in Chicago and other cities across the United States are turning away potential applicants who are illegal immigrants -- despite a special wartime provision President Bush signed into law after Sept. 11 allowing them to serve...

...On July 3, 2002, Bush authorized -- in Section 329 of the Immigration and Nationality Act -- an expedited citizenship process for legal immigrants serving in the armed forces in time of war, regardless of their length of residency...

Not so fast. The fly in the illegal immigration supporters' ointment is presented in the last letter on this page:

The fact is that the US military can accept undocumented aliens as recruits when the US is in a declared state of war. Despite what President Bush repeatedly says about the US being involved in a war against terrorism, no such war has been declared by Congress.

The article also quotes Margaret Stock as once again supporting illegal aliens joining the military.

(Via langamp.com/borderblog/?p=4525, which deleted two comments I just left there. Hmmmmm.)

UPDATE: Oddly enough, the comment I left on the last post is... back. I don't know whether it's an issue with them or with me. If the latter, it would be very odd for Firefox to cache the penultimate and not the last version of a page that was viewed.

Posted at 12:07 PM | Comments (2)

Durham illegal aliens victims of black on Hispanic robberies; Wells Fargo?

The article "Nearly half of robbery victims in Durham [North Carolina] are Hispanic" says that others say that Hispanics are a lucrative, vulnerable and growing target for armed robbers. Of course, they aren't really refering to "Hispanics" in general, but to illegal aliens, many of whom don't have bank accounts and carry large amounts of cash with them. And:

An assistant Durham County district attorney supports their assertion, saying armed robbery of Hispanics here is chiefly a black-on-Hispanic crime.

The first lesson here is that this wouldn't be an issue if there weren't so many illegal aliens there.

The second lesson here is that articles like this are sometimes precursors to self-interested parties stepping in offering to "help". Expect the Mexican government to announce a partnership with local or national banks (such as Wells Fargo or Bank of "America"), with perhaps that government giving their Matricula Consular card to illegal aliens outside the bank and the illegal aliens then using that card to open accounts.

Here's an example from Austin, with one of those involved in the scheme later getting an award from Mexico.

Posted at 10:10 AM | Comments (2)

Mayday/May 1, 2007: another illegal immigration boycott

Mark it on your calendars, because illegal aliens and their supporters will supposedly be holding yet another mass walkout/boycott/march on May 1 of this year. And, there's supposedly going to be a planning meeting on February 3 and 4 at Loyola Marymount Law School in Los Angeles. The specific target of the boycott is Walmart.

The only organizer mentioned is Javier Rodriguez from the "Coalicion 25 de Marzo"/March 25 Coalition. They were one of the sponsors of the September 2, 2006 Los Angeles march.

He may or may not be involved, but Fernando Guerra is a Loyola Marymount associate professor and the director of the Center for the Study of Los Angeles. He's also a lobbyist for both Microsoft and Home Depot, and he has at least an indirect link to former MEChA member and current Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Posted at 09:27 PM | Comments (2)

Comments too hot for the Sacramento Bee (part 2)

I left the following comment on the SacBee story "Health care plan facing opposition" by Aurelio Rojas. I believe I've waited long enough and I can safely say that it was not approved. (In the original comment, both links were tinyurl links in non-HTML format).

In November, the author of this article discussed one of Arnie's advisors, one Arnoldo Torres. Unfortunately, Rojas didn't disclose that Torres also serves on an advisory council to the Mexican president. He's even listed on a Mexican government website (ime.gob.mx/ccime/comisiones/asuntos_politicos.htm).

Perhaps the SacBee should look into whether Arnie's plan was influenced by Torres, or whether his plan was directly influenced by the Mexican government.

As usual, I'll write to ombud *at* sacbee.com for an answer that will probably never come.

Previously: Comments too hot for the Sacramento Bee

UPDATE: I usually read these things, so either I missed it the first time or they recently added it, but before the comment form, in tiny, tiny print, it says:

...A comment cannot contain potentially libelous language, foul words, hate words, personal attacks or web links, among other things...

Pretty much every statement of fact is "potentially libelous", but, since nothing in the comment is in fact "potentially libelous", I think we can rule that out. Could the stuck-in-the-19th-century dimbulbs at the SacBee be objecting to the tinyurl "web links"?

UPDATE 2 (WTF EDITION): Someone named "bricko" has posted and had approved a variant of my comment. I don't know whether that's a reader of this post or someone from the SacBee.

Posted at 02:07 PM | Comments (0)

Bush rejoiced Democrat takeover of House; can get immigration "reform"

The article "Congressional leaders predict immigration law" quotes House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer describing last week's meeting between Bush and Dem leaders on today's "Fox News Sunday":

"He (Bush) smiled and he said, 'You know, I think I'm going to have a lot easier time dealing with you on immigration than I had dealing with the House Republican leadership on immigration.'"

GOP members (or their hacks) might say that as horrific as Bush is, the Dems are worse. As long as they continue to support the GOP in its present form, they will continue to be faced with that same choice and people like Bush will get what they want.

The solution to that dilemma is clear: urge your GOP representatives to turn their backs on Bush and his associates, turn your backs on Bush's enablers, and if the GOP calls asking for money, tell them you'll do it after they choose pro-American leaders unaffiliated with Bush.

Posted at 02:07 PM | Comments (1)

Boycott Toys"R"Us/Babies"R"Us

Toys"R"Us has recently shown their lack of respect for both U.S. law and their own rules, and I suggest boycotting them. Their Babies"R"Us subsidiary recently held a "First Baby of 2007" contest, with the winner receiving $25,000. There were three possibilities, and the winner of the tie-breaker drawing turned out to be the child of illegal aliens. This was a violation of the contest rules, which stated that it was only open to "women... who are legal residents [of the U.S.]"

After a manufactured controversy by ethnic advocacy groups, ToysRUs has capitulated and given the prize to all three finalists.

On the one hand this is the smartest move based on their situation. On the other hand, they've sent the message that neither their rules nor our laws really matter. And, they've in effect supported anchor babies as well as perhaps foreign citizens receiving subsidized U.S. healthcare.

Posted at 11:43 AM | Comments (4)

Catholic Charities: bagmen for corrupt businesses?

The Catholic Charities office in Avon, Colorado (located in Eagle County, home of Vail) won't be getting their usual allotment of $25,000 from that county because they don't ask about their clients' immigration status as the newly-passed Proposition 300 appears to require. That determination was done by Colorado Attorney General John Suthers; the director of Catholic Charities in Eagle and Garfield counties, Tom Ziemann, disagrees.

The latter provides this quote:

"I'm sure there are a lot of people applauding (the state law)," Ziemann said. "But some people out there know this community has a vested interest in what we do."

When I read that, I said to myself that they should try to get money from those corrupt businesses that profit from illegal labor, since - in addition to illegal aliens and indirectly and in a minor way the Mexican government - that's who they're benefiting. The more services illegal aliens are able to get from the state or private agences, the fewer services employers have to provide and the more money they can make off of illegal activity.

I'm sure Ziemann wouldn't quite put it the same way. Rather, he put it this way:

To that end, Ziemann said he's looking for help from local businesses.

"I hope some of them might be willing to partner with us," he said.

"There aren't many foundations that like to fund these programs because it's so political," Ziemann added. "Many businesses benefit from immigrant workers. We're hoping they'll recognize this is the right thing to do."

Posted at 06:07 AM | Comments (2)

Illegal immigration, ethnic power, idiocy, Nina Bernstein, Toys R Us

I can't believe I'm posting on such a trivial matter, but: Nina Bernstein of the New York Times is in a slightly more reportarial mood with "First-Baby Sweepstakes Fuels Immigration Debate". It seems that Toys R Us - specifically their Babies R Us subsidiary - sponsors a "1st Baby of the Year Sweepstakes", and this year there were three possibilities:

1. a New York Chinese couple who appear to be illegal aliens
2. a "black American" who gave birth in Gainesville, Georgia
3. a couple from El Salvador

All three could have won, so they held a tiebreaker, initially choosing #1. However, then they found out that the parents couldn't prove legal residence, and they switched to option #2.

This has caused ethnic power groups to erupt in a furor of race-based indignation. Those mentioned are: John Wang (president of the Asian American Business Development Center), officers of the Organization of Chinese Americans (including past national vice president Leo Y. Lee), and Albert H. Wang (corporate lawyer).

The last is a bit surprising, since presumably he can interpret the rules of the contest (firstbabyoftheyear.com/rules.html):

Sweepstakes only open to women who are pregnant and could plausibly give birth in a U.S. or D.C. hospital, at or after 12:00 am (local time in registrant time zone), on January 1, 2007 and who are legal residents of the 50 United States or Washington D.C.

The legal residence requirement absolutely applies to the woman giving birth, not to the baby.

Posted at 03:23 AM | Comments (3)

"Families First in Immigration"

The new group "Families First in Immigration" appears to be a pro-amnesty coalition of conservative evangelicals. They've already sent a letter to Bush and Pelosi supporting their views, but that apparently won't be released until Monday. Apparently they're seeking a "third way" on immigration "reform", but one wonders exactly how different their scheme could be from the ones currently proposed. Specifically, based on their name it appears they'll stress family reunification, something which has helped lead to current massive legal and illegal immigration, and a surprise feature of the Senate's bill.

Those involved include:

* Manny Miranda ("memogate"; former counsel to Bill Frist)
* Paul Weyrich (Coalitions for America)
* Dr. Donald Wildmon (American Family Association)
* Gary Bauer (American Values)
* David Keene (American Conservative Union)

Expect them to be the only-slightly-less-loony version of Cardinal Roger Mahony and other Catholic Bishops.

UPDATE: The WashTimes has more. They want amnesty for all illegal aliens who have a U.S. citizen relative, which would amnestize all parents of anchor babies and, practically speaking, every other illegal alien in the U.S. who would fake a relation if they didn't have such relatives. On the other hand, they want to end birthright citizenship.

Others in the coalition include: Deal Hudson of the Morley Institute for Church & Culture... direct-mail guru Richard A. Viguerie..., the Rev. Louis Sheldon of Traditional Values Coalition and Rabbi Aryeh Spero of Caucus for America. They hope to get Sen. Sam Brownback involved.

Posted at 12:15 PM | Comments (4)

More on Mexico's rescue beacons for illegal aliens

The AP's Istra Pacheco has more on Mexico's plan to give rescue beacons to "migrants". The article provides just a little more than that previously covered, but it has an extra helping of AP bias and reflects their inability to dig for the truth.

We're informed that two "state government institutions" are involved, presumably a reference to "Puebla state's Commission for the Attention of Migrants" (quote from their rep Jesus Torreblanca) and Monterrey Tech University. Rather than using commercial models, the latter is developing their own version, and they'll be passed out free to "migrants". And, despite their denials, it appears the Border Patrol might have at least been contacted about this, because we're informed that the "U.S. government has yet to sign off on the project".

As for the article, while it uses the at least partially acceptable phrase "illegal migration", it also refers to "migrants", a favorite euphemism of the Mexican government (and Bush). It also refers to "anti-immigration groups". And, we're informed that:

Hundreds of Mexicans are killed each year trying to sneak illegally into the U.S. Many are lost or succumb to heat exhaustion in the desert, while others are killed trying to swim across the Rio Grande or hide in vehicles.

The use of the verb "kill" rather than "die" is probably an attempt to prejudice the reader in favor of "migration".

Then, we get this unopposed quote from Torreblanca:

"Our main purpose is to show people the enormous dangers they risk in crossing rivers, canals and deserts ... but the phenomenon of immigration is something that can't be stopped overnight... The U.S. government has every right to protect its borders anyway it sees necessary... The only thing that we ask is that they respect human rights."

There are other ways to show the dangers, and rescue beacons aren't them. And, of course, refering to Mexico sending its people north as a "phenomenon" is a standard trick they use. And, Mexico's definition of "human rights" is a bit sloppy and apparently includes the "right" to cross borders illegally.

Posted at 10:12 AM | Comments (1)

Sylvester Stallone defends boxing, illegal immigration

From our "who gives a flying fsck what some washed-up Hollywood freak thinks but let's keep this around for anyone who's considering giving him any money" category comes this:

Sylvester Stallone defended boxing, praised the hard work of Mexicans and dished out some jabs against U.S. plans to build a wall on its southern border, as the 60-year-old actor visited Mexico City to promote his sixth prizefighting film, "Rocky Balboa."

..."I support Mexicans who work in my country," he said, adding that the United States depends on the hard work of Latinos to keep running...

...[The border fence] was "crazy" and "ridiculous," Stallone said, arguing nations should be able to interact without being divided by walls...

It's certainly possible to oppose both the fence and illegal immigration, but if Stallone had meant to do that he would have used the magic word "legal" when refering to Mexicans working in the U.S.

For those who don't follow this topic that closely, here's what Stallone in effect supports:

* Increased corruption in the U.S. as companies that profit from illegal immigration donate to politicians who look the other way.

* Increased numbers of low-wage workers coming into a high cost of living country (resulting in people living in garages or even tents in backyards).

* Lowered wages for our own low-wage workers, many of whom have simply stopped looking for work.

* Increased chance of worker abuse and workplace injuries and deaths (much higher for illegal aliens).

* Entrenching the corrupt Mexican government rather than forcing them to reform.

* Giving even more political power inside the U.S. to the government of Mexico. That government has direct or indirect links to several major non-profit organizations, and their consuls have a habit of meddling in our internal politics.

* Assisting attempts to weaken U.S. citizenship and sovereignty.

* Foreign citizens marching in our streets demanding rights to which they aren't entitled.

* Among other previously rare diseases, drug-resistant tuberculosis.

* Reducing innovation. Rather than inventing machines to pick crops, growers can simply import low-wage labor.

Posted at 02:54 AM | Comments (5)

"New port security may stall trucking"

Stephen Franklin and Darnell Little of the Chicago Tribune offer this:

Fanning out from the mammoth ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, 16,000 drivers, nearly all of them Latino, crisscross Southern California's congested highways, carrying freight that will make its way to every part of the country.

But a number of the drivers are undocumented immigrants, and they could soon find themselves out of work and freight ould begin backing up across the country...

...Like any business pondering how it will get by without undocumented workers, the trucking industry is in deep debate about what could lie ahead.

"There could be a huge impact," said Curtis Whalen, an official for the American Transportation Association. "If you start getting whacked in the West, you will have an impact in Chicago because of less traffic flow."

Oh, the horror that would ensue if Americans had to pay a few cents extra for lettuce, sneakers, or Tickle Me Elmo dolls.

However, let's compare that dire warning from the first two paragraphs with the details they reveal in the rest of the article:

* A large percentage of port drivers are illegal aliens. In other words, foreign citizens about whom we know nothing are able to handle freight which travels our busiest highways, possibly leading to terrorist attacks.

* Due to deregulation, trucking companies have been able to engage in union busting through hiring illegal aliens, including some who are bottom feeders who'll work for a very low price.

* Drivers make very little money, and contribute to pollution because they can't even afford to upgrade their trucks.

* Some trucking companies that pay good wages no longer do port work because they can't compete with those who hire illegal aliens and other very low-wage workers.

* Port truckers are driving chassis in bad repair, possibly leading to accidents.

Let's keep an eye out for who ends up supporting the American Transportation Association and others who will no doubt try to advocate for the current situation. I suspect that will be the usual suspects: the media, most Democratic leaders, and all Bush-linked GOP leaders.

Posted at 10:06 PM | Comments (0)

U.S.-Mexico Social Security Totalization Agreement gets MSM attention

Surprisingly, at least three sources are now discussing the details of the U.S.-Mexico Social Security Totalization Agreement. After a 3.5 year FOIA battle, the TREA Senior Citizens League recently obtained a copy of that agreement, and their suit continues as they seek more documentation.

Michelle Mittelstadt has a rundown with the ludicrous subheadline "Federal officials insist it would cost only $105 million for the first 5 years". All the Bush administration's other plans and estimates have worked out OK, right?

Hernan Rozemberg says:

...The accord lacks specific language clearly delineating that [illegal aliens] would be barred from applying for benefits, and it should concern anyone on Social Security that billions of dollars could be going to millions of people who worked illegally, said Shannon Benton, executive director of the senior league.

Mark Lassiter, the SSA spokesman who was granted authority to speak for the White House on the matter, said the group's allegations are false.

He said the agreements tackle taxation, not immigration issues, and that current laws forbid people from collecting benefits if they don't have a valid Social Security number.

But those laws leave loopholes that could cost at least $10 billion in benefits, the senior league countered.

...the document is based on existing benefits laws that provide loopholes for unauthorized migrants to collect benefits, and that sends the wrong message, according to the senior league.

And, Stephen Dinan says:

But Mark Lassiter, a spokesman for the Social Security Administration, said the agreement doesn't change U.S. law. The law states that those who do not have authorization to work will not get benefits under a totalization agreement.

"To get Social Security benefits, you do have to be legally in the United States. This agreement does not address in any way immigration, immigration laws or override current law," he said, adding that a 2004 law, the Social Security Protection Act, prevents illegal aliens from getting benefits.

But the seniors group said the 2004 law also states that if those aliens later get legal status -- through an amnesty or some sort of legalization plan such as the one President Bush and the Senate tried to enact last year -- they would be able to collect the benefits based on their time as illegal workers.

UPDATE: Investors Business Daily has an editorial opposing the scheme, as does the WashTimes.

Posted at 12:36 PM | Comments (1)

Immigration "reform" would completely overwhelm USCIS

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) would administer any "guest" worker or immigration "reform" (amnesty) scheme. However:

But in recent months, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officials have determined that the troubled, $2-billion-a-year agency is unable to effectively manage its existing work, much less a flood of new applications.

A report released Dec. 20 by Homeland Security Inspector General Richard L. Skinner cited a long list of setbacks and concurred with internal USCIS reviews that the bureau "lacks the processing capacity, systems integration and project management resources needed to manage a potential increase in workloads."

...Many legal immigrants already face years-long waits when they apply for green cards, often a first step toward obtaining citizenship.Another 100,000 names submitted to the FBI for background checks have been on hold for a year or more. Congressional auditors recently reported that 14 immigration offices had lost track of 111,000 files as of July...

Related:
"[USCIS] Whistle-blower let go"
"Terrorist screening missed 75% of time"
The Senate amnesty: an "Administrative and National Security Nightmare"
Whistleblower: USCIS broken, infiltrated by operatives of hostile foreign countries
USCIS director: Senate amnesty timeline is not "practical"
GAO report shows how "guest" worker schemes would fail miserably

Posted at 10:51 AM | Comments (2)

Fred Barnes, Morton Kondracke support illegal immigration, again

For future reference, Fred Barnes and Morton Kondracke - stars of the Fox News Channel's "Beltway Boys" - said this on their year-end wrap-up:

Kondracke: "Our 'Dumbest Move' award of the year is Republicans trashing immigrants. And this - this has disastrous consequences for the, in the election. The Hispanic vote, which is the fastest-growing element of the population, went 55 to 42 percent Democratic in 2004. This time, it went 76 to 26. And it's all because of this stupid wall that the House Republicans wanted to build, and rejected their own president's plan for a comprehensive immigrant reform in preference to cozying up to radio talk show hosts."

Barnes: "I don't think it's the wall, per se. I think it's their whole attitude toward immigrants in general, but particularly Hispanic immigrants. It seemed mean-spirited, and, you know, American voters are generally not mean-spirited. You, you're going to have some kind of a wall at some point, but you have to a lot of other things, too."

Kondracke: "Yes. The wall only is the problem."

Additional comments - this time anti-Lou Dobbs - at the link.

Related:
Has the Weekly Standard backtracked on Graf/Hayworth myth?
Fred "Shifty Eyes" Barnes on comprehensive immigration reform
Fred Barnes is mostly clueless on immigration
Morton Kondracke on illegal immigration
How out of touch is Morton Kondracke?
More Morton Kondracke immigration idiocy

Posted at 10:37 PM | Comments (1)

SEIU dividing over "guest" workers vs. amnesty for all

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) was deeply involved in last year's illegal immigration marches. However, their president Andy Stern only goes as far as supporting the Senate amnesty schemes which include "guest" worker plots. Other SEIU members go even further, opposing "guest" workers and demanding legalization for all illegal aliens [1].

The open borders side of things is represented by the California group of SEIU members calling themselves "No Worker is Illegal". One of their leaders is Renee Saucedo of the City of San Francisco's Day Labor Program. One of those on Stern's side is SEIU Vice President Eliseo Medina.

As for those of us on the American side of things, I'd suggest that the SEIU being seen as extremist as possible is the best outcome, with the SEIU being split into two over "guest" workers vs. complete amnesty being the second best outcome.

[1] Needless to say, that would be the equivalent of an open borders plan. Millions more illegal aliens would come here in expectation of receiving the next amnesty. And, if they support across the board legalization now, there's very little chance they would oppose it for those new illegal aliens. Repeat ad infinitum.

Posted at 07:43 PM | Comments (4)

Foreign Policy on the Nanny-Driven Economic Miracle

Harvard economists Michael Kremer and Stanley Watt have released a study claiming that importing a certain amount of cheap labor - such as nannies - does wonderful good for an economy. James G. Forsyth of Foreign Policy explains:

Kremer explains his findings by pointing out that domestic workers can increase a country's supply of highly skilled workers by allowing well-educated parents (generally mothers) to remain in the workforce. Household help is actually far more liberating to parents than day care, he argues, because nannies let them work the long hours required by many highpowered, highpaying jobs.

Of course, one wonders whether Kremer and Watt actually looked at this issue in its totality or whether they only looked at the fiscal aspects of the matter. Given what passes for economics, I suspect the latter. Specifically, I doubt whether they reported on the social impacts of the importation of cheap labor from foreign countries. For instance, are cheap Korean or Filipino nannies imported into Japan healthy for either party? Is importing Mexican nannies to their "lost territories" a dangerous situation? Does creating a "nanny employing class" lead to decadence and an elite class that becomes even further estranged from their (supposed) fellow citizens? Real economists would cover those issues, but I would be surprised if Kremer and Watt did.

Posted at 08:20 AM | Comments (1)

Tom Vilsack misled about Swift raid, DHS cooperation?

Oh, please say it's just a miscommunication and Iowa governor and illegal immigration supporter Tom Vilsack didn't lie about the Swift immigration raids, which were held on December 12. A week later, Vilsack and Iowa National Guard Maj. Gen. Ron Dardis sent a strongly-worded letter to DHS head Michael Chertoff complaining about a "media blackout" and that they hadn't been informed of the "size and scope" of the raids. However, on December 4 the Iowa NG signed a rental contract with ICE indicating that they knew full well how big the raids were going to be.

First, here's a snippet of the letter (PDF):

...ICE's failure to advise the Iowa National Guard of the size and scope of the raid could have led to unacceptable risks to Guard personnel and property. Although the Guard was simply a space provider, your department's operations and lack of coordination put the Iowa National Guard into the national spotlight without the courtesy of providing them sufficient information or authority to plan and respond...

...ICE failed to provide any information to Iowa National Guard public affairs staff prior to and during the operation...

...In order to prevent similar or greater problems in the future, please note that the Iowa National Guard... will now require proper notification to the Governor and appropriate law enforcement personnel, as well as a thorough and synchronized media plan, before we again agree to provide any space for future actions or operations by ICE.

And, here's the details on the contract:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement planned to house up to 1,100 undocumented workers for as many 10 nights at Camp Dodge, according to a government contract.

The contract showed that would have cost ICE $32,000, but the site was used for fewer days last month and housed about 500 people who were arrested during the Dec. 12 raid at Swift & Co. meatpacking plants in Marshalltown and five other states.

The contract between ICE and the Iowa National Guard was dated Dec. 4 and prohibited guard officials from discussing it without permission from ICE.

The contract shows ICE reserved access to communications support, cleaning services, beds and 1,100 sets of linens...

The only out for Vilsack in this case is to either accuse Dardis of lying to him or to pretend that reserving 1100 sets of linens is not a good indication of the size of the raid.

Posted at 05:21 AM | Comments (1)

Teddy Kennedy and thousands of Iraq refugees

Supposedly tens of thousands of Iraqis leave their country each month to avoid the general violence. Some of them have worked with the U.S. and fear for their lives. Our refugee planning - like almost all other Bush administration "planning" - failed to take this into account, and until recently only considered resettling 500 Iraqis this year. The State Department says they could handle many more, but blames the issue on the U.N.

Teddy Kennedy to the rescue! The incoming chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship is going to hold hearings to try to figure out what to do.

On the one hand, we do have an obligation to those Iraqis who have worked for us and who do not pose a threat should they be brought here. However - given once again the Bush administration's general incompetence - some of those that we would admit might end up posing a threat to the rest of us. The best solution would probably be to encourage some other country to take as many as possible.

Posted at 12:00 PM | Comments (2)

Los Angeles Times on immigration: 2006 in review

Patterico offers his Los Angeles Times Year in Review post. Here's some more bias from that paper specifically relating to immigration matters:

Dec: Danced around the status of a cop shooter. Backs Bill Richardson's opposition to border fence. Elizabeth Mehren said that Mitt Romney directly employed illegal aliens, when they were actually employees of a lawn care company with which he'd contracted.

Nov: Lionized and continued to cover up for Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Editorial engaged in the Graf/Hayworth canard.

Oct: Peter Wallsten: the GOP can't win without opening the borders. David Streitfeld/Los Angeles Times promotes illegal immigration. "Food Stamps in Four Hours" (Mexican consul+USDA)

Sep: Los Angeles Times reporter Sonia Nazario promotes illegal immigration on CBS News. Reporter Lee Romney promotes "guest" worker schemes. At an immigration march, they gave in to union thuggery. Joe Mathews didn't ask about the immigration status of hotel workers engaging in political theater. Patt Morrison opposes the border fence.

Aug: Jordan Rau falsely claims that "liberals and Latinos" "strongly" support driver's licenses for illegal aliens. The numbers aren't there.

Jul: To their credit, they issue a partial indictment of what they support. A few days before: Molly Hennessy-Fiske/LAT promotes corruption in Arkansas. A few days before came the slightly more balanced "Vision That Inspires Some and Scares Others: Aztlan".

Jun: Alicia Robinson of Orange County's Los Angeles Times-affiliated Daily Pilot promotes Mexico's "IDs for Illegals" identity card.

May: Los Angeles Times supports Bush immigration speech (editorial).

Apr: Columnist Steve Lopez thought massive immigration would help a low-wage legal immigrant. They join those who refer to foreign citizens marching in our streets as an "Immigrant" Rights Movement. They conduct a puffball interview on immigration with Antonio Villaraigosa. Partially on the other hand, they disclosed Bush's Aztlan video. Tim Rutten slams Lou Dobbs. Put a smiley face on students marching for illegal immigration. Anna Gorman misleads on workplace enforcement.

Mar: Printed a pro-illegal immigration ad from the Mexican government. Reports on massive trash dumps left behind by illegal aliens... and blames it on the Border Patrol. OTOH, they give a couple paragraphs to the downsides of Maywood's support for illegal immigration.

Feb: Christopher Goffard discusses the illegal aliens who "oil the gears of [Orange County's] humming economy"

Jan: Peter Wallsten plays the 187 canard among many other misleading statements.

I didn't cover the L.A. Times' coverage of the illegal immigration protests, but I'd imagine it was in line with the above.

Posted at 09:59 AM | Comments (1)

U.S.-Mexico Social Security Totalization Agreement released (FOIA battle)

"Totalization Agreements" allow foreign workers in the U.S. to qualify for Social Security benefits, and we have them with developed countries such as the UK. Around 2000 people are covered under the agreement with that country. However, in June 2004, the Social Security Administration signed an agreement with Mexico, which - if signed by Bush - could result in billions going to millions of illegal aliens.

After a three and half year battle involving FOIA lawsuits, the TREA Senior Citizens League has finally received a copy of the agreement. Bush apologists might want to explain why this matter was handled with such secrecy. And, the MSM might want to explain why they weren't the ones filing the FOIA requests. Of course, the media will probably continue to ignore these matters.

The agreement hasn't taken effect yet. If Bush signs it, Congress will have 60 days during which they can vote to reject it. From the link:

The U.S. currently has 21 similar agreements in effect with other nations, which are intended to eliminate dual taxation for persons who work outside their country of origin. All of the agreements are with developed nations with economies similar to that of the U.S.

For example, a worker who turns 62 after 1990 generally needs 40 calendar quarters of coverage to receive retirement benefits. Under totalization agreements, workers are allowed to combine earnings from both countries in order to qualify for benefits. The Agreement with Mexico, like other totalization agreements, would allow workers to qualify with just six quarters, or 18 months, of U.S. coverage.

But Mexico's retirement system is radically different than that of other participating countries. For example, only 40 percent of non-government workers participate in Mexico's system, whereas 96 percent of America’s non-government workers do. In addition, the U.S. system is progressive, meaning lower wage earners get back much more than they put in; in Mexico, workers get back only what they put in, plus accrued interest.

Previously:

The hidden surprise inside "guest" worker schemes
Status of Social Security totalization with Mexico?
"CFR's Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada"
Social security for illegal aliens meeting resistance
No Social Security for Illegal Aliens

Posted at 12:43 PM | Comments (3)

Mexico to give rescue beacons to "migrants"?

Illegal aliens and a smaller number of legal immigrants send more than $20 billion back to Mexico each year. That partly helps explain why that country has passed out a comic book to prospective illegal aliens showing them how to cross the desert. They also considered passing out maps (with the help of two U.S. collaborators), they operate a "migrant assistance" group called Grupo Beta, and the state of Yucatan even came out with a computer CD.

Thus, the report "Mexico offers satnav to illegals crossing into the US" - as ludicrous as it might sound to someone who's not familiar with our remora fish to the south - isn't that much of a surprise. Apparently officials from the Mexican state of Puebla (led by Jaime Obregon, "coordinator for the state commission for migrants") are going to pass out personal locator beacons of some kind to those trying to cross the border. If they get lost - or get abandoned by their coyote - they can activate the beacon and help - supposedly from either Mexico or the U.S. - will be on the way. An unnamed CBP spokesman denies any knowledge of the scheme.

The article is a bit questionable because it's in a Hong Kong newspaper and there doesn't appear to be any other source with the news, but the author is Justin Stares, who appears to be a writer for various British newspapers.

On the other hand, they say they might pass out 200,000 of the devices which could really add up. "Personal Rescue Beacons" for use on boats and such appear to cost several hundreds of dollars, they're so pricy that there's even one site offering them for rental (you need to sign in to see their rental prices so I didn't bother), and a device called a "Digital Angel" that uses cellphone technology appears to cost around $400. However, many or most cellphones contain GPS technology and they aren't too expensive so maybe there are cheaper alternatives.

Or, perhaps Mexico has some sort of a rental arrangement in mind, with the "migrants" turning their PLB into the local consulate once they arrive in Mexico's "Lost Territories".

UPDATE: This story also appears in the UK Telegraph, so it might be legit.

UPDATE 2: As discussed here, the AP has confirmed this report. A Mexican university is developing their own cheap beacon, which will be passed out free to "migrants". If they have the abilities to design and manufacture cheap electronic devices, one wonders why they're unable to put that to good uses that would reduce "migration" rather than putting it to uses that will only make Mexico's overall situation worse.

Posted at 08:13 PM | Comments (4)

Mike Madden/Gannett News, and the Amnesty All Stars

Mike Madden of Gannett News/USA Today offers "Advocates hope new Congress will act on immigration reform", the latest in a long line of similar articles (Tim Gaynor/Reuters: "Democrats' win spurs hope of immigration revamp", the NYT editorial "Signs of Hope on Immigration", Boston Herald wants to "resolve immigration reform", etc.) Certainly, the views of the other side are to a certain extent worth listening to, but one wonders whether six opponents of amnesty have been featured in their own article.

Madden informs us that "[m]illions of immigrants marched from coast to coast demanding new rights", when I recall them actually being foreign citizens or their supporters making a show of force in our streets. Then, after playing the Hayworth/Graf canard, he sets down to work by quoting "Marshall Fitz, director of advocacy for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, which is pressing for reforms." Harry Reid promises to come up with his own version of the bill the Senate passed. Patrick Leahy is mentioned, then we're treated to a quote from:

John Gay, a lobbyist for the National Restaurant Association and co-director of the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, made up of trade organizations for industries that depend on immigrant labor.

Unnamed aides say that Nancy Pelosi, unlike Harry Reid, is on the fence:

Many new House Democrats supported new border security restrictions on the campaign trail, which could complicate matters politically for Pelosi, even though lobbyists working on the issue believe a majority of the House would vote for reform.

So, Hayworth and Santorum lost because of their support for enforcement, but Dems won despite supporting enforcement? Or, did Madden simply forget what he wrote only a few paragraphs before?

Continuing with the internal inconsistencies:

But the stalemate this year taught advocates that they need to act fast, before election-year politics come into play, said Cecelia Munoz, vice president for advocacy at the National Council of La Raza, the nation's largest Latino civil rights group, Munoz hopes the House will take up a bill by spring in order for Congress to finish its work before 2008.

The NCLR also has links to and funds extremists, but who's counting. Finally, Madden refers to the flow of illegal aliens over the border as the "arrival of new immigrants", and says that agricultural interests are complaining about a lack of labor.

Posted at 06:35 AM | Comments (1)

Bush pardons drug dealers, doesn't pardon railroaded BP agents

President Bush recently issued his year-end pardons, and those receiving good news included (via this and this):

-Marie Georgette Ginette Briere of Gatineau, Quebec, possession of cocaine with intent to distribute.

-George Thomas Harley of Albuquerque, N.M, aiding and abetting the distribution of cocaine.

-Eric William Olson of Ojai, CA, possession with intent to distribute hashish.

-Phillip Anthony Emmert of Washington, IA, conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine (commutation of sentence).

Those who were not pardoned include quite-possibly-railroaded Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean.

Posted at 06:03 AM | Comments (2)

Boo! Mike Huckabee says won't scare Dems, moderates

Sanctimonious illegal immigration supporter Mike Huckabee - current governor of Arkansas says:

"I think I would appeal to true conservatives for whom conservatism doesn't mean they're angry at everybody... My brand of conservatism is not an angry, hostile brand. It's one that says 'conservative' means we want to conserve the best of our culture, society, principles and values and pass them on... I would be the kind of Republican who doesn't scare the living daylights out of people who are in the center or slightly to the left."

Indeed, he should appeal to the 25% or less of the populace who support illegal immigration. When combined with the 0.1% of the populace who will buy another "compassionate conservative", he should simply coast to victory.

Posted at 02:28 PM | Comments (6)

Zoe Lofgren optimistic on immigration "reform"

In an interview with KCBS radio that probably had little journalistic content whatsoever, Democratic Congressperson Zoe Lofgren of San Jose expressed the hope that immigration "reform" could be passed. She'll be the new head of the House Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security, and she was also mentioned as an upcoming player in the NYT article linked to by "McCain, Kennedy, Gutierrez, Flake collaborating on immigration "reform", Part 2".

To help both her and KCBS, let's examine their recap and - hopefully - the reader will go a bit further and contact either Lofgren or the station and suggest ways that they could lie better (in the first case) or ask better questions (in the second case). You can reach KCBS at 415-474-KCBS (5227), and Lofgren is at 202-225-3072 or 408-271-8700.

The representative points out that many of the politicians who pinned their re-election hopes on being tough on immigration lost in the midterm elections. "So I think that has been a wake up call for the Republicans that people want some practical solutions," she added.

At that point in the interview, the "reporter" should have called her on her BS by refering her to the many sources that have shown that canard to be false.

She said an amnesty program is under consideration but there still must be some consequences for those who have blatantly violated the law.

At that point in time, the "reporter" should have first thanked her for at least being honest enough to call it an amnesty. Then, the "reporter" should have discussed those "consequences" that illegal aliens will be subjected to before receiving their amnesty, such as not having to pay two out of five years of taxes. And, the "reporter" should have asked her exactly how she intends to prevent the amnesty being seen as a massive "Welcome" sign for future illegal aliens. If she says through enforcement, then the "reporter" should have pointed out that the 1986 amnesty was never really enforced, as well as noting all the forces currently working against enforcement and asked Lofgren whether she fantastically assumes they'll stop opposing enforcement after they get the "reform" they seek.

Lofgren said the goal is to get some true legislative reform next year in order to avoid the congestion of the presidential elections in 2008.

At that point in time, the "reporter" should have (once again) called her on her BS, asking her to deny that she realizes that "reform" is a political loser and could harm Democratic - and Republican - contenders for president.

Since the reporter clearly didn't ask any of those questions, they could have just saved time and money by asking Lofgren to send in an audio press release.

Posted at 05:18 AM | Comments (1)

Rep. Jose Serrano's muddled immigration musings

Back on the 18th, Rep. Jose Serrano (D-South Bronx) enlightened the Congressional Progressive Caucus - of which he's a proud part - with his thoughts in "Serrano Denounces Immigration Raids". It isn't worth a full treatment, but let's take a look at a few points from his cri de coeur for racial power:

The current system provides no way for the businesses of our nation to find the labor supply they need, and provides no way to allow immigrants to become documented workers who need not fear deportation.

I'm willing to bet that there's a large and unemployed labor supply right in the district he supposedly represents, and I'm willing to bet that if all our illegal aliens left tomorrow we'd have some problems for a while but eventually our labor markets would adjust. That certainly wouldn't please businesses that want the cheapest or most pliable labor possible, but I'm sure we can do it. As for the second part, his thinking is more than a bit muddled since we have hundreds of thousands of legal immigrants per year. If we have caps on unskilled laborers, well, perhaps there's a reason. And, if Serrano wants to raise that cap, then perhaps he should consider seperate legislation as well as describing exactly how many workers would be allowed in under his scheme.

Then, he plays the "it's for the children" line, refering to the Swift case in which parents were supposedly separated from their children. Needless to say, he doesn't discuss the parents' negligence for bringing children here or having them here while illegal aliens.

And, having spent too much time on this payaso already, let's finish with this:

Our nation has never turned away workers who come seeking a decent salary and a shot at a better life.

Obviously, that's false. Those arriving at Ellis Island were pre-screened by the shipping companies, and once here a small percentage were not allowed into the country. And, just as obviously, there's a huge backlog of applications from prospective legal immigrants, and not all of those are approved.

Posted at 02:23 AM | Comments (1)

MSMWatch: will cop shooter's immigration status be mentioned?

Last week, two Long Beach (CA) police officers were shot by long-term criminal Oscar Gallegos and they remain in stable but critical condition. Yesterday Gallegos was shot and killed in a gun battle with Santa Ana cops.

According to KFI's Eric Leonard, Gallegos was an illegal alien. At post time, none of the news sources discussing this case have revealed that, and only two instances of an earlier AP report disclose that he was "deported at least once" (KESQ, PE.com).

As with a previous case, let's wait and see whether the non-KFI local media tries to cover up his immigration status and whether they bother to look into whether sanctuary policies played any role in his ability to remain in the U.S.

UPDATE: The unbylined AP article here dated 12/29/06 says:

Gallegos was an illegal immigrant who had been deported three times and had a criminal record dating back to 1990, including arrests for drug offenses and assault with a deadly weapon, authorities said.

And, on 12/27 (apparently not showing up in google news), the L.B. Press-Telegram said:

Gallegos, an illegal immigrant from Mexico, was deported at least three times, the last one occurring in 1996, according to immigration officials.

Now, we turn to the Los Angeles Times.

12/25's "Long Beach police search for gunman" by Richard Winton and Stuart Silverstein says he has a "long criminal history" but there's not even a hint to his status.

12/28's "Long Beach gunman slain in Santa Ana shootout" by David Haldane and Stuart Silverstein likewise offers no clue.

12/29's "60 lawmen joined hunt for suspect" by Andrew Blankstein and Garrett Therolf dances like so:

Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley said authorities were concerned that Gallegos, a Mexican national who had been deported from the United States three times, might flee the country.

12/28's "Possible shooting suspect is slain" by David Haldane and Stuart Silverstein dances too:

[Authorities] said he had also been deported in 1994, although they provided no details on where he was sent or the incident prompting the deportation.

(That also has the news that he was arrested by Long Beach police on a warrant in 2003, but the warrant was actually for someone else with the same name. He tried to sue and collect $5 million, but the suit was dismissed. The question then becomes why his status wasn't discovered while in jail and why he wasn't turned over the the INS.)

Summary: in this race for the bottom, the AP is even more accurate than the L.A. Times.

Posted at 10:07 PM | Comments (3)

Swift and Company raids leading to collapse of Pork Industry?

Could the recent immigration raids at Swift and Company lead to a full-blown collapse of the Pig, Pork, and Swine Industry? Or, will those raids simply send the message that The Industry should deal with doing business within the law? I favor the second choice, but the Associated Press appears to be working itself into a future article that will warn about the first choice. For now, all we have is the relatively understated (in AP terms) "Immigration raid still hurting Swift production and hog prices":

More than two weeks after immigration raids resulted in the detention of 1,282 Swift & Co. workers, the company's pork plants still have not returned to full capacity and the slowdown has caused hog prices to drop.

...hog farmers who need to sell their animals have had fewer buyers, driving prices down. David Preisler, executive director of the Minnesota Pork Producers Association, estimates that the raids are costing pork producers $6 per pig.

I'm no Porcine Professional, but do Hog Farmers "need" to sell their crop within some certain time? Or, can they keep piggies around if they can't find a good price? And, of course, the article doesn't disclose current pig pricing nor the average weight of a pig and whether the cost is based on when the pig is still in possession of its various appendages and so forth.

[Swift spokesman Sean McHugh] said that because the raid happened early in the morning, we were able to get in touch with our producers, and a lot of the normal deliveries were either stopped, turned around en route or directed to other processors," he said. "There were no livestock at risk from an animal welfare perspective."

Brad Freking, owner and managing partner of Jackson-based New Fashion Pork, said the raid proves the need for a compromise on immigration reform.

"The impact of this is so widespread. We're being indirectly impacted - Main Street businesses and social services are all impacted," he said. There has to be a better method."

The better method he has in mind is to let the Pork Industry run our immigration system. I suggest they deal with the current situation and make do.

UPDATE: The Cattle Network (not the one on TV, the web one) weighs in with this:

A panel of pork industry analysts said that while Swift & Co. was hurt by the [immigration raids], the impact on the pork industry as a whole was extremely short-lived. "It took the industry less than a week to recover" and return to pre-raid production levels, said Ron Plain, professor of agricultural economics at the University of Missouri.

Posted at 04:02 PM | Comments (4)

Bloomberg links illegal immigration "crackdown" to tourism

Mayor Mike Bloomberg stuns once again with his outright support for illegal immigration. The end of "44 Million Tourists and Counting" - putatively about tourists coming to New York City - contains this:

The mayor said that a crackdown on illegal immigration was discouraging law-abiding visitors to the city.

"Current immigration policy is making it harder for people from other countries to come to New York, and it's not just hurting tourism but all of our businesses in this city," Mr. Bloomberg said. "Now, we all recognize that in today's world we have to do a better job of securing our borders. But we also have to make sure it's done right."

On the one hand, he might have a slight point. Increased scrutiny to tourist and other visa applications - enacted after that minor incident that occured in his city five years back - may have made it more difficult for people to come here. But, he should take heart that, as far as I know, we've still got an open door for visitors from Saudi Arabia. And, as a matter of policy, we want to make sure that visa recipients actually intend to abide by the terms of the visa and don't stay on as illegal aliens. Other than that, the mind reels trying to think how a supposed "crackdown" on illegal immigration - such as workplace and border enforcement - could impact tourism to his city. Perhaps he's thinking of the workers for his associates and not the tourists themselves.

Posted at 08:30 AM | Comments (2)

Border Patrol apprehensions supposedly down; propaganda?

The long article "Border patrol says Bush plan is working" says that Border Patrol apprehensions of illegal aliens are down 11% over last year in Arizona and 8% along the entire border. The article says that might be due to the National Guard troops stationed at the border, but it also says that relying on such numbers as an indicator of reduced attempts to cross is not advised. Oh, and it also buries this:

...Border Patrol officials say the work being done by guard troops has freed 108 agents in Arizona to go out into the field. The troops are intended to serve as a stopgap until the Border Patrol has time to recruit, hire, and train 6,000 additional agents by the end of 2008.

This June,the National Guard plans to cut in half the number of troops deployed along the border. The Border Patrol, meanwhile, is struggling to find enough qualified candidates. The agency plans to add 2,500this fiscal year, 6,000 by the end of 2008, for a total of 18,000. But it's unclear whether the agency will be able to meet those goals. The Border Patrol estimates it will have to interview 500,000 people to find 6,000 qualified candidates.

So far, the Border Patrol has hired 367 new agents. Another 739 are currently in training at the Border Patrol academy in New Mexico. But many candidates wash out before graduating, or don't pass muster once they get out in the field...

Posted at 05:50 AM | Comments (1)

Spotlight on Gould Construction

Gould Construction is the Colorado construction company featured in Tom Brokaw's pro-illegal immigration propaganda piece from NBC. After that show aired, they claim to have received 600 phone calls from job applicants, as well as a quantity of "hate mail". While I certainly wouldn't mind seeing them coming under some degree of scrutiny vis-a-vis their hiring practices, they are ultimately small fry and just the vessel that Brokaw's handlers used to promulgate their message.

So, let me suggest that everyone calls NBC Nightly News with their thoughts on the show. I believe their phone number is: 212-664-4971.

Posted at 02:42 AM | Comments (3)

WaPo's Boom Burbs go bust; what happens to the illegal aliens?

Nick Miroff of the Washington Post offers "Immigrants' Jobs Vanish With Housing Slowdown", about the situation in the DC/Maryland/NoVa suburbs area. Seems some illegal aliens can't find jobs in construction and are leaving mostly for other states, but some are even - gasp - returning to the countries of which they're citizens. Note that just over a year ago, the Washington Post promoted illegal activity in order to keep the good times a-rollin' in those "boom burbs". Now, with the slowdown, even they are grappling with the impact of their policies.

Even the local advocates are desperately trying to maintain their grasp on racial power:

Gustavo Torres, executive director of CASA of Maryland, said he's concerned that tensions over immigration will spread and intensify if large numbers of idle construction workers are not quickly absorbed by other services and industries. "We've seen workers leaving for other states for jobs in construction or agriculture," he said.

Torres argued for the need for job training programs to help workers make the transition into other sectors, saying he feared that "confrontation will accelerate further" if the slowdown worsens.

Thankfully, sanity is restored with the next paragraph:

"That's one of the dangers of importing lots of workers," said Ira Mehlmen, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which seeks to curb illegal immigration. "After their services are no longer required, you end up with them and with their families. "There isn't much reason for them to return home when services and other benefits are available."

Posted at 02:49 PM | Comments (7)

Tim Gaynor/Reuters: Democrats to save us from "nativists"

Tim Gaynor of Reuters offers "Nativists fan flames of U.S. immigration debate". And, it's even worse than the title might indicate. (Via this).

...The founder of the Emigration Party of Nevada is among a growing number of nativists from across the United States that have been stepping up direct action in recent months to make a stand on the issues of illegal immigration and border security.

The milder end of the spectrum includes the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, who spot for illegal entrants crossing the borders from Mexico and Canada, and councilors in towns and cities from California to Pennsylvania who vote to curb landlords from renting to undocumented immigrants...

He goes on to discuss the non-mild end of the spectrum with neoNazi, various supremacist groups, "gangs who battled newcomers on the streets of New York in the 1800s", and "the Ku Klux Klan's rants against Mexican immigrants in the last century". In Reuters' view, anyone who takes action to prevent illegal immigration is a "nativist" and just a step or two away from extremists and perhaps violence. Needless to say, this is guilt by association and simple name-calling. News sources that wish to remain objective shouldn't engage in this type of behavior, but then again, it's Reuters so what do you expect.

The article also quotes Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government. Reuters does not, of course, reveal that link.

Thankfully, Tim Gaynor reveals that help is on the way:

However, analysts caution that the groups are small and increasingly out of step with mainstream Americans, who elected a Democratic Congress on November 7 that promises a comprehensive approach to immigration combining tough enforcement with incentives for newcomers.

"The (nativists) show up at town meetings, they call talk radio shows and some of them even engage in acts of violence, but the elections are the ultimate poll," said Frank Sharry, the executive director of the National Immigration Forum think tank in Washington.

Previously:
Tim Gaynor/Reuters: "Democrats' win spurs hope of immigration revamp" (also quotes Sharry)
Tim Gaynor/Reuters, "experts", say fence is "impractical"

Posted at 03:33 PM | Comments (1)

Tom Brokaw, pro-illegal immigration hack

Tonight, Tom Brokaw is hosting "In the Shadow of the American Dream" on NBC. As a preview, he offers "Indisputable points in the immigration debate" (also here). The pro-illegal immigration points could be disputed, such as this:

In many parts of the country immigrants are doing the work Americans no longer want to do, especially the hard work of manual labor at construction sites.

I highly doubt that "want to do" comports with reality. Rather, Americans have been driven out of the market due to illegal aliens being willing to work for a lower wage or with lower safety requirements and also by forming networks. Here's just one example. He goes on to advocate for unnamed "urgent action in Congress" that sounds an awful like "comprehensive immigration reform." This page also disputes his various "indisputable points".

Obviously, Brokaw doesn't know what he's talking about, and he's simply a pro-illegal immigration hack and not a real journalist. Even the NYT's review admits that "this is no expose... [v]aried views are dutifully represented, but this is at heart a pro-immigrant program..."

Debbie Schlussel's review is even less kind. NewsBusters has a clip of his promotional appearance on the Today show and a discussion of his pro-amnesty statements, including his incorrect statement that remittances to Mexico are only $8 billion per year (they're actually >$20 billion). The Stein Reports' commenters have more.

If anyone knows anyone who's part of the Nielsen survey, please urge them to watch something else.

UPDATE: VDare comments here. Showing just how little he knows, the Washington Post's Tom Shales praises the propaganda piece, conflates "illegal aliens" with "Hispanic", and even says this:

President Bush, who likes to call himself a "compassionate person," certainly doesn't sound compassionate in an excerpt from a surly speech on immigration that he gave earlier this year.

If Tom Brokaw ever gives a speech near you, I urge you to try to publicly ask him a question about his "documentary", perhaps concentrating on one of his "indisputable" points. If a local reporter or similar interviews Brokaw, contact them and suggest they do the same or ask them why they didn't.

And, like Debbie, I suggest doing the same with his helpers: David Corvo (executive producer), Soraya Gage (producer), Joyce Cordero and Leonor Ayala (field producers), Liz Bowyer (editorial producer), Erika Beck (researcher).

Posted at 12:03 PM | Comments (6)

McCain, Kennedy, Gutierrez, Flake collaborating on immigration "reform", Part 2

Rachel Swarns of the New York Times offers "Bipartisan Effort to Draft Immigration Bill", about various Congressmen thinking they can pass immigration "reform" early next year. Most of this was already covered in the article linked to in McCain, Kennedy, Gutierrez, Flake collaborating on immigration "reform".

Unbelievably, they want to create an even more open borders version of the Senate bill. The latter had a three-tiered approach that treated illegal aliens differently depending on how long they'd been here. The version they're trying to create would do away with those tiers and basically offer amnesty to all. No illegal aliens would even need to leave the U.S. first to get their amnesty.

They also want to block financing for the 700 mile fence bill.

Of course, some of their ideas might be considered to be bargaining chips, but even after compromise what remains will be opposed by most Americans. The best outcome would be for them to try something like this and fall flat on their faces, which might allow us to discredit even more open borders hacks in the process.

And:

[Aides] said the bill might include incentives for illegal immigrants to leave the country.

That's certainly an interesting statement, but as could be expected Swarns doesn't explore it. If offering incentives to leave the country would work, why don't we try that first? Clearly, the putative U.S. elected officials involved in this scheme strongly support illegal immigration and want illegal aliens here now to stay.

As for the article, it's among other things internally inconsistent. The Hispanic vote myth is trotted out, and we're told that "reform" is a winner (including with the Graf/Hayworth canard), but we're also told that the schemers need to tread carefully, such as:

The House Democrats are concerned about protecting newly elected moderate and conservative Democrats, some of whom had campaigned against legalizing illegal immigrants.

Posted at 11:47 AM | Comments (1)

Nina Bernstein/NYT: Immigration enforcement equals fear

Our old favorite Nina Bernstein of the New York Times offers "Immigrants Go From Farms to Jails, and a Climate of Fear Settles In". She spends two screens painting a picture of upstate New York dairy farmers and their illegal alien employees living in a state of fear. The poor dear farmers are afraid one of their enemies is going to drop a dime on them to ICE. The poor oppressed illegal aliens are afraid of being taken away in shackles (if the report had audio, it would be of the sound of cattlecars). She even uses the phrase "harvest of fear" and makes a reference to "The Twilight Zone".

She also mentions - but doesn't explore - the role that political corruption plays in lack of immigration enforcement. Instead, she concentrates on the emotional aspects with the clear intent of promoting immigration "reform".

Here's the first paragraph:

As record-setting enforcement of immigration laws upends old, unspoken arrangements, a new climate of fear is sweeping through the rural communities of western and central New York.

It will take a real reporter - and not just a pro-illegal immigration hack - to explore those "unspoken arrangements" and to follow the money. As for Bernstein, this is all we get:

Now, more aggressive enforcement has disrupted a system of official winks, nods and paperwork that for years protected farmers from "knowingly" hiring the illegal immigrants who make up most of their work force.

If the NYT wants to be a real news sources, they'll dispatch someone else to look into those "winks [and] nods", and not someone who's part of the problem.

And, apparently someone's reading the papers:

Others, including the [New York Farm Bureau], pointed to the unusual intensification of the dairy investigation after [Rodney Brown who together with his wife Debbie are dairy farmers in Clifton Springs] was quoted in a Sept. 11 Associated Press account [presumably "Farmers: Harvest raids are badly timed" by Cara Anna which appears to have been rewritten here].

Others mentioned include Marshall Farms, Cliff DeMay, "a large private labor contractor", and:

Maureen Torrey, an 11th-generation grower and a director of the Federal Reserve Bank's Buffalo branch

Looking into the political corruption side of this issue is left as an exercise for a real news source.

Please write public *at* nytimes.com with your thoughts.

Posted at 01:21 PM | Comments (1)

Wall Street Journal not very Swift in support for illegal immigration

The WSJ comments on the recent Swift & Co. immigration raids in "Not Very Swift". As could be expected, they oppose the raids. Let's look at a couple of their statements to see where their priorities lie.

Immigration restrictionists would have us believe that harassing businesses like Swift, the world's second-largest beef and pork processor, helps make America safer. But so far the Swift raids haven't uncovered any al Qaeda cells, merely a bunch of hard-working people trying to feed their families. The operation involved more than 1,000 federal agents in six states. And of Swift's 15,000 or so employees, a grand total of 144 have been charged to date with misidentifying themselves to get hired.

Obviously, enforcing our laws isn't "harassing" and, while their operations were temporarily disrupted, only their workers were arrested and deported with the company itself so far escaping legal action. And, of course, those "hard-workers" don't work in isolation. Their presence fuels political corruption, they send money back home to Mexico and prop up that company's oligarchy, and so on and on. And, those who were using American's identities weren't just "misidentifying" themselves; they were obviously having a negative impact on the WSJ's fellow citizens (not that that means much to them). The Wall Street Journal also fails to note that wherever you have illegal alien workers, you also have those who come to prey on them, such as the paramilitary Central American gang members arrested last year in Marshalltown, Iowa.

Put another way, 1,000 federal agents that could have been focused on potential terrorists or other dangerous threats were instead focused on a meatpacking company that hires thousands of willing unskilled workers and pays them more than twice the minimum wage with full health benefits after six months. How's that for government efficiency?

Obviously, the WSJ is ignoring such things as those wages being much lower than they were before companies like Swift were allowed to employ illegal aliens, as well as all the subsidies that those workers are receiving from U.S. citizens such as mandatory educations for their children. And, there are plenty of willing Americans that are lining up out the door to take those jobs. The WSJ is obviously not thinking of them and would probably support child labor if they could get away with it.

Posted at 10:54 AM | Comments (2)

Karen Arenson/NYT: Columbia Minuteman speech disruptors charged

The NYT reports ("Columbia Charges Students With Violating Protest Rules") that the students involved in the fracas at that university where students and others rushed the stage where Jim Gilchrist of the Minuteman Project was speaking and unfurled banners will face unspecified punishment. The possibilities include "disciplinary warning, censure, suspension and dismissal".

It being the NYT, their version of the events does not seem to comport with my recollections:

Protesters unfurled a banner on stage during one speech, and were then attacked by the speaker's supporters, including some from outside Columbia.

If those "attacks" were done out of self-defense or out of concern for the safety of those speaking, is "attacked" really the correct word?

Posted at 11:57 PM | Comments (2)

George Bush's Christmas gift for railroaded Border Patrol agents

Ramos and Compean are two Border Patrol agents who appear to have been railroaded by our own government, perhaps to send a message to other BP agents that they shouldn't really enforce the law or perhaps to send a message to Mexico that president Bush isn't really serious about enforcing the law. Both have been sentenced to over 10 years in prison. Bush could pardon them, but with even his Attorney General denying having received a letter from Congressmen about the case, that seems less than likely. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher will soon be trying to give Bush a petition signed by 160,000 Americans, so perhaps that might do the trick. However, this will probably end up being what he gives them for Christmas:

Posted at 06:38 AM | Comments (4)

Immigration questions for Max Sawicky

Max Sawicky (of MaxSpeak) recently posted this entry which purports to smash several of the myths surrounding immigration. Unfortunately, he lumps all forms of immigration under the same banner, and he also only discusses financial-related issues. Thus, he doesn't really answer some of the even more perilous aspects of massive illegal immigration. So, here are a few questions he can try to answer next time:

1. The downsides to remittances include: creating an unnatural dependence between countries, encouraging the U.S. Federal Reserve and member banks to profit from illegal activity, and propping up the Mexican government.

2. Many of our "immigrants" come from Mexico, a country which used to own part of this country. 58% of Mexicans think the U.S. southwest (their "lost territories") rightfully belongs to Mexico. Only an ahistoric fool or a hack would try to downplay that major difference between current and past immigration.

3. Many companies profit from illegal immigration, and they donate money to politicians who support illegal immigration in one way or another. That is political corruption no matter how you want to look at it, and massive illegal immigration is leading to massive political corruption.

I look forward to Sawicky putting on price tag on those in a future post.

Related: An immigration challenge for Andrew Sullivan

Posted at 05:31 PM | Comments (5)

LULAC, Democratic Party, other illegal immigration supporters call for moratorium on deportations (Part 2)

At a news conference in San Antonio yesterday, illegal immigration supporters called for a halt to deportations until "comprehensive immigration reform" was passed. Michelle Roberts of the AP - or her editors - appears to have forgot to include a few juicy quotes and omitted one quote source entirely.

Jim Forsyth of Reuters quotes Rosa Rosales of LULAC saying this:

"We are demanding an end to these immigration raids, where they are targeting brown faces. That is major, major racial profiling, and that cannot be tolerated... ...Every labor-intensive industry including the hospitality, construction, agriculture and restaurant industries will be adversely impacted if these raids continue."

Obviously, LULAC is a very strong supporter of illegal immigration.

Then, we turn to Carla Vela, who Forsyth only describes as a Democratic Party activist. She's actually the Chair of the Democratic Party of Bexar County (home of San Antone). Their homepage is here, and there's more on their troubled group here and here. This representative of the Democratic Party is quoted as saying:

"This unfortunately reminds me of when Hitler began rounding up the Jews for no reason and locking them up... Now they're coming for the Latinos, who will they come for next?"

I urge everyone to attend meetings by national Democratic Party leaders and ask them to take a stance on her quote.

We're also informed that other groups at the San Antonio press conference included the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (has at least one indirect link to the Mexican government), the Hispanic National Bar Association, and the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (has at least one direct link to the Mexican government).

And, of course, no Reuters story would be complete without disinformatsia:

Anger at anti-immigrant rhetoric and measures is said to have hurt Republican candidates with Hispanic voters in November elections that saw the Democrats win a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate.

Posted at 09:23 AM | Comments (2)

Deval Patrick to rescind Mass cooperation on illegal immigration with DHS

Massachusetts governor-elect Deval Patrick is pledging to rescind Mitt Romney's order that would allow Mass state police to include the possibility that a suspect in another crime was an illegal alien in their investigations. This order would not allow police to detain people just suspected of being illegal aliens or performing similar functions.

As previously discussed, Patrick appears to be little more than a robot pre-programmed with Dem talking points, and he uttered them in this case. Specifically, he doesn't want MA troopers enforcing federal laws: they already have enough to do. Needless to say, neither the NYT (by Katie Zezima; link) nor the Boston Globe (by Andrea Estes; link) called him on those statements, and neither asked him why he thinks that deporting illegal alien criminals would increase rather than decrease the workload of state cops.

However, there is one difference between the nominally-independent papers. The Globe failed to note even more evidence that Patrick has absolutely no clue about the decisions he's making. The NYT notes this quote:

"I also understand the I.N.S. isn't interested in sharing their enforcement powers," he said, referring to the former immigration agency.

"Former", as in "going on four years now".

Slightly related:
Silvestre Reyes knows less about terrorists than many bloggers

Posted at 06:31 AM | Comments (2)

Illegal aliens, supporters call for moratorium on deportations (LULAC)

From our "pickpockets call for moratorium on laws against pickpocketing" file comes a trio of - possibly loosely coordinated - stories about illegal aliens or supporters of illegal immigration calling for a moratorium on raids and deportations until such time as "comprehensive immigration reform" is passed.

First up is the noxious League of United Latin American Citizens and their national president Rosa Rosales. Speaking in San Antonio, Michelle Roberts of AP quotes her as saying:

"We would like the raids to stop - a moratorium on them - until we can come up with comprehensive immigration reform."

What happens after "reform" is passed, millions of new illegal aliens come here, and raids - such as those presumably included in the "reform" bill - are conducted? Does anyone in their right mind think that LULAC would then approve of those raids? Is there anyone who cannot hear LULAC saying what they're saying now in that case? Should anything they say be trusted?

The same article quotes another illegal immigration supporter, "Jaime Martinez, president of the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, a division of the AFL-CIO". And, it includes this slight clue that the Bush administration is much closer to LULAC's thinking than that of the vast majority of Americans:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman Marc Raimondi said that although Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has made it clear that comprehensive immigration reform is necessary, the agency must enforce the law.

Next come the far-lefties, hiding behind selective readings of the Bible. A group of "community activists" spoke in Omaha:

"People were asking for mercy. It was not mercy. It was so painful. It was so sad," said Jorge Canelas, of the Cathedral of St. Mary's Church...

..."The Episcopal Church recognizes the importance of secure borders, but we also believe our nation must not abandon its commitment to principles of justness and fairness toward those who come to our shores for legitimate reasons," said the Rev. Joe Burnett, of the Bishop of the Northeast Episcopal Diocese...

..."When you disrupt a family, you disrupt the lives of children," said Tom Harvey, of Omaha Public Schools...

..."We need the people who migrate here. We need their culture. We need the rich gifts they bring. We depend upon that so that our culture continues to grow in diversity," said the Rev. Andrew Alexander, of Creighton University...

Finally, Lyanne Melendez of KGO-TV offers the not-at-all coherent report "Day Laborers Denounce Recent Immigration Raids". If illegal aliens are opposed to enforcement of our laws, where does the problem lie? Their news director Kevin Keeshan has a blog, so let's all clue him in: newsdirectorblog.abc7news.com

UPDATE: Here's more from Rosa Rosales and from Carla Vela, Chair of the Democratic Party of Bexar County.

Posted at 03:02 AM | Comments (2)

Bryan Caplan descends into self-parody on immigration and... donuts

Bryan Caplan - along with TCS/Insty fave Arnold Kling - is one of the contributors to "EconLog", a libertarian/"free" market-oriented site that, like other libertarians, can't seem to understand how massive illegal immigration violates the supposed libertarian support for national defense and their supposed opposition to subsidies.

In his latest post, Caplan has - according to this - descended into self-parody, and I concur. While not specifically concerning the illegal variety of immigration, he supports immigration from Cambodia... because Cambodians are good at making fresh donuts:

...In L.A., independent shops with fresh doughnuts are the rule. What gives? ...After learning a bit about the industry, I advanced a simple explanation: Los Angeles has Cambodian immigrants to thank for its happy situation.

Thankfully, commenter "superdestroyer" provides some counterpoint to Caplan's starry-eyed blather. And, I join in with a link to my Jobs for South Asia satire.

If Caplan would like to be taken seriously, he might consider approaching some of the downsides of what he's promoting in a future post.

Posted at 05:36 PM | Comments (3)

No Santa For Hazleton

Some wacky illegal immigration supporter has started the satire site nosantaforhazleton.com:

The people of Hazleton, PA are proud to announce a citizen-organized public awareness campaign called "No Santa for Hazleton." The campaign will use Santa Claus' status as America's most-loved illegal worker to demonstrate Hazleton's new "zero tolerance" policy toward illegal aliens. [...further support for illegal immigration deleted...]

Jon Hurdle of Reuters jumps on the fun, offering "Hoax Web site jabs anti-illegal immigrant U.S. town". It must feel great to have your propaganda picked up by an even greater propaganda source.

Unfortunately, those behind the site aren't brave enough to reveal their identities either on the site or through their WHOIS (see melbourneit.com.au) which is cloaked using "Private Domain Registration" (see concentric.com/privatereg.php) which may lead people to think they're located in Emeryville, CA when in fact that's simply a mail drop. There are certainly good reasons to hide WHOIS info in the case of, say, political prosecution, but in this case why should they (presumably) be ashamed? They aren't advocating anything reprehensible, right?

Their video is here and they even created a special user account just for this project. The only thing to be gleaned from that is that they joined two months ago.

The site was dugg here (digg.com/users/joein3d/news/dugg), but he probably found it through youtube. That user appears to be Joe Walsh (joein3d.mit.edu) who's involved with video. Oddly enough, "joezane" also dropped the link at Stephen Colbert's forum (tinyurl.com/y4xk83), and that may be the same joezane who has a myspace account (tinyurl.com/ycjke2). Certainly, I have a bunch of sites and post messages here and there using different names, so none of that should indicate that he has any connection to the site whatsoever.

UPDATE: MSNBC prints the Reuters story under the title "Hoax Web site jabs anti-illegal immigrant town" (link). However, a search for the title of this post in google shows that the title as indexed was "Web site takes swipe at nativist town".

Posted at 03:24 PM | Comments (2)

Swift and Company sued under RICO Act

From this:

A spokesman for Swift & Co. says a lawsuit filed recently by eighteen former Swift & Co. employees is "completely without merit." The $23-million lawsuit alleges that the meat packing company conspired to manipulate and depress the labor market and wages by hiring illegal immigrants.

The lawsuit, filed late Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, alleges that defendants including Swift and its owners, HM Capital Partners LLC in Dallas -- formerly Hicks, Muse, Tate & Furst -- engaged in an "enterprise that grossly affected commerce through a pattern of racketeering activity" in violation of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act...

I heard one of the lawyers on KFI's John & Ken Show a day or two ago. Most of the plaintiffs are Mexican-Americans and legal Hispanic immigrants. However, he didn't seem to sure of the suit, and J & K seemed to think it might be a bit of a fishing expedition.

Posted at 02:11 PM | Comments (2)

New Haven's John DeStefano gets illegal immigration Christmas card

New Haven, Connecticut mayor John DeStefano is linked to collaborators with the Mexican government. Thus, it shouldn't come as a surprise that earlier today he received a "giant Christmas card and a call for immigrants' rights" (link):

New Haven based "Unidad Latina en Accion" made a special Christmas delivery to City Hall today.

The group made up of illegal immigrants and advocates for immigration rights handed over a Christmas card to Mayor John DeStefano. Inside the card were their Christmas wishes for the New Year.

First and foremost, making into law a "general order" that allows police officers to disregard an illegal immigrants' status when that person reports a crime. The "order" goes into formal affect tomorrow...

...The grassroots group for immigrants' rights thanked Mayor Destefano for signing off on the police department's new policy to look the other way when it comes to immigration status...

Posted at 01:11 PM | Comments (2)

Swift slabs of pro-illegal immigration propaganda

Various news sources have been working overtime to spin the recent Swift & Company immigration raids as a case of the evil ICE (called in at least one article "INS") oppressing poor undocumented workers. The motivations for this may vary and may include: those illegal aliens make money for persons linked to those media sources, or those sources look on them as a market, or they're trying to support the Democrats and the "comprehensive immigration reform" with which they're linked, or out of ethnic solidarity. In the case of local reports, the papers may be thinking of the "local economy".

An early report from Roxana Hegeman of the Associated Press was previously discussed.

Others include:

* "Immigrants' Families Figuring Out What to Do After Federal Raids" by Julia Preston/New York Times (link; discussed here; write public *at* nytimes.com)

* "Mom, kids spend 3 days in agony" by Jennifer Jacobs/Des Moines Register (link; discussed here)

* "Food, items donated to raid families" by Dan Browning/Minneapolis Star-Tribune (link; discussed here; the original title of the article may have been "A helping hand after a week of fear")

* "Raid rattles workers and life along Hwy. 60" by Chao Xiong and Richard Meryhew/Minneapolis Star-Tribune (link; discussed here)

Posted at 11:26 AM | Comments (5)

Pro-illegal immigration ACLU meddling in Butler County, Ohio

To the best of my knowledge, every single immigration-related matter that the ACLU has been involved in does not involve support for our laws but rather supports massive illegal immigration. Continuing that trend, the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio says they're going to act as "watchdogs" over Butler County Sheriff Richard K. Jones due to his request to the DHS that would allow him to detain suspected illegal aliens:

...The ACLU has requested copies of the agreement [with the DHS] from both the sheriff's office and ICE.

"Sheriff Jones has already demonstrated hostility towards the Hispanic population in Butler County," ACLU of Ohio Staff Attorney Carrie Davis said in a statement. "It is important to review the document and discern what he can and cannot do under this agreement and ensure he stays within those boundaries."

Davis criticized the erection earlier this year of billboards around the county featuring Jones threatening local businesses that hire illegal immigrants and his detention of 18 suspected illegal immigrants in May after an altercation at a construction site near Seven Mile.

Neighboring Warren County will be making a similar request to the DHS.

Some brave reporter somewhere should ask the ACLU why they're always on the side of illegal immigration, as well as asking about their indirect link to the Mexican government.

Posted at 08:46 AM | Comments (4)

Recovering useful idiot immigration test for liberals

To my liberal readers:

You catch more flies, etc. But, then again, sometimes you have to just come right and say uncomfortable things: many liberals are useful idiots when it comes to immigration matters.

To help said afflicted persons recover, I suggest reading the report "Immigration phenomenon, not problem, Mexico vice consul tells AJC gathering" from Deborah Moon of the Jewish Review concerning a speech that that consul gave in Portland. This is a good example because one would have to be very deluded to take what she says at face value:

..."We don't like to promote emigration," said [Estela Garcia Leon, vice consul of the Consulate of Mexico in Portland], of the Mexican government. "We don't like to see our human capital go away."

Still, Leon said that the Mexican government considers immigration not as a problem, but as a natural phenomenon that occurs around the world. While the phenomenon has caused problems for both Mexico and the United States, Leon said, "We need to talk about it and manage it together."

Recognizing the U.S. need for increased border security in the post-9/11 world, Leon said border issues also require the two nations to work together...

...Leon said that if the U.S. government would authorize a sufficient number of visas for Mexicans seeking to enter this country, then people could enter by the front door instead of the back door, thereby decreasing human trafficking and reducing the impact of foreign labor on U.S. wages since legal workers would not undercut domestic wages...

Do you notice anything slightly unusual about the article? Yes, that's correct, Moon only acted as a transcription service and, at least based on her report, didn't ask any questions.

And, do you completely believe everything Leon said? Or, do you think there's the possibility that she was lying through her teeth? Is she playing you for a sucker?

Can you compare the last paragraph quoted above to a similar request? Do you agree with her economic analysis? (For extra points, compare the last paragraph to a type of crime.)

Posted at 05:49 AM | Comments (3)

Greeley, Colorado encouraging illegal immigration

Greeley, Colorado is home to Swift and Company, which was recently raided by ICE. Now, according to this article by Joanna Larez, the "Greeley Human Relations Commission" has given $2,000 to the "Our Lady of Peace Catholic Church fund for families hurt by the raid." They would have given more, but they haven't yet cashed the grant check from "The Colorado Trust to begin planning action to build a stronger community with good relationships with immigrants". Where exactly the money came from is not stated; it could have come from private funds, or perhaps city money.

This is a very small amount in the scheme of things, but it's the thought that counts. If they gave the money together with bus fare for illegal aliens to leave the city, that would be one thing. However, their gift will allow those illegal aliens to remain in their city. The ultimate beneficiaries of the gift will be the employers of those illegal aliens, who will continue to have a ready supply of cheap, illegal labor. On a hopeful note, the 50+ comments on the story are mostly highly negative.

Whether that commission is an actual city agency isn't clear, but it:

consists of nine members appointed by the City Council, and representatives from the University of Northern Colorado, Aims Community College, and School District 6.

And, everyone hold hands and sing their Mission Statement:

To promote respect, understanding, appreciation and harmony among the members of our community by acting as a forum for advocacy of equality, fairness and celebrating diversity.

Other usual suspects quoted in the article are Sylvia Martinez and Maria Flores of Latinos Unidos.

Posted at 01:30 AM | Comments (3)

Roxana Hegeman/AP: the $5 Swift sausage scare

Roxana Hegeman of the Associated Press offers "Immigration raids may affect meat prices". Per her, the only way to keep prices low is to allow companies to flagrantly violate the law:

When hordes of police and immigration officials stormed meatpacking plants in six states this week, the illegal workers arrested may not have been the only victims.

Consumers and the industry itself may be feeling the repercussions in a shortage of meatpackers, higher wage costs and, ultimately, higher prices for the beef that lands on America's tables at home and in restaurants...

Oh heavens no. I guess if I want to avoid the coming twenty dollar hamburgers (together with a ten dollar salad), I'll have to go to a Chinese restaurant or something. And, of course, one might think that in this case the victims are those who had their identity stolen, as well as those who were forced to subsidize Swift's labor, as well as every other U.S. citizen that's been forced to put up with our government's failure to enforce our laws. Hegeman thinks different: it's the government that's guilty, with the illegal laborers being the "victims".

Continuing on, she features the thoughts of guest worker program hack Mark Reed "former immigration regional director who now runs his own consulting business, Border Management Strategies, in Tucson, Ariz":

"The meatpacking industry has become dependent on an unauthorized labor force, and it is not good government to destroy an entire industry. In some way, there is going to be a meeting of the minds..." Every labor-intensive industry -- the hotel industry, the construction industry, agriculture -- will be similarly impacted, he said.

If the meatpacking business can't do business within our laws, then they should go out of business. Supporting our laws - and avoiding government corruption - is far, far more important.

Posted at 10:14 PM | Comments (9)

What were the Swift & Co. illegal aliens thinking?

The usual sources are complaining about the recent Swift & Co raid breaking up mixed-status families (illegal aliens parents, U.S. citizen children). My brief glance at their statements failed to find anyone calling those parents to task for their extreme irresponsibility. Those illegal aliens weren't kidnapped and brought to the U.S. In the vast majority of cases, they came here willingly and fully aware that what they were doing is contrary to our laws. Then, they have children.

Shouldn't they bear some responsibility in this matter? Should they have put their children in such a situation? What would you think of yourself if you did such a thing? Do some people perhaps have a lower opinion of them than of Americans, thinking somehow they're not so bright or something? Should we hold them to a lower standard? Should we encourage future cases of people coming here and expecting to stay as long as they have U.S. citizen children? (Perhaps the Democratic Party could make that a plank in their next platform.)

This situation is similar to the propaganda designed to support the DREAM Act. In none of those reports have I seen a reporter try to interview the parents and see what they were thinking.

Posted at 03:47 PM | Comments (1)

"Meatpacking raids: A victim's story" (Swift, identity theft)

Surprisingly, MSNBC offers this:

Theresa Sanchez was expecting a $5,400 tax refund when she opened a letter from the IRS in January 2003. Instead, she got a bill demanding payment of taxes on $120,000 in undeclared wages. Someone using her name and Social Security number had earned the money through a series of jobs dating back to 1996 and had not paid any taxes on the income, the letter said.

Sanchez complained to the agency and to the Federal Trade Commission that her identity had been stolen, and was being used by someone to gain employment. Nonetheless, more than two years later, in April 2005, a woman walked into the Swift & Co. meatpacking plant in Greeley, Colo., and used Theresa Sanchez's name and Social Security number to get a job...

More on these victims here, here, here, here, and here.

Posted at 10:53 PM | Comments (5)

PBS NewsHour's Soviet-style immigration coverage

The PBS NewsHour is no longer an accurate source of information on immigration but is now simply a Soviet-style propaganda source. The latest example is the Gwen Ifill "report" on the Swift packing raid, which featured two sequential guests.

The first was Mark Lauritsen of the United Food and Commercial Workers union. He basically cried and whined his support for illegal immigration, his support for "comprehensive immigration reform", and his attempts to pass the buck. Ifill did not ask him questions in any way tough enough to blow his various statements out of the water.

OK, fine I think, hopefully they'll have someone on the other side blow both of them out of the water. Let's go to the transcript:

GWEN IFILL: And now to Julie Myers, assistant secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Your response?

JULIE MYERS, Immigration and Customs Enforcement: Well, I agree. We need comprehensive immigration reform.

Note to PBS: this is how things are handled in totalitarian regimes: a "debate" between people on the same side. If you wish to have any credibility, at the very least have a third person available that actually supports our immigration laws and will let your viewers know what's really going on. Without that person, you're misleading your viewers and broadcasting propaganda.

Please everyone send a message to PBS at this link: pbs.org/newshour/letters.html

Posted at 07:29 PM | Comments (1)

Will Rod Blagojevich pro-illegal immigration scheme violate law?

In November 2005, Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich - a very strong supporter of illegal immigration - created the "New Americans Immigrant Policy Council" (press release link) to come up with ways to deal with immigrants in his state. The report from the NAIPC has been released, as has a report from a similar panel. Blago has endorsed their findings, but has not committed any money. And, whether any money will be found is still to be determined.

As even the WaPo discloses ("Ill. Governor To Announce New Benefits For Immigrants" by Kari Lydersen), these benefits would be for both legal and illegal immigrants:

Key points of the New Americans program include increasing the number of dual-language schools, English-as-a-second-language programs and bilingual staff members at state agencies, as well as providing job training for skilled and unskilled immigrants. The program is described as the first of its kind nationwide.

Tom Vilsack and Mike Huckabee might beg to differ; the "welcoming centers" proposed in one of the reports matches those offered in Iowa. There are only two points worth noting in the WaPo coverage: that one of the members of one of the panels is "former Immigration and Naturalization Service commissioner Doris Meissner", and this:

Susan Tully, national field director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said the program will put Blagojevich in violation of U.S. immigration law... "He does not have the right under the Constitution, even as governor of Illinois, to grant benefits to people who haven't been cleared by immigration and customs agents," she said.

The article "Aid for immigrants proposed" by Oscar Avila has more on the proposals, but like the WaPo report it doesn't offer much backstory.

Now, let's look at the seamy underbelly of Blago's scheme.

The 11/2005 press release doesn't differentiate between illegal and legal immigrants. And:

The Governor shall appoint a 15-person New Americans Immigrant Policy Council comprised of the chairs of the Joint Legislative Immigrant and Refugee Policy Task Force, a representative of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, and other appropriate parties.

Like Blago, the ICIRR is a strong supporter of illegal immigration. They were involved in the Jim Oberweis smear. And, they helped organize some of the Chicago illegal immigration marches; Blago spoke at at least one of those. Not only that, but after the first march their president Juan Salgado spoke at Los Pinos, the Mexican White House. And, their president is Josh Hoyt.

I look forward to the WaPo and the Chicago Tribune disclosing who Blago is affiliated with.

Posted at 11:08 AM | Comments (4)

Swift packing immigration raid conducted; send Bush a cookie!

Yesterday ICE conducted the latest in a series of what are most likely show immigration raids, this time of Swift & Co.'s meatpacking plants in various cities. A roundup is here. "Liberals"/illegal immigration supporters weigh in with more links here and here.

The last link even has a stern condemnation from Teddy Kennedy (D-Grand Marnier):

"I am deeply disturbed by the reports I have received today about the actions taken by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to apprehend individuals and cart them away for processing without any opportunity to assert their rights or contact their families and attorneys. These men and women are simply workers and not terrorists or dangerous criminals and they should not be treated as such. No one denies the need for additional enforcement at the border and at US worksites. We support efforts by ICE officials to enforce our immigration laws, but do not condone enforcement efforts that mistreat workers and violate their legal rights... Comprehensive immigration reform is good for our economy and our security, and it's consistent with our values and our heritage as a nation of immigrants. Today's enforcement action is the most recent reminder that our immigration system is irreparably broken and needs to be urgently fixed."

The cities include Greeley, Colorado (home of Swift), Grand Island (Nebraska), Cactus (Texas), Hyrum (Utah), Marshalltown (Iowa) and Worthington (Minnesota).

Marshalltown has a Gov. Tom Vilsack link. Grand Island has a tangential link to former Nebraska governor (and current Ag Secretary) Mike Johanns.

Cactus was the subject of a three-part series from the Dallas Morning News; the last is here and the first is here.

If I seem blase, it's because I am. Whatever the motivations behind these raids, they're too little too late. And, they may have been conducted as an attempt to show that the Bush administration is serious about enforcement, as a way of getting "comprehensive immigration reform". There's probably very little chance that Teddy Kennedy and Bush were actively colluding on the raid, but both are serving the same master: "comprehensive immigration reform" (i.e., a massive amnesty).

Such raids need to be encouraged, but the Bush administration also needs to know that we're on to what is most likely a game they're playing. My original thought was to send a cookie to the White House as a bit of positive enforcement, but that's probably not a good idea.

However, perhaps some brave soul could send the White House a McDonalds gift certificate. Apparently the smallest amount you can get online is a $5 book with five certificates, although one of their restaurants might have smaller denominations. I'd suggest sending the smallest coupon possible (preferably something good for only an ice cream cone or half a McRib or something), thanking them for their however belated attempts to enforce our laws. And, informing them in the most condescending-but-polite terms possible that if they keep doing a good job they'll get the rest of the book. (And, of course, if they can't keep the cert themselves they should give it to one of the homeless people just a few blocks from the White House). That plan is only for the brave, of course, and don't tell them I gave you the idea.

Perhaps someone like Neal Boortz or Glenn Beck could pick up this idea and run with it.

Posted at 05:41 AM | Comments (4)

D.A. King needs money to fight illegal immigration

D.A. King of the Dustin Inman Society has been a strong campaigner in opposition to illegal immigration, especially in Georgia. That state is rife with questionable persons such as Pedro Marin, Sam Zamarripa, and Teodoro Maus. Now, he's asking for donations so he can continue the fight against those anti-American forces.

Posted at 08:35 PM | Comments (1)

Stillmore: The Crider/SPLC/MSM plantation

Dahleen Glanton of the Chicago Tribune offers no less than four (and maybe more) articles about September's ICE raid of the Crider Poultry plant in Stillmore, Georgia. The raid resulted in hundreds of illegal aliens leaving the city, and that resulted in pro-illegal immigration propaganda from Russ Bynum of the AP, Reason Magazine, and Patrik Jonsson of the CSM, as well as a lawsuit from the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government.

The Glanton article that should read before the others is "New hires, most black, find a grim daily grind". Not only does that reveal more about Crider and the city than the previous articles, it also makes some of Glanton's other coverage a bit questionable:

Crider officials are scrambling to find workers. Over the last decade, the company gradually replaced African-American employees with Hispanics. Now the company has again turned to blacks and anyone else it can find, including about 40 felons from a detention center and 30 homeless men from a mission, to keep running...

[An unemployed welder from Douglas 100 miles away describes how a recruiter hired him to work at the plant:] "He said they had rooms for us and I was thinking at least a Holiday Inn. But when I got here, it was a different story."

The man who hired him was a private contractor, and the free room turned out to be in barracks owned by Crider. Inside the filthy two-bedroom units, men and women sleep on mattresses on the floor and toilets overflow. Crider officials said they plan to shut the barracks.

The barracks used to be filled with illegal immigrants. Now the tenants are all African-Americans. "When we pulled in here, I felt like I would be used and discriminated against," Stanford said. "I felt degraded. I've never lived like this and I can't wait to get out."

Why would anyone support such living and working conditions? Yet, that's exactly what those who've taken Crider's side in this matter are doing: Russ Bynum of the AP, Reason Magazine, Patrik Jonsson of the CSM, and the SPLC are all implicitly supporting those "filthy" barracks.

The article "Raid exposes ethnic fault lines" informs us that the town had to raise $1 million for a new sewer system to deal with the influx of illegal aliens, a subsidy that Reason Magazine should be especially proud of implicitly supporting.

The article "For immigrants, raid dims hope for a better life" doesn't mention the "filthy" barracks described in the first article.

Finally, the article "Raid stirs aid effort as lawsuit seeks relief" has more on the suit:

...Last month, the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a lawsuit against the federal government on behalf of five Hispanic U.S. citizens who said they were harassed during the raid. The suit seeks monetary damages and a court order preventing future raids in the U.S.

...Another plaintiff, David Robinson, 48, earned $115,000 a year renting trailers to Crider's immigrant workers. Since the raid, his income has been cut in half. Robinson, who is white, was so enraged by the raid that he flew an American flag upside down on his property for a week.

In his view, he has done nothing wrong.

"I suspected they were illegal, but there is no way to know for sure," said Robinson. "When they go to Wal-Mart, nobody tries to find out if they are legal before they sell to them. I'm just providing a service."

Posted at 05:29 AM | Comments (2)

Anne Taylor Fleming not on immigration

Anne Taylor Fleming is an author and regular essayist for PBS' NewsHour. Tonight's essay discussed the growing gap between the rich and the super rich on one hand, and the large number of non-rich persons on the other. It's not that notable for its content, only that which she keeps forgetting to mention.

In tonight's show, she discussed making annual pilgramages to Beverly Hills to do window-shopping, and was shocked that a purse was being sold for $28,000. She informed us that Los Angeles has more millionaires than any other U.S. city. Then, it cut to a shot of her on perhaps Broadway downtown (or perhaps on one of the streets in the Wilshire area) standing in front of a Hispanic boutique discussing how there are hundreds of thousands of very poor people in the same city. Something vaguely multicultural followed.

In a show from some years ago, she discussed how some of the poorest cities in either California or the U.S. are located in the South East L.A. area, specifically Maywood, Cudahy, etc.

In the first case and if I recall in the second, she did not mention the predominant reason there are so many poor people in those areas: massive immigration, especially of the illegal variety. She also did not look into the correlation between the gap mentioned in the first report and said massive immigration. I suspect there's a large degree of causation involved as well.

If ATF is really concerned about these issues, perhaps she can make up for the NewsHour's pro-illegal immigration, pro-amnesty bias by discussing these matters in a more complete detail than can be found in their other coverage.

Posted at 08:04 PM | Comments (2)

Bill Richardson collaborating with OAS on immigration; Foreign Agent?

From the AFP:

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, a former UN ambassador, was named as the Organization of American States' special envoy on migration in an effort to improve US-Latin American dialogue.

..."The migration issue is key to improving relations (between Latin America and the United States," Richardson, 59, said at a news conference alongside OAS Secretary General Jose Miguel Insulza.

...Richardson, whose state borders Mexico, rejected plans backed by President George W. Bush to build a huge fence along the US-Mexico border to stop the flow of illegal immigration.

Instead, he called for comprehensive reform to regularize undocumented workers.

"Two things must take place. One, a plan to legalize the 12 million (illegal) immigrants in the United States, and I think that it is important to improve border security," he said, pointing to the need for increased patrols and more cooperation with Mexico.

(For those who don't follow this issue closely, the AFP was very misleading above. Bush is as strong a supporter of "comprehensive reform" as Richardson, and he only signed the fence bill reluctantly.)

Richardson also says that he knows Daniel Ortega and Hugo Chavez and he's willing to speak with them. Unlike others, I'll give him a pass on that, but I will second the idea that the governor of a U.S. state should not be representing a non-U.S. body, especially one that supports activities contrary to our laws namely illegal immigration. Perhaps New Mexico citizens could start a drive to make him register as a Foreign Agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

Related:
ACLU claims U.S. violating human rights obligations (OAS)
Mexico, 27 OAS nations declare opposition to border fence

Posted at 03:32 AM | Comments (4)

Texas gov Rick Perry: no full fence, yes to anchor babies, guest workers

From this:

...Republican Gov. Rick Perry earned applause from the crowd [at a meeting of the Texas Border Coalition] when he said strategic fencing along the border makes sense but the idea of a complete wall or fence is "preposterous."

Instead, he wants the federal government to establish a guest-worker program that will allow the government to track workers, he said.

...Perry was asked after his speech whether it was a good or bad idea to do away with citizenship as a birthright [via proposed Texas legislation].

"I think any of those types of legislation that create divisions are bad," he said. "We need to look at ways to be bringing people together rather than driving wedges between them."

Now, compare his quote with that from State Rep. Veronica Gonzales, D-McAllen:

"That's just a ridiculous bill and I hope it does not see a debate on the floor, because what's going to happen is it's going to become extremely divisive..."

Cats and dogs working together, or could it be that they're both cats?

She also says she'll fight these bills with the help of the Texas Association of Business and the Mexican American Legislative Caucus.

In related Perry news:
Trans Texas Corrider master plan released
Suzanne Gamboa/AP on immigration ads
Schwarzenegger, Perry, Napolitano, Richardson urge "comprehensive" immigration reform
Rick Perry on immigration, Trans-Texas Corridor

Posted at 06:25 PM | Comments (2)

McCain, Kennedy, Gutierrez, Flake collaborating on immigration "reform"

Jerry Kammer of the Copley News Service offers "Immigrant legislation strategy is plotted" which, while it has its problems, is surpring in that it's not completely biased towards "reform":

Two of the most liberal members of Congress met with two of their most conservative colleagues this week to revive immigration legislation that passed the Senate but was throttled by House Republican leaders who resisted its attempt to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants.

"The plan is to bring the bill up in late winter," said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a conservative stalwart who attended the meeting in the office of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. The other participants were Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill.

If anyone can put the "u" back in collaborateur, it's the last. More on him here.

One of the problems with the article is this:

That enforcement-heavy approach is fine with immigration advocates as long as it is part of a package that provides permanent legal status to those who are beckoned across the border by agriculture, restaurant, construction, landscaping and janitorial jobs.

Unfortunately, all of those "immigration advocates" currently strongly support illegal immigration. They will not stop that support if they get "reform". Moreover, if they get "reform" they'll have even more political and financial power and they'll be even more effective at supporting illegal immigration.

Posted at 01:38 PM | Comments (2)

Los Angeles Times backs Richardson's opposition to border fence

The Los Angeles Times offers the unsigned editorial (perhaps written by Andres Martinez) "Off the fence", which discusses New Mexico governor Bill Richardson's immigration speech. They call it "thoughtful" and a "rebuke to Republican immigrant bashers". Obviously, that's muddled thinking, but that's what you expect from the LAT. BR's speech was in support of illegal immigration, not the legal variety. And, supporting our immigration laws isn't "bashing".

Then:

[The fence] would merely shift the strain on the system elsewhere and fail to address the 45% of illegal immigrants who enter legally but overstay their visas.

They willfully ignore the deterrent effect the fence would provide, and I don't think anyone has said that the fence will prevent visa overstays because, obvious to all except the LAT, those are two separate issues. Something else can be done about that, and, while the LAT doesn't understand this, both that and the fence can be used at the same time (see: walking, chewing gum).

After the obligatory Dobbs bashing (he's "CNN's millionaire working-class hero"), we're informed that BR has "unusual credibility on the issue" and:

It wasn't long ago that restrictionists were singing his praises for declaring a state of emergency along the border and calling in his state's National Guard to patrol it.

I can't speak for other "restrictionists", but my August 12, 2005 entry discussing his plan started out with the phrase "New Mexico's Bill Richardson is pro-open borders and pro-racial solidarity... making this report a bit interesting, but not really all that much."

Finally, the LAT hedges:

Certainly the governor isn't right about every one of his proposals, and how his speech will affect his presidential aspirations remains to be seen. But he couldn't be more timely in reminding his party that comprehensive immigration reform is no less urgent now that Democrats control Congress.

The Democrats should indeed pick up the banner and run with it. Then, they should give us a chance to discredit sources like BR and the LAT as they fail miserably.

Posted at 12:34 PM | Comments (3)

Alan Colmes, immigration lightweight

The "Immigration Watchdog" appeared on Hannity & Colmes tonight to discuss reconquista matters. He needs to learn to filibuster a bit better, because liberal lightweight Alan Colmes was able to keep interrupting him and at the end mocked him over his mention of the North American Union. At the appropriate moment (after Colmes had disputed his statement that the majority of Mexicans thing this is rightfully their land), IW should have told Colmes that his source was a Zogby poll conducted in Mexico.

IW did get in that Antonio Villaraigosa and Cruz Bustamante are former members of MEChA, but one of the key facts he should have mentioned is that part of the problem is the "liberal" infrastructure, including Colmes himself. Rather than looking into these matters, they try to downplay them (Colmes), or they ignore or even completely lie about them (the Los Angeles Times, for instance).

Posted at 09:55 PM | Comments (1)

Bill Richardson: Dems should "get rid of" border fence

New Mexico governor and possible presidential candidate Bill Richardson continues his outreach to the 5% or so of U.S. citizens who support illegal immigration with his thoughts that the recently passed border fence "gets in the way" of U.S.-Mexico relations, and:

"The fence is very unpopular on the border in Texas and New Mexico, in Chihuahua... So one of the most significant and constructive acts the U.S. Congress should take is to get rid of it."

He said this after meeting with the leaders of the state of Chihuahua, which is located in Mexico, which is not the U.S. Apparently Richardson is unclear on that fact.

Tomorrow he'll be speaking at Georgetown University, so if you know anyone in the area please urge them to turn out and protest his appearance with flyers and posters pointing out his strong opposition to our most basic laws.

Posted at 08:53 PM | Comments (3)

Federal Reserve is completely corrupt (Directo a Mexico)

The U.S. Federal Reserve is encouraging and profiting from illegal immigration by tapping into the remittances market (money sent from workers in the U.S. back to their home countries).

A significant portion of the money sent to Mexico was earned by illegal aliens who were involved with the illegal activity associated with illegal immigration: illegally entering the U.S., document fraud, ID theft, hiring an illegal alien, etc.

Now, Judicial Watch has obtained some of the Fed's marketing materials (PDF file) associated with the Fed's "Direct to Mexico" scheme. Those materials include a poster, a brochure, and the text of a radio ad (all in Spanish). And, in the PDF they give a chart of the number of "Migrants" in each U.S. state, as well as the number of "Migrants" coming to the U.S. from various Mexican states. Needless to say, the word illegal or even undocumented doesn't appear anywhere.

It's bad enough when small banks have tried to profit from illegal immigration. When the top levels of the government do it, it indicates an extremely dangerous situation. If they are able to do this, what else will they do?

I haven't been able to find exactly who can be contacted in this matter; the Fed's Board of Governors would probably be the group that approved this scheme. Contacting them might be an option, but the best bet might be to contact the members of the House Committee on Financial Services' Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee (financialservices.house.gov/members.asp?comm=4).

Posted at 12:21 PM | Comments (1)

Mike Huckabee is Bush++ (sanctimony,support for illegal immigration,white guilt)

The possibility mounts that Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee is a cruel practical joke, as we're informed that:

...the nation is being given a chance to make up for past racism by the way it handles the influx of Hispanics.

Huckabee, a Republican who is considering a run for president in 2008, said Arkansas has made progress on racial justice and has a fresh opportunity to do the right thing in the way it welcomes the growing Hispanic population.

"One of the great challenges facing us is that we do not commit the same mistakes with our growing Hispanic population that we did with African Americans 150 years ago and beyond. We're still paying the price for the pathetic manner in which this country handled that," Huckabee said at a meeting of the Political Animals Club in Little Rock. The club meets monthly to hear from political figures and experts.

"I think frankly the Lord is giving us a second chance to do better than we did before," Huckabee said.

If he actually believes that, he's nuts. If he has an extreme case of white guilt, he should deal with it personally and not impose it on the rest of us.

If he's just faking it, he's trying to smear those who oppose illegal immigration as racists and trying to hide support for illegal immigration behind religion. Either way, he's not only not qualified to be president, he's not qualified for any elected office.

Previously:
Mike Huckabee disses Americans, Mexicans, promotes illegal immigration
Mike Huckabee: opposition to "comprehensive" immigration reform isn't racist
Molly Hennessy-Fiske/LAT promotes corruption in Arkansas; Huckabee
Mexican consulate coming to Little Rock
Arkansas Republican governor Mike Huckabee and the "underground economy"
Arkansas' Bob Caudle doesn't pull any punches
Arkansas' Huckabee, Tyson Foods, LULAC all aligned

Posted at 11:56 AM | Comments (4)

"Tom Brokaw Reports" on illegal immigration (December 26)

The day after Christmas, NBC News will offer an hour-long show entitled "Tom Brokaw Reports: In the Shadow of the American Dream". (Expect to hear the word "illlllegal" repeatedly.) It will probably be mostly biased, offering heartwarming anecdotes in the place of disclosing facts, but we shall see:

The hour-long documentary follows a booming economy attracting illegal workers willing to do unskilled labor, questioning what happens to American culture and America's laws when hundreds of thousands of people enter the country illegally. Brokaw interviews police, teachers, doctors, residents, and illegal immigrants to help explain the impact of illegal immigration on America. He also sits down with Congressman Tom Tancredo, a Republican from Colorado who has been out front in his opposition to illegal immigration.

UPDATE: The show's purpose has been revealed, see "Tom Brokaw, pro-illegal immigration hack" for the details.

Posted at 12:23 PM | Comments (1)

Is Michele Marcucci/Oakland Tribune biased?

Michele R. Marcucci is a staff writer for the ANG Newspapers Group who appears to be based out of the Oakland Tribune. She offers the long article "Immigration group may not be what they seem". It would be good journalism if she covered all sides of the issue, which she does not. Instead, while she reports on two supposed "nonwhite" groups actually being initiated by - gasp! - white people, she doesn't report on questionable activities by those on her apparent side of the issue. It reads like something ripped from the pages of the SPLC, and in fact the article appears to have been fashioned from their "research". Those on her side are considered to be the gold standard of truth; those on the other side are condemned with innuendo:

Pro-immigrant advocacy organizations say Vietnamese for Fair Immigration may be one of an increasing number of groups that appear to be nonwhites gathering to ask for greater immigration controls, but are actually groups started with help from whites or from major, mostly white anti-immigrant groups that are seeking greater legitimacy for their views.

One wonders why they would be seeking "legitimacy" for views that are widely held. Marcucci is obviously assuming that those views are somehow disreputable.

As for VFI, they have unbelievably wasted their money on a billboard in Berkeley saying "No Racist Amnesty", and refering to the pro-Mexico bias in the proposed amnesty schemes. It turns out that the head of the group is one Tim Brummer, but he had presented himself as "Tim Binh" and initially denied that the first was his real name. Certainly a stupid move. (That might be a picture of him and his wife and daughter on the billboard and on their site).

Now for the other group:

Earlier this year, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, one of the nation's largest immigration control groups, created and backed a group called Choose Black America, which was supposed to be an organization created by blacks who feel illegal immigration has hurt blacks. But its leaders later acknowledged their kickoff press conference in May was funded by FAIR. And they were unable to name any of Choose Black America's members when asked.

In the next paragraph, we're informed that the Southern Poverty Law Center not only has "tracked such groups" but "broke the story about Choose Black America". Actually, while the 5/19/06 press release announcing the 5/23 press conference doesn't mention FAIR, it does give the name Ira Mehlman as a contact person. He works for FAIR and has been quoted in countless newspaper articles, including the current one. If FAIR were trying to hide their involvement that's an extremely sloppy thing to do. And, the 5/24 Washington Times article discussing the press conference of the previous day says this:

Choose Black America is the second minority-based group created by the District-based Federation for American Immigration Reform that opposes illegal entry... FAIR last month helped create "You Don't Speak for Me," a national coalition of Hispanic Americans who oppose the idea of amnesty for illegal aliens and who spoke out against immigration rallies held recently.

Obviously, while FAIR wasn't trumpeting their involvement from the rooftops, they also weren't trying to hide their involvement as Marcucci implies. You can read the SPLC's "ground-breaking" interview with two participants here: splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=673. She also smears VDare over this article, and accuses Mehlman of FAIR of seeking "legitimacy" in a truly McCarthy-esque fashion.

If Marcucci wants to offer a less biased report, she can now go ask the members of the various pro-illegal immigration groups that were formed to agitate foreign citizens to make shows of force in our streets to name the other members of their various coalitions. For instance, she could start with the "Fair Immigration Reform Movement" or the "We Are America Alliance".

Even better, she could give her readers background information on the SPLC, such as disclosing that they have at least one indirect link to the Mexican government. Or, she could discuss their academic McCarthyism. Or, their other issues discussed here, in The Church of Morris Dees. It's not like this information is hidden: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center#Critical Why is she considering such a group to be the gold standard of truth?

This might be the wrong contact person, but the Oakland Tribune's Managing Editor is Leanne McLaughlin: lmclaughlin *at* angnewspapers.com

Posted at 05:23 AM | Comments (1)

WashTimes: Congress might pass amnesty

The article "Congress open to passing bill on immigration" doesn't exactly live up to its ominous headline, offering only a few quotes, including this from Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT):

"Years of dawdling have worsened our border security and made it harder to fix this broken system... We should not let partisan politics and intolerance continue to delay and derail effective reform... This past May, the Senate Judiciary Committee reported and then the Senate passed bipartisan versions of comprehensive immigration reform to bring people out of the shadows while strengthening our borders... I look forward to building on that work next year and making progress on a bipartisan effort that improves security, supports our economy and respects the dignity of all people."

Obviously, opposition to a massive illegal alien amnesty is a separate issue from those he claims.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher says the Dems will pass amnesty, but Rep. Tom Tancredo isn't so sure, thinking they'll only be able to block funding for the recently-passed border fence bill. We're informed that various GOP leaders are weak on the issue and might support amnesty. It also has some of their grades from Americans for Better Immigration:

Rep. John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House Republican leader, has a "D"; Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri, the House Republican whip, scores a "C+." Incoming House Republican Conference Chairman Adam H. Putnam of Florida, who has co-sponsored legislation that many view as amnesty, scores an "F-" from the group on the issue.

It might not be so bad if the Dems and some Republicans try to push "comprehensive reform", just so long as it generates a debate and a large number of complaints from their constituents and is then scrapped. If along the way some of the pro-amnesty pundits, reporters, and others are discredited that would be a nice bonus.

Posted at 01:02 PM | Comments (5)

Howie Carr on Boston Globe's hypocrisy (Mitt Romney lawn care)

From this:

How do you turn a noble undocumented worker into a sinister, conniving illegal immigrant?

You do it by hiring him to cut the lawn at Gov. Mitt Romney's house, or at least that's how the bow-tied bumkissers at The Boston Globe pulled it off.

The phrase that is usually frowned upon by the Globe - illegal immigrants - was used 11 times in a front-page story Friday. Yesterday, those same dreaded "illegal immigrants" made it into the lead sentence of the follow-up story...

...Suppose that Mitt had shown more interest in the immigration status of his lawn crew. What if he had confronted the company owner - a legal alien from Colombia, remember - and told him he suspected that the mowing crew was here illegally, an adverb used three times in the first story.

Here's how the lead of that story could have been written:

"GOP Gov. Mitt Romney engaged in racial profiling, assuming that good family men from Chelsea, here only to do the jobs that Americans won’t do, were in the U.S. illegally. In a move denounced by such non-partisan groups as the ACLU and La Raza, this hypocrite, whose father by the way was born in Mexico, even demanded to see their green cards before he let them work on his verdant lawn. Romney, a member of the Mormon faith, which until recent years did not allow blacks to become ministers..."

Posted at 05:42 AM | Comments (4)

NYT: Growers want to be subsidized (they already are)

Alexei Barrionuevo of the New York Times offers "Imports Spurring Push to Subsidize Produce":

For decades, the fiercely independent fruit and vegetable growers of California, Florida and other states have been the only farmers in America who shunned federal subsidies, delivering produce to the tables of millions of Americans on their own.

But now, in the face of tough new competition primarily from China, even these proud groups are buckling. Produce farmers, their hands newly outstretched, have joined forces for the first time, forming a lobby group intended to pressure politicians over the farm bill to be debated in Congress in January...

The NYT fails to note that those growers already receive a huge government subsidy: low-wage illegal labor. Those growers get to pay a low price for their workers, and all those other costs of that labor (schooling, healthcare, etc.) is paid for by U.S. taxpayers.

And, those growers tirelessly lobby for even more cheap labor, through propaganda which newspapers like the NYT willingly run as well as by pushing for amnesties like AgJobs.

Please write public *at* nytimes.com with your thoughts.

Related:
Western Growers gives Senator Feinstein a big green thumbs up
Miranda Vagg transcribes growers pining for cheap labor
Crops rotting in the fields... enforcing immigration laws to blame?
A "comprehensive" 1986 amnesty would have prevented pro-grower propaganda
Farmers hollowed when laws followed

Posted at 12:30 PM | Comments (3)

MIRA, DNC respond to Romney smear by supporting illegal immigration

The Boston version of the National Enquirer informs us that it wasn't just Mitt Romney that contracted with "Community Lawn Service with a Heart", the landscaping service that apparently employed illegal aliens. It was also the city of Chelsea as well as the Massachusetts Port Authority.

(A question: why didn't the three Boston Globe reporters stake out those locations? Why did they choose Mitt Romney's manse? Could they be... biased?)

Then, we come to those illegal immigration supporters that are trying to profit from this smear:

"Over the past four years, Governor Romney has railed against undocumented immigrants relentlessly," Ali Noorani, executive director of the Massachusetts Immigrant Advocacy Coalition, said in a statement. "To our knowledge, Governor Romney has never offered a solution that respects undocumented immigrants as hard-working individuals striving to achieve the American dream, like the individuals who manicured his lawn for the past 10 years."

A Democratic National Committee spokesman, Damien LaVera, said that "Romney was too busy using immigration to cozy up to the right wing of the Republican Party to bother tending to his own backyard first."

A day late and a dollar short, the Boston Globe seeks legal advice:

Manuel Macias, an East Boston attorney who specializes in immigration law, said that someone who hires a contractor to perform services on his property has no obligation to make sure the employer's workers are in the country legally.

"If you hire a contractor, it's their responsibility, if they have employees, to [abide] by state and city laws, from workman's comp to immigration requirements," he said.

Posted at 12:28 PM | Comments (0)

Elizabeth Mehren/LAT misleads about Mitt Romney's lawn care

[...shakes head, wonders whether William Randolph Hearst is still around...]

Elizabeth Mehren of the Los Angeles Times offers "Workers a thorny issue for Romney":

Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a 2008 GOP presidential aspirant and an outspoken critic of illegal immigration, apparently employed undocumented landscape workers at his home near Boston.

Responding to a report in Friday's Boston Globe, the governor's communications director said Friday that Romney was unaware that several of the landscapers who kept up his suburban Belmont property were in this country illegally...

At this point in time, I'd like to turn it over to a labor lawyer for analysis, but lacking that I'm going to say that Elizabeth Mehren is being extremely misleading, and perhaps intentionally so. Romney did not directly "employ" the alleged illegal aliens. They were the employees of a gardening service with which he apparently had some form of contract.

Personally, I think this blurring of the lines is an intentional smear, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt. After all they're good enough to provide us with this news:

The Guatemalan laborers told the Globe that the governor sometimes greeted them by saying buenos dias.

What we're supposed to draw from that is unclear.

Please write readers.rep *at* latimes.com with your thoughts.

Posted at 09:18 AM | Comments (0)

Jared Polis, Colorado Springs awarded by Mexican government (Ohtli award)

Jared Polis is a dotcom multimillionaire who serves as Vice-Chairman of the Colorado State Board of Education. He's also donated large sums of cash to "liberal" causes and candidates. Last year, that Board produced Colorado's guide for illegal aliens, and Polis is also involved with ProgressNow.

On November 20, Polis' hard work paid off, as he was given Mexico's "Ohtli" award by their local consul general, Juan Marcos Gutierrez. As shall become clear, receiving that award might be considered a strong indication that the recipient is a Fifth Columnist:

...The award is the highest Mexican government award outside of Mexico. The Ohtli - Nahuatl for "path" - award is given to someone who has contributed to the betterment of the Mexican community and has helped Mexicans abroad.

"This was a tough year for us because of the race issues and immigration issues, so we look for a person who advocates for the Mexican community and who had done it for a long time," Gutierrez said. Polis "is smart, successful, and he has been one of the most effective advocates on education and the Dream Act."

...The "Amistad" award was given to the city of Steamboat Springs for its work in reaching out to its growing Latino community. Sister Alicia Cuaron was given the "Merito Communitario" award for her lifelong dedication to the Latino community...

The anti-American DREAM Act would take college discounts from U.S. citizens and give them to Mexican citizens and others who are here illegally.

Apparently recipients are nominated by a putatively U.S. organization, the National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO). The awards are given by the Institute for Mexicans Abroad (Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior), which is led by Carlos Gonzalez Gutierrez. The IME is part of the Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores, their state department. Earlier this CGG said:

"The basic concept is that the Mexican nation goes beyond the borders that contain Mexico. You can feel part of our nation without being on our territory... For the first time, we are exporting our politics. Many Mexicans now live 'transnational' lives, with one foot in our country and one foot in the other. This contributes to everyone's well-being."

Other recipients of the award include (source: preview.tinyurl.com/y47yrg):

* Harry Pachon, president of the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute (1), former executive director of NALEO (2)

* Douglas, Arizona Mayor Ray Borane (frequent anti-Minuteman and/or pro-illegal immigration quote source)

* former Congressmen Edward Roybal and Eligio "Kika" de la Garza

* current Congressman Luis Gutierrez

* former Congressman and current Senator Bob Menendez (reasons for his award here: preview.tinyurl.com/y22rtr).

* Ruben Barrales, Deputy Assistant to the President of the United States; White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs

In 2003, a recipient was the assistant police Chief of Austin, Texas, Rudy Landeros. Vicente Fox was present when he was given the award, and it's related to a program started in 2000 by that city's police chief, Stan Knee:

[Knee] directed the launch of an outreach program to alert the community about the increase in robberies of Hispanics. The program consisted of a series of news conferences and an appeal to Hispanics to report crimes against them. Posters, bumper stickers, and radio public service announcements were distributed in both English and Spanish. The goal of this outreach program was to ensure the safety of the Hispanic immigrant community in the City of Austin.

The Austin Police Department is partnered with the Texas Secretary of State, Mexican Consulate, Greater Austin Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and Wells Fargo... the project was called Banca Facil - Easy Banking.

In February 2001, APD Assistant Chief Rudy Landeros and Eliza May, Executive Director of the Greater Austin Hispanic Chamber of Commerce addressed the issue with Rick Burciaga, Chairman and CEO for Wells Fargo in Austin, encouraging Wells Fargo to participate in the outreach program. May indicated that one solution that would help protect the immigrant population would be to make banking products more easily accessible. It was the beginning of Banca Facil.

From 2005:

...Tommy Espinoza and Alfredo Gutierrez were honored at the Ohtli Award presentation, co-hosted by ASU and the Secretary of Foreign Relations of Mexico at the ASU Kerr Cultural Center.

...Espinoza is the chief executive officer of Raza Development Fund, the largest and most successful financial institution for the development for Hispanic communities. [...former president of Chicanos Por La Causa...]

Recently, he, along with the Consulate of Mexico, collected almost $2 million to fight the Proposition 200 that was approved by the electorate of Arizona. The approval of this initiative was lowered from 76 percent to 56 percent.

...Gutierrez won a seat in the Arizona Senate in 1972. He was then 27 years old and the youngest person who had ever been elected to the state Senate. For 14 years he served Arizona in that capacity. He now leads Tequida & Gutierrez, a consulting company that produces strategic campaigns in English and Spanish...

Posted at 11:18 AM | Comments (1)

Lefties lead smackdown over judge's "Hot House Flowers" book

Brooklyn criminal (early night) court judge John H. Wilson is the author of an allegory about illegal immigration and/or massive immigration entitled "Hot House Flowers". It's 24-pages, self-published, and only available from Amazon. This site isn't exactly a big fan of the book's overview, which is indeed a little creepy and which leftie illegal immigration supporters have already taken advantage of. In the book, said hot house flowers are edged out by invasive dandelions, until the owner of the hothouse decides to weed out the dandelions. Obviously, much, much better analogies to the current situation could be found.

The flaws in the book's premise have also allowed leftwing Gramscians/legal defender/illegal immigration supporting-type persons to now ask for an ethical review. The judge also apparently asked a member of his court's advisory ethics committee to review what he was doing, and was given the OK. He was promised a written opinion, which still has not been given.

Those quoted as trying to stir up trouble are Steven Banks, chief attorney for the Legal Aid Society and Lisa Schreibersdorf, executive director of Brooklyn Defender Services.

Posted at 06:53 AM | Comments (3)

Alberto Gonzales unaware of letter about Ramos/Compean case; give him a call

This site reprints an action alert from FAIR:

During the last year, Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean were criminally prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to serve years in prison for doing their job - protecting America from drug and illegal alien smugglers at our southern border. Those who have been following the case with us have been dismayed at the injustice of criminally prosecuting border patrol agents while granting immunity to a drug smuggler, who was carrying 743 pounds of marijuana into the U.S., to testify against the agents. The smuggler - who received medical care at William Beaumont Army Medical Center in El Paso, Texas - is now suing the Border Patrol for $5 million for violating his civil rights.

For months FAIR has been working with members of Congress to raise awareness of this case. One member who has been leading the charge is Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC). Over the past four months, Congressman Jones has written seven letters to the Bush administration regarding the Ramos and Compean case: three to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, one to Press Secretary Tony Snow, and three to President Bush himself. Indeed, one of the letters sent to Attorney General Gonzales was signed by 22 members of Congress; another by six members. However, during a radio interview on The Keith Larson Show (WBT Charlotte) this week, Attorney General Gonzales stated that he was "unaware" of the Congressman's letters...

...Please call Attorney General Gonzales and ask him to recommend to President Bush that these agents be pardoned! You can reach the Office of the Attorney General at (202) 353-1555.

Posted at 01:28 PM | Comments (2)

Violent MSU lefties disrupt Tancredo speech

Rep. Tom Tancredo tried to give a speech yesterday at Michigan State University's law school. Leftie protesters apparently pulled the fire alarm twice, and also attacked organizers:

"One was spit on, one was kicked, and one was punched," Tancredo said in an e-mail. "Tires were also slashed."

The protesters reportedly used facebook.com to organize, so if anyone has an account there please post the information. And:

The people who attended to oppose the event said they came to represent themselves — not the minority campus groups with which they are affiliated.

One of those mentioned is Claudia Gonzalez; this page says someone by that same name is "a member of the Radical Chicano Student Union".

Another protester is Randy McPherson, who appears to have been one of "Jeter's Leaders".

Note that the sidebar in the first link in this post quotes Tim Dickinson/Rolling Stone's misleading, pro-illegal immigration propaganda.

Posted at 11:02 AM | Comments (5)

Explosive Boston Globe on tiny company tending Mitt Romney's lawn

Those who read all three screens of "Illegal immigrants toiled for governor" should constantly ask themselves, "cui bono?" Three Boston Globe "reporters" (Jonathan Saltzman, Maria Cramer, Connie Paige) spent months investigating the article that can now disclose that the gardening service that tended Mitt Romney's law may have employed illegal aliens:

The situation underscores the extent to which illegal immigrants permeate the US economy. Even as Romney travels the country, vowing to curb the flood of low-skilled illegal immigrants into the United States, some of those workers maintain his own yard, cutting grass, pruning shrubs, and mulching trees.

They admit that the gardening service is tiny; the owner says he only hired legal immigrants (but didn't ask for proof of their status); Romney didn't ask for their status either; four out five employees questioned said they were illegal aliens.

The Boston Globe seems to have been put up to this by either the Democrats or perhaps a local illegal immigration-supporting group:

The Globe received a tip in July alleging that Romney was using illegal immigrants to landscape his property.

Not only did they track the former workers down in Guatemala, and not only did they verify one worker's social security number, but they conducted quite a stakeout:

Reporters then observed the lawn service workers outside Romney's house more than a dozen times, sometimes as frequently as twice a week.

Obviously, Romney should have been more careful, but then again if the owner of the service now says the workers were legal he probably would have told that to Romney as well. If Romney had decided to be better safe than sorry and hired a service with an all non-Latino crew, the Globe probably would have accused him of profiling.

Obviously, stories like this should be very low on the priority list of papers that want to report on large scale malfeasance. Reports like this will have the impact of supporting illegal immigration rather than reducing it.

Please write ombud *at* globe.com with your thoughts.

Posted at 05:18 AM | Comments (2)

Pro-Farmers Branch editorial

Farmers Branch, Texas is one of those cities that passed Hazleton-style ordinances to try to reduce illegal aliens moving to the town. Now, in a rare move of sanity, the Dallas Morning News has published a column from radio host Mark Davis support that city and City Council member Tim O'Hare:

...[Passing the ordinance] had two effects. Among those who are passionate about strong laws and effective borders, Mr. O'Hare became an instant hero. To those opposed, he became a gringo devil, a ripe target for some of the most reckless slander in recent North Texas political history.

...But the most prevalent and baseless scorn was heaped by officials and individuals acting in accord with the League of United Latin American Citizens and other Hispanic advocacy groups. From Domingo Garcia to Jesse Diaz and beyond, Mr. O'Hare and his supporters were demonized as racist, an absurd claim that overlooks the fact that this is a matter of behavior and not ethnicity.

They were branded as un-American, the first time I can recall a devotion to law being characterized as unpatriotic.

Most comically, they were called un-Christian, as if we are called on by Jesus to practice a bizarre brand of compassion that involves blindness to just laws.

Mr. O'Hare would deserve praise for his actions alone. But throw in the bitter, racist hatred he and his family have tasted since standing up for U.S. law, and it becomes the stuff of outright heroism...

Posted at 03:40 PM | Comments (1)

Mexican political parties involved in Chicago illegal immigration marches

The article "Irked Mexicans open alternate consulate" about supporters of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador ("AMLO") from Mexico's PRD Party opening a symbolic alternate consulate in Chicago buries the news that Mexican political parties were involved in the Chicago marches in support of illegal immigration.

The article mentions that one of those involved in opening the alternate consulate is Martin Unzueta, president of the Illinois chapter of the PRD party. On the other side is Salvador Pedroza, president of the Illinois chapter the PAN party. He's also president of the Little Village Chamber of Commerce. Then:

Both were key organizers of the massive immigrant marches in Chicago earlier this year. The march's executive committee included members of Mexico's three main political parties.

In other words, representatives of foreign political parties helped encourage foreign citizens to march in our streets, making a show of force and demanding rights to which they are not entitled. More on this foreign meddling here.

Anyone who supported those marches also supports foreign forces attempting to meddle in internal U.S. politics.

Posted at 01:08 PM | Comments (3)

"Hispanic vote" voted for something for some reason (or other)

Elizabeth Aguilera of the Denver Post offers "Dems won over Latino voters, study says":

Latino voters leaned heavily Democratic in the recent midterm elections, indicating the heated debate over immigration reform may have cost Republicans support in some key races, an analysis released Monday indicates...

...Some, however, questioned whether the study exaggerated the impact of immigration on the Democrats' wins Nov. 7...

Michelle Mittelstadt of the Houston Chronicle offers the similar "Immigration alone didn't sway Hispanics from GOP":

Exit polls suggest Latino voters deserted the Republican candidates at nearly twice the rate of non-Hispanic whites during this month's congressional elections, the Pew Hispanic Center said on Monday.

But the conventional wisdom that Hispanics were turned off by the party's hard line on illegal immigration — and would deliver on the "Today we march, tomorrow we vote" cry from the spring's protest marches — was not the decisive factor, some experts said...

The bottom line is that no one knows for certain, and it boils down to which illegal immigration-supporting hack you choose to believe.

Posted at 01:57 PM | Comments (1)

Joe Biden speaks mostly truth about Mexico, immigration

For forgotten reasons, this site isn't exactly a cheerleader for Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE), but his latest statements seem to go a bit beyond the usual "pretend to talk kinda tough but actually promise nothing" blather:

"Mexico is a country that is an erstwhile democracy where they have the greatest disparity of wealth," Biden said. "It is one of the wealthiest countries in the hemisphere and because of a corrupt system that exists in Mexico, there is the 1 percent of the population at the top, a very small middle class and the rest is abject poverty."

Unless the political dynamics change in Mexico and U.S. employers who hire illegal immigrants are punished, illegal immigration won't stop. "All the rest is window dressing," he said.

An even bigger problem are illegal drugs "coming up through corrupt Mexico," he said. "People are driving across that border with tons, tons — hear me — tons of everything from byproducts for methamphetamines, to cocaine, to heroine [sic]."

Whatever Biden's other issues, at the very least, you will never, ever, ever, hear such truthful statements come from the Mund of California's Rove/Kennedy/Mexico-linked governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Of course, the bigger test for Biden will come after Mexico partisans such as MALDEF and the NCLR have had the chance to write their press releases. Will he fold, or will he give them the (rhetorical) finger? Let's wait and find out. UPDATE: Video here.

Posted at 05:03 AM | Comments (2)

Paul Campos/University of Colorado: law professor, hack

Paul Campos is a University of Colorado law professor who offers "The workers often press '2'". A prolific hack, he's been writing a weekly column for the RMN since 1999. He's also the author of - hold on to your Oprah - "The Obesity Myth: Why America's Obsession with Weight is Hazardous to Your Health".

He says that "anxiety about creeping bilingualism is quite reasonable", but then says, "resentment toward the increasing prominence of Spanish is a product of the kind of ugly nativist sentiment exploited by Tancredo and his ilk" and then engages in the Appeal to Tradition logical fallacy.

Then, he goes even further off the deep bend:

Yet the most significant fact to keep in mind about people who speak Spanish in the United States is this: such people are invariably performing useful labor. In fact, it isn't too much of an exaggeration to say that the odds a person does the kind of work that simply has to get done in order to keep civilization afloat go up in direct proportion to the probability that this person speaks Spanish.

Part of this has already been answered here, and I'll offer a bit more.

While having a third world peasant class does do wonders for the ol' lifestyle, there are huge downsides. Those include the strong possibility of making said peasantry angry and susceptible to demagogues, perhaps resulting in revolts and the like. (Campos should ask someone in the History department to explain that to him.)

It also leads to decadence, as an out-of-touch elite class becomes separated from day-to-day concerns. And, it leads to cheap labor supplanting innovation. Why invent, engineer, build, and market a chicken-plucking machine when you can just hire a bunch of serfs to do the same thing? We need a balance, and the current situation is quite a bit too reminiscent of past societies that relied on some form of forced labor. (Once again, consult someone in the History department.)

Posted at 03:37 AM | Comments (3)

Boston Globe: Bush, Kennedy, Specter uniting on a massive illegal alien amnesty

That's what the article "Bush seeks unity on immigration" by Rick Klein says, but it offers little that isn't already known:

The White House is reaching out to leading congressional Democrats on the issue of overhauling immigration, hoping to build a bipartisan coalition to support a "guest worker" program and provide a path to legalized status for many undocumented immigrants, lawmakers and administration officials said.

President Bush has expressed an eagerness to work with Democrats on the issue in private meetings with lawmakers and in public statements, as he seeks to strike a new tone with Democrats who will be in control of Congress for the final two years of his presidency.

The president's interest in the issue is getting a warm reception from members of both parties in Congress, particularly in the Senate...

...Senator Edward M. Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat who is set to take the chairmanship of the subcommittee that oversees immigration issues, has already met with leading Republicans -- including Senator John McCain of Arizona and Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the Judiciary Committee's top Republican -- to begin crafting a new bill early next year...

...Kennedy and the other lawmakers are planning a broader meeting this week of about 12 leading senators from both parties. They are hoping to have Congress vote on a final immigration bill by mid-2007, according to congressional aides.

Though no specific proposals have been floated, the bill passed this year by the Senate is a likely starting point, aides said...

After discussing the "12 million undocumented immigrants" here as well as "anti-immigration voices", Klein throws it over to Michele Waslin of the National Council of La Raza ("Latino civil-rights group") as well as Ali Noorani, executive director of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition ("MIRA").

Then, it's off to canardville:

The election results also assuaged fears among both Democrats and Republicans that voters would punish lawmakers who support a bill giving undocumented immigrants a way to achieve legalized status... Exit polls indicated that the GOP appeared to pay a price in the elections for its emphasis on cracking down on illegal immigration.

And, one wonders if such support exists, then why do "[p]roponents of a comprehensive overhaul feel a sense of urgency"? Perhaps they know something Klein doesn't: no one except for hacks supports "reform". And, we're also informed that Harry Reid is holding Bush signing the border fence against him, something that he only did so in order to get the "reform" they both want.

Posted at 02:01 PM | Comments (2)

Stillmore: Crider Poultry employing homeless, felons instead of illegal aliens

In September, ICE raided the Crider Poultry plant in Stillmore, Georgia, which resulted in hundreds of illegal aliens leaving the city. That resulted in pro-illegal immigration propaganda from Russ Bynum of the AP, Reason Magazine, and Patrik Jonsson of the CSM, as well as a lawsuit from the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government.

Now comes the news that Crider is hiring the homeless as well as felons on probation from the Macon Diversion Center; the homeless are provided by a local mission which is trying to recruit more workers for the plant. And, both Crider and the AP are still trying to buck the (legal) market for labor:

...To fill the gap, Crider also has been outsourcing jobs in its raw deboning plant to Alabama, has raised wages to attract new workers and has turned to an outside company to hire about 100 cleaning workers. The plant has seen its processing slow down because of the smaller workforce, officials said.

Purtle said the company is also spending more on hiring _ paying to bus in the probationers, for example _ and on training, because many of the new hires have poor attendance and quit quickly...

Desperate third world illegal serf laborers do indeed tend to work hard and without complaint, don't they? However, if Crider wants to abide by our laws, they'll have to learn about the legal employment market. At some wage or benefit level, they will find that attendance and retention improves dramatically. (That makes the somewhat questionable assumption that they're telling the truth.) If they have to rely on desperate third worlders to pluck their chickens, then perhaps that's a sign that they should go into another line of business or automate. The article also contains this bit:

Pastor Ariel Rodriguez said some people have gone back to Mexico, while the majority went to Kentucky, following a priest who used to live near Stillmore.

I wasn't able to find out who he's refering to, but hopefully the ICE will be hot on his heels.

Posted at 05:33 AM | Comments (2)

John Quinones/ABC News: brazen illegal immigration-supporting hack

John Quinones of ABC Nightly News offers "Pear Crop Rots as Field Hands Kept from Crossing Border", a brazen pro-cheap labor slab of propaganda that reports on what growers say without offering even the slightest bit of contradictory information. It is so biased it could have been - and might have been - written by the growers themselves. It even includes a grower being emotional:

If the migrants don't show up for the next harvest, Ivicevich said he'll have to destroy entire orchards that were planted more than a century ago. ..."That makes them 120 years old," he said, in tears. "So, I mean, how could I take that tree out?"

What's worse is that the grower's statements seem to be to a good extent related to factors other than the lack of illegal and/or cheap labor. See Pearanoia - Latest Scam From The Cheap Labor Lobby, which links to this SacBee article that - unlike virtually all other articles discussing this topic - at least tried to fact-check grower statements.

If John Quinones wants to do some real reporting, perhaps he can start by looking into the forces that pushed and approved his "report".

Posted at 06:58 PM | Comments (6)

Bob Darcy/Oklahoma State: voting rights for all OK residents

Dr. Bob Darcy is a political science professor at Oklahoma State University, and he wants to give voting rights to all residents of that state, regardless of their citizenship status. The article consists mostly of his "thoughts" which you've probably heard before:

..."From the late 1800s to the early 1900s the nation was ran by prosperous white, non-Catholic men. They were called WASPs -- white, Anglo Saxon Protestants," he said. "And the WASPs didn't want anyone new upsetting their operation..." [etc. etc., rips a page from Michael Ignatieff, etc. etc.]

Many more links on this general issue in "Voting: the next demand illegal aliens will make".

Posted at 04:15 PM | Comments (3)

Randal Archibold/NYT: illegal immigration-supporting groups are right, "vigilantes" are wrong

Randal Archibold of the New York Times offers "A Border Watcher Finds Himself Under Scrutiny", about Arizona rancher Roger Barnett:

...But now, after boasting of having captured 12,000 illegal crossers on land he owns or leases from the state and emerging as one of the earliest and most prominent of the self-appointed border watchers, Mr. Barnett finds himself the prey.

Immigrant rights groups have filed lawsuits, accusing him of harassing and unlawfully imprisoning people he has confronted on his ranch near Douglas. One suit pending in federal court accuses him, his wife and his brother of pointing guns at 16 illegal immigrants they intercepted, threatening them with dogs and kicking one woman in the group...

I'm not going to defend Barnett since I'm not familiar with what he does. While he might have done what he's accused of, there's also the strong possibility that this and the other suits are simply set-ups by illegal immigration supporters. In the past local officials haven't pursued him apparently due to lack of evidence.

What I will do, however, is note that we're only receiving one side of the story: that presented by those "immigrant rights groups". They are presented as the gold standard of truth; Archibold doesn't question their statements and doesn't look into whether they have questionable links. So, to help Randal Archibold be a real reporter and not just an illegal immigration-supporting hack, let's do that.

Jesus Romo Vejar, is identified only as "the lawyer for the hunting party". He reportedly is or was a member of Derechos Humanos, a group that's working with the Mexican government. Whether he's still a member of that group isn't known.

The article also quotes "Jennifer Allen of the Border Action Network, an immigrant rights group". The BAN is part of the Border Human Rights Working Group, a coalition consisting of Derechos Humanos and two other groups that are also collaborating with the Mexican government.

The article mentions that the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund is involved in the suit against Barnett, and also quotes the Southern Poverty Law Center. Both of those organizations are also in the BHRWG, and both thus have at least one indirect link to the Mexican government.

Please write public *at* nytimes.com and suggest they hire real reporters and not just illegal immigration-supporting hacks.

Related:
Randal Archibold/NYT: Democratic win could lead to amnesty

Posted at 10:49 AM | Comments (3)

Gustavo Torres/Case de Maryland refuses to say Pledge of Allegiance

Casa de Maryland is a government-funded organization that strongly supports illegal immigration and that's been involved in organizing immigration marches. Earlier this year, Gustavo Torres, their executive director, threatened to picket not just the residences of Minuteman Project members, but the schools of their children. So, while there's certainly no requirement to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, this is not a surprise:

...at the Gaithersburg City Council meeting last night, one citizen refused to recite the Pledge. Casa De Maryland Executive Director Gustavo Torres, an immigrant from Colombia, stood in definace while substantially everyone else present recited the Pledge of Allegiance.

Even the day laborers at the meeting, many of whom have previously admitted that they are in the USA illegally, stood up in respect for the US flag and recited the Pledge as best as they could.

Related:
Gramscians demand ouster of Maryland comptroller
DC Metro bilingual signs and illegal alien advocates

Posted at 06:25 PM | Comments (9)

"The struggle for Indigenous sovereignty and immigrant rights"

Just for fun, let's check in with those who are just slightly to the left of the New York Times:

A multinational crowd packed the Boston Workers World office on Nov. 18 for a meeting on the struggle for Indigenous sovereignty and human rights. This important meeting was held at a crucial time, less than a week before the 37th National Day of Mourning in Plymouth [Thanksgiving] and only two weeks before the Boston Rosa Parks Human Rights Day rally and march on Dec. 1.

The featured speaker was Mahtowin Munro, co-leader of United American Indians of New England (UAINE). Denouncing the racist vigilante Minutemen as well as the proposed wall of death along the border with Mexico, Mahtowin gave a detailed overview of the history of immigration in North America, starting with the first and only truly illegal immigrants—the Europeans who started their invasion in 1492...

Posted at 08:48 AM | Comments (2)

Maricopa County sued over anti-smuggling law; Mexico links

A potential class action lawsuit has been filed by various groups against Maricopa County, Arizona (home of Phoenix) concerning a state law designed to stop human smuggling. Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas have been using that law to arrest and charge illegal aliens with smuggling themselves into the country. Since starting that earlier this year, they've managed 180 convictions (two by jury) out of 360 arrests.

What's interesting here is those on the other side; for instance, one of the lawyers involved has at least three links to the Mexican government. In addition to six Mexican citizens, the plaintiffs include (descriptions from the first link, notes in brackets):

* We Are America/Somos America Coalition of Arizona [has some sort of link to the AZ Democratic Party; whether they're part of the We Are America Alliance is not known.]

* the community organization Friendly House

* state representatives Kyrsten Sinema, Steve Gallardo (1,2) and David Lujan [slightly positive note here; he wanted immigration marchers to carry American flags to supposedly show pride in the U.S.]

* Arizona State University sociology professors Cecilia Menjivar [co-editor of "When States Kill: Latin America, the U.S., and Technologies of Terror"] and LaDawn Haglund [author of "You Can Jail the Resistors, But You Can't Jail the Resistance"]

The lawyers are:

* Phoenix attorneys Dan Ballecer, Antonio Bustamante, and H. Michael Clyde

* Ray Velarde of LULAC in Texas

* Peter A. Schey of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law. As discussed at the links, he has at least three links to the Mexican government.

Related:
Maricopa County Attorney: Mexico trying to block Arizona law
Peter Schey working with Mexican government (Arpaio posse)

Posted at 06:05 AM | Comments (1)

Do polls show support for "comprehensive immigration reform"?

Yes, misleading and/or incomplete polls do show support for "comprehensive immigration reform". The latest such poll is crowed about by Reuters, which is your first clue that there's something wrong:

Most Americans believe illegal immigrants should be allowed to become guest workers and eventually U.S. citizens, but Congress should do more to close the border to stop more illegals entering the country, according to a new poll published on Tuesday.

The nationwide poll, conducted by Quinnipiac University, found that by a margin of 69 percent to 27 percent, American voters say illegal immigrants should be allowed into a guest worker program with the ability to work toward citizenship over a period of several years. Such a guest worker program had wide support among voters of all political stripes.

Our next clue that there's something wrong is when we look at one of the questions that was asked:

15. Currently illegal immigrants cannot apply for citizenship. If the law were changed to allow illegal immigrants to register into a guest worker program, should that program offer them the ability to work toward citizenship over a period of several years?

The results: 69% yes, 27% no.

However, if Quinnipiac University wanted to conduct a poll based on reality, they would have then asked other questions:

16. Do you still say "yes" to #15 knowing that it would result in endless chain migration, as new "guests" can invite in family members, who will then invite in other family members, and so on?

17. Do you still say "yes" to #15 knowing that it would encourage more illegal aliens to come here in expectation of receiving the next amnesty, or even in expectation of using fake documents to take part in the current amnesty?

18. Do you still say "yes" to #15 knowing that it would give political power to groups (growers, far-left organizations, racial power organizations, etc.) that have supported illegal immigration in the past and will no doubt continue to support it?

19. Do you still say "yes" to #15 knowing that it would give even more political power inside the U.S. to Mexico?

Around about question #25, only the most cheap labor-besotted would still support "comprehensive immigration reform".

Please write pollinginstitute *at* quinnipiac.edu with your thoughts.

Posted at 05:13 PM | Comments (1)

What CBS Evening News didn't tell you about immigration

On 11/15/06, CBS Evening News broadcast "Will New Congress Pass Immigration Reform?" by Bill Whitaker. The script and video of the report are here, and my response is here.

Posted at 01:33 PM | Comments (2)

Darryl Fears: the Democratic line on immigration

Darryl Fears of the Washington Post offers "Republicans Lost Ground With Latinos In Midterms". As might be expected, it's so full of misleading statements, superficial analysis, hidden agendas, and hidden assumptions that a full treatment would be novel-length:

...Latinos [gave] the GOP only 30 percent of their vote as strident House immigration legislation inspired by Republicans and tough-talking campaign ads by conservative candidates roiled the community. It was a 10-point drop from the lowest estimated Latino vote percentage two years ago, and a 14-point drop from the highest...

Of course, GOP votes from other groups were down as well. The percentage drop may be have been greater among Latinos, but that doesn't mean that it had anything to do with immigration or related ads. And, the idea that there could be a "community" is identity politics at its finest, but is untrue since, for instance, there are obvious differences between Cuban-Americans in Miami and Mexican-Americans in Texas colonias. And, not all of those "tough-talking" ads were from "conservatives"; perhaps that's why he used that word and not "Republicans". And, while a few of the ads may have gone overboard, if "the community" objects to enforcement of our laws, perhaps we have a deeper problem that needs to be addressed. And, needless to say, HR4437 wasn't "strident".

Then, he quotes "Simon Rosenberg, president of NDN, formerly the New Democrat Network" as saying that the "Republican Party is hostile to Hispanics". Obviously, he's biased. And, just as obviously, that's false. Not even those GOP leaders that support our immigration laws are hostile to one ethnic group. They just oppose, for instance, those like Rosenberg who support massive illegal activity as an "ethnic thing".

Then:

Latinos by and large supported the millions of marchers who protested House immigration proposals in the spring, and there are recent signs that Republicans are working to bring them back to the party [via rightwing Cuban - and thus non-Chicano - Mel Martinez].

Those marches might have indeed had widespread support, and most Americans should consider that alarming. Those marching were doing so in support of illegal activity, and many were in fact foreign citizens making a show of force in our streets. Many of those marching seem to think that they have a right to move here at will, and some of those even called the U.S. their "homeland". And, some of the organizers of those marches have links to foreign governments and Mexico's PRD party.

Then:

[HR4437] would make it a felony to assist any illegal immigrant, frightening the Roman Catholic Church. It worried rights groups because it would step up enforcement that could cost illegal immigrants their jobs, homes and lives.

As far as I know, the Pope didn't weigh in on 4437. However, Cardinal Roger Mahony did pretend to be "frightened", but then later admitted he was full of it. As for those "rights" groups, perhaps they shouldn't be supporting illegal aliens working illegally. And, perhaps we shouldn't encourage banks to give loans to illegal aliens, since that ends up encouraging political corruption. As for the last, stepped-up enforcement would reduce such issues, since many fewer would try to come here. Those "rights" groups actually encourage people to try to cross, resulting in more tragedies than their would be if they discouraged them from trying to cross the desert in summer.

Don't expect Darryl Fears to do a deeper analysis of this issue, since he's simply an illegal immigration supporting hack.

Posted at 08:10 AM | Comments (3)

Signs of Delusion in New York Times Immigration Editorial

The New York Times offers the unsigned editorial "Signs of Hope on Immigration". Not only is it wrong, it's in parts so wrong it's funny. It's of the now-standard "Democrats and Bush can work to pass 'comprehensive immigration reform', but they need to tread lightly" variety.

While not explicitly engaging in the other now-standard canard that J. D. Hayworth, Randy Graf, John Hostettler, and Rick Santorum lost because of their immigration stances, it does mention them by name and refer to them as "[s]ome of the debate's loudest shouters, liars and dead-horse beaters". Then:

All those shrill Republican ads about Mexicans stealing your Social Security failed as an electoral strategy, but that doesn't mean politicians always lose by being immigration hawks... [Arizona's anti-illegal immigration propositions won...]

The NYT appears to be playing CYA for the cases of those Democrats who pretended to be "immigration hawks". And, of course, a serious newspaper would consider the ramifications of millions of former illegal aliens receiving billions of dollars in social security and other benefits, not to mention the separate issue of totalization. The NYT does not appear to have covered the first, and a search of their site for the latter term only returns two non-relevant hits.

Then, the NYT refers to the "the losers on the border-fixated fringe". In contrast, the NYT is much more "laid-back", almost comatose. For instance, they don't appear to have covered this news (PDF file):

Members of Hezbollah, the Lebanon-based terrorist organization, have already entered to the United States across our Southwest border. On March 1, 2005, Mahmoud Youssef Kourani pleaded guilty to providing material support to Hezbollah. Kourani is an illegal alien who had been smuggled across the U.S.-Mexico border after bribing a Mexican consular official in Beirut for a visa to travel to Mexico. Kourani and a Middle Eastern traveling partner then paid coyotes in Mexico to guide them into the United States. Kourani established residence among the Lebanese expatriate community in Dearborn, Michigan and began soliciting funds for Hezbollah terrorists back home in Lebanon. He is the brother of the Hezbollah chief of military operations in southern Lebanon... In December 2002, Salim Boughader Mucharrafille, a cafe owner in Tijuana, Mexico, was arrested for illegally smuggling more than two hundred Lebanese illegally into the United States, including several believed to have terrorist ties to Hezbollah...

The NYT's policies would allow cases like that to repeat themselves; the policies of those who are "border-fixated" want to prevent them. Who should America trust?

They end up by promoting the Senate amnesty bill, but only after it's stripped of "tough-posing amendments that made it fundamentally unworkable and unjust". They say that (post-reform) the "laws should be enforced at the border and workplace". If the New York Times has ever supported enforcement of our current laws, I haven't seen it. What I've seen is an endless stream of pro-illegal immigration propaganda, and I have little doubt that that would continue no matter which "reform" scheme was passed.

And, they don't mention that the USCIS would almost certainly be even more overwhelmed by any form of amnesty, nor the massive legal and continuing illegal immigration that McCain-Kennedy would lead to, nor any of the other serious issues. As with terrorist infiltration, details like that are apparently for losers.

Posted at 05:18 AM | Comments (1)

"Open-Borders Advocates Distort Election Results"

As previously discussed, massive immigration supporting hacks like Fred Barnes, Linda Chavez, Tamar Jacoby, the Wall Street Journal editorial page, Arlen Specter, and Michael Barone among others have tried to claim that some GOP losses were due to opposition to an illegal alien amnesty. How this is wrong was discussed in NRO on Graf/Hayworth election results myth among other entries.

And, Mark Krikorian of CIS offers this:

...The open-borders crowd scavenged for results they hoped would confirm their pre-packaged conclusions. A favorite was the defeat of two Republican immigration hawks running for the House in Arizona, incumbent Rep. J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, who was seeking liberal Republican Rep. Jim Kolbe’s seat. The problem with pointing to these results as proof of the public’s support for the Bush-McCain-Kennedy “comprehensive” amnesty plan is that the very same voters overwhelmingly approved four good ballot measures related to immigration: denying bail to illegals, barring illegals from winning punitive damages in civil suits, prohibiting illegals from receiving certain state subsidies for education and day care, and declaring English the state’s official language. Clearly, the actual policy issue of immigration control remained hugely popular and, while Hayworth’s opponent endorsed a guest-worker program, he explicitly said on his campaign website, “Secure Our Border and Stop Illegal Immigration,” “Hold employers accountable for whom they hire,” and, “I oppose amnesty and will not support it.” Hardly a Bush echo...

This is a wonderful opportunity to discredit hacks like Barnes, Jacoby, Barone, and the others, as well as those bloggers and other pundits who support them. Whenever they spread this line, come back with articles like this.

Posted at 03:38 AM | Comments (0)

What Steve Kroft/60 Minutes forgot to ask (Hazleton immigration ordinance)

Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes offered a slightly fair report on Hazleton, Pennsylvania's new ordinance concerning illegal aliens renting and being employed in the city.

Here's a partial list of some of the things he forgot to do:

1. At the end, when Kroft said that some people had called mayor Lou Barletta a racist, and Kroft lingered over the word "racist", he forgot to mention the far-left, anti-American loonies who've said such things. If 60 Minutes opposed illegal immigration, they would have given people like Anna Arias, Agapito Lopez, or Stephen Glassman enough rope to have hung themselves.

2. Kroft interviewed a disguised illegal alien and her daughter. The former had been working 60 to 72 hours per week, and had only ended up near the poverty line. Kroft asked her if it was better than Mexico, and she responded affirmatively. If 60 Minutes opposed illegal immigration, they would have pointed out that such working conditions are Dickensian, and they would have wondered why Mexico is unable to take care of their own people. And, he would have tried to compute all the social services that the duo received, pointing out that that was a huge subsidy to her former employer.

3. Kroft gave more than a minute to Lucas Gutentag of the ACLU's Immigrant Rights Project, without asking about their indirect link to the Mexican government, and without asking why all of their immigration-related lawsuits and activities will enable Mexico to keep sending us people. (See also this and this).

4. Kroft offered a brief interview with a local shopowner, Isabel Rubio. Despite being here legally, Croft implied that some people don't want Hispanics in general in the town. And, in the the brief shot of her shop's sign, one can see that one of her lines of business is wiring money out of the country. Perhaps Croft could have discussed issues relating to remittances if he wants to "follow the money".

Posted at 08:17 PM | Comments (1)

Cynthia Tucker/AJC supports illegal immigration

Cynthia Tucker of the Atlanta Journal Constitution opposes a Hazleton-style ordinance considered for Cherokee County in Georgia in "In bullying illegals, county picks easy fight".

First of all, the idea that illegal aliens as a group could be bullied is completely false. They have very powerful allies: corrupt employers, corrupt politicians, the corrupt media, racial power groups, and so forth. Those powerful forces will work overtime to make sure that those they profit from are not "bullied". In fact, Tucker's column is an example of one of their protectors fighting back.

She does, however, get one thing right:

If the nation is serious about curbing illegal immigration, there is a rather simple way to do it: Crack down on employers who hire illegally. Don't just fine them; give them prison time. Once a few business executives were frog-marched in front of news cameras in handcuffs — convicted of illegal hiring — others would get the message. And once Mexicans and Guatemalans and Hondurans without documents figured out that they couldn't get jobs here, they'd stop coming. It's really as simple as that.

Unfortunately, the rest of the column is based on the "take away" sales technique: she then proceeds to tell us all the horrific disasters that would happen without all that illegal labor. That includes the recent pears canard:

...There would be consequences to our economy, by the way. Fruit and vegetables would die in the fields. (Over the summer and early fall, a splendid pear crop withered and died in California orchards because the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services cracked down on undocumented workers, and farmers had no laborers to pick their crops. Many of them lost hundreds of thousands of dollars.) The price of many foodstuffs — including chicken — could be expected to increase as labor costs shot up. Prices for services such as child care, janitorial work and lawn care — occupations now heavily serviced by foreign-born workers — would spiral upward. Ditto construction costs. Some jobs would simply go undone. America has a burgeoning population of elderly who need tending and not enough young workers to take care of them. Perhaps more of them would simply be neglected...

In brief, she's giving her readers all the reasons why they should continue to allow massive illegal activity, and she's a strong supporter of illegal immigration.

Previously:
Cynthia Tucker still illegal immigration-supporting idiot
Cynthia Tucker still idiot on immigration
Cynthia Tucker to uncover corruption!

Posted at 02:45 PM | Comments (2)

Has the Weekly Standard backtracked on Graf/Hayworth myth?

Bill Kristol and Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard - as well as other cheap-labor supporters - have tried mightily to spread the myth that one of the reasons some GOP candidates lost is because of their stance against illegal immigration.

Now comes Weekly Standard reporter Duncan Currie with what some Kreml' watchers might consider to be a bit of a correction:

...Fans of the Bush-Martinez strategy point to losing Republicans J.D. Hayworth, Randy Graf, and John Hostettler. Here were three of the toughest border hawks of the campaign. Hayworth and Graf were running in Arizona, one of the states most affected by illegal border crossings. Yet they both lost, as did Hostettler in Indiana. Meanwhile, a national exit poll found that voters--when given two options for dealing with illegal immigrants--preferred giving them "a chance to apply for legal status" over mass deportation by a margin of 57 percent to 38 percent. All these data, say the Bush-Martinez Republicans, suggest public support for the sort of "comprehensive" reform that passed the Senate.

Other Republicans, not surprisingly, draw a different lesson. They claim the exit poll question ("Should most illegal immigrants working in the United States be: Offered a chance to apply for legal status; Deported to the country they came from?") was hopelessly skewed in favor of the "amnesty" side. They note that Hostettler's opponent, Democrat Brad Ellsworth, was also a security-first, anti-amnesty border hawk. And while Arizona voters rejected Hayworth and Graf, they overwhelmingly approved a series of ballot initiatives that will, among other things, restrict illegal immigrants' access to social services, ban them from winning punitive damages in civil lawsuits, and make English the official state language...

Posted at 07:02 PM | Comments (2)

Gerardo Sandoval (S.F. Supervisor) pushes illegal alien amnesty

Gerardo Sandoval is a San Francisco Supervisor, and he offers "Democrats must push immigration reform". Everything about it is wrong or just plain loony, so a full treatment isn't possible. He starts with supporting a caste system:

For the 44 million Latinos living in the United States, and for those Americans who appreciate them cleaning our offices, picking our fruit and caring for our children, the measure of success is very clear: immigration reform.

He might support increased Border Patrol funding, but only because it "may be unavoidable". Passing an "amnesty law" is the only "benchmark of success". And, he doesn't even seem to have followed the news these past six years:

At the other end, the Republican Party just selected a Latino, Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., as its new national chairman. Republicans will try to stoke Latino conservatism while ignoring amnesty, essentially a divide-and-conquer strategy.

Earth to Sandoval: Mel Martinez is the co-sponsor of the Senate amnesty bill.

Amongst other race-based opposition to our laws comes this:

Second, Democrats need to be clear that the $6 billion border fence now under construction is not just a wasteful boondoggle, but an affront to all Latinos.

Then, there's support for illegal immigration and the importation of a foreign serf class:

Finally, we need to educate middle America about the contributions of undocumented workers. Their hard work at low wages makes America more productive.

Does anyone doubt that "middle America" isn't a codeword for "Anglos"? His disdain for "middle America" and the ethnic boosterism continues:

Their commitment to family values is not a cliche, but a wake-up call for America to care for its elderly, its sick and to spend quality time with its children instead of forgetting them at the door of some fancy private school.

Despite what I wrote above, I strongly urge the Democrats to take his advice.

Posted at 03:27 PM | Comments (5)

Scott Stroud/San Antonio Express-News, illegal immigration supporter

Scott Stroud is the politics/government editor for the San Antonio Express-News, and he offers "Latino backlash against GOP immigration policy a gift to Demos".

Discussing Texas House Bills 28 and 29, he says:

So if we make it harder to live and work in America and to send cash back to impoverished family members, maybe people will stop coming. Of course, we also could stop hiring them to run our farms and ranches, build our buildings and roads, and keep our economy humming for minimal compensation.

Instead of asking why the federal government isn't enforcing our laws, Stroud supports the importation of desperate foreign citizens in order to keep the "economy humming".

He also lies about HR4437:

...the measure passed in the U.S. House last year that would have made it illegal to offer a drink of water to a thirsty man who just walked across the desert...

His thoughts appear to be in line with his editor, Robert Rivard.

Posted at 09:36 AM | Comments (2)

Arlen Specter wants "comprehensive immigration reform" this year

Yesterday Roll Call offered the subscriber-only "Specter to Take Another Stab at Immigration Bill Before Year Ends", which is excerpted here:

After meeting privately with Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) earlier this week, Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said Thursday he is moving forward with plans to resurrect the languishing immigration reform measure before the end of this year.

Specter said the three Senators, at the core of negotiations over the legislation, "decided to make an effort" to spend the next month working to bridge the divide between the House and Senate over the issue. He said the Nov. 7 elections, in which Republicans lost control of both chambers, sent a signal to Congress that voters want immigration reform now, and it is incumbent upon lawmakers to heed that call before the end of the 109th Congress.

"I'd like to do it," Specter said. "We have time."

Specter said he already has talked to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) about his intentions, adding that he expects Frist will discuss the matter with Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) when the two leaders meet later this week. The Judiciary chairman said he is also engaging the White House on the issue...

Sen. Mel Martinez is also on board.

Please contact as many Senators as you can with your thoughts.

Posted at 10:57 AM | Comments (6)

NRO on Graf/Hayworth election results myth

National Review offers "The Legend of Arizona", a response to the mythmakers who've tried to claim that the recent losses of Randy Graf, J.D. Hayworth, and others were because of their pro-enforcement positions. They list our favorites such as: Fred Barnes, Linda Chavez (first link), Tamar Jacoby, and the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Plus, they inform us that the myth has also been spread by Arlen Specter (link) and Michael Barone (link). Then:

...Time for a reality check. This year’s anti-Republican wave was indiscriminate, washing away such immigration hawks as John Hostettler and Charles Taylor, but also such amnesty supporters as Mike DeWine and Lincoln Chafee. In other places, Republicans were able to withstand the wave in part because they opposed amnesty: Chris Shays was the only Republican congressman to survive in Connecticut, and Pete King kept his seat in New York...

...Even in Arizona, Sen. Jon Kyl, who voted against the open-borders bill, beat a Democratic candidate who supported it. Arizona voters also approved, by wide margins, three ballot measures cracking down on illegal immigration, plus one declaring English the state’s official language...

...A final piece of mythology concerns the Hispanic vote. Exit polling found that 30 percent of Hispanics voted for Republican House candidates, down from 38 percent in the 2002 midterms. To see the significance of this drop, it has to be put in context. The percentage of white voters who picked Republicans fell from 58 to 51 percent over the same period. Hispanics just followed the national trend...

Posted at 05:39 AM | Comments (1)

Boston Herald wants to "resolve immigration reform"

The Boston Herald offers a canard-laden editorial called "Time to resolve immigration reform". Like others, they cautiously think this is a good opportunity for the Democrats and Bush to find common ground:

But many Democratic leaders do share with the Bush administration a vision for a temporary guest worker program for the people who keep the wheels of our shadow economy moving - while at the same time toughening enforcement at our borders. They should take advantage of that common ground.

Those "guests" wouldn't be "temporary". Under the Senate bill, they'd be here for three years, followed by a possible three year extension. At four years, they could apply for legal permanent resident status. And, under anything other than a very tightly controlled short-term program, our "guests" would have U.S. citizen children, and people like Bill Richardson would oppose deporting those who didn't want to leave. As for that "shadow economy", it'll still be around, as new illegal aliens come here to take advantage of future amnesties. And, needless to say, it is based on illegal activity such as identity theft and it leads to government corruption.

A meaningful compromise would be a lesson to those Republicans who preferred to hold sham hearings rather than tackle this tough issue before the election. Heck, Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.), a fan of that oh-so-practical idea of sealing the borders and deporting all 12 million illegal immigrants, is already watching from the sidelines, having lost his bid for re-election.

And, here we thought the "sham hearings" talking point had been retired. And, Hayworth supported attrition, not the mass deportations implied. And, as has been pointed out a few times already, other factors played a large role in Hayworth not being reelected.

This people just don't give up, do they?

Posted at 02:02 AM | Comments (1)

Bill Richardson supports Elvira Arellano (illegal alien holed up in Chicago church)

New Mexico governor Bill Richardson seems to have misread the political mood a bit. He's throwing his weight behind Elvira Arellano, the illegal alien who twice entered the U.S. illegally, who was caught using a fake SSN in a job at an airport, and who's holed up in a Chicago church in defiance of an order to show up to be deported. This week he sent a letter to Bush urging that he parole her and let her stay in the U.S.:

The governor said in his letter that the case of the Arellano family illustrates the problems of the federal government not acting on a comprehensive immigration plan.

The governor told the president that permitting the family to remain in the United States, will allow the boy to "continue to be raised as the great American he has already proven to be."

I don't want to call a seven-year-old un-American, but I guess that's part of the problem, isn't it? Arellano and her activist friends are shamelessly using him as a prop and a poster boy. So, let's just say that going to Mexico and asking them to support an attempt to stay in the U.S. is not a "great American" thing to do. In fact, it's about as contrary to the best interests of the U.S. as one could do in this case.

Arellano has shown that she has no respect for our immigration laws, and, in a certain way it would be a good thing if Richardson does try to run for president. He's shown that he's willing to put his race and his support for illegal immigration ahead of what's in the U.S.'s best interests. A campaign can be started to irreparably tie him to support for criminality and a complete lack of respect for our laws and sovereignty.

Previously:
Bill Richardson and racial solidarity
Bill Richardson profile
Bill Richardson, Manny Aragon, Wackenhut, and anti-white discrimination
Schwarzenegger, Perry, Napolitano, Richardson urge "comprehensive" immigration reform

Posted at 08:40 PM | Comments (2)

How to fight Minimum Wage hikes

Republicans! Want to fight the Minimum Wage increases that both Nancy Pelosi and Teddy Kennedy favor? Point out to Democrats that their quasi-open borders policies have driven down wages for low-wage workers, and that the best way to naturally raise the minimum wage is to reduce illegal immigration by low-wage workers. With fewer low-wage workers, there will be less competition for minimum wage jobs, and employers will have to offer more. Point out that a raise in the minimum wage would increase the numbers of illegal aliens working in the "cash economy", thereby driving large numbers of low-wage American workers out of work.

They'll probably respond with a tu quoque argument, at which point you admit that, yes, the GOP leadership is part of the problem and you're trying to do something about that. But, you then stress that it takes "two to tango", and that if the Democrats strongly opposed illegal immigration instead of supported it, the GOP would be forced to stop their support.

At the very least you'll create a log jam where the Dems are forced to choose between raising the minimum wage and reducing illegal immigration.

Posted at 12:29 PM | Comments (1)

Juan Jose Gutierrez, ANSWER, Party for Socialism and Liberation, and NBC News

Juan Jose Gutierrez is the director of Latino Movement USA, and NBC News featured him as a spokesman for the Hispanic community last month. A week before then, he was a featured speaker at a public forum sponsored by the "Party for Socialism and Liberation". The flyer for that is to the right, and a description of the event is here. Note that the other featured speaker was Karina Garcia, the Political Chair of the Chicano Caucus at Columbia University (columbia.edu/cu/chicanocaucus).

Did NBC News know about this? Perhaps they did, but they were convinced to run the segment without identifying his underlying beliefs because of his links to the SEIU and Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Maybe after airing that report they also found out about the Los Angeles branch of that party holding their 3rd annual "Socialism Conference" on November 11:

...The day will begin with a focus on fighting the capitalist offensive, including the meaning of the capitalist mid-term elections; immigrant rights and the case for amnesty; fighting the Minutemen and right-wing attacks; Black liberation and socialist struggle; and the struggle against racism, sexism and homophobia, and for working class unity...

...Featured speakers include Brian Becker, Party for Socialism and Liberation and National Coordinator of the ANSWER Coalition (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism); Karina Garcia, Political Chair of the Chicano Caucus at Columbia University in New York; Muna Coobtee, Free Palestine Alliance; Eugene Puryear, Howard University student leader; Gloria La Riva, Coordinator of the National Committee to Free the Cuban Five; Ian Thompson, Editor of PSLweb.org; Juan Jose Gutierrez, Director of Latino Movement USA; Carlos Alvarez, Youth & Student ANSWER; Angelina Corona, Executive Director of Hermandad Mexicana Nacional; and Preston Wood, Coordinator of ANSWER Coalition-LA...

Surely, the crack researchers at NBC News discovered this.

And, just as surely, they've read the article "Latinos Threaten to Take to the Streets":

Tuesday US Latino organizations threatened to carry out mass demonstrations on the streets of the United States if Congress refuses to take actions favoring immigrants.

[The executive director of the DC chapter of the Central American Resources Center (CARECEN-DC) Saul Solorzano]* urged for an all-embracing migratory reform to authenticate 11.2 million people with no identity papers.

We'll wait 110 days [for the new Democratic Congress], if in that time the legislative body does not act, "we will," he warned.

...USA Latino Movement director Juan Jose Gutierrez expressed his opposition to Congress and White House propaganda for their interests to the detriment of immigrants.

One of the points on the Democrats agenda will be modification of the US migration laws, which House Democratic leader Harry Reid called a failed system.

Nancy Pelosi, who will be first female House speaker, hopes to reach a bipartisan accord on this topic.

*In the article, he's refered to as "Central American Resources Center executive director Raul Solorzano", but his first name is actually Saul.

You can reach NBC Nightly News at nightly *at* nbc.com

Posted at 11:40 AM | Comments (2)

Mel Martinez stabs base in back, will promote massive immigration

One of the leading MSM themes is to falsely accuse those who support our immigration laws of being bad people, mean-spirited, meanies, and the like. Unfortunately, some corrupt Republicans join in that bashing. In effect, those GOP members are crossing over to the other side and they're doing the MSM's (and the Democrats') work for them. Such moves undercut the GOP base and give power to the MSM, the Democrats, and far-left groups. And, those lies are then regurgitated over and over by the MSM and become enshrined as facts. A perfect example is the anti-Proposition 187 meme that's been propagated by people like Allan Hoffenblum. Other examples are the various Chris Cannon attacks on Tom Tancredo.

The latest example comes from the RNC chair-elect, Senator Mel Martinez:

...[He] said his goal will be to undo the election damage done by the border-enforcement-first message of most Republicans -- which he called "harshness only."

...Speaking to reporters after the Oval Office announcement, Mr. Martinez said he was "not going to do a post-mortem on the election here today." Moments later, though, he did a post-mortem on immigration, saying he saw a clear message on that issue.

..."I think we have to understand that the election did speak to one issue, and that was that -- it's not about bashing people, it's about presenting a hopeful face," said Mr. Martinez, who won his seat in 2004...

..."Border security only, enforcement only, harshness only is not the message that I believe America wants to convey," Mr. Martinez said...

Instead of, for instance, condemning the many Democrats who lied about their immigration positions or condemning Democrats for supporting illegal immigration and opposing border security, he's falsely accusing those in his own party of "bashing people". The far-left, the Democrats, and the MSM will probably use his own words against any other GOP candidate who supports our immigration laws.

Martinez' candidacy for head of the RNC will be decided in January. This would be a good opportunity for every GOP member to think for themselves and turn their backs on Bush, Rove, Martinez, and all the other GOP leaders who do not have the best interests of the U.S. at heart.

RNC member Randy Pullen - former chairman of a committee in favor of Arizona's Proposition 200 - says it's "another Harriet Miers moment". Hopefully it will be that, and hopefully the GOP base will tire of the frequency of such "moments" and decide that turning their backs on Bush is the best course of action for the GOP and for the country.

Posted at 05:45 AM | Comments (3)

Comments too hot for the Sacramento Bee

Like some other newspapers, the Sacramento Bee allows readers to leave comments on their stories, and on Saturday I left two comments on the story "Dash of salesmanship: In Mexico, governor blasts border fence plan" (discussed here; article here).

Neither comment has shown up, and I'm going to assume neither was approved. Certainly this might have been a technical problem, but it might also be due to the (just slightly) hostile nature of my comments. Nevertheless, neither comment was abusive, used foul language, or anything similar. So, I've written to ombud *at* sacbee.com for an answer.

-- COMMENT 1 --
First, various people are working to make sure that "joestalin" gets his wish. There are already plans underway to join the U.S., Mexico, and Canada into a greater union. Bye bye U.S.A., hello NAU: eagleforum.org/topics/NAU

As for the article, perhaps the SacBee should consider asking a few tough questions here or there. For instance, why is a U.S. governor going to a foreign country to try to reach out to U.S. citizens of Mexican descent? Shouldn't those U.S. citizens be encouraged to think of themselves as completely American? Isn't this an example of that assimilation difficulty Arnie spoke about recently?

And, since Gloria Romero was there, perhaps the SacBee could ask her about the resolution passed by the CA Senate that supported foreign citizens marching in our streets. Isn't foreign citizens making a show of force inside a country generally considered a very bad thing, and aren't those who promote such marches generally considered, well, Quislings?

-- COMMENT 2 --
Which business leaders/groups were along for the ride, and what other links do they have to Arnold and how much money have they contributed to him? Why hasn't that been covered? (I'm going to guess that one of them is Luanna Hallstrom, can that be confirmed? Will the SacBee cover any other links she has, assuming she went along?)
-- END COMMENTS --

Note that her actual name is Luawanna Hallstrom. Since the SacBee - as well as all the other sources along for the ride - won't do their jobs, we don't know whether she or others from the Western Growers Association were there.

Posted at 01:13 AM | Comments (1)

Charlie Gibson promotes illegal immigration on ABC Nightly News

On tonight's ABC Nightly News, anchor Charlie Gibson turned a few minutes of the broadcast into little more than an advertisement in support of illegal immigration. He first discussed the recent Hazleton-style ordinance that was passed in Farmers Branch, Texas. Then, in a peppy contrast, he informed his viewer that Houston had a different way of dealing with the issue. The ensuing report featured Gibson as the "reporter" and an illegal alien housekeeper/high school student as the sympathetic subject. She's attending a high school specifically opened for working students, and we were soon treated to an "interview" Gibson conducated with the school's principal. The latter could charitably be refered to as a "liberal" useful idiot, and during the "interview" Gibson asked a series of puffball questions and they appeared to take much humor in the fact that many of the students there were illegal aliens. Gibson even used the phrase "American dream" at least twice to refer to illegal aliens, and it was clear that Gibson saw no problem at all with people illegally crossing our borders.

This report was simply pro-illegal immigration propaganda, and it wasn't in any way journalism. If Gibson wants to redeem what ever journalistic standing he had before, perhaps he could do a little investigative journalism of himself. Maybe he could find out who exactly caused this report to be made, and why. Is it because they or their associates make money from illegal immigration? Is it to help the Democratic Party? Is it just because they're useful idiots?

While I didn't have a particularly negative opinion of Charlie Gibson before this report, I have one now, and I hope that he lost a large number of other viewers.

Unlike newspapers, television networks are generally impervious to criticism, but if enough people send them an email it might do some small amount of good. However, if you ever see Gibson in another setting - such as at a journalist confab of some kind - see if there's a way to sneak his report into the conversation in some way.

Posted at 06:49 PM | Comments (1)

Citizen Saul Arellano gets anti-deportation resolution from Mexico

Saul Arellano is the seven-year-old son of Elvira Arellano, who's currently holed up in a hole-in-the-wall Chicago church in defiance of a court order to appear to be deported. Saul was recently taken to Mexico and appeared before their Chamber of Deputies (House) asking them to lend their support to his effort.

To the surprise of none, they complied and have passed a resolution asking the U.S. Congress to avoid deporting not only Elvira Arellano, but all other illegal aliens who have U.S. citizen children:

...If the U.S. agrees, it would "create a precedent that will benefit more than 4.9 million children who have been born in the United States and whose parents live under the threat of deportation," said Mexican congressman Jose Jacques, who lived in the United States for 33 years and has an American daughter and granddaughter...

...[Vicente Fox's] spokesman Ruben Aguilar acknowledges that Arellano broke U.S. law, but "we think there exist certain elements of a humanitarian nature that should be taken into account to avoid splitting up the family."

Needless to say, this illustrates the problems not only with illegal immigration, but with guest worker schemes as well: those guests would have U.S. citizen children, and the same techniques would be used to keep "guests" from having to go home.

Contrary to what the linked article by Julie Watson of the AP implies, it's not just "conservative columnists and anti-illegal immigration activists" who think Arellano should be deported, but both major Chicago newspapers. They realize how much damage this case could do to their support for illegal immigration. I'd say we rub as much salt as possible into their wounds by continually discussing that this case illustrates how much we need to enforce our immigration laws and avoid (at the least) long-term "guest" worker schemes.

Posted at 05:20 PM | Comments (4)

Barnes, Kristol pass canard baton to Tamar Jacoby

She's back! Our favorite amnestibot, Tamar Jacoby, offers "A Wedge Too Far: The immigration issue didn't work." It's a continuation of the long line of articles previously discussed here. A sample:

...Immigration was the dog that didn't bark. It did not prove an effective wedge issue. And as far as could be determined, it decided few if any contests. No congressional or gubernatorial candidate otherwise poised to win was defeated primarily because of his or her views on immigration. No more than one or two, if that many, struggling to catch up managed to ride it to victory. And the most stridently restrictionist candidate in the country, Arizona congressional hopeful Randy Graf, who ran a campaign based almost entirely on immigrant-bashing, went down in flaming defeat... [...much deleted...] ...The Republican party has maneuvered itself onto the wrong side of the immigration issue. What it--and the country--needs is for reformers like President Bush and Sen. McCain to take up the issue again and rescue the GOP from the restrictionist corner it has backed itself into.

Even the BushBots at PowerLine partially disagree with her:

...But did it hurt to be a hard-liner? I don't think so. One certainly can make the case that it may have hurt Randy Graf and J.D. Hayworth in Arizona. But, as Jacoby says, Graf came off not just as tough on illegal immigration but as fanatical, and neither his party nor the incumbent Republican he defeated in the primary supported him...

Of course, neither Jacoby nor PL are correct that Graf was an extremist, although certainly the far-left or those who have a profit motive might say otherwise. And, the exact reasons why the national GOP in effect supported Giffords remain to be disclosed, but it probably has something to do with the fact that Graf would have cost their contributors money.

Posted at 10:18 PM | Comments (2)

Amnesty supporter Mel Martinez to head Republican National Committee

Florida Senator Mel Martinez will be the new head of the Republican National Committee ("RNC"), sources say. He'll be continuing as a Senator, with the day-to-day operations handled by someone else.

Martinez is the co-sponsor of the Senate amnesty bill (2611), also called the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006" or simply "Hagel-Martinez". In 2004, he opposed amnesty, now he's a strong supporter.

He's perfect for the Bush vision of the GOP, but abysmal for the U.S. Hopefully a third party will form that will offer an alternative, because this move makes the GOP even less attractive than they were before.

Of course, this move will probably come as a blow to another one of Bush's (presumed) top picks, and someone who - unlike Mel - will soon retire from his current position: Vicente Fox.

Posted at 02:00 PM | Comments (3)

Jesse McKinley/NYT's hidden assumptions

Jesse McKinley of the New York Times offers "Immigrant Protection Rules Draw Fire" about sanctuary cities. It's certainly not as bad as it could be, but it labels those opposed to those policies as "hard-liners", "conservatives", and the like. The supporters - who McKinley and/or his editor presumably consider to be "normal" - are not identified with corresponding labels.

* It states that "[c]ritics argue that sanctuary policies discourage the police from enforcing laws". It doesn't mention the impact that those policies have on encouraging additional illegal immigration.

* Here are the phrases used to describe opponents:
"conservative legal groups and politicians"
"immigration hard-liners"
"Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group"
"Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which lobbies for stronger immigration enforcement"

In contrast, the supporters are not described as "liberals" or "far-left". Those listed as "[s]anctuary supporters" are: S.F. Supervisor Gerardo C. Sandoval; Lt. Paul Vernon, a spokesman for the Los Angeles Police Department; and the Major Cities Chiefs Association. Other unlabeld supporters are: "Kamala D. Harris, the San Francisco district attorney", "Joan Friedland, an immigration lawyer for the National Immigration Law Center", and the caption to the lead photo:

In San Francisco, Kavitha Sreeharsha, left, a lawyer, with a translator and a client at Asian Pacific Islander Legal Outreach, a group that has been active in fighting human trafficking and other abuses in the Bay Area.

The only slightly negative label is "[a]dvocates for illegal immigrants", of which only one is named: "Lucas Guttentag, the director of the Immigrants’ Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union".

Posted at 09:01 AM | Comments (0)

Michael Chertoff admits he isn't doing his job (guest worker program)

DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff spoke to the editorial board of the Dallas Morning News, and admitted that he isn't doing his job:

"We are going to go after systematic, willful violators with heavy criminal cases, where people face real jail time, losing businesses, paying millions and millions of dollars in fines. Because that is the only way you will start to change the behavior that has driven a lot of this activity in. Now, we're going to get a lot of squawking from business, whose basic argument will be that "our business rests upon the ability to hire people who are not Americans [and] therefore, if you punish us you're going to drive us out of business." So we've got to find a way to satisfy that labor need without compromising our border control or security..."

Aren't our "border control or security" a much higher priority than avoiding "squawking from business"? Isn't it Chertoff's job to secure the U.S.? As indicated by his use of the future tense, why hasn't he already been doing that?

To see this more clearly, pretend that he said this while being under consideration for the job. In that case, those who truly cared about the security of the U.S. would not take him seriously. If he said this right after being appointed for the job, those who truly cared about security would not confirm him. But, he's saying this after having been in the job for almost two years.

This would be a perfect opportunity for the Democrats to point out how regard that the Bush administration has for U.S. security. And, in addition to any political benefits, they could also help this country by replacing him with someone who'd put the security of the U.S. ahead of less important issues. Unfortunately, I don't think the Democrats will take up this cause.

And, not only does he admit that he's not doing his job, he comes perilously close to blackmailing the U.S.:

"And that means you've got to create a program that registers people who want to work, taxes them, makes sure that they are within the system so that when they're mistreated they have recourse..."

As previously noted, he's ultimately saying that until the Bush administration gets its guest worker program, they aren't going to take border security seriously. Then, he accurately describes the current situation:

"But what we're not going to do is have a GWP [guest worker program] by failing to enforce the law."

Needless to say, the DMN's editorial board didn't call him on that megawhopper: the Bush administration has been largely failing to enforce the law for six years, resulting in a de facto "guest worker program".

Asking him a follow-up question pointing out that obvious huge lie is grade-school level journalism.

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

Chertoff promotes "Guest" Worker Program at House meeting

Chertoff promotes "Temporary Worker Program" at Senate meeting

And, Chertoff is similar to the previous incompetent Asa Hutchinson:

Rounding up all illegals 'not realistic'

Starring John Cornyn as "Asa Hutchinson"

"The Truth About Asa Hutchinson"

Posted at 05:43 AM | Comments (1)

"Immigration-Reduction did NOT lose at the polls"

An email here from Roy Beck of Numbers USA discusses the pro-amnesty forces incorrectly trying to spin the election results as a victory for their side. For instance:

Loss of Election by Republicans Based on Their Immigration-Reduction Grade of This Congress

* 9.6% with an A grade lost

* 25.0% with an F grade lost

* 9.2% with a B grade lost

* 6.4% with a C grade lost

* 9.5% with a D grade lost

Posted at 01:54 AM | Comments (1)

Fred "Shifty Eyes" Barnes on comprehensive immigration reform

Over the weekend, Fred Barnes and Morton Kondracke - hosts of Fox News' Beltway Boys show - gave the video version of their claim that the election results mean that voters want "comprehensive immigration reform". Here's a summary, and here's another one:

Barnes just touted himself while grasping his chest ("manly style") that he "is a Conservative" (he's not) and that Ronald Reagan "wasn't opposed to illegal immigration" -- that "the rejectionists" (as both Kondracke and Barnes call those who oppose illegal immigration and seek border security) "were defeated" and that "even the Weekly Standard supports" open borders.

When he said the bit about Reagan his eyes oscillated wildly back and forth and he gave the tiniest glimpse of a smile. This time that strange activity was even more pronounced than the earlier instance I pointed out. Now, maybe he's got some kind of a nervous tic or something. But, the explanation I find much more likely is that he knows he's full of it.

Posted at 09:42 PM | Comments (0)

Borderland mayors oppose border fence

From this:

Mayors from Mexican and U.S. border cities signed a document Friday denouncing U.S. plans to build new border fences.

In the document, the mayors of Eagle Pass, Texas, and Ciudad Acuna and Piedras Negras, both in the Mexican state of Coahuila, declare the U.S.-Mexico border an area for union and solidarity — not division.

"From El Paso to Brownsville, Texas, we're against building the wall. ... That's why we're here today to support our neighbors," Eagle Pass Mayor Chad Foster said...

Posted at 10:39 PM | Comments (4)

Amnesty proponents can't be trusted (Democrats waver on border fence)

One of the clearest arguments against "comprehensive immigration reform" (aka a massive amnesty) is that the new laws would be enforced in the same manner as the current laws: only when necessary and unwillingly so. This amnesty will fail in the same ways as the 1986 amnesty, and the same forces that oppose enforcement now will continue to oppose enforcement, and they'll have even more power as a result of the amnesty.

And, they're tipping their hand even before beginning to push for the amnesty. From "Democrats to 'revisit' law creating border fence":

Democrats will look again at the legislation mandating 698 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border and might seek to scrap the plan altogether when they take control of Congress next year.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, Mississippi Democrat, told reporters this week that he expected to "revisit" the issue when he becomes chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee in the 110th Congress.

Mr. Thompson said the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) new border enforcement program, known as the Secure Border Initiative or SBI Net -- which includes monitors, cameras and other integrated surveillance systems -- is a viable alternative to fencing.

"We might do away with it, or look at [integrating it into] SBI Net," he said. "A virtual fence rather than a real one."

President Bush and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff have voiced similar concerns about building the fence...

Thompson's immigration-related votes get an F-, and some of his votes are listed here.

However, from a May 4 article:

"Most blacks don't think migrant workers hurt their chances to get work, with the exception of a few industries -- most notably construction -- and they want to show solidarity with the immigrants," said Rep. Bennie Thompson, Mississippi Democrat.

But, he said, people are put off by the rhetoric used to support a guest-worker program for illegal aliens already in the U.S.

"The most insulting thing you hear is that [immigrants] are doing jobs that we won't do ... as if the idea is that if we won't do a back-breaking job for $5.15 an hour without protections -- health care, workers' compensation -- [it] means we are shiftless and lazy. That is simply an insult," Mr. Thompson said...

Posted at 03:22 PM | Comments (2)

Nancy Pelosi "hopeful" about a "comprehensive immigration overhaul"

From this:

U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, who is in line to become Speaker of the House, is hopeful a bipartisan agreement on comprehensive immigration overhaul will be reached by the new Democratic-controlled Congress, said her spokeswoman Jennifer Crider.

"She raised the issue with the president when she met with him as one of the issues she hopes they can work together on," Crider said...

Posted at 11:14 AM | Comments (3)

Arnold Schwarznegger: no immigration "reform" is "crazy", "insane"

The possibility that California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is simply a Bush/Big Business puppet asked to go to Mexico to try to drum up support for a massive illegal alien amnesty increases with his latest outbursts. He had a "private" meeting with Mexican president-elect Felipe Calderon. Then, his helpers played a portion of the video tape recording of the "private" meeting to reporters.

Arnie says of the fence:

"It is crazy for the federal government not to simultaneously ... also create a law where we can bring more people into the country legally."

Some other quotes from that meeting or from before:

"The good thing is that new blood comes to Washington, new Democrats, new Republicans... I think there is a better chance to move immigration reform forward much quicker... ...It is insane ... not to have been able to accomplish ['comprehensive' 'reform'] this year..."

Oddly enough, I'm reminded of George P. Bush's big trip to Mexico during which he dissed the Border Patrol.

UPDATE: There's a longer Arnie quote from the "private" meeting in this article from Kevin Yamamura:

"We can't get enough workers into our country, so it has a direct effect on our economy... You have to literally simultaneously go and also create a law where we can lift the cap and bring more people into the country legally so they can hire people legally. ... It's, like, insane not to go and not to have been able to accomplish that."

The last also contains this passage in which Arnold gets a cookie from Calderon, and racial demagogues then try to sell him on passing Mexico-friendly proposals:

...The governor also boasted to Calderon that he received 40 percent of the Latino vote in Tuesday's election. Told that Republican governors historically have received less than that, the president-elect replied, "That's amazing. The Latino people really, really like you." Three exit polls showed the governor receiving between 33 percent and 41.5 percent of the Latino vote in Tuesday's election, though at least one political strategist said those numbers seemed high.

State Sen. Martha Escutia, D-Montebello, said those numbers show that Schwarzenegger is doing "very well" for a Republican governor, but she suggested he has room to improve. Escutia was one of three Democratic Latino state legislators joining Schwarzenegger on the trip.

"Frankly, if I were them, I wouldn't settle for 40 percent," she said.

"I would want to get more. However, on key issues of concern to the Latino community, I think the governor needs to improve. We have outstanding the issue of the driver's license. We have outstanding the issue of tuition assistance for undocumented immigrant kids. And what are we going to do about English-language learners?"

In his meeting with Calderón, the governor reiterated his opposition to issuing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants until the federal government approves regulations under a national identification card act. The governor vetoed a bill this year to allow licenses once the federal regulations are approved. Schwarzenegger told Calderón that the driver's license issue had depressed his support among Latinos.

"I could have gotten way over 40 percent of the Latino votes but the sticking point is the driver's licenses," Schwarzenegger said.

Another traveling legislator, Sen. Gloria Romero, said that driver's licenses were taken away in 2003 because of "some anti-immigrant hysteria." She said the issue is not the most important for Latinos, who are concerned about jobs and education, but that it is a symbolic one.

"Now is the opportunity, as the governor has demonstrated on so many issues before, is the time to lead," Romero said...

Posted at 09:00 PM | Comments (2)

Randal Archibold/NYT: Democratic win could lead to amnesty

Randal Archibold - frequent co-conspirator with Rachel Swarns on New York Times articles about immigration - offers "Democratic Victory Raises Spirits of Those Favoring Citizenship for Illegal Aliens". If their search function works correctly, this is the only NYT article this year using "illegal aliens" in the title; in 2005 there were two; one in 2004; 2003 was a banner year, with at least five. Nevertheless, such baby steps towards the truth should be encouraged.

The article points out that those "spirits" are dampened somewhat because some of the new Democratic winners campaigned with a "tough approach to illegal immigration", which is one way of saying they want to enforce our laws. We're also informed that Randy Graf is a "self-described Minuteman border vigilante"; I tend to doubt that, since "vigilante" is a smear started by our very own "American" president.

And:

Still, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a Washington group favoring tighter limits on immigration, said six state ballot initiatives making life harder on illegal immigrants were approved by voters on Tuesday, four of them in Arizona, where immigration is intensely discussed, and two in Colorado.

I doubt whether they said it in the same way that Archibold says they said it.

And:

The election "shows what we have been saying all along, that the anti-immigrant, enforcement-only rhetoric to motivate conservative voters was not reflecting where the majority of Americans are on this issue," said Angela Sembrano, director of the Central American Resource Center in Los Angeles, one of the groups that helped organize large pro-immigrant marches in the spring.

The marches were, obviously, pro-illegal immigration, not simply "pro-immigrant". And, Chung-Wha Hong, executive director the New York Immigration Coalition, is quoted as saying that their goal would remain "legalization for as many people as possible."

Posted at 04:52 PM | Comments (2)

An immigration challenge for Andrew Sullivan

In addition to various other things, Sully is wrong on immigration, saying this:

And we may get a sensible compromise on immigration.

That "compromise" - otherwise known as "comprehensive" "reform" - would vastly increase legal immigration and would lead to millions of new illegal aliens coming here in expectation of receiving the next amnesty. It would have many other negative consequences, but let's concentrate on just two:

1. Since the 1986 amnesty was never really enforced, and since the same types of forces (growers, the far-left, etc.) that pushed that through are now encouraging the new amnesty, what specific assurances can Sully offer that the new amnesty would be enforced?

2. Hopefully we can agree that Mexico has been able to obtain a good deal of political power inside the U.S. due to all of the legal and illegal immigrants that they've sent us. And, the new amnesty would increase that power. Does Sully have any plans that would counteract their political power, or is he not concerned about Mexico obtaining even more political power inside the U.S.?

Posted at 04:43 PM | Comments (2)

"House GOP's immigration strategy no 'magic bullet'"

This is an entrant for the Meme: Graf, Hayworth losses = support for "comprehensive immigration reform" post, but, because it contains some more in-depth analysis in addition to the meme it's in its own post.

...Republicans were unable to turn the immigration issue into a winner on Tuesday thanks in large part to their opponents' abilities to support comprehensive reform and yet still cast themselves as "me-too border hawks" who agreed on most aspects of enforcement, said John Fonte, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.

Fonte said the tough border approach did help certain Republicans, including Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl and Peter Roskam, who held retiring Rep. Henry Hyde's Illinois seat for the party. But it did little to help Republicans as a whole save their 15-seat majority.

"It wasn't a silver bullet," Fonte said. "For someone like Hayworth who was bogged down with Abramoff stuff, it couldn’t turn it around for them. And Graf, with no money, it couldn’t turn it around for him.”

Fonte said Republicans found it difficult to differentiate their positions when their opponents came out tough on the border.

Giffords drew attention several months ago for an ad in which she drew a line in the sand near the border. Mitchell hammered Hayworth for being a part of a Republican majority that saw illegal immigration skyrocket over the last decade.

Margaret Kenski, a GOP pollster in Arizona who polls for Kyl, echoed Fonte’s sentiments. She said Arizona Democrats, led by Gov. Janet Napolitano and her move to declare a state of emergency on the border last year, moved to the center on the issue to make themselves accessible to voters.

Kenski credited Democrats’ recruitment of the non-ideological and beloved high school teacher and former Tempe Mayor Harry Mitchell with Hayworth’s demise, but suggested neither Hayworth nor Graf were successful enough with other issues besides illegal immigration, such as healthcare.

“It’s necessary but not sufficient,” Kenski said. “You can’t run on just that.”

Voters clearly favor a comprehensive approach, but when further questioned, want to see the enforcement piece come first, Kenski said...

If they were given the full details on what the "comprehensive approach" would involve, most likely many more people would oppose it.

Posted at 09:39 AM | Comments (1)

About half of Arizona Hispanics voted for official English proposition

From this:

About half the Hispanics who voted Tuesday in Arizona supported a successful ballot proposal that makes English the state's official language, according to an exit poll by The Associated Press.

While whites and blacks favored it overwhelmingly, Hispanics and other racial groups were divided over Proposition 103, which also requires that government functions be conducted in English.

Like three other immigration measures on the Arizona ballot, Proposition 103 drew in support in the 70 percent range. People on both side of the immigration debate said they weren't surprised by Hispanic support for the proposal.

..."I think our sense that the Hispanic community is monolithic is just shattered when these issues come before us," [Fred Solop, a political science professor and pollster at Northern Arizona University] said.

The poll of 2,523 voters was conducted for AP and television networks by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International.

The survey included 600 absentee voters interviewed by telephone during the past week and their responses were weighted to represent 20 percent of the total sample — their estimated proportion of the state's electorate. Results were subject to sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points, higher for subgroups...

Posted at 11:06 PM | Comments (1)

J.D. Hayworth hasn't lost yet...

Arizona Rep. J.D. Hayworth has not yet conceded in his apparent loss to Democrat Harry Mitchell. In fact, there are about 250,000 ballots still to be counted in Maricopa County; only part of that number would be in the 5th District.

This is the current total:

Mitchell: 73,762/51%
Hayworth: 67,830/46%
Severin:4,754/3%

One analyst says that Hayworth would need 80% of the remaining votes (which are less than those above), but commenters on the first link think he'd only need 53%.

Posted at 09:05 PM | Comments (1)

Bush, Calderon promote "comprehensive" immigration "reform"

Our allegedly American president welcome Mexican president-elect Felipe Calderon to the White House just two days after the midterm election, and promoted "comprehensive" reform:

PRESIDENT BUSH: ...I have made it very clear to the President-elect that Mexico is a priority of this administration... I know a fair amount about Mexico; after all, I was the governor of Texas. I assured him that we will work very closely together. We talked about trade. We talked about mutual interests, fighting drugs, and we talked, of course, about migration. And I assured the President-elect that the words I said in the very Oval Office that we sit about a comprehensive immigration vision are words I still believe strongly.

...PRESIDENT-ELECT CALDERON: (As translated.) President Bush and I had a very good conversation today. And we reaffirmed the purpose that we both had, which is to strengthen the bilateral relationship between Mexico and the United States even more.

I expressed to President Bush my concern regarding the issue of migration. President Bush was very open to all the arguments that I have presented to him. And we both stressed the need to have a comprehensive vision with which we can move forward. This is, of course, an extremely important issue. It is not the only issue in our bilateral relationship... We want to foster our trade relationship, our economic relationship even more. We both understand that the only solution to many of the problems that we have is to create well-paid jobs in Mexico. And for that, we need even more investment. We will continue to show the importance of democracy, the importance of free trade, the importance of all of these issues that will make us an even stronger nation, which will also strengthen the bilateral relationship... [etc...]

Thankfully, Greg Flakus has jogged my memory that I meant to mention Bush's choice of words:

The president's use of the word migration is sure to ruffle the feathers of many critics of his immigration policy because that word is often used by groups who see the influx of Mexicans across the border as part of the natural flow of labor. The word is also used by groups who believe Mexicans have a special right to come to the United States since much of the land in the American southwest was part of Mexico and was taken by the United States after the war with Mexico that ended in 1848.

Posted at 03:39 PM | Comments (1)

"Mexico's Calderon Heartened By Outcome of U.S. Elections"

Mexico president-elect Felipe Calderon met with reporters and editors from the Washington Post yesterday. No word is given on whether he gave them talking points, and the article contents don't entirely live up to the headline. The only thing that comes close is the first paragraph:

Mexican President-elect Felipe Calderon said yesterday that Democratic gains in Congress could lead to "room for improvement" in U.S.-Mexican relations, a suggestion that headway may be made on immigration and other bilateral issues.

Related:

Vicente Fox welcomes Democratic control of Congress

Terrorists, Enemies of America Applaud Election

Posted at 03:31 PM | Comments (1)

Tim Gaynor/Reuters: "Democrats' win spurs hope of immigration revamp"

Tim Gaynor of Reuters offers this:

Sweeping wins for Democrats in U.S. midterm elections have rekindled hopes among Latino activists of achieving a comprehensive overhaul of immigration policy that was blocked by Republicans in Congress.

Democrats swept Republicans from power in the U.S. House of Representatives in Tuesday's elections, and appeared to have taken control of the Senate, in a clear repudiation of President George W. Bush's handling of Iraq.

..."I would say our chances in the next Congress are better than they have ever been," said Frank Sharry, the executive director of the Washington-based National Immigration Forum...

[...says that public opinion is "divided" about what to do about the illegal aliens here now, and implies that the House/Senate represent that divide...]

..."It's early days, but there are real grounds for optimism," said Elias Bermudez, the founder and executive director of Phoenix-based advocacy group Immigrants Without Borders. [described as an "immigrant-rights advocate" --LW]

[...points to AZ propositions winning, and also Dem winners pretending to support enforcement... says that both Bush and Pelosi support "reform"...]

..."If President Bush is smart and is interested in getting something accomplished in his final two years as president, this is a natural issue for him," said Michael Shifter, vice president for policy at the Inter-American Dialogue...

..."A more humane immigration measure might begin to repair the damage in U.S.-Latin American relations," Shifter said.

Posted at 11:52 AM | Comments (0)

Meme: Graf, Hayworth losses = support for "comprehensive immigration reform"

As regular readers know, illegal immigration supporters will go to any depth to promote amnesty and similar schemes. One meme you can expect to hear over the coming months is that the recent losses by Randy Graf and J.D. Hayworth in Arizona mean that voters want "comprehensive immigration reform".

The quickest example of how that's wrong is presented by the fact that no less than four anti-illegal immigration propositions in Arizona passed by wide margins. And, in Graf's case he got shafted by the national GOP (whose contributors would have lost money if he'd won). He was also probably a bit too socially conservative for Tucson. In Hayworth's case, it may have been because he was seen as a rubberstamp for the Bush administration or similar factors. And, in both cases their opponents co-opted their positions to a certain extent.

This list will be updated:

1. Unsigned blog post from USA Today:

Tuesday's results suggest that any legislation seen more as anti-immigrant rather than anti-illegal immigration can easily backfire. This point was made in some individual races, even in border states. Randy Graf, a candidate for a seat held by a retiring House Republican in Arizona, was soundly defeated after running almost exclusively on a hard-line anti-immigrant platform... [... Bush can now get his amnesty...] ...Simply building a fence and threatening to deport illegal immigrants looks to be a political loser.

2. Linda Chavez ("Immigration Bust",link):

In several high-profile races where illegal immigration was a key issue, the anti-immigrant candidate lost big. In Arizona, the front line in the immigration wars, Republicans J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf lost handily to more moderate voices. Hayworth, a six-term congressman, once favored a guest worker program but flip-flopped when he sensed bashing immigrants was a surer ticket to re-election... Apparently voters in Arizona's 5th Congressional District wanted no part of Hayworth's proposed ban [a three-year moratorium on immigration from Mexico]... Graf, a former state representative and member of the extremist Minuteman Project, was even more off base. Graf supported calls to reinstate "Operation Wetback," a 1950s federal deportation program that not only rounded up thousands of illegal aliens but also ensnared some U.S. citizens of Mexican descent...

She can't even get her lies straight; it was Russell Pearce and not Graf who mentioned OW as a historical example of mass deportations. Obviously, those whose brains aren't clogged with cheap lettuce realize that any similar plan Pearce would come up with would try to avoid deporting U.S. citizens and would not be called by the same name as the previous program.

3. "Voters weren't on the fence about illegal immigration" by Michelle Mittelstadt lists Graf and Hayworth as supposed examples.

4. Los Angeles Times unsigned editorial "'No' to immigration hard-liners" hits the standard points without, of course, looking into other factors involved in the Graf/Hayworth losses:

...Critics of this approach ["comprehensive immigration reform"], including Republican candidates for governor, attorney general and two of Arizona's eight House seats, argued instead for sealing the borders and enforcing current immigration laws. They all were defeated, despite the frustration and anger expressed by many Arizonans about the torrent of border jumpers... Those emotions were evident in the overwhelming support Tuesday for ballot initiatives to deny bail, curtail subsidies for education and childcare, limit civil damage awards for illegal immigrants and make English the state's official language. Voters backed all these proposals, reflecting a widespread belief that illegal immigrants impose a variety of burdens on taxpayers... Nevertheless, voters in the state demanded a more nuanced and pragmatic solution than that being offered by the most virulently anti-illegal immigration candidates... The voters of Arizona have pushed a comprehensive solution one step closer to reality.

5. Morton Kondracke offers "Moderates Fed Up With Polarization":

...The clearest repudiation of the loud right came on the issue of immigration. By a margin of 57 percent to 38 percent [in unnamed exit polls], voters said they wanted illegal immigrants who work in the U.S. to be allowed a chance to apply for legal status and not be deported... Voters in Arizona rejected two of the nation's most vociferous immigration restrictionists, Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R) and Minuteman founder Randy Graf (R)... House Republicans massively bought into the talk-show claque's agenda by rejecting Bush's Latino-friendly proposal for comprehensive immigration reform, and they’ve suffered important damage as a result... Bush managed to capture 44 percent of the Latino vote in 2004, according to disputed exit polls, but this year Hispanics went Democratic by a margin of 72 percent to 27 percent, 10 points higher than in 2002... If Republicans and Democrats are looking for an issue around which to demonstrate they can unify and accomplish something, they could use the lame-duck session of Congress to pass the comprehensive Senate immigration bill...

6. Fred Barnes offers this:

Already the wails of the immigration restrictionists are rising, insisting Republicans lost because they weren't tough on keeping illegal border-crossers out. Not true. The test was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats. Graf lost in a seat along the Mexican border, where illegal immigrants flock... What Americans want is a full-blown solution to the immigration crisis. And that will come only when Republicans come together on a "comprehensive" measure that not only secures the border but also provides a way for illegals in the United States to work their way to citizenship and establishes a temporary worker program. If Republicans don't grab this issue, Democrats will.

7. David Brooks only has so many words to work with, and some of them are misleading and at least one is a lie ("The Middle Muscles In"):

...It was a terrible day for anti-immigration restrictionists on the right of the G.O.P., like J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf in Arizona...

Neither are "anti-immigration", and like the others he doesn't go into the other possible reasons. And, he also says that Arnold Schwarzenegger is "independent".

8. From this:

...[Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA)] said there are a number of House Republicans who thought their enforcement approach was bad policy but good politics. He said that belief was shattered by Tuesday's elections with the loss of two Republicans in Arizona -- Randy Graf, a candidate for a seat near Tucson, and Rep. J.D. Hayworth, an incumbent from Scottsdale -- who both ran heavily on opposition to a guest-worker program...

9. Frank Sharry of the National Immigration Forum offers "Immigration Reform Surprise: Hard-Liners Lost, Pragmatists Won". While he does present a fairly long list of "hard-liners" who lost, he gives it all away with this statement:

So much for the conventional wisdom that supporting comprehensive reform would turn out to be a loser and that being a hard-line hawk would be a winner.

No one really ran explicitly on "comprehensive reform". They ran on tightening the border, with the "comprehensive" in fine print. And, no one who ran a "comprehensive" campaign revealed to the voters what their plans would actually end up doing.

Posted at 08:48 AM | Comments (4)

Vicente Fox welcomes Democratic control of Congress

America's best friends have spoken:

Gains by Democrats in the US congressional elections may help promote more liberal immigration policies sought by Mexico, President Vicente Fox's spokesman has said.

...[The border fence] angered Mexico, which has more faith in the Democrats on immigration. In midterm elections on Tuesday, Democrats won control of the House and were near taking control of the Senate as vote counts continued in an outstanding race.

"We hope this new make-up of the US Congress can be a catalyst for the US government working toward a migration reform with the characteristics proposed by Mexico," Fox's spokesman Ruben Aguilar said...

..."I hope this also obliges the refocus toward our region, toward our nation," [Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez] said.

Calderon will be meeting with Bush later today, and will probably say something similar.

Posted at 06:04 AM | Comments (0)

WSJ: "Vote Is a Blow to Republican Pursuit of Hispanics"

As could be expected, the Wall Street Journal keeps on pushing for open borders (full article for subscribers only):

The Republican Party's dream of attracting the nation's growing number of Hispanic voters as part of its effort to dominate U.S. politics suffered a serious setback this week.

The election results reflected damage done to the Republican Hispanic strategy by some Republicans' harsh words on illegal immigration, much of it crafted -- apparently unsuccessfully -- to bring immigration foes to the polls. Exit polls, which found that 69% of Hispanic voters cast ballots for Democratic congressional candidates while 29% voted for Republicans, suggested that Hispanics are more critical of the Iraq war and of President Bush's performance in office than...

Posted at 04:01 AM | Comments (0)

Michelle Mittelstadt: "Voters weren't on the fence about illegal immigration"

Michelle Mittelstadt of the Houston Chronicle offers a slice of wishful thinking that the new Democratic Congress will lead to "sweeping immigration changes":

..."I do see a light at the end of the tunnel," Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, of Houston, the top Democrat on the House immigration subcommittee, said Wednesday.

Still, few were rushing to predict that Congress will quickly — or successfully — tackle a major immigration overhaul in the legislative session that begins in January.

"Some of the worst (political) barriers have been washed away," said Tamar Jacoby, an immigration expert with the conservative Manhattan Institute. "(But) it's still going to be extremely hard to accomplish it in Congress."

Immigration's huge impact on economic, national security, cultural and foreign policy arenas makes it among the most controversial of policy issues in the best of times.

At least the article isn't completely biased.

"It's a difficult issue," said newly re-elected Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas. But, she added, "We need to make every positive effort to work with the Democrats and have solutions. That's what the people want."

Then, after discussing Bush's press conference and how some Dem winners told voters they weren't for open borders:

..."Neither party can deliver immigration reform on its own," said Cecilia Munoz, vice president of the National Council of La Raza, which is pressing for legal status for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants.

But she and her allies had a bounce in their step with the defeat of several ardently anti-immigration incumbents and exit polls suggesting Latino voters deserted the GOP in droves.

Gosh, and just a few months ago Karl Rove reached out to her group, yet that paragraph makes it sound like they more or less hate the GOP. Maybe we could add that to the long list of things about which Rove is wrong. And, of course, that's also one of the groups losing California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson genuflected before.

"Miami pollster Sergio Bendixen" doesn't like the tone of the issue. Then:

Still, "I think we've learned a lot during the debate," said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. "My hope is we'll roll up our sleeves and sit down and work out a bipartisan bill that the president can sign."

The article closes on a hopeful note:

Some Republicans, however, made clear they won't budge from their opposition to a legalization plan.

"I just think it will be very difficult for the Democrats to pass legislation granting amnesty to illegal aliens," said Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston.

Posted at 12:14 AM | Comments (4)

Bush reluctantly promotes immigration "reform" at Rumsfeld press conference

Perhaps the overnights from Tony Snow's statement that the Democrats' win would enable "comprehensive immigration reform" came in and weren't favorable. Announcing Donald Rumsfeld's resignation/"resignation" earlier today, this is what our lame duck president had to say (whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/11/20061108-2.html):

Q Thank you, Mr. President. On immigration, many Democrats had more positive things to say about your comprehensive proposal than many Republicans did. Do you think a Democratic Congress gives you a better shot at comprehensive immigration reform?

THE PRESIDENT: You know, I should have brought this up. I do. I think we have a good chance. Thank you. It's an important issue and I hope we can get something done on it. I meant to put that in my list of things that we need to get done.

I would hope Republicans have recognized that we've taken very strong security measures to address one aspect of comprehensive immigration reform. And I was talking to Secretary Chertoff today; he thinks that these measures we're taking are beginning to have measurable effects, and that catch and release has virtually been ended over the past couple of months. And that's positive.

And that's what some members were concerned about prior to advancing a comprehensive bill. In other words, they said, show me progress on the border, and then we'd be interested in talking about other aspects. Well, there's progress being made on the border in terms of security, and I would hope we can get something done. It's a vital issue. It's an issue that -- there's an issue where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.

Q What are the odds for a guest worker provision?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, that's got to be an integral part of a comprehensive plan. When you're talking comprehensive immigration reform, one part of it is a guest worker program, where people can come on a temporary basis to do jobs Americans are not doing. I've always felt like that would be an important aspect of securing the border. In other words, if somebody is not trying to sneak in in the first place, it makes -- decreases the work load on our Border Patrol, and lets the Border Patrol focused on drugs and guns and terrorists. But that's a -- I appreciate you bringing that up. I should have remembered it.

Listen, thank you all very much for your time. I appreciate your interest.

Posted at 01:02 PM | Comments (4)

Bill Clinton jokes about concerns over terrorism, illegal immigration

Via this comes this MSNBC clip of a Bubba sighting:

Andrea Mitchell: [Bill Clinton] headlined a party last night for Ben Cardin... and he ridiculed what Republicans have been saying about Democrats...

Bill Clinton: ...you have to vote for us because our opponents are no good... and because they'll tax you into the poor house... and on the way to the poor house you'll meet a terrorist on every street corner... and when you try to run away from the terrorist you'll trip over an illegal immigrant... isn't that their thing? That's what they're saying...

Yes, but only some of them are truly concerned about the vital issues of terrorism and illegal immigration. Some, like Bush, Clinton, and the Dems are more concerned with other issues.

Clinton made this same joke at a recent ASU appearance.

Posted at 09:08 AM | Comments (0)

"The virus that ate DHS"

Via this comes this Wired story about a computer virus that shut down the US-VISIT computer system used by the Customs and Border Protection agency of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). There was apparently some form of cover-up involved, and it took Wired a year's worth of FOIA requests and court orders to get the full documentation of the incident.

Posted at 03:13 AM | Comments (0)

Tony Snow looks on bright side of House loss: it will lead to immigration "reform"

KLo offers this reader account:

"FoxNews reporting from the White House: White House spokesman Tony Snow reacted to the change in House control by allowing they're disappointed, but that it presents some intriguing opportunities, such as passing comprehensive immigration reform which failed in the previous Republican House."

Posted at 09:11 PM | Comments (0)

Fred Barnes: paid to promote immigration "reform"?

FoxNews just had a segment with Fred Barnes discussing Randy Graf's loss to Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona, and he discussed how Graf was a member of the Minuteman Project and how (of course) this loss indicates voter support for "comprehensive immigration reform".

The only problem was he looked like he knew he was lying. In fact, he looked like a paid shill who had been given a certain line to read. He had the lines down pat, but it was the furtive movements of his eyes that, had I been speaking to him about a used car, would have caused me to run the other way.

I have no proof of this, but if anyone can post that specific segment to Youtube it might be a bit instructive.

Posted at 08:11 PM | Comments (4)

Fareed Zakaria still wrong about immigration

When we last discussed Fareed Zakaria, he was wrong about immigration, and he's wrong again. It's a standard "deep inside the Beltway and willing to buy misleading polls from interested parties" screed:

...Despite the efforts of populist and nativist politicians and pundits to whip up hysteria about a looming catastrophe, Americans didn't bite. In a news-week poll taken last week, voters listed immigration a distant fifth on their list of concerns—after Iraq, terrorism, the economy and health care...

Obvious to those in the know, immigration is linked to "terrorism, the economy and health care". Also obvious is that having millions of foreign citizens in your country is indeed a "looming catastrophe".

...Consistent two-thirds majorities favor a comprehensive overhaul that would include tighter enforcement, but also guest-worker visas and a path to citizenship for illegal workers already in the country...

As discussed here in the past, if you phrase questions in just the right way (or lie to people), you can get the poll results you want. Calling those who would be here for between three and six years and who could apply for legal permanent resident status at four years "guests" is obviously a lie.

...The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. Only about 20 percent of voters, mostly but not exclusively Republican, are dead set against a guest-worker program as well as any path to citizenship for illegals...

As indicated above, calling them "guests" is a lie. And, any form of legalization would be perceived as an amnesty, and would lead to increased illegal immigration. If voters were presented with the truth and if they were informed of the actual impact of any sort of amnesty, the great majority would be opposed to what Zakaria supports.

Shouldn't we expect more of TV pundits than to simply take biased polls that don't reveal what proposals would actually do and then try to base policy on that?

Posted at 11:44 AM | Comments (1)

PBS NewsHour: pro-illegal immigration, pro-amnesty bias

In the past, on a few of the occasions when the PBS NewsHour has covered immigration matters they've invited on those who were legitimately on different sides of the issue. In the past several months, however, their idea of "debate" has switched to featuring people who are on the same side. For instance, David Brooks and Mark Shields arguing over which form of a massive amnesty they prefer.

The latest example of PBS NewsHour degrading into a propaganda source is illustrated by a "likely voters" panel they conducted. Most such panels should perhaps consist of average voters, rather than wonks. However, PBS seems to have snuck a "plant" onto the panel, in the person of Eduardo Romero of the Nonprofit Roundtable (nonprofitroundtable.org), who had this to say:

EDUARDO ROMERO: ... really quickly, as well. I think we heard this is an economic challenge, but it's also a moral challenge. And I think we've heard some -- you asked about amnesty. I remember when amnesty was not a dirty word.

GWEN IFILL: Yes, when did that happen?

EDUARDO ROMERO: But somehow, it's switched, and "illegal" for me is a dirty word. One can say one breaks the laws, but tell that to that pre-school kid who now is determined to be an illegal alien...

He goes on to play the race card and various other pro-illegal immigration talking points. Not only was no one around to respond to his inflammatory comments, but another panelist - a Republican - supported amnesty. If they're going to have someone like him on the panel, they should also have invited someone who could have shown just how he's wrong.

PBS NewsHour has truly degenerated into Washington Post-level hackery.

Please send them a polite message via this form informing them that debates usually involve at least two sides.

Posted at 03:29 PM | Comments (2)

What Senator Bob Menendez is saying behind your back (illegal immigration, ethnic solidarity)

Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey delivered the Democratic Hispanic Radio Address today, and here's part of what he said:

Good morning. This is Senator Bob Menendez from New Jersey. This coming Tuesday, November 7, Latinos can make the difference in elections across the country. We have the ability to make our voices heard and vote for those who respect our rights and will look out for our best interests. We can vote for leaders that will set a new direction for America or we can stay the course with Republican leaders who have done nothing but protect their political power and attack our community. While Republicans have controlled the White House and the Congress, they have chosen to take America down the wrong path, and putting their party's interests above the best interests of our country and the interests of our children.

Needless to say, not all of those who speak Spanish are Latinos, and if you find his exclusionary rhetoric disturbing, just wait.

...While Democrats fought for comprehensive immigration reform, the Republicans in the majority didn't allow it, instead they chose public relations stunts. And let us not forget that it was the overwhelming majority of Republicans in Congress who voted to make felons out of hard working undocumented immigrants and the clergy, nurses and others who help them.

Menendez is clearly not just a supporter of illegal immigration, he's also lying: HR4437 wouldn't have the dire effects he describes.

...My Latino sisters and brothers. This coming Tuesday, November 7, our people have an extraordinary opportunity that we cannot allow to pass. We have the chance to make America what it should be.

Should America really be the home of ethnic nationalism?

Posted at 03:41 PM | Comments (3)

MALDEF, ACLU, PFAW sue Escondido over illegal immigration ordinance

Escondido, California (near San Diego) is one of the cities that have passed "Hazleton-style" ordinances, and that's resulted in a predictable legal challenge from various far-left, illegal immigration-supporting non-profit organizations. In this case it's a "coalition" including:

...the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Fair Housing Council of San Diego, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), and People For the American Way (PFAW), is challenging the anti-immigration ordinance passed by the Escondido City Council on October 18 which bans renting an apartment to undocumented residents. The coalition also includes the private law firms of Rosner & Mansfield LLP and Cooley Godward Kronish LLP.

According to this, it's only the ACLU's San Diego chapter. But, the above implies that it's the national ACLU, and note that an earlier warning letter was signed by Omar Jadwat and Jenny Chang of the ACLU Foundation's "Immigrants' Rights Project". There are questions and biased answers about the ordinance here.

While you won't read it in any of the papers, the ACLU's San Diego chapter, MALDEF, and other groups are in a coalition with three groups that are openly collaborating with the Mexican government.

Related:

Hazleton sued by far-left illegal immigration supporters (Part 2)

"ACLU, PFAW, businesses sue Riverside NJ over immigration law"

Posted at 02:00 PM | Comments (5)

Rights for All People, the patriotic "immigrant" rights group

From this:

A coalition of immigrant-rights groups gathered on the steps of the [Denver] state Capitol on Thursday to protest negative immigration messages in the campaign season.

"The elections have been demonizing illegal immigrants. We need a change in the way we handle the immigration issues in the state," said Lisa Duran of Rights for All People.

The group, joined by about a dozen supporters, also criticized as "unjust and inhumane" bills passed during the state legislature's special session.

..."The country can't win across the pond, so they have to stay here and try to win a war against defenseless people," [supporter Richard Moreno] said.

It also quotes local restauranteur Mike Miller, who's quoted as saying that "his business would not survive without immigrant labor". He appears to be the owner of Basil Doc's Pizza (basildocspizzeria.com). Rather than, for instance, ordering a delivery under the name "I.P. Freely", I'd suggest just finding another pizzeria.

Posted at 10:44 AM | Comments (1)

Why pro-borders candidates must win

There are several pro-borders candidates - all that I know of Republicans - up for election on Tuesday, and I encourage everyone to do everything they can to see that they win.

Those candidates include Randy Graf, J.D. Hayworth, and Russell Pearce in Arizona, John Hostettler in Indiana, Peter King in New York, and Tom Tancredo in Colorado.

If they lose, not only will there be a legislative impact and an increased chance of Bush and the Democrats passing amnesty, but - perhaps even worse - it will hand the other side a massive propaganda victory.

There have already been several articles from pro-illegal immigration sources claiming that running on "enforcement only" is a losing issue, and if those candidates lose expect that to increase.

One recent example is from Carolyn Lochhead entitled "In Arizona, GOP finds the issue of immigration no help at polls":

...Getting tough on illegal immigration is a winner in Arizona. Yet the issue is not playing out as House Republican leaders planned six months ago, when they bet their majority that a hard-line, no-compromise stance would rescue them in a brutal election climate dominated by the Iraq war and corruption.

With Tuesday's election days away, in districts where illegal immigration is Topic A, Republican hardliners are the candidates in trouble here. As many as three GOP House seats are in jeopardy, including that of six-term incumbent J.D. Hayworth, whose race has slid from shoo-in to toss-up...

Posted at 02:19 AM | Comments (2)

Chris Cannon: few endorsements; SLT for Burridge, his "comprehensive" opponent

Illegal immigration supporting Representative Chris Cannon (R-UT) - as detailed here dozens of times - is a real piece of work. And, while it's seemed that way in the past, he might finally be on the way out. As described here, the only endorsements he's gotten are from George Bush, his wife, and (unfortunately) Rep. James Sensenbrenner. Utah governor Jon Huntsman and Senator Orrin Hatch (also pieces of work) have refused to endorse him, and he was forced to remove a link to the Minuteman Project from his website because it looked too much like an endorsement. And, the Salt Lake Tribune has endorsed his opponent.

Unfortunately, his Democratic opponent Christian Burridge has this to say:

We need comprehensive immigration reform. This means strict enforcement of illegal hiring practices. Also, employers should have access to Internet-based technology to verify the identity of those they hire. When we get unlawful activity out in the open it is easier to regulate and enforce our borders.

"Comprehensive" reform means a bit more than that: it's simply a code word for a massive illegal alien amnesty.

Nevertheless, it might be better if a Democrat pushes the same thing that Cannon would push, and it would certainly be a good thing if Cannon is no longer in Congress.

Posted at 11:30 PM | Comments (1)

Gabrielle Giffords won't reveal which guest worker plan she supports (AZ,Randy Graf)

Democrat Gabrielle Giffords is running for Congress against Randy Graf in Arizona, and I called her office a few times trying to find out exactly which of the various immigration plans she supports or where her support differs from those plans. All I managed to get out of one of her staff members is that she supports the Kennedy-McCain plan, which includes a "guest" worker plan. [1] However, that plan did not pass.

I asked about the plan that did pass the Senate, the "Hagel-Martinez compromise", which also contains a "guest" worker plan similar to that from Kennedy-McCain. [2]

I was told that they couldn't comment on that because it hadn't passed the House as well. I was told that she might support parts of that, but since it was up in the air she can't comment on which parts she might support or oppose. An interview [3] she did gave the impression - perhaps false - that she only supported a "seasonal" "guest" worker plan, but they would not comment on whether she only supported that or one with a longer term.

We already have seasonal programs, but one of the problems with longer term programs is that both Kennedy-McCain and Hagel-Martinez allow "guests" to apply to become legal permanent residents, and also most of our "guests" would have U.S. citizen children while they were here, thus making it very difficult to deport "guests" who didn't want to go home.

In any case, it appears to me that Giffords has no real clue about these issues, and is not willing to tell people where she really stands on these issues.

[1] Kennedy-McCain:
tedkennedy.com/journal/75/mccain-kennedy-kolbe-flake-gutierrez-bill-at-a-glance
vdare.com/collins/050521_enthusiasts.htm
visalaw.com/05may4/3may405.html
thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.1033:/

[2] Hagel-Martinez:
heritage.org/Research/Immigration/wm1076.cfm
frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22672

[3] KUAT interview:
http://kuat.org/misenplace.cfm?ID=240

Posted at 09:29 PM | Comments (1)

Don't do business with Wells Fargo

As detailed here many times, Wells Fargo bank has been a strong supporter of illegal immigration by letting illegal aliens open accounts. The site Embargo Wells Fargo has a handy round up of links about their activities.

Posted at 02:42 PM | Comments (4)

ACLU claims U.S. violating human rights obligations (OAS)

The American Civil Liberties Association - which has at least one indirect link to the Mexican government - together with the National Employment Law Project and the Transnational Legal Clinic at the University of Pennsylvania School of Law [1] (run by Sarah Paoletti [2]) have filed [3] a petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (part of the Organization of American States):

...to find the United States in violation of its universal human rights obligations by failing to protect millions of undocumented workers from exploitation and discrimination in the workplace.

The petition [4] was submitted to the commission on behalf of the United Mine Workers of America, AFL-CIO, Interfaith Justice Network and six immigrant workers who are representative of the six million undocumented workers in the United States labor force...

...The petitioners are requesting that the Inter-American Commission find the United States government in violation of its obligations under the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man [5], which was adopted by the United States in 1948, as well as universal human rights principles...

They're complaining about not just the U.S. itself, but these individual states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Kansas, New York, and New Jersey.

Some of the legal background is described here:

The petition, filed by the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and the other groups, is an unusual appeal to an international body to push American courts and lawmakers away from a 2002 Supreme Court ruling known as Hoffman v. National Labor Relations Board. The petitioners say the ruling has had a snowball effect, limiting or denying the basic protection of labor laws to millions of illegal immigrant workers in violation of principles like equal protection before the law and freedom of association under the nation's international treaty obligations.

Now, let's take a look at some of the other Articles of the "American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man":

Article XXXIII. It is the duty of every person to obey the law and other legitimate commands of the authorities of his country and those of the country in which he may be.

Obviously, all of the illegal aliens named in the complaint did not abide by that Article. And, this one:

Article XXXVIII. It is the duty of every person to refrain from taking part in political activities that, according to law, are reserved exclusively to the citizens of the state in which he is an alien.

Obviously, all those Mexican consuls that consistently try to meddle in our internal politics have repeatedly broken that Article, and that might also apply to those illegal aliens who marched through our streets demanding rights to which they aren't entitled. It might also apply to unions that accept dues from illegal aliens and then lobby on their behalf.

UPDATE: There's more on the ACLU's efforts here.

-------------------
[1] law.upenn.edu/clinic/transnational.html Run by Sarah Paoletti, whose name is on the complaint.

[2] From December 20, 2004 (link): The American Friends Service Committee, an internationally recognized social justice organization [which also has indirect links to the Mexican government --LW], joined more than 20 labor, civil rights and immigrants’ rights organizations in filing a formal request for a hearing before the Organization of American State’s (OAS) Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The request, co-signed by students in the International Human Rights Law Clinic at American University Washington College of Law (WCL), highlights the United States’ discriminatory treatment of millions of undocumented workers within its borders... "Undocumented workers are the hidden and highly exploitable staple of the American economy who provide us with food, clothing, manicured golf courses and lawns while at the same time contributing billions of dollars to the U.S. economy through the payment of Social Security, taxes and other expenditures," said Sarah Paoletti, an immigrants rights expert and a practitioner in residence in the International Human Rights Clinic at WCL. "Without these workers, many areas of our economy would be in trouble."

And, from March 1, 2005 (link): Students in the International Human Rights Law Clinic at American University Washington College of Law and workers will testify before the Organization of American States Inter-American Commission on Human Rights about U.S. human rights abuses against undocumented workers. The hearing will be held on Thursday, March 3... "Undocumented immigrant workers not only provide the backbone of our service industry, they have helped build the Nation’s Capital," said Sarah Paoletti, an immigrant rights expert and practitioner-in-residence in the International Human Rights Law Clinic at WCL. "The Inter-American Commission plays a vital role in educating Congress and the American public, employers and employees alike, about human rights law and its role in protecting vulnerable immigrant workers. We are asking that the Commission exercise its oversight and educational role to help extend fundamental human rights protections to all those who work in the United States, regardless of when or how they came to this country."

[3] aclu.org/immigrants/discrim/27235prs20061101.html Others mentioned in the press release are Claudia Flores (ACLU Women's Rights Project) and Chandra Bhatnagar, (ACLU Human Rights Program), both attorneys.

[4] aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file946_27232.pdf

[5] cidh.org/Basicos/basic2.htm

Posted at 12:17 PM | Comments (1)

Southern Poverty Law Center sues ICE over Stillmore immigration raids

In September, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents began sweeps in Stillmore, Georgia relating to illegal hiring at the Crider poultry plant in that town. Now, the SPLC is suing over those raids. On a perhaps related note, the Southern Poverty Law Center has at least one indirect link to the Mexican government. From the AP:

A civil rights group sued the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency Wednesday, claiming its agents had harassed five U.S. citizens of Mexican descent during raids targeting illegal immigrants in southeast Georgia... The Southern Poverty Law Center said the agents were engaging in a "Gestapo-like" campaign to drive Latinos out of the area. It claimed the agents entered houses without warrants, stopped cars on the street, terrified Latinos and vandalized their property.

The second link below has the town's mayor saying something similar, and has links to other instances of illegal immigration supporters also invoking Godwin's law.

"They trampled on the constitutional rights of every person of Hispanic descent who was unfortunate to be in their way," said Mary Bauer, an attorney with the center who is representing the plaintiffs. "You don't get to stop all who look brown." ...The center, based in Montgomery, Ala., wants an injunction preventing ICE from conducting similar raids, as well as unspecified compensation for the plaintiffs.

ICE says the SPLC's characterization is "patently false", and elsewhere the article says, "agents converged on workers' homes after getting the addresses of suspected illegal immigrants from Crider's files." And, even if SPLC's characterization is partially correct, it's pretty obvious that their ultimate goal is preventing immigration raids in general.

Another plaintiff is the landlord of a trailer park who was apparently renting to the plant's workers and who claims ICE agents broke into his trailers. I didn't quote him in the previous posts on this issue, but I believe it was in either the AP or CSM report.

And, here's yet another clue to what the SPLC is really after:

The center is seeking class-action status for the lawsuit to cover everyone of Hispanic origin or appearance who lives within the area covered by immigration agents headquartered in Atlanta...

Previously:

Patrik Jonsson promotes illegal immigration in Stillmore, Georgia

Russ Bynum/AP promotes illegal immigration (Stillmore, Georgia)

Posted at 12:01 PM | Comments (0)

Debbie Stabenow voted for Social Security for former illegal aliens

This site reprints a press release from the Michigan Federation for Immigration Reform and Enforcement.

On May 18, 2006 Senator Debbie Stabenow cast the deciding vote to kill an amendment, No. 3985, to the McCain-Kennedy Amnesty Bill S.2611. That amendment would have prevented illegal aliens from collecting Social Security benefits on wages earned using fraudulent numbers. Using fraudulent numbers is a common practice among illegal aliens and is a crime.

The vote to table this Social Security protecting amendment to the amnesty bill passed 50-49. Senator Stabenow cast the deciding vote to prevent this amendment from being part of the bill. There is no question that Stabenow voted to allow illegal aliens, those who commit identity theft, to gain access to our Social Security funds.

The purpose of the amendment to S.2611, the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006," as stated by the Secretary of the Senate, was as follows:

"Reduce document fraud, prevent identity theft, and preserve the integrity of the Social Security system, by ensuring that persons who receive an adjustment of status under this bill are not able to receive Social Security benefits as a result of unlawful activity."

Posted at 01:00 PM | Comments (1)

Hazleton sued by far-left illegal immigration supporters (Part 2)

This page has a round-up with links to the ordinances, complaint, etc.

UPDATE: That was quick. A federal judge (James Munley of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and a Dem) has issued a temporary restraining order forbidding Hazelton from enforcing their new laws. It extends for two weeks, and:

In a 13-page opinion, Munley said immigrants risked "irreparable injury" by being evicted from their apartments if the law is enforced. He also said he was not convinced by the city council's argument that illegal immigration increases crime and overburdens social services... "Defendant offers only vague generalizations about the crime allegedly caused by illegal immigrants but has nothing concrete to back up these claims," Munley wrote...

Previously: Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission party to Hazleton suit?

Related: ACLU, PFAW, businesses sue Riverside NJ over immigration law

Pahrump anti-illegal immigration ordinance; bucks rotting in the banks?

Local immigration news: Cook County, Mesa, Houston, Beaufort County, Carpentersville

Posted at 11:36 AM | Comments (1)

New York Times wrong about immigration (Part #4952234, "The Fence Campaign")

The New York Times offers an editorial called "The Fence Campaign". Let's take a quick look at just three misleading statements that the NYT makes:

A. Whatever they want to call it, the Senate bill would be perceived as an amnesty by millions of prospective illegal aliens around the world, and they'd come a-running. Saying "it's not an amnesty" doesn't mean a thing if everyone else thinks it is.

B. Those "immigrants" wouldn't get to the back of the line: they'd still get to live here and they'd be ahead of those in foreign countries who've been (legally) waiting to come here.

C. The MSM has been quite successful in painting those who support our laws as "extremists" (e.g., Randy Graf) and those who want to reward law-breakers with "comprehensive" "reform" as "moderates" (e.g., Gabrielle Giffords). If you actually look at what, for instance, the Senate bill would do, it's clear that those who support it are in favor of a truly radical policy that would do tremendous damage to the U.S.

It should be noted that I in no way wish to give the impression that the NYT only made three misleading statements; no doubt there are many more.

Posted at 08:27 PM | Comments (5)

Senator Barbara Mikulski sneaks H-2B visa increase into defense bill

This site has part of a FAIR newsletter containing this:

Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) used back-room negotiations to slip language into the Department of Defense Authorization bill, signed into law on October 18, 2006, that potentially doubles the H-2B visa cap for unskilled workers. This language added to the defense bill is similar to the H-2B amendment Senator Mikulski offered to S.2611, the Senate guest worker amnesty bill that the House refused to take to conference committee. Senator Mikulski was successful in including the H-2B language to in the Defense Authorization bill despite statements from Armed Services Chairman John Warner (R-VA) that he would not allow any extraneous provisions to be added to that bill. In contrast, before Congress adjourned for the November elections, House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) waged a public battle to attach his own immigration provision to the same defense bill. Speaker Hastert’s provision would have prohibited alien gang members from entering the U.S. and allowed for the detention and deportation of alien gang members already within the country. Chairman Warner, however, refused the Speaker’s request to include the alien gang language. Last week, as the President signed the Defense Authorization bill into law, Senator Mikulski released a statement stating she would not have been successful in her effort to pass the H-2B provision without the help of Senator Warner.

Posted at 12:53 PM | Comments (3)

Dave Mejias on immigration (Peter King, NY-03)

Democrat Dave Mejias (daveforamerica.com) is running against Republican incumbent Rep. Peter King in New York's CD-3. The unattributed (not even a free email) site mejiaswatch.blogspot.com points out that back on April 30, 2006 he stood in solidarity with the foreign citizens who marched through our streets demanding rights to which they aren't entitled:

"Some politicians say they will support the [May 1] boycott. Nassau County Legis. David Mejias (D-Massapequa) said he plans to close his law office in Hempstead out of respect for the Latino community."

Mejias is the son of Cuban refugees, and thus has little in common with those who snuck over our borders or who overstayed their visas.

And, from this article with an unknown date:

As more and more Hispanic and Latino immigrants move to the suburbs and lack the ability to access transportation, a disproportionate number have been involved in car-pedestrian and bike accidents... That is why for the past several years, Legislator Dave Mejias has launched a drive to collect donations of bike helmets to be dispersed to various community-based organizations to educate and assist new immigrants.

There's no indication given of the legal status of those "new immigrants", but one might imagine that a large number are illegal aliens. The better solution would be to discourage very low-wage workers from moving to his area. Instead, Mejias wants to help them, which has the ultimate effect of helping their employers continue to employ them at low wages. If child labor were still an accepted practice, people who think the same way wouldn't want to stop it, they'd just want to give the kids nice lunchpails.

And, in the included picture he's standing next to Reverend Allan Ramirez. Mexico's local consul (Arturo Sarukhan) declared him to be a "friend" for his defense of the local day laborers. Ramirez also refered to Steve Levy's attempts to shut down day laborer flop houses as "ethnic cleansing". It's not known whether the picture was taken before or after those statements. Others involved in the bike equipment giveaway are: La Casa Communal, Marianela Jordan, Executive Director of Nassau County's Coordinated Agency for Spanish Americans ("CASA"), and the Central American Refugee Center.

And, you can see Mejias' stock spiel on immigration around the six minute mark of the interview WABC's Diana Williams did here. Although her questions weren't that bad, she didn't call Mejias on the finer points of what he said.

He says he'd give citizenship to illegal aliens who've been here for five years.

Five years? Not even Teddy Kennedy wants to go that quickly.

Let's assume that he just wants to put illegal aliens on the "path to citizenship" as long as they've been here for five years.

That will lead to people coming here illegally or overstaying visas knowing that all they need to do is keep their heads down for five years, and they'll be started on the "path to citizenship" by Mejias. And, it will also lead to illegal aliens getting fake documents showing they've been here for five years.

But, it may all be moot because the Senate immigration bill lets "guest" workers stay here at least three and as much as six years, and they can start on the "path to citizenship" after four years. Not really what most people would call "guests".

And, Mejias says those illegal aliens should pay back taxes. In fact, the Senate bill forgives 2 out 5 tax years, and in any case many of them will end up receiving a tax refund because of the EITC.

And, Mejias says those illegal aliens should go to the back of the line. That's also highly misleading. The Senate bill allows them to continue to stay in the U.S. *and* puts them ahead of those in other countries who've been patiently - and legally - waiting for their chance at citizenship.

Posted at 11:37 AM | Comments (1)

Peter Wallsten: the GOP can't win without opening the borders

Peter Wallsten of the Los Angeles Times offers "Latino and black voters reassessing ties to GOP". As with another article he wrote, it contains conventional "wisdom" in support of illegal immigration. While he's to be commended for bringing George Bush's Aztlan video to our attention, the non-corrupt wing of the GOP might want to consider whether his advice is in their best interest.

The Latino backlash has grown so intense that one prominent, typically pro-Republican organization, the Latino Coalition, has endorsed Democrats in competitive races this year in Tennessee, Nebraska and New Jersey. The coalition is chaired by Hector Barreto, the former administrator of the Small Business Administration under Bush; its president is a former strategist for the Republican National Committee...

But in recent months, Democratic activists watched with amazement as Republicans pushed into law a 700-mile fence along the Mexican border and tried to make it a felony to migrate illegally or to help undocumented immigrants. The latter provision did not become law, but it especially angered some church leaders, who said it would have criminalized their religious duty to help the least privileged in society.

Despite Bush's lobbying for an immigrant guest-worker program, favored by many Latinos, conservative lawmakers in the House refused to bend, forcing Bush to endorse the fence legislation and dimming his popularity among Latinos...

Needless to say, Wallsten takes at a given that the problem is with those House Republicans and not with Bush or those "many Latinos". Perhaps those Latinos who don't support our immigration laws out of racial power grounds or similar should be considered the outliers, and not those elected U.S. representatives who want to enforce our laws. And, his statement that HR4437 would make it a felony to "help undocumented immigrants" is false. Rather than calling those far-left "religious leaders" on their lies, Wallsten repeats them.

The article also contains this misleading statement:

Bush won an estimated 44% of the Latino vote in 2004. While polling numbers vary, many analysts said that represented about a 9-percentage-point improvement from 2000, suggesting that Latinos might become a substantial pillar upholding a durable Republican majority.

Posted at 02:04 PM | Comments (1)

Robert Rector: "Importing Poverty"

Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation has a long article entitled "Importing Poverty". Here's just one paragraph, read the rest for much, much more:

[...] ...the roughly six million legal immigrants without a high school diploma will impose a net cost of around a half-trillion dollars on U.S. taxpayers over their lifetimes. The roughly five million illegal immigrants without a high school diploma will cost taxpayers somewhat less because illegal immigrants are eligible for fewer government benefits. However, if these illegal immigrants were granted amnesty and citizenship, as proposed by the Bush Administration and legislated in a recent Senate-passed immigration bill (S. 2611), they could cost tax­payers an additional half-trillion dollars. In total, all immigrants without a high school education could impose a net cost on U.S. taxpayers of around one trillion dollars or more. If the cost of educating the immigrants' children is included, that figure could reach two trillion dollars... [...]

Posted at 11:47 AM | Comments (1)

Ramos/Compean: smear? CBP head won't criticize prosecution

The latest on the case of Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean - who appear to have been railroaded by our government - includes the Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, Ralph Basham, refusing to "criticize [their] prosecution" (link). Regarding the letter that twelve House members sent asking for an investigation, Tony Snow says:

"Let's wait and see what the hearing produces... I believe you have 12 people who want to have a hearing, and we'll be interested in seeing what those hearings provide."

On Friday, Snow also said this regarding his earlier "nonsensical" comment:

"I wasn't trying to embarrass anyone," Snow told Joseph Farah, editor of WND. "It's just that I am not permitted even to discuss pardons – to comment on them. This is the president's call alone."

And, from the "most likely a sleazy smear" department comes "Report: Agents 'out to shoot Mexicans'".

Department of Homeland Security officials told four House members last month that two Border Patrol agents convicted of shooting a drug smuggler admitted to supervisors that they were "out to shoot Mexicans" the day of the shooting, but have yet to provide proof the agents made such statements.

In an effort to convince four concerned congressman that the El Paso, Texas, trial, conviction and sentencing of Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean were warranted, representatives of the Homeland Security Office of Inspector General met privately with the congressmen to assure them of Ramos' and Compean's guilt.

...Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, one of the congressmen at the private meeting, said he and three of his House colleagues were told by the OIG's office that the agents "were out to shoot Mexicans" and that the Department of Homeland Security had other damning information about Ramos' and Compean's actions the day that Aldrete-Davila was wounded.

...Those officials, however, did not provide proof of the agents' supposed confession. Instead, they said they would provide the information after last week's sentencing hearing, according to the congressmen.

Two of the congressmen, along with National Border Patrol Council President TJ Bonner and Andy Ramirez, chairman of the Chino-based Friends of the Border Patrol, now are demanding that the OIG immediately provide the evidence promised. Both organizations have publicly supported Ramos and Compean.

Officials at the DHS Office of Inspector General did not return phone calls for comment.

"They will provide us the information we requested," Poe said. "They will either provide it informally or they will be doing it formally." ..."These outrageous fabrications were clearly intended to derail the congressional investigation into the circumstances underlying the prosecution of two innocent Border Patrol agents," [National Border Patrol Council President TJ Bonner] said...

There's even more, including the possibility that prosecutor Johnny Sutton was caught in a lie.

Previously:
Ramos/Compean case: sentenced to 10+ years, no mistrial
Send an email about Ramos/Compean Border Patrol case
Justice for the Border Patrol (Compean/Ramos)
"Legal defense fund started for convicted Border Patrol agents"

Posted at 09:31 AM | Comments (0)

Will James Webb oppose illegal immigration?

The sometimes-credible Weekly Standard offers "Tangled Webb", discussing how Democratic senatorial candidate Jim Webb (running against incumbent Republican George Allen) is a bit more conservative than one might think from the "D" beside his name. It ends with this:

...Webb's right-wing populism and the liberalism of today's Democratic party make for an abrasive fit, and hints of it showed the other morning at Cecilia's, a Latin restaurant on Columbia Pike, in Arlington. Walter Tejada, Arlington's leading Hispanic politician and the man responsible for making Democrats of the county's growing immigrant population, arranged for Webb to attend a small rally with what Tejada calls "the community." [He's also a former LULAC leader; 1, 2, 3;waltertejada.blogspot.com]

...Webb's views of immigration, like many of his positions on questions of domestic policy, are unformed. It's not hard to imagine where his populism and ethnic allegiance would lead him, though. One thing that all economists agree on--those who favor the present influx of immigrants and those who don't--is that mass immigration lowers the wages of unskilled, uneducated native-born workers; "my people," as Webb calls them. A quick way to raise those wages would be to cut off the future flow of unskilled immigration. Yet this step toward "economic fairness" is not available to a Democratic candidate these days (or to many Republicans either).

In a brief and uncomfortable stump speech, Webb told the Hispanic crowd that he was against a guest-worker program. "We must first define our borders," he said. "And then we must ensure corporate responsibility, because a lot of this is going to come down to the employers."

The crowd seemed puzzled. Later reporters asked Webb to clarify his position. With Tejada next to him, he said he favored some path to legalization and citizenship for the illegals already here. Tejada nodded solemnly. But what about the future? a reporter asked. Would Webb favor tough economic sanctions against businesses that employ illegals, as a way of drying up the tide of immigrants?

"Yes," Webb said, "there needs to be corporate enforcement. We've had no corporate enforcement for six years! There's got to be employer sanctions, otherwise you're going to keep wages down. We have got to get a handle on this."

Tejada glanced at the ceiling. Punishing employers who hire illegals is not, needless to say, part of the game plan for the community, or for Arlington Democrats...

Posted at 01:05 PM | Comments (2)

Houston Chronicle does part against border fence

The Houston Chronicle's James Pinkerton offers "Border barrier could put chill in Valley ecotourism, wildlife". It features the thoughts of just four people predicting disaster for the fence itself, the region, wildlife, and various other calamities.

Farmer Fred Schuster says the fence will wash away in the rains. Oliver Bernstein from the Sierra Club handles the wildlife section of the article, without mentioning the environmental disaster of all the trash left behind by illegal aliens. Similar thoughts are expressed by Jimmy Paz, manager of the Sabal Palm Audubon Sanctuary. Nancy Millar, VP of McAllen's Convention and Visitor's Bureau, handles the tourism chores.

While we're told that "[t]ourist bureaus, wildlife refuges and farm and ranch operations" had worries, those are the only ones quoted in the article.

Related: NYT: Border fence to be built, jaguars hardest hit

Posted at 09:41 PM | Comments (2)

John DeStefano linked to Mexico collaborators (CT governor race)

New Haven mayor and Democrat John DeStefano [1] is running for governor of Connecticut against Republican incumbent M. Jodi Rell. DeStefano has several links to a New Haven group called "JUNTA for Progressive Action" [2], a group which is collaborating with the Mexican government. [3] That group also has links to several other organizations and community leaders.

Perhaps the closest link is that DeStefano's campaign manager is married to the head of JUNTA [4]:

The headquarters of Mayor John DeStefano Jr.'s gubernatorial campaign is beginning to resemble City Hall, with the announcement Monday that another former City Hall staffer will be joining the campaign... Henry Fernandez LAW '94 will become the mayor's campaign manager, after his resignation in March from his position as New Haven's economic development administrator, a position he had held for seven years. Fernandez joins Derek Slap, who in February switched from serving as the mayor's spokesman in City Hall to become the mayor's campaign trail spokesman... [...Fernandez] also helped bring IKEA to the city and was responsible in part for the expansion of Tweed-New Haven Airport. His wife, Kica Matos, is executive director of Junta for Progressive Action, an antipoverty agency based in Fair Haven...

From the Yale Daily News (link) (April 27, 2006, "Candidates court growing Hispanic vote"):

DeStefano's campaign has formed a group named Amigos de DeStefano, whose first house party at the home of Kica Matos, the director of New Haven's JUNTA for Progressive Action, drew 90 guests... the DeStefano-led City Hall is generally considered responsive to the needs of the city's Latino population, Yale professor Alicia Schmidt Camacho said. Camacho, who teaches in the American Studies Department, also serves on the board of Junta, a local Latino service agency... Camacho said her colleagues at Junta appreciate that the mayor is working on a plan to give municipal identification cards to all city residents. New Haven also launched "Hablamos Espanol" last year, a program that translates city documents into Spanish...

From this city page:

The New Haven Economic Security Coalition (NHESC) was formed in 2002 in partnership with Mayor John DeStefano, Jr., the IRS, and local organizations to provide free tax preparation and raise awareness about the Earned Income Tax Credit. Partners include: Community Action Agency, JUNTA for Progressive Action, Yale University, Spanish American Merchants Association, Empower New Haven, National Student Partnerships, and NewAlliance Bank.

More groups are listed here:

The New Haven Economic Security Coalition (NHESC) is a coalition of the Office of the Mayor of the City of New Haven [DeStefano's office], the Internal Revenue Service, Fleet Bank, Yale Law School, Quinnipiac Law School, Community Action Agency of New Haven, Student Health OUTreach, JUNTA for Progressive Action, Community Builders, the Spanish American Merchants Association, with support from the City of New Haven, Empower New Haven, and the Annie E. Casey Foundation.

JUNTA also received a $25,000 grant from Citizens Bank of Connecticut and WTNH-News Channel 8 [5]

From the New Haven Register [6]:

Junta is working with city police and Mayor John DeStefano Jr.'s administration on convincing banks to allow the undocumented to open savings accounts so they won’t be such easy prey for thieves.

He also spoke an illegal immigration rally in New Haven on 4/10/06 [7]:

"Amnistia para todos" — "Amnesty for All" — read a sign affixed to the onstage public address system as an estimated 1,500 to 2,000 people, many of them Latin American immigrants, listened to Latin-Ka, a Latino rock band, a Mexican-American mariachi band and dozens of speakers ranging from immigrant rights and union leaders to Mayor John DeStefano Jr. to Auxiliary Bishop Peter Rosazza of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Hartford.

His plan to give city IDs to illegal aliens was announced, withdrawn, and then studied [8]:

Over the past year or two, Junta has worked with Unidad Latina to promote rights for the undocumented, encouraging Mayor John DeStefano to issue a municipal identity card, among other ideas... That proposal slipped out "prematurely" last year, said Rob Smuts, DeStefano's deputy chief of staff and another member of last night's panel. He promised that the mayor is still planning to issue the cards, once the administration works out some of the bureaucratic kinks involved, because DeStefano believes it's not good to have a shadow population...

That proposal continues [9]:

...Immigrant rights groups, such as Fair Haven-based Junta for Progressive Action, are working with the city's police department to establish a policy that would forbid police from asking about the legal status of immigrants who are crime victims or turning over any such information to federal immigration authorities. And City Hall has spent the past year slowly developing a plan to provide all New Haven residents with city ID cards, which would allow immigrants to open bank accounts and avoid carrying the large amounts of cash that often make them targets of violent crime... [... "Danbury Eleven" matter...] ...The plan to provide ID cards is still being developed, as are plans, also announced last year, to develop an order for the New Haven Police Department that would forbid officers from asking individuals about their immigration status, according to officials in City Hall who have been working on the proposals. The police policy is already practiced, for the most part, by officers, said John Buturla, the city's chief administrative officer, and the challenge now is just to clarify it and put it in writing... [Matos] said Junta is also working on a program with Southern Bank, located just down the street from the organization's Fair Haven headquarters, on a program to offer financial literacy education to immigrants and help them open accounts... DeStefano policy analyst Kate McAdams worked on the project until she left New Haven three weeks ago; since then, the mayor's legislative assistant, Paul Nunez, picked up where McAdams left off, though [John Buturla, the city's chief administrative officer] said no meetings have yet been held on the subject. Nunez said he is planning to meet with the city's new budget director at the end of this week to discuss funding options, and he hopes that the program will be in place by January... Chief Franciso Ortiz was unavailable for comment, but NHPD spokeswoman Bonnie Winchester confirmed that Ortiz is working on the proposal...

Junta also advises or funds the Tides Foundation's "Death Penalty Mobilization Fund" [10]

[1] destefanoforct.com
[2] juntainc.org
[3] From newhavenindependent.org/archives/2006/10/id_for_life.php ...Laura Huizar, the program coordinator for economic development at JUNTA, greeted one of the nearly 100 people who came to the auditorium of the Fair Haven Middle School on Thursday night for a meeting with Mexican consular officials... Mexican consular official Eduardo Penalosa presented a kind of workshop in how to obtain the MCAS. The MCAS (Spanish initials for matricula consular de alta seguridad), Huizar, explained, is recognized by hundreds of cities, police departments, and financial institutions across the country as a valid ID. It's the Mexican government's official ID for its nationals living abroad, incorporating holograms and other embedded technology designed to prevent forgery. Which is why JUNTA has been cultivating a relationship with the Mexican Consulate; in past visits to Fair Haven in 2004 and 2005 the consulate provided approximately 400 Mexican nationals with these consular IDs. However, many other applicants were turned away. After such informational sessions, Huizar hopes the consulate will return in the months ahead and many more consular IDs can be issued...
[4] "DeStefano names campaign manager", 4/4/06, Sarah Mishkin, link
[5] From citizensbank.com/au/news/ctz/2005/07_08_05_ct_champion.aspx Citizens Bank of Connecticut and WTNH-News Channel 8 today named Junta for Progressive Action, Inc. (JUNTA) as its first Champion In Action the new name given to the program formerly known as the Community Champions Program. As a champion, JUNTA will receive a $25,000 grant, media coverage and extensive promotional and volunteer support for its outstanding work in the area of youth support programs... As the Champion in Action, JUNTA will receive... A $25,000 contribution in unrestricted funds from the Citizens Bank Foundation... Media coverage from WTNH-News Channel 8, including public service announcements and television profiles... Volunteer support from Citizens and WTNH-News Channel 8 employees... Extensive public relations support... Promotional support, highlighting the "Champion in Action" in all Citizens Bank branches and on its ATMs; and... Exposure on both Citizens Bank and WTNH-News Channel 8 Web sites... Citizens Bank of Connecticut is a $4 billion bank with 48 branches and 60 ATMs in Connecticut It is headquartered in New London. It is a subsidiary of Citizens Financial Group, Inc., a $137 billion commercial bank holding company headquartered in Providence, R.I.
[6] "City aldermen hear of immigrants' needs", 9/19/2005, Mary E. O'Leary, NH Register: juntainc.org/en/news/Register_09.19.05.php
[7] "Politicians, Residents, Bishop Rally for Immigrant Rights", 4/11/06, Mark Zaretsky, NH Register: juntainc.org/en/news/PoliticiansResidentsBishopRallyforImmigrantRights.php
[8] "Living in the Shadows" juntainc.org/en/news/LivingintheShadows.php
[9] "Activists lobby for immigrants", 10/4/06, Sarah Mishkin, Yale Daily News: juntainc.org/en/ActivistsLobbyforImmigrants-10.2006.php
[10] link

Posted at 01:12 PM | Comments (2)

Bob Casey: $50 billion in benefits for illegal aliens

Pennsylvania Senatorial candidate Bob Casey is trying to unseat Rick Santorum and is issuing highly misleading statements as part of his attempt. One of those is the claim that he doesn't want to give Social Security benefits to illegal aliens. If you parse that statement in the legally-correct, Clintonian way it's true.

What he fails to note is that under the Senate amnesty bill (which he supports), many millions of current illegal aliens would be suddenly declared to be legal residents, and then they'd suddenly be eligible for up to $50 billion worth of "federal benefits such as the earned income and child tax credits, Medicaid, and Social Security" (WaPo on the CBO estimate).

Please send this video around:

UPDATE: In an earlier version I said "all" current illegal aliens would be legalized under the Senate bill. That actually wouldn't include "all", just the vast majority. And, it would also most likely include new illegal aliens who came here and obtained falsified documents "proving" that they were covered under the Senate amnesty.

Posted at 10:45 AM | Comments (0)

"Doubts linger on feasibility of barrier" (border fence)

From this:

Both proponents and opponents of 700 miles of fences along the U.S.-Mexico border question whether the Bush administration can deliver the barriers -- whose exact location, price tag and construction start date remain unknown.

The Secure Fence Act, signed yesterday by President Bush, does not require the government to show any results of fence construction until May 2008 and while it does specify where along the 1,951-mile U.S.-Mexico border the barriers should go, there's no guarantee they ever will.

State legislatures, governors, and city and county governments, along with Indian tribal councils, have veto power over fencing locations...

T.J. Bonner of the National Border Patrol Council says it will "do nothing" and will act only as a "speed bump". One possible motivation for his remarks is that he wants to get more BP agents. And, of course it will do something, and have a deterrent effect, especially if advertised correctly in Mexico.

Posted at 06:52 AM | Comments (5)

NBC report on border fence features Juan Jose Gutierrez

Tonight's NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams featured a report on the border fence bill being signed. For the thoughts of the Hispanic community, they turned to... Juan Jose Gutierrez. You know, the guy who organized a 1996 march that was led by the Mexican Army's band. In 1994, he took part in a protest - along with current CA Assembly speaker Fabian Nunez - that included a U.S. flag with just 13 stars. Nowadays, he's still organizing marches and he's linked to ANSWER.

The footage looked like it was shot in a studio, and it also looked like it was provided by an affiliate. Nonetheless, are NBC's NYC producers unable to use those search engine things?

There are at least two levels to this: the fact that JJG is a bit of a Hispanic "leader", and also the fact that NBC considers him to be a leader and presents him as such. In order to do something about the first, please do something about the second by contacting your local NBC affiliate and suggesting that they contact their HQ with some constructive criticism.

Posted at 07:27 PM | Comments (1)

Bush signs border fence bill; on to "comprehensive immigration reform"!

Our president George Bush has signed the "Secure Fence Act", which might result in 700 miles worth of fencing on the Mexican border. A White House fact sheet is at whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061026-1.html

In case it wasn't clear already, that "fact sheet" shows that the fence is just an excuse to get what Bush really wants. Be suspicious of those questionable sources (Bill Frist and other politicians, GOP hacks such as Insty, Cap'n Ed, etc.) who promote the fence, because they only see it as one part of the equation:

"This bill will help protect the American people. This bill will make our borders more secure. It is an important step toward immigration reform." - President George W. Bush, 10/26/06

Today, President Bush Signed The Secure Fence Act - An Important Step Forward In Our Nation's Efforts To Control Our Borders And Reform Our Immigration System. Earlier this year, the President laid out a strategy for comprehensive immigration reform. The Secure Fence Act is one part of this reform, and the President will work with Congress to finish the job and pass the remaining elements of this strategy.

Comprehensive Immigration Reform Begins With Securing The Border. Since President Bush took office, we have:

...This Act Is One Part Of Our Effort To Reform Our Immigration System, And We Have More Work To Do

Comprehensive Immigration Reform Requires That We Enforce Our Immigration Laws Inside America. It is against the law to knowingly hire illegal workers, so the Administration has stepped up worksite enforcement...

Up from 4 to 8 cases! (numbers approximate).

Comprehensive Immigration Reform Requires That We Reduce The Pressure On Our Border By Creating A Lawful Path For Foreign Workers To Enter Our Country On A Temporary Basis. A temporary worker program would meet the needs of our economy, reduce the appeal of human smugglers, make it less likely that people would risk their lives to cross the border, and ease the financial burden on State and local governments by replacing illegal workers with lawful taxpayers. Above all, a temporary worker program would add to our security by making certain we know who is in our country and why they are here.

Since he admits that that situation is unsafe, why has he allowed it to get worse by refusing to do real workplace enforcement?

Comprehensive Immigration Reform Requires That We Face The Reality That Millions Of Illegal Immigrants Are Here Already. The President opposes amnesty but believes there is a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant and a program of mass deportation...

Whatever he wants to call it, it will be perceived as an amnesty by millions of prospective illegal aliens around the world, and they'll come running. Note also the stock false choice; another choice would be to start enforcing our laws, encouraging many illegal aliens to return home and discouraging others from coming here.

Comprehensive Immigration Reform Requires That We Honor The Great American Tradition Of The Melting Pot. Americans are bound together by our shared ideals, an appreciation of our history, respect for the flag we fly, and an ability to speak and write the English language. When immigrants assimilate and advance in our society, they realize their dreams, renew our spirit, and add to the unity of America.

Meaningless blather. Karl Rove has shown a willingness to reach out to far-left forces that oppose assimilation.

UPDATE: There's a handy list of who voted against this bill here.

Posted at 10:20 AM | Comments (4)

Mexico, 27 OAS nations declare opposition to border fence

From our who cares department:

Mexico, supported by 27 other nations, made a declaration at the Organization of American States slamming U.S. plans to build hundreds of miles (kilometers) of fence on its southern border.

The declaration, read aloud Wednesday at the OAS headquarters in Washington, said the barriers would not solve the immigration problem and urged the U.S. government to rethink its position, according to press releases from the OAS and Mexican foreign ministry.

The 28 nations express "deep concern regarding the decision adopted by the United States of America to build and extend a wall on its border with Mexico, considering it to be a unilateral measure that goes against the spirit of understanding," it said in the declaration, which was read out by Mexico's Ambassador Alejandro Garcia Moreno...

In a surprisingly gutsy move, the U.S. representative to the OAS decided against supporting the declaration. Mexico will also take its complaints to the United Nations.

Mexico's co-signers are:

Antigua, Argentina, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Granada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, San Kitts and Nevis, San Lucia, San Vicente, Suriname, Uruguay and Venezuela

Posted at 10:14 AM | Comments (4)

"Clarification" letter sent to Hispanics (Tan Nguyen, MALDEF, NCLR, NALEO)

Secretary of State Bruce McPherson's office has sent a letter to the 14,000 people who had been sent the Tan Nguyen letter. It's good that he's clearing things up. It's not so good that he's carrying the water - in an official state document under the California state seal - for far-left groups that support illegal immigration. From the PDF file with the letter:

The official election information letter, in English and Spanish, was mailed by the Secretary of State's Office in collaboration with the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) and the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO).

Why is the Secretary of State "in collaboration with" far-left groups, at least two of which have supported illegal immigration in the past? Isn't this in effect an endorsement of those group's agendas? The SoS didn't really need any others to be involved, but if they were going to enter into collaborations shouldn't they have also sought out more conservative Hispanic groups that haven't supported illegal immigration?

Why is the State of California carrying these groups' water?

I called the number given in the letter trying to get answers and I was told that the person listed would call me back. If anyone has better luck, let me know.

UPDATE: The MSM hacks who've discussed this story have not once to my knowledge offered a legal analysis of the letter from qualified experts. Hopefully eventually someone will do that, and they might even be able to answer whether this "Memorandum of Agreement" regarding the "Help America Vote Act" ("HAVA") qualifies as the computerized match system mentioned in the original letter: usdoj.gov/crt/voting/hava/ca_moa.htm

Also, Bruce McPherson is up for re-election on Nov. 7, and I'm reluctantly urging everyone to vote for Debra Bowen. She's the only one with a chance to beat him, and as the letter he sent shows he is unfit for office. If you can't bring yourself to do that, choose anyone else from this list.

Related:
Tan Nguyen: the Manchurian candidate?
Democrats offer Tan Nguyen letter of their own [satire]
Arnold Schwarzenegger gives power to far-left (immigration letter)
Hispanic voter suppression letter: from a Republican???
Hispanic voter suppression letter: evidence, Arnold, hacks (pre-Tan)
How the "California Hispanics vote suppression" story will end (right so far)
Help Tan Nguyen Beat Loretta Sanchez! (pre-letter)

Posted at 02:22 PM | Comments (4)

Michael Bloomberg: possible illegal alien taxi drivers isn't dangerous

Michael Bloomberg has yet again let his outright support for illegal immigration interfere with his job of protecting New Yorkers. Via this we find this:

The city's plan to stop asking prospective taxi drivers to provide proof that they are legal residents will not endanger the security of New Yorkers, a spokeswoman for Mayor Bloomberg said yesterday.

Cab drivers would no longer need to show immigration documents under changes the Taxi and Limousine Commission is set to vote on tomorrow. Instead, they will need to provide a Social Security card and driver's license...

His spokeswoman informs us:

"To suggest that this regulatory streamlining effort in any way represents a risk to the public is erroneous"

Social Security cards and numbers can, of course, be faked. And, several states give driver's licenses to illegal aliens. NY used to be one of those states, and there were hundreds of thousands of questionable DLs issued. The New York Times' Nina Bernstein and other groups fought tooth and nail to continue allowing illegal aliens to get New York driver's licenses, but that was blocked in July (PDF file):

The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court this week upheld new regulations adopted by the State of New York that make it extremely difficult for illegal aliens to obtain driver's licenses. The decision was a victory for the Washington Legal Foundation (WLF), which filed a brief urging the court to uphold the regulations.

Posted at 02:02 PM | Comments (2)

Jennifer Talhelm, Arthur Rotstein, Terry Tang mislead about Randy Graf

Jennifer Talhelm, Arthur Rotstein, and Terry Tang (reporting from... Scottsdale) of the AP offer a superficial, misleading, pro-Democratic Party article called "GOP Shuns Immigration Hardliner in Ariz." The headline is the first part that's wrong in that Graf is opposed to the illegal variety of immigration and wanting to enforce our laws is not a "hardline" position. It continues:

Randy Graf is a tough-on-immigration [a false statement] Republican in a district that is fed up with people pouring illegally across the border and hasn't elected a Democrat to the House in two decades... Yet Graf's national party is turning its back on him, the retiring Republican congressman he wants to succeed has disavowed his candidacy and he's finding trouble getting traction beyond the most secure GOP voters _ and a border militia that's backing him.

Calling the Minuteman Project a "militia" is an attempt to conjure up images of compounds in Idaho and the like. I hadn't seen an MSM source say something similar for a while, but either I haven't been paying attention or they're repurposing their old smears for the 2006 season.

And, prominent GOP members have not "turned their back on him." While the pro-illegal immigration Kolbe has not supported him, McCain and others have, and Hastert will be campaigning for him next week.

As for why the national GOP leaders would "turn their backs on him", Talhelm, Rotstein, and Tang don't try to find out what might really be behind that. Is it because of the stated reason that they think he can't win? Or, is it because they think he might win and if he does he'll cost those companies - GOP donors - that profit from illegal immigration money?

Then, flanked by an AP picture of Gabrielle Giffords, we get this article's "man-on-the-street/voice-of-reason":

Voters such as Sue Malusa, a mother of four from Tucson, think Graf and his supporters go too far. Graf is backed by the Minutemen, self-appointed border-watchers. Malusa will vote for a candidate who supports "a humane and fair way of controlling the border," she said. "That's important."

As detailed in the past many times, anything that allows illegal immigration to continue is not humane, and what Giffords supports will allow illegal immigration to continue. Malusa needs to think with her head and not buy what those who hide behind "compassion" try to sell.

Then, we get to the smears:

Graf made waves last week defending a state lawmaker who endorsed reinstatement of a 1950s federal deportation program called "Operation Wetback" and sent supporters information from a white separatist group... In a candidates' debate, Graf said the lawmaker, state Rep. Russell Pearce, is a friend and they agree on how to control the border.

As previously discussed just recently, the word "reinstatement" is a lie. As for the second smear, he realized the error right away and sent a followup email. Only the most delusional Democratic hack could think that he would have sent that article if he'd read the whole thing or knew about the group involved.

It continues, but it's clear that Jennifer Talhelm, Arthur Rotstein, and Terry Tang of the AP are willing to mislead in order to support either Giffords or illegal immigration. And, it's clear that they aren't willing or able to dig into a story and discover what's really going on.

Posted at 01:46 PM | Comments (2)

Atlanta: Radio hosts fired after lawsuit by Hispanic DJs

"The Regular Guys Show" - previously featured on WKLS-FM in Atlanta Georgia ("96Rock") and consisting of Eric Von Haessler and Larry Wachs - has been taken off the air and the hosts fired after two Hispanic hosts of a sister station show filed a lawsuit. The animosity between the two shows stretches back to the pro-illegal immigration marches, when the Regular Guys invited "Yogi and Panda" (Juan Tapia and Jose Carias from Viva 105.7) to appear on their show and discuss the rallies. Yogi and Panda were apparently encouraging their listeners to join the boycott (one of the organizers of that boycott is a former Mexican consul general). Those hosts complained to their employer repeatedly that they were "disrespected", then:

...Tapia and Carias said in the suit that Regular Guys co-host Larry Wachs secretly taped their conversations while they were in restroom stalls in the Clear Channel office building Oct. 9, then aired them Oct. 10.

Tapia and Carias also said they complained to management on numerous occasions about "incendiary comments" the Regular Guys made about their "alleged sexual orientation, race and nationality" but "these complaints have largely been ignored."

Wachs says they knew he was there and were "yelling insults" at him.

This probably isn't about the money and despite outward appearances it probably isn't personal either. It's probably an attempt to obtain racial power and try to prevent other hosts from opposing illegal immigration and associated marches. If anyone has any information on whether any politicians or similar are involved in the lawsuit or have links to Yogi and Panda, please leave a comment.

Also, please forward this news to any local talk show hosts that oppose illegal immigration.

Posted at 11:43 AM | Comments (4)

Former Border Patrol agents: no amnesty

Around two hundred members of an apparently new organization called the "National Association of Former Border Patrol Agents" have issued a position paper calling for:

* securing the border and tight screening of those permitted to enter;

* opposition to any legislation that would allow aliens to remain in the country who have entered illegally and remained illegally;

* meaningful employer sanctions;

* a guest worker program with tight restrictions.

As for the latter, the restrictions would have to be very tight in order to avoid the issue of "guests" having U.S. citizen children, making deporting them very difficult. And, I'm a bit worried that the Pence amnesty scheme sounds like it could be hammered into their framework. Nevertheless, I'm willing to listen, but I haven't been able to find their site.

I'm also concerned because on June 6, 2006, John Tierney of the New York Times wrote a paean to the Bracero program ("Securing the Border (Again)", tinyurl.com/yyp4fz), using NAFBPA member Buck Brandemuehl as a starting point. Another member of the organization is Hugh Brien.

And:

Many of the signers participated in the administration of the 1986 amnesty program. They say the problems with it included:

* Rampant fraud

* Judicial extension of the program

* The effects of chain migration – whereby six family members ultimately follow to join each alien who achieves legal status.

Posted at 06:34 AM | Comments (1)

Tony Snow asked about Ramos/Compean case, dodges question

On Monday, Les Kinsolving asked Whitehouse spokesman Tony Snow about the case of the two Border Patrol agents who appear to have been railroaded by our own government. He specifically asked whether Bush would give them a pardon. Here's Snow's response:

"That's an unanswerable question, Les. The president is the person who is responsible for pardons. You can tell the network, which made you ask that question, that it is nonsensical."

Posted at 02:22 AM | Comments (0)

Yvonne Wingett: "Language used to sway voters in immigration debate"

Yvonne Wingett of the Arizona Republic offers the titular article, which contains the seeds of its own evisceration. Let's see how she uses language to try to sway the voters in an open borders direction:

...The tipping point came last month, when Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, suggested that "Operation Wetback," a 1950s mass-deportation program, be reinstated to help combat illegal immigration.

The term "wetback" is offensive to Latinos and is typically used to refer to a person who is an undocumented immigrant...

Pearce's use of the word and suggestion that the program be reinstated insulted minority, religious and community leaders who called for lawmakers to reject such divisive language...

Here's what Pearce actually said:

"We know what we need to do. In 1953, Dwight D. Eisenhower, put together a task force called 'Operation Wetback.' He removed, in less than a year, 1.3 million illegal aliens. They must be deported."

So, Wingett is lying about him wanting to "reinstate" that program. "Reinstate" is defined as "to put back or establish again, as in a former position or state", and specifically refers to the previous program. What Pearce suggested was something similar to OW. He wasn't calling for taking OW and starting it over again.

And, one can find thousands of cases of Mexicans or Spanish-speakers using the word "mojados", the equivalent of "wetbacks".

And, of course, "undocumented immigrants" are actually illegal aliens.

As for those who were "insulted", that's highly questionable considering that all of the media reports discussed at the second link were based only on the remarks of the Arizona Democratic Party and two people from the same group (Somos America, a group that organized some illegal immigration marches in Arizona).

Posted at 04:02 PM | Comments (2)

Bill Winter on immigration

Bill Winter is running for Congress against Rep. Tom Tancredo. Like other Democrats, he supports the Senate amnesty, and thus everything said about that horrible bill applies. Moreover, his page on immigration has several questionable or misleading statements:

1. His page twice refers to the "INS", an agency that hasn't existed since March 2003. While this might seem like a minor error, if whoever wrote that page doesn't even know that the INS no longer exists it tends to raise questions whether the other proposals on that page have been thought through as well.

2. He complains about the Republican leadership cutting funding for the Border Patrol and ICE, without disclosing that the Republicans are split into two camps on this issue: the more open-borders Bush camp (which is aligned with the Democrats) and the pro-borders camp, including Rep. Tancredo.

3. The page includes a picture of - and references - China's Great Wall, without stating that what Winter calls a "wall" is not a wall but a fence, and the fence is similar to fencing already in place on the border.

4. The page falsely states that "Tancredo maintains that we need to corral all 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States and deport them". As Tancredo has pointed out, he prefers attrition and not mass deportations. In fact, the article that section links to ("CBS4 Examines Illegal Immigrant Costs In Colorado") does not state what Winters claims, and instead refers to Tancredo's attrition plan. Under that plan, increased border and workplace enforcement would lead to a large number of illegal aliens leaving voluntarily as well as prospective illegal aliens deciding not to come.

5. The page refers to a study concerning the costs of deporting all illegal aliens from the liberal Center for American Progress. The page does not discuss the ludicrous methodology used in the study, which assumed that the deportations for one year represented a best-case effort, and then divided the number of aliens deported by the agents' salaries. Obviously, the enforcement being done now is not in any way a "best-case effort".

6. The page claims that failing to pass "comprehensive immigration reform" - what most refer to as an amnesty and which would result in somewhere between 20 and 60 million new legal immigrants over 20 years - makes the U.S. more vulnerable. However, the GAO admits that the USCIS is already stretched to the limit and won't even have a fraud management program in place until 2010. And, considering that most of those former illegal aliens who would be made legal workers under the plan Winter supports come from countries with high levels of corruption and low-tech record keeping, the "reform" he supports is a massive recipe for disaster not just because of fraud but also because of the possibility of terrorist infiltration.

7. Winter claims that raising the minimum wage "will take away the incentive to hire illegal workers in the first place". In practice, that's false because that will make illegal labor more attractive and allow current and future illegal aliens to underbid legal workers. (Maybe he got this idea from the Drum Major Institute or from... Michael Dukakis.)

Winter also blogs at... bill-winter.dailykos.com.

Tags: Bill Winter, Tom Tancredo, Tancredo

Posted at 10:20 AM | Comments (1)

Democratic Texas/Mexico/Aztlan flyer confirmed?

I'm sure you all remember this classic:

That flyer - showing Texas and Mexico rejoined - was supposedly passed out at the April 9, 2006 illegal immigration march in Dallas. At the time, I wondered whether it was a real poster or a fake.

Now, someone has sent an email to one Sarah from dallasdemocrats.org and says they've received the following reply:

"Yes it is likely one that we produced. I can't seem to get to the part of the site that explains the context of why they showed it though."

Not exactly a full admission, and they might backtrack, but at the very least we can say they haven't disowned it.

Posted at 10:55 AM | Comments (2)

Tucson Citizen endorses former MEChA member Raul Grijalva

The Tucson Citizen has endorsed U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva in his reelection bid for Arizona's Congressional District 7. He's running against Ron Drake (Republican) and Joe Cobb (Libertarian).

Grijalva is not just a former MEChA member, he's proud of his membership in that group. MEChA wants to "liberate" "Aztlan" (the supposed homeland of the Aztecs, which just happens to coincide with the U.S. southwest and parts of Mexico). And, of course, he's a Democrat.

Even Los Angeles' "Mayor Reconquista" Antonio Villaraigosa has (somewhat) renounced that group, saying that he doesn't support their goals. Apparently Grijalva does support their goals.

Grijalva's past affiliations might be a good conversation starter if anyone ever runs across Howard Dean or another leader of the Democratic Party somewhere.

Posted at 05:22 AM | Comments (4)

ICIRR in suit against Terry Goddard over Western Union wire transfers

The Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights ("ICIRR") is "sponsoring" a class action lawsuit against Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard over that state's program that tries to stop human smuggling by seizing Western Union wire transfers that meet certain criteria. ICIRR is "sponsoring" three nobody plaintiffs - at least one of whom is a legal resident - who had money seized and couldn't get it back because they couldn't prove that the transfers were legitimate. The attorney is Matt Piers; another attorney who may have just filed the papers is Tim Eckstein (azstar).

As detailed at the first link, ICIRR was one of the organizers of the big March 10 Chicago illegal immigration rally as well as of the one on May 1. And, after the first rally, their president Juan Salgado spoke at Los Pinos, the Mexican White House. They were also involved in the smear against Jim Oberweis. Salgado was also appointed to a state commission by Chicago governor Rod Blagojevich. Another group involved in the suit is the Instituto del Progreso Latino, whose Executive Director is Juan Salgado.

But, wait, there's more:

[ICIRR Executive Director Josh] Hoyt acknowledged his organization has received grants in the past from Western Union, and confirmed that some of the information for the lawsuit came from the company. But he said the interest of his group is solely to protect the rights of individuals.

It's like a giant spider's web of sleaze, isn't it? From this:

...Goddard said the company also sent letters to clients, asking those who had funds seized to contact Instituto del Progreso Latino... "They solicited people" for the federal lawsuit, Goddard said. "It's Western Union trying to protect their profits." ...Sherry Johnson, corporate director of media relations for Western Union, said in an e-mail that "while we do have a long-standing relationship with this group, I can assure you that this is a completely independent action by the ICIRR."

As for the POV of "our" representatives, State Rep. Steve Gallardo - naturally a Democrat - nuances his way into supporting illegal immigration (azstar):

"We should not just be using the $500 threshold," he said, but instead require proof of some sort of pattern or other evidence of criminal activity... Goddard said the state provides that proof to the judge who issues each of the damming warrants... Gallardo also said the state's offer to refund funds improperly taken is insufficient because it requires people to go to a government office to prove their ownership in order to get their money back... "That's intimidating for those folks who perhaps may be here undocumented," he said, and simply want to send money home to relatives.

As for Matt Piers, he appears to be a civil rights-style attorney from Chicago. In 2000 or so he was on the other side: suing money transfer companies over hidden fees. He defended the Benevolence International Foundation on a terrorism-related charge. Daniel Drezner appeared on a TV show with him in relation to that. He was involved in another terrorism-related case in the late 90s (ncarl.org/newsletter2004.html). And, in 2001 he was apparently planning to sue both the U.S. and Mexico over monies due Bracero Program workers that had disappeared.

On a slightly related note, see "Maricopa County Attorney: Mexico trying to block Arizona law".

Posted at 09:16 PM | Comments (1)

Ramos/Compean case: sentenced to 10+ years, no mistrial

The two Border Patrol agents who appear to have been railroaded by our own government have been sentenced to 10+ years each. Before the sentencing, they filed a last minute motion:

...Mary Stillinger, the lawyer for Border Patrol agent Ignacio Ramos, filed a motion Tuesday to have the verdict set aside and a new trial ordered for the two agents after three jurors said they were coerced by other jurors into finding the agents guilty.

The Daily Bulletin interviewed two of the jurors in late August, after Ramos and his family broke their 18-month silence about the case in an exclusive interview with the newspaper. Robert Gourley and Claudia Torres told the Daily Bulletin they voted guilty because they did not believe Judge Kathleen Cardone would accept a hung jury.

A third juror, Edine Woods, told Stillinger that the three were still voting not guilty after two days of deliberations. The three said they were misled into finding Ramos and fellow agent Jose Compean guilty, according to Stillinger's motion...

This will most likely be a part of whatever appeal is planned.

Posted at 03:45 PM | Comments (3)

Western Growers gives Senator Feinstein a big green thumbs up

From their press release:

Western Growers, one of California's largest and most prominent agricultural trade associations, today announced its endorsement of Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) for reelection to the United States Senate.

"Senator Feinstein has represented California with great integrity, honor and skill," said Tom Nassif, President and CEO of Western Growers. "She has been an outstanding member of the United States Senate and has proven that she is a true friend of our industry. Senator Feinstein has consistently supported California agriculture and has been a strong leader for the industry on critical issues such as immigration reform..."

...Western Growers is an agricultural trade association whose 3,000 members grow, pack and ship 90 percent of the fresh vegetables and nearly 70 percent of the fresh fruit and nuts grown in Arizona and California, about one-half of the nation's fresh produce. For more information, visit wga.com

Meanwhile, in older news:

Shortly before Thanksgiving last year, Tom Nassif did something few law-abiding citizens would ever think to do: He called the U.S. Border Patrol here and suggested agents stop manning a highway checkpoint intended to keep illegal immigrants out of the country.

A former U.S. ambassador and currently the president of a powerful farming association, Mr. Nassif told officials that the agency couldn't have picked a worse time to beef up enforcement. Didn't they know it was lettuce season?

Dianne Feinstein, valiantly protecting the U.S. from the specter of mythical $10 a head lettuce by trying to make the Senate amnesty even worse.

In addition to Nassif, a few other favorites serve on the board of the Western Growers Association: Luawanna Hallstrom of Oceanside's Singh & Sons (what harm could illegal aliens do on a Marine Base anyway?) and perennial "crops rotting in the fields" quote source Jon Vessey. Use the search function to find many more quotes from Dianne Feinstein's strong supporters.

Posted at 09:10 AM | Comments (3)

ACLU, PFAW, businesses sue Riverside NJ over immigration law

Riverside, New Jersey is one of the cities that have adopted "Hazleton-style" ordinances, and like other cities they're being sued by far-left, pro-illegal immigration organizations such as the ACLU. While this does cost those cities money, and the far-left foundations that support those far-left organizations have very deep pockets, at the end of the day the ACLU and their fellow travelers can only file so many suits.

In the current case, one of the ACLU's helpers is People for the "American" Way. Let's hope that their legal filings are a bit more precise than their misleading press release:

A coalition of Riverside business owners and landlords and residents will file a lawsuit today against the Township of Riverside in state court, contending that the recently adopted Illegal Immigration Relief Act oversteps the city's authority, is too vague, unfairly puts businesses at risk and violates civil rights under state law.

The plaintiffs are represented by attorneys from the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, People For the American Way Foundation, Spear Wilderman, P.C, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation Immigrants' Rights Project, American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey and Ragonese Albano & Viola.

The ordinance is one of the most restrictive of the recent wave of anti-immigrant legislation passed by local governments across the nation. It attempts to ban immigrants from renting, residing, using property or being employed in Riverside. The ordinance, in very broad terms, applies to actions that "aid or abet" undocumented immigrants anywhere in the United States.

"This ordinance is so vague and overbroad that it's virtually impossible to obey and appears to ban a large amount of innocent conduct," said Elliot Mincberg, Vice-President and Legal Director for PFAW Foundation. "Even a hospital or church that allows an immigrant on its premises could be charged with a violation."

Come on, it's OK now, we're all friend here: you can say "illegal".

New Jersey Appleseed and the Seton Hall Law School Center for Social Justice will be filing amicus briefs, and another person involved is David Verduin, "a Riverside business owner and a plaintiff". He's identified here (also here) as the president of the "Coalition of Business Owners and Landlords". That also says that Franco Ordonez, owner of the "King Chicken" (probably "Chicken King") restaurant is another member. (See the "ghost town"-style propaganda piece here from Summer Harlow of Delaware Online in which an employee of that company is quoted and the Coalition is mentioned, but no link between the company and the Coalition is noted.) This page identifies another member as Steve Marino; he's identified as a "landlord" here. A copy of an earlier letter identifies one of the lawyers for the ACLU-IRP as Omar C. Jadwat, Esq., which rings a bell for some reason. And, this page says:

O empresário americano David Verduin lidera uma coalizão de empresários americanos e brasileiros que entrou na Justiça contra a lei antiimigrante de Riverside. Ele morou 20 anos no Brasil e se considera brasileiro de coração. Também sofreu ao ver os brasileiros serem ofendidos.

I take that to say in part that he lived in Brazil for 20 years and considers himself Brazilian in his heart, but I'd appreciate an accurate translation.

I don't know about the members of the CBOL, but obviously a fair number of business owners and landlords in Riverside are making money off illegal immigration. And, if the ACLU wins that would help said business owners and landlords to keep making money off illegal immigration.

I wonder what your average donor to the ACLU thinks of their constant support for illegal immigration? While the ACLU is infamous for accepting a few very unpopular clients, when they're always on the same, wrong side of one issue people have to begin to wonder what's going on.

Posted at 05:25 AM | Comments (1)

Hispanic voter suppression letter: from a Republican???

This is Part Three of the story of Hispanics in Orange County having received a supposed voter suppression letter, the "WTF Edition".

Looking at the limited amount of evidence available and the attempts by Democrats and illegal immigration supporters to take advantage of it, it seemed very unlikely that the letter could have come from the GOP or an opponent of illegal immigration. Yet, Attorney General Bill Lockyer is now saying that he's focusing on "one or more Republican candidates for office", and sources tell the LAT and the OCR that one of those campaigns is that of Tan Nguyen. He's running against Loretta Sanchez in the 47th Congressional District.

Who would have thought that whoever sent this letter out would do so via bulk mail instead of, for instance, printing it out on an old untraceable printer and putting it into envelopes while wearing gloves (just blue skying here)? Yet, that's what appears to have been done, and the mailing was more extensive than previously considered: around 14,000 letters were supposedly sent out. If Nguyen or another Republican did this, they will have given the Democratic Party a terrific GOTV tool and an issue that will probably be brought up in future Democratic campaigns.

But, bear in mind that Nguyen hasn't been charged with anything and has not issued any sort of a statement.

Also bear in mind that me refering to those in the previous post as "Hacks" still stands: given all of the evidence available, the strong possibility that this was a smear should have been considered, but those sources did not do that.

10/19/06 3pm UPDATE: The latest is that Nguyen blames his since-fired office manager. He refers to "her", but the only paid staffer someone can find is a "he", Ryan Flynn, who's identified as his campaign manager here. Despite that, it could have been a volunteer. The bulk mailing center (Mailing Pros) owner says he didn't deal with Nguyen on the mailer, but OC GOP chairman Scott Baugh says sources there and at the AG's office say Nguyen called to expedite the mailer. However, calling to expedite the mailer doesn't necessarily mean he knew what it contained.

And, you can see the letter here:
maldef.org/pdf/AlbertoGonzales10172006.pdf

Note that that link seems to be accusing CCIR of sending the mailer, something that they deny. Given the current facts, unless there's a link between Nguyen and/or his mystery office manager and CCIR, they were not involved.

Whether MALDEF has libeled CCIR or not remains to be seen.

If you find any examples of people continuing to definitely state that CCIR, the other groups mentioned in the letter, or those opposed to illegal immigration in general were involved in the mailing, please leave the details in comments.

UPDATE 2: On a note related to media bias and the language used in the infamous letter, the NYT's "County G.O.P. Asks Candidate to Withdraw Over Letter Threat" from October 20 2006 by Cindy Chang falsely states: "The candidate, Tan Nguyen, who is running on an anti-immigration platform..." (Despite that wording, I'm positive that Cindy Chang is not the mystery office manager.)

Posted at 11:32 PM | Comments (7)

Kerry Healey vs. Deval Patrick on illegal immigration

From this:

[Massachusetts gubanatorial candidate] Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey opened a fresh wave of attacks on [fellow candidate] Deval Patrick over the issue of illegal immigration yesterday, launching a TV ad and appearing at a pier in Charlestown to call for illegal immigrants to be denied driver's licenses.

Healey said Patrick's support of driver's licenses for illegal immigrants would lead to fraud and abuse...

...The Patrick campaign said Healey's claim was moot, because a federal law passed last year prohibits the state from issuing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants...

Huh? As discussed in the same article, Patrick supported that which he calls moot earlier this year, and he even supported it just three weeks ago in their big "debate".

Healey also opposed granting in-state college tuition to illegal immigrants, which Patrick, the Democratic nominee, supports. A legislative proposal to grant the tuition break also requires the students to graduate from high school in Massachusetts.

She could end his candidacy and even have some impact on his future career if she would use the right phrasing to explain why that's a bad thing.

Posted at 06:54 AM | Comments (1)

Gabrielle Giffords campaign tries to have Minuteman PAC ads pulled

The Minuteman PAC is airing ads in Arizona in support of Randy Graf and in opposition to Gabrielle Giffords. A lawyer from her campaign has sent a letter to the station running the ads trying to get them pulled. He appears to only have problems with one statement from the ad:

AD: "AND GIFFORDS EVEN THINKS ILLEGAL ALIENS SHOULD GET SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS."

FACTS: Giffords' attorney's letter claims that Ms. Giffords "believes that only United States citizens should receive Social Security benefits." However, this letter then contradicts that position, saying that the candidate supports the Kennedy-McCain "immigration reform bill." Both McCain and Kennedy voted against an amendment to that bill introduced by Senator John Ensign that would have stopped illegal aliens from collecting Social Security payments based on their illegal work in the United States. (For more, see Washington Times, May 19, 2006 http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060518-114132-2456r.htm) It is clearly fair to say, based on her support of that bill, that Ms. Giffords opposes the Ensign Amendment and therefore supports Social Security for Illegal Aliens.

This is a highly semantic area. If the phrase "illegal aliens" is taken to mean "those who are currently illegal aliens but who would be legalized", then the ad is correct. However, if Giffords wants to play games, she could claim that she doesn't want to give SS benefits to "illegal aliens", but only to "legal workers who used to be illegal aliens".

This is further complicated by both the portion of the McCain-Kennedy amnesty and the Ensign amendment, as well as the existence of the proposed Totalization Agreement, which is a separate matter.

The best course of action would be to change the ad to say something like, "she thinks millions of current illegal aliens should be legalized and get Social Security benefits for work performed when they were illegal aliens and might have been using someone else's Social Security number" (or words to that effect). I believe that statement is completely correct.

And, of course, there's the possibility that there's some loophole in one of the bills or agreements somewhere that would in fact give social security to illegal aliens while they still are illegal aliens.

Posted at 03:13 AM | Comments (2)

Hispanic voter suppression letter: evidence, Arnold, hacks

[UPDATE in Hispanic voter suppression letter: from a Republican???]

This is a follow-up to the story of Hispanics in Orange County having received a supposed voter suppression letter.

In this post I'm going to:

• present evidence that the letter was sent by an illegal immigration supporter...
• discuss how Arnold Schwarzenegger has been politically emasculated and how his handlers don't have the U.S.'s best interests at heart...
• illustrate a PIIPP that the AP has fashioned from the story (no, really)...
• and, discuss those hacks who promulgated this story and who have shown that - even with what we know now - they have little journalistic integrity and that their future reports should not be trusted.

** EVIDENCE **

• The first possible evidence is to look at who profits from this letter. Clearly, there's very little chance that the sender thought that the letter would not be released to the news media. Because of that, one has to look at those who ultimately profit. This letter is a wonderful Get Out The Vote recruiting tool for the Democratic Party, and even though on its face the letter might be taken as a way of suppressing the Hispanic vote, it will probably increase it. In fact, here's a quote from John Trasvina, "interim president and general counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund": "A lot of people will get angered by this and say, 'No you can't take away my right to vote'". [1] Neither the GOP nor those opposed to illegal immigration profit from this, only those on the other side.
• And, one looks at all the coverage that the story has received: the AP, LAT, OCRegister, and several blogs. Certainly, news stories can be written fairly quickly, but this one reads almost like it was written as a script.
• For evidence of greater weight, CCIR's Barbara Coe says she's gotten "dozens" of calls from supposed recipients of the letter. What percentage of recipients would feel the need to call? At the most, it would appear that one or two hundred letters were supposedly received. Yet, one of the recipients is one Nellie Diaz [2]. She's not only the wife of Garden Grove City Council candidate Benny Diaz, but she [3] and her husband [4] are both members of the illegal immigration-supporting racial power group LULAC. He also appears to be the California state treasurer of the organization. [5] What are the chances that one of the recipients of what appears to be a small mailing just happens to be a member of a national group that supports illegal immigration?
• Here's another excerpt from the letter [6]; see if you can spot a rather curious phrase:

  "Be advised that the government of the United States is installing a new computer system to verify the names of all registered voters ... Anti-immigration organization can ask for information from this new computer system."

  Which groups use the phrase "anti-immigration"? Almost all groups that are opposed to illegal immigration are very careful about making the distinction between legal and illegal immigration, and take offense at the use of such phrases. In fact, the ones who almost always try to use similar phrases are the MSM and those who support illegal immigration. Even if the writer did not have a full grasp of colloquial Spanish or did a machine translation, they would have had to exclude the "illegal" part of that phrase to begin with. While there's certainly the possibility that the letter came from someone who is opposed to all forms of immigration, the use of the same phrase that supporters of illegal immigration use is very strong evidence that the letter was a joe job.

** ARNOLD **
California's governor - almost certainly based on advice from either Maria or his Rove-linked advisor - has gone overboard and called the letters "racist" and "despicable," and argued the perpetrators should be tried for a hate crime. [7] In his statement, there was no consideration given to the possibility that the letter might be a hoax, yet obviously not only can that possibility not be denied, it seems more than likely. What he's done is not only helped portray those who oppose illegal immigration in a false light, he's also given ammunition to the far-left grievance industry by reflexively taking their side instead of considering all possibilities. This gives far-left, mostly anti-American groups like LULAC and MALDEF even more power and puts his own party even more at the mercy of such groups.

** REPURPOSING PROPAGANDA **
The AP's Peter Prengaman has even taken this story and fashioned a PIIPP out of it [8]:

They've been naturalized U.S. citizens for nearly 20 years, but Benny Diaz says he and his wife felt intimidated when they each received a letter over the weekend warning that some immigrants could be jailed or deported for voting next month.

The letter, written in Spanish and sent to an unknown number of Hispanics in Orange County, also says the government has developed a computer system to track down the names of immigrant voters.

"A lot of Latino families have called me to say they ripped up the letter because they felt so insulted," said Diaz, 49, who is originally from Peru. His wif