Archives

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

Wisconsin: Sen. Cathy Stepp's home surrounded by illegal immigration supporters

That state Senator offers the following letter:

Leaders of a Hispanic activist group known as Voces de la Frontera believe that in America, it is better to storm the home of an elected official and yell in their windows after dark to intimidate someone rather than to run for office to change policy.

On the evening of Friday, December 16th, a group of people advocating the issuing of drivers’ licenses to non-citizens appeared outside my windows yelling and attempting to intimidate me into voting against Assembly Bill 69...

See the many comments, one of which points out that "Voces" has a link to one Al Levie, a teacher at Horlick High School in Racine:

...Shortly thereafter, with financial assistance from Voces de la Frontera, Al, his wife Jennifer, Voces de la Frontera leader and longstanding community activist Maria Morales, and seven of the most active students traveled to Washington, D.C. The Center for Community Change organizedthree days ofactivities centering on the DREAM Act and Student Adjustment Act. These federal acts would offer undocumented students a pathway to citizenship, in-state tuition for college, and opportunities to apply for federal financial aid. Students trained in lobbying techniques and spent a daylobbying elected representatives.

They participated in a mock graduation ceremony at the U. S. Capitol and marched to the Department of Education todeliver lettershighlighting the fact that thousands of dreams were being denied because of lack of access to higher education. The Washington Post interviewed Xavier Marquez and Marylu Garcia and featured Xavier's picture on the front page the following day...

All of this is reminiscent of the "action" against Karl Rove: "Even more on the Karl Rove harassment". That involved a different group, "National Political Action", pulling a similar stunt in support of the same anti-American legislation. And, that involved school teachers as well and might have involved publicly-funded schoolbuses.

UPDATE: The other side responds:

This letter is to clarify that it was never the intention of the people who came to Senator Stepp's door to harass or intimidate her. In fact, four people came to her door. They were not yelling at her window; nor were they yelling about AB 69/SB334... Members of Voces de la Frontera were practicing the right of free expression and the right to petition a legislator. Politicians come knocking on our doors all the time, especially before elections. Does that mean we should call the police and threaten to pursue charges? An elected official has a duty to hear from and respond to constituents. The warm invitation for dialogue that was expressed at the public hearing was the basis of our decision to try to speak with Senator Stepp directly...

I fervently hope that Stepp pursues charges against these people.

Posted at 04:16 PM | Comments (1)

"Hatred and retaliation won't fix the migration problem"

Someone named Kelly Arthur Garrett is apparently an American reporter who lives in Mexico. She offers the titular piece, which starts with this:

What a sad commentary on the state of the migration policy debated when asimple call for bilateral cooperation loosens an avalanche of anti-Mexico vitriol from misguided Americans who confuse sword rattling with patriotism.

Then, she follows that with reading bits from the mail she received about an earlier column. While she apparently wants the reader to disagree with most of her epistlers, I'm having trouble doing so since most of them are completely right. Obviously, I could waste my time showing how most are indeed right, but instead I'll just provide this:

Here's the way two researchers put it two years ago: "Offering to work more closely with Mexico on trade and migration, the United States can press its neighbor both to adopt reforms that will help its workforce achieve parity in earning power and to develop common procedures and competencies in law enforcement, immigration policy, and defense. Perhaps integration may then come close to becoming a reality."

Is that a call to treason? Leftist propaganda? Hardly. That plea for bilateral migration cooperation is quoted from a report by the very architect of the conservative ideology that currently reigns in the United State — the Heritage Foundation.

Here's the report she's refering to. As you might have guessed, the "integration" refered to in the quote above is "continental integration", aka a sovereignty-sapping scheme to join the U.S., Canada, and Mexico together into an EU-style superstate. I'll leave it to the reader to determine whether simply calling for such a form of governance rises to the level of treason or not, or whether one would need to actually try to bring it about to meet the requirements of that most serious charge.

Posted at 10:35 AM | Comments (3)

AP/Arthur H. Rotstein: some of my best friends are Minutemen

The AP offers the biased report "Vigilante Anti-Immigration Group Gaining" about the Minuteman Project. A search shows that that's the original AP title, and not the one from Yahoo. (Fox calls it "Minuteman Project Gains Popularity", two AZ sources change it: KVOA, AZ Daily Sun, as do two ND sources: IN Forum, Grand Forks Herald. About 50 other sources have the same title as Yahoo.)

Obviously, the MMP don't call themselves "vigilantes"; it was Our Leader and others who came up with that. And, they aren't "anti-immigration", so the AP starts out with a lie. But, of course, that spirit continues:

The Minuteman Project was launched earlier this year amid fears that racist crackpots would rough up illegal immigrants trying to slip into this country.

Yes, but it would be helpful if the AP would tell us who was doing the fear-mongering: the "so-called" liberal media and far-left, pro-illegal immigration groups. Then, they inform us that that fear-mongering was wrong, and give us some good news:

And even critics of the movement acknowledge its participants are not all bigots or extremists.

Hey, I can play that game too: not all members of the MSM are far-left, anti-American propagandists. Then they quote a member of Morris Dees' Southern Poverty Law Center:

..."there are real strains of racism and anti-Semitism in this movement." Still, "the movement has attracted people who are not Klansmen or neo-Nazis."

Can I play again too? Not all members of the media are traitors.

While they do provide a quote from Dan Stein of FAIR, they also quote an Arizona sociologist to give us some "historical" background.

And, they end by giving us a few links to those mentioned in the story. Except, for one reason or another, the National Immigration Forum gets a link, but wasn't mentioned...

Posted at 06:33 AM | Comments (0)

Financial Times discovers dangers of massive illegal immigration

The Financial Times superficially reports that "LA's hidden economy threatens region". That's their take on the Milken Institute report discussed here in "Liberalism" caused Los Angeles' massive underground economy:

The findings, which added fuel to an already fierce debate about illegal immigration and revived talk about ways to make California more business-friendly, overshadowed the principal conclusion that the existing workforce is ill-equipped to man well-paid knowledge-based industries. So-called "informal" workers are most commonly found in catering, domestic service, the garment trade, construction and gardening. About 60 per cent are non-citizens, although not necessarily undocumented.

Noting the increased diversity and resilience of the economy, the study said Los Angeles had recovered strongly from recession and the loss of aerospace and financial services jobs in the 1990s. "The city also remains polarised between high-end and low-end jobs. It suffers from a workforce that is disproportionately unskilled."

...The city needed to offer better opportunities for immigrants and their children to attain higher educational standards, and generate initiatives such as loan guarantees to improve small businesses' access to capital. Its universities should also be better used to "seed" new businesses and ideas, and vocational training should focus on industries that are stable and offer good pay and growth prospects.

Improved education and training, seen by voters as the state's most urgent political issue, is the main policy platform adopted by Antonio Villaraigosa, Los Angeles mayor.

Once again: take care of illegal immigration, and this problem will take care of itself.

Posted at 03:01 AM | Comments (1)

Vicente Fox lectures America: don't forget immigrant roots

America's amigo, like our leader, has now become a parody, offering us the following canard:

"[The proposed wall on the Mexican border is] a very bad sign, which does not speak well of a country that is proud of being democratic, proud of being a country of immigrants... The vast majority of the population of the United States, when we look at their roots, are immigrants who have arrived from all over the world and who have constructed that great nation. That's why they can't deny who they are."

We are indeed a land of immigrants. Because of that, does that mean we have to let anyone come here and join us? Obviously not. Because if we did, we'd have a population larger than India in a decade or two.

So, Vicente, that's why we have immigration laws. See, we need to manage the flow of future immigrants. In order to make the best life for the descendents of past immigrants, we need to make sure that those who come here will be good for the country.

That's why we need to make sure that people who come here don't, for instance, think that our land rightfully belongs to some other country. And, we need to make sure that those who come here are going to be full Americans, and not just Mexicans who live in the U.S. Unfortunately, the Mexican government teaches its citizens that the U.S. southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico, and it does its level best to make sure that those "immigrants" it sends us stay true to their homeland. Now, surely, there are many Mexicans who emigrate here and give up allegiances to their former homeland. However, most of the illegal aliens who Mexico allows to come here do not fit that description.

So, Vicente, is there anyway you could look after your own citizens instead of sending them northward and then issuing pathetic pleas to emotionalism? Thanks.

Posted at 06:18 AM | Comments (2)

WaPo: immigration laws aren't being enforced, therefore they won't work

Michael A. Fletcher and Darryl Fears offer "Analysts: Crackdown Won't Halt Immigration". It includes quotes from a few people saying that enforcement alone won't work and we need a guest worker scheme. The "reporters" seem to be leading the reader to come to that same conclusion.

However, in the very same article, the "reporters" inform us that we aren't really doing enforcement:

Congress has passed laws to crack down on illegal immigration in the past -- most recently in 1996 -- but those efforts have met with little success, especially when it comes to holding employers accountable. In 1999, the government issued 417 notices of intent to fine employers for hiring undocumented workers. Last year, that number dropped to three, according to a report by the Government Accountability Office. Even when employers were caught hiring undocumented workers, the penalties typically have been minor, the GAO found.

Obviously, the problem is not that the laws don't work. The problem is that they are not enforced. Now, surely, most readers of this article will realize that, right? Why would the WaPo discredit itself like this?

And, enforcement used to work, back when it meant actual "enforcement" and before the WaPo and others redefined it to mean "enforcement on paper only". The problem now is that we have "enforcement", but because of political corruption the laws are ignored.

If the WaPo wanted to rise above its current rag status they'd point that out and indicate that the root cause is corruption and not that our laws don't work. And, they'd include historical data showing that, yes, indeed, enforcement works when it's actually carried out.

They also quote Steven A. Camarota, research director for the Center for Immigration Studies, but they don't indicate whether he agrees with their headline. In fact, I'd imagine that he'd say something similar to what I wrote above.

The solution to the illegal immigration crisis is to vote corrupt politicians out of office. At the same time, sources like the WaPo have to be completely discredited.

This is yet another of my small contributions in the latter effort, and I strongly encourage you to do whatever you can to help. For instance, please write ombudsman *at* washpost.com and let them know you know what they're up to.

Posted at 04:23 AM | Comments (1)

Immigration lawyer unsuccessfully pimps guest worker scheme at DU

"MemFromDem" claims to be an immigration lawyer, and in an anti-Lou Dobbs thread it tries to pimp the Kennedy-McCain guest worker scheme. "TahitiNut" takes it to task, complete with some shocking charts that I'll have to incorporate in future posts. And:

Suffice it to say that when the 'ownership society' invites and facilitates an invasion of cheap labor from a deliberately oppressed neighboring country it's an invasion in nearly a literal sense of warfare. To attack those raising the alarm as racists is the cheapest and most hypocritical of ploys. It's disgusting. But monarchs (and oligarchs) have always deployed cannon fodder against cannon fodder, haven't they? It's just another kind of war profiteering - class warfare.

Posted at 08:52 AM | Comments (0)

Class action lawsuit filed against California giving tuition discounts to illegal aliens

From a report that the SacBee misleadingly titles "Immigrant tuition law challenged":

Sparked by a former California congressman, a class-action lawsuit was filed Wednesday in Yolo County Superior Court challenging a state law allowing undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition at public universities.

Former U.S. Rep. Brian Bilbray, a San Diego Republican currently running for the vacated seat of Randy "Duke" Cunningham, initiated the suit by complaining after his children were charged out-of-state tuition at a community college after moving to California from Virginia.

Bilbray contends it is fundamentally unfair for his two adult children, Briana, 19, and Patrick, 20, to be charged the higher out-of-state rate while some undocumented immigrants are eligible for much lower tuition fees...

...The Attorney General's Office declined comment, saying it had not yet seen the suit. Ravi Poorsina, spokeswoman for the University of California, said the state law being challenged does not provide special treatment to undocumented immigrants because it provides the same benefits to out-of-state students who meet the criteria, such as students who attend a California boarding school while their family lives elsewhere.

Of the 1,339 UC students who received a tuition exemption under the statute in 2004-05, roughly 30 percent may have been undocumented immigrants, though precise figures are unavailable, Poorsina said.

If this fails on a technicality or because Poorsina's description of the statute fits the DHS's rules, then I guess one of the remaining options would perhaps be to try to get some state or federal agency to conduct an investigation of some kind which would lead to a charge of aiding and abetting illegal aliens. Of course, the chance of that happening is quite slim.

UPDATE: In the unlikely event that there's an investigation, perhaps it could start with Marshall "Mark" Drummond, chancellor of California Community Colleges. He told the L.A. Times:

"My job isn't to patrol the border. My job is to build healthy communities... Regardless of the merits of these folks coming here in the first place, the point is to me that they're here, they're residents of communities, they are successful graduates of California high schools, and I personally welcome them to study and learn in our community colleges and contribute back to their communities."

Posted at 04:08 PM | Comments (3)

Stop the trojan horse illegal alien amnesty

Your calls are needed immediately: Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) has added language to HR 4437 that supports adding a guest worker scheme to the final bill.

The "Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005" will be voted on today, so please take a minute and call your Congressman immediately. Perhaps it would be best to scrap HR 4437 completely and start over, or at least suggest that they remove this pro-illegal alien amnesty language.

Please contact your rep here or just call 202-224-3121.

"The assurances that we had on this bill was that it would address our border security concerns," said Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., who made an impassioned statement Wednesday at a meeting of Republican members calling for the leaders to remove the language before the bill hits the floor. "Now the day before the vote we learn that there's a Trojan horse that's being attached by way of a guest worker program that we feel will lead to an amnesty."

...Royce said this new language was put into Sensenbrenner's amendment "because Jeff Flake and others who are enthusiasts for an open border position have tried to negotiate this into the final bill through subterfuge."

A spokesman for Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., said he wanted to wait and see whether the Rules Committee left his language in the bill before responding to Royce...

UPDATE: This page will be updated with the progress of the bill, and it has links to much more information. See also this or this.

UPDATE 2: Speaking on KFI, Rep. Tom Tancredo says that the Flake amendment has been removed, and that an amendment allowing for 700 miles of border fence has been inserted into the bill.

Posted at 10:10 AM | Comments (1)

Urgent action needed: strengthen HR 4437

Rep. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (R-WI) has proposed H.R. 4437, aka the "Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005". It contains some strong provisions against illegal immigration and a (probably deliberately) weak provision or two. The last might indicate that this bill is actually a trojan horse designed to make massive illegal immigration legal and help pave the way for a guest worker scheme. And, some have speculated that this might be a sneaky attempt to get such an amnesty.

In that scenario, the House would pass this bill before the holidays and be able to go home and brag to their constituents that they'd done something about this crisis. But, the House and the Senate would then work together behind closed doors to add in a "guest" worker scheme. And, there's little that the pro-American House members could do about that.

However, the bill itself doesn't include a "guest" worker or "temporary" worker scheme. This would be a helpful bill, but only if its negative, trojan horse provisions were removed.

To solve both problems, please contact all your representatives and tell them to not only strengthen H.R. 4437 but that you will not only not vote for them but will refuse to donate to their parties if they pass any kind of a "guest" or "temporary" worker scheme.

The idea that this bill might be helpful is assisted by those on the other side. Mexico is not only opposed to the bill, they're encouraging their allies inside the U.S. to speak out about it.

Whether on Mexico's urging or just on their own, those opposed include the National Council of the Race (it's "appalling" and "mean-spirited"), MALDEF, LULAC, AILA, National Immigration Forum, the ACLU, and AZ Republic: Revisionist reform.

Just because those on the other side oppose the bill doesn't mean it's perfect, so please contact your representatives and urge them to do something about the trojan horse provisions.

UPDATE: People's Weekly World expresses their opposition.

Posted at 03:37 AM | Comments (18)

The Democratic Party of Hidalgo County and "armed resistance"

The post "Howard Dean to embarass self August 5 2005" discussed how the Democratic Party in Texas' Hidalgo County invited racists to speak at one of their meetings and even make threats against the Minuteman Project.

I recently noticed this August 2 post, which says it's an article that appeared in the Rio Grande Guardian:

Hidalgo County Democratic Party Chair Juan Maldonado has turned down the chance to appear on Fox News' O'Reilly Factor and CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight show. Fox and CNN wanted Maldonado to talk about plans by the Brown Berets to use physical force against supporters of the Minutemen Project, should the controversial border watch group decide to patrol in the Rio Grande Valley this October.

Maldonado said he would not appear on national TV because he believed talk about taking up armed struggle against the Minutemen was a ruse by Republican operatives designed to damage the image of the Democratic Party.

"I have rejected all offers to appear on national TV for now," Maldonado told the Guardian. "I think the whole thing with the Brown Berets was a plan by Republicans to get me to support or be linked with armed struggle. I have made it abundantly clear that I do not promote or condone violence and nor does my party."

Honestly, the last thing I was expecting was to have him call it a COINTELPRO-type attempt. I didn't buy his attempts to downplay this after the meeting, and I don't buy this rather creative attempt. It's too bad that (apparently) no one asked Mad Howie about this at the time.

Posted at 06:52 PM | Comments (0)

Dude from Slate visits border, discovers trash and other illegal immigration issues

Last week, Slate ran a three-parter from Judd Slivka entitled "How the Border Changed Us". It's not exactly pro-illegal immigration, but it's a standard "dude (as in the ranch) visits desert southwest for first time" piece. It concentrates on the trash left behind by crossers and their attempts to get water and lifts out of border residents. Oh, and it only uses the word "illegal" about trails and roads, not about entrants.

Posted at 02:32 PM | Comments (0)

79% of Texans think "government is not doing enough to stop illegal immigrants"

According to the Scripps Howard Texas Poll:

Seventy-nine percent say the government is not doing enough to stop illegal immigrants... The finding reflects a 10 point increase from February of 2004 and a 21-point hike from August of 2001. The survey included 1,000 Texas adults, and the poll has an overall margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

The survey also shows that 86 percent believe that U.S. businesses are contributing to the surge of illegal immigration by hiring undocumented workers. A similar number - 83 percent - believe that businesses should identify and report undocumented immigrants.

...Eighty-four percent of Texans surveyed consider illegal immigration a serious problem, while 76 percent believe the number of unauthorized immigrants crossing into Texas has been increasing in recent years.

The survey, however, shows that Texans are split over proposed guest worker programs, including one by President Bush that would allow undocumented residents to stay in the country and work for several years in jobs bypassed by U.S. citizens. Fifty percent support the plan, compared with 42 percent who oppose and 8 percent who don't know.

The survey also shows that nearly half the Texans surveyed cast a skeptical view on the controversial Minutemen, citizen volunteers who patrol the border. Forty-nine percent oppose such efforts, while 47 percent approve.

Forty-nine percent believe undocumented workers take jobs that nobody wants, while 37 percent believe they take jobs from U.S. citizens...

Obviously, the poll isn't as nuanced as one would hope. Last year's results are in "Poll: Texans believe illegal immigration is a serious problem".

Posted at 11:04 AM | Comments (0)

Arizona Catholic Bishops support open borders

From this:

The bishops of Arizona are calling on Catholics to welcome immigrants into their parishes, whether documented or undocumented, and to work to reform the U.S. immigration laws in an effort to facilitate immigration and stem the growing number of migrant deaths at the U.S.-Mexico border...

How about working to reform Mexico's corrupt system? Isn't that the real way to solve this problem? (Along with not encouraging corruption here by making illegal immigration even worse.)

...They acknowledged "the legitimate strain of this crisis" on different aspects of society, but they reminded Catholics of their call "to live out the principles of global solidarity" and to defend the human dignity of the other...

...Catholic social teaching has consistently maintained that the goods of the earth belong to all people and that it is the right of the worker to migrate to sustain their family when they are unable to achieve a life of dignity in their own land, the bishops underlined...

Say what now? Private and state property has now been abolished? Perhaps we should tell that to Vatican City and start discussing how best to share all the real estate holdings of the Catholic Church.

...And while Catholic teaching recognizes that nations have the right to control their own borders and to regulate immigration, "this right is not absolute," said the bishops. Instead, they explained: "the needs of immigrants must be measured against the needs of the receiving countries, and that the rights of these nations must not be exaggerated to the point of denying access to needy people from other countries."

I wonder if these Bishops would write garbage like this if most of our "immigrants" were from Muslim countries and had no intention of ever converting.

And, if 10 million Muslims from Bangladesh showed up on our doorstep tomorrow, we couldn't deny them entry. According to their logic, we would have to admit anyone who comes here just as long as they're needy. Even if it's in the overall best interests of our country and their country that they stay at home, we have to let them in.

Perhaps all those African immigrants who are trying to storm Melilla could be sent to Vatican City.

Posted at 07:46 AM | Comments (5)

60 Minutes' guest worker propaganda

As previously discussed, Ed Bradley reported on illegal immigration on last night's 60 Minutes.

Taking a bit of a harsher tone than I did comes this annotated transcript.

Posted at 10:55 AM | Comments (0)

"No such thing as 'temporary workers'"

Michael S. Teitelbaum (a demographer at the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation) and Philip L. Martin (professor of labor economics at the University of California at Davis) discuss "guest" worker schemes:

...Decades of experience with such temporary worker programs in high-wage liberal democracies worldwide show that neither the programs nor the migrants turned out to be genuinely "temporary."

Mexico is unlikely to realize sustained benefits from exporting workers. Migrants' payments sent back to relatives wane over time, and such payments can stimulate land price inflation, conspicuous consumption of imported goods, and rising inequalities of wealth rather than stay-at-home development.

In the past, proponents have declared that such migrants would require very little in public expenditures. Yet universally, some temporary workers find ways to bring their families to join them, and then become substantial beneficiaries of existing government-financed programs such as public education, healthcare, and safety-net services for low-income residents. Politicians have also discovered - too late - that temporary worker programs really are labor subsidies to low-wage sectors such as garments, labor-intensive agriculture, and in-home personal services, retarding efforts to raise the level of national wages and productivity.

Temporary-worker programs are often portrayed as a legal and humane alternative to unauthorized migration. But they fail to acknowledge that the last major Mexico-US temporary worker program, the so-called bracero program, actually was the initiator and accelerator of today's large-scale unauthorized migration. The same is true across Western Europe, where "guest worker" programs based on similar claims were embraced during the economic booms of 30 to 40 years ago. Their "guests" for temporary work were transformed into millions of permanently resident "foreigners," who today have very high rates of unemployment and welfare dependency...

By the same authors: "The Mirage of Mexican Guest Workers"

Posted at 10:30 AM | Comments (0)

Creepy WaPo article on illegal immigration contains grain of truth

An article with a rather strange provenance has appeared in the WaPo, entitled "Who's Trying to Cross Our Southern Border? Everyone". Here's the signature block:

Michael Flynn is a freelance writer based in Geneva. He received a grant from the Washington-based Fund for Investigative Journalism to report on transmigration from Mexico.

And, he includes this:

...provided to me during a recent trip to Mexico when officers from the International Organization for Migration (IOM), a group committed to managing the global migration crisis...

IOM is like a mini-UN. It was started by Belgium and the U.S. in the 50s, and, like the U.N. it has member states, observer states, etc. While nominally independent from the UN, I think we can consider them one and the same.

The article reports on those from about a third of the countries of the world who come to Mexico to cross into the U.S. The grain of truth amongst the propaganda comes from this:

Mexican commentators also argue that many of the country's problems stem from U.S. policies. If the United States didn't give so much work to undocumented immigrants, goes the argument, then Mexico wouldn't be flooded with migrants from across the globe. Says Father Vladimiro Valdez, a Jesuit priest in Mexico City and outspoken critic of both Mexican and U.S. immigration policies: "The fact is, the United States needs illegal workers, and it needs them to remain illegal because then they can continue to keep their wages low."

The politics of free trade, say critics like Valdez, have done little to improve the situation of the poor. Some claim that NAFTA has become a tool used by the United States to drive poor Mexican farmers off the land, thereby producing a steady stream of cheap labor for U.S. agribusiness.

They might indeed be right about that. The solution is not to create a guest worker program. And, the solution is not to give more benefits to illegal aliens and increase the draw.

The solution is to crack down on those growers and others who are creating this huge demand for illegal labor. Fewer foreign crossers coming to Mexico, fewer crossers coming to the U.S. It's a win-win.

Posted at 04:02 AM | Comments (3)

Ed Bradley offers superficial report on illegal immigration

Tonight's 60 Minutes had a segment called "More Migrants Dying To Get In". That link provides a rough transcript of the segment, but there are some not insignificant things they left out, such as Tancredo briefly referencing workplace enforcement and Ed Bradley not following up on that remark. And, Ed offered a little bit of editorializing, in effect agreeing with one guest that we need a guest worker scheme because we need those illegal workers. (That guest was Mark Reed; more on him here, here, here, and here.)

Here are some of the things Ed forgot to include in his report:

- Who exactly is responsible for not enforcing our immigration laws at workplaces?

- What role does political corruption play in all this? If politicians take contributions from companies that profit off illegal immigration, isn't that corruption and a threat to our entire political system?

- Who was governor of Nebraska during the meatpacking raids Ed discussed, and what's his current job? (I believe that would be Mike Johanns, who is now our Secretary of Agriculture.)

- If Bob just comes to work, well, who could refuse Bob a job? And, if Fred just comes to work, well, we don't want to deny ol' Fred what he wants. But, when you've got millions of people "just coming to work", doesn't that have a major impact on our economy and our way of life? Why didn't Ed say anything about that?

- Why didn't Ed discuss the Mexican government's continual attempt to meddle in our internal politics?

- Why didn't Ed discuss any of the threats to our country discussed in Heather MacDonald's recent piece on the actions of Mexico's consuls in the U.S.?

- Why didn't Ed discuss those U.S. politicians who occasionally act more like Mexican politicians?

- Why didn't Ed disclose that a major chunk of Mexico's population would come to the U.S. if they could?

- Why didn't Ed discuss how illegal immigration will undercut any immigration system, and the way to stop that - and stop desert crossings - is to go after the employers and reduce or eliminate non-emergency public services?

- Does Ed think Americans are stupid enough to think that the fact that no terrorists have (supposedly) been caught at the border indicates that a) they haven't tried or b) they haven't already succeeded?

- Does Ed think terrorists who infiltrated our borders would then, for instance, send CBS a press release to announce their presence?

I realize there's only so many minutes in a segment, but by providing such a superficial report Ed Bradley undercuts his own credibility and does a disservice to his viewers.

UPDATE: There's an annotated transcript here.

Posted at 08:45 PM | Comments (1)

Illegal immigrants in Minnesota costs $188 million/year; "liberals" whine

Minnesota's Department of Administration recently released a report showing that illegal immigrants to that state cost them $188 million a year. Governor Tim Pawlenty commissioned the study and, while offering no specific legislation at this point, appears to be intending to do something.

That caused this:

"It's playing to racism, basically," said Rep. Karen Clark, DFL-Minneapolis. " ... I think it is a desperate move. I'm very sad that Governor Pawlenty would go in this direction again."

Actually, Clark is the one who's playing to racism, by playing the race card. Many in that state are concerned about the issue and don't want to spend that money. Rather than offering proper public policy, the opposition simply plays the only card they have.

Focusing on illegal immigrants' costs without counting their contributions doesn't make sense, said Jared Erdmann, co-director of Hacer, a Hispanic research organization in the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs. He said a Hacer study estimated the buying power of Latinos, believed to make up the bulk of illegals in Minnesota, at $3.1 billion. Migrants, both legal and illegal, have revitalized entire neighborhoods, he added.

So, if someone sneaks in to your movie theater, it's OK if they buy popcorn? Sorry, I'm not buying that. One person sneaking in leads others to try to sneak in, and leads to others not respecting those doors you have on the theater. And, if your manager is paid to look the other way, he should be immediately fired because he's a corrupt crook. Many of our managers in Washington are in effect paid to look the other way, and, while it's a little difficult to fire them we've come close a couple times recently.

I'd also suggest doing the math on Erdmann's figures. Either there are a lot more "Latinos" than illegal aliens in MN, or every single one of those illegal aliens has a buying power of over $30,000.

Previously: "[MN Governor] Pawlenty Asks Cities To Rethink Immigration Ordinances"

Posted at 09:34 AM | Comments (0)

"Congress and the Naturalization of Immigrants"

There's a historical backgrounder here.

This part stands out:

Federal law and regulations establish procedures, administered by the Department of State, by which Americans can voluntarily renounce their citizenship. In addition, federal law lists a variety of acts that shall result in the loss of citizenship if "voluntarily perform[ed] . . . with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality." These include obtaining naturalization in a foreign state; declaring allegiance to a foreign state; serving in the armed forces of a foreign state as an officer or when the foreign state is engaged in hostilities against the United States; and, in some cases, serving in governmental office in a foreign state.

Of course, there are millions of U.S. citizens who are also citizens of other countries. And, recall the case of Illinois state senator Martin Sandoval, who wants to also serve on a Mexican committee.

Posted at 08:19 AM | Comments (2)

Knight Ridder offers conventional "wisdom" on immigration "reform"

David Goldstein of K-R offers "Undocumented immigration a growing worry". Unfortunately, like other articles it offers the false choice between amnesty lite and amnesty heavy, without acknowledging the revolutionary step of simply enforcing our current laws.

Posted at 08:44 AM | Comments (0)

More fretful farmers whining for you to pay for their labor

The N.C. Times' William Finn Bennett offers "Local farmers fret over rising cost of wages". That reporter is usually better than writing articles like this, and he or anyone else who believes anything these farmers say should first read "Jon Vessey, crops rotting in the fields, and pro-illegal immigration propaganda" or "The Mirage of Mexican Guest Workers".

While the article is full of disgusting bits, this might be the worst:

"American workers are not willing to work these types of jobs for this type of pay... Most young people (in this country) have never even held a shovel ---- Americans would not eat if they depended on other Americans to do farm labor."

Obviously, this country has done some mighty important and noteworthy things. Just off the top of my head, we've been to the moon, we've dammed mighty rivers, we've expanded the U.S. from thirteen colonies into a world collossus, we've fought world wars, and so on and so forth. And, some pissant grower dares say we'd starve without a foreign serf class? As politely as I can muster: up yours, buddy. Perhaps he should consider moving to another country, because he obviously doesn't belong here.

But, looking on the bright side of that noxious comment, it sounds like a good lesson could be had by both parties. Our (supposedly) spoiled and unskilled young people could learn shovel work. And, those growers who employ illegal aliens could learn a new skill as well: making license plates.

If these farmers' crops are really going to rot in the fields, perhaps they should stop trying to take advantage of illegal behavior and paying foreign serfs to do stoop labor in what is alleged to be an advanced First World country. Perhaps we should import strawberries rather than serfs. And, perhaps they should pay the full and fair price for that labor instead of expecting everyone else to pick up that cost. Or, perhaps those growers should push for research into farm mechanization with the same tenacity.

And, perhaps Dan Weintraub should look for the story behind the story (as evidenced by the second and third link above), rather than writing things like this:

First nurses, then teachers, now farmworkers. Labor shortages are becoming a big story in California.

Perhaps he should look into this in a bit more depth rather than falling for propaganda.

Posted at 03:09 AM | Comments (1)

Korean anchor babies and "birth tourism"

In May 2002 the LAT reported on the phenomonon of "birth tourism": foreigners traveling to the U.S. specifically to have children. Those children would then automatically be declared U.S. citizens and could receive benefits and wouldn't be subjected to the home country's rules. And, once they reach 18, those citizens could then sponsor the whole family to come here as immigrants.

Obviously it's a scam and an attempt by people around the world to take advantage of us, but, since many of those people are non-white, "liberals" reflexively jump to defend this scam.

From "Korean moms want 'born in USA' babies":

...One might say it is the ultimate gift that South Korean parents can give their newborns. Those who can cough up the $20,000 or so it costs are coming to the United States by the thousands to give birth so their newborns can have American citizenship.

Their reasons range from a desire to enroll their offspring in American schools to enabling them to avoid South Korean military service.

Los Angeles is the most popular destination because of its large Korean-speaking population, along with New York, Boston, Hawaii and even Guam. The practice is also believed to be popular among women from Hong Kong and Taiwan.

So many are doing it that a mini-industry has developed here of agencies that refer expectant mothers to travel agents, immigration lawyers, prenatal clinics, hospitals and even baby-sitters, arranging what are, in effect, package tours for pregnant women.

"From birth to citizenship," advertises one Korean-language Web site (www.birthinusa.com) that helps women give birth in Los Angeles...

"If they could afford it, all my friends would go to the United States to have their babies," Kim said. "My biggest complaint about Korea is the educational system. In high school, you have to study past midnight or else you fall behind the others and can't get on with your life. And since the baby is a boy, I thought it would be a big gift for him not to be burdened with military service."

...South Korean-run Hana has three centers for expectant mothers in the Los Angeles area and last year opened an elegantly furnished postnatal facility called Larchmont Villa, in L.A.'s Koreatown, where women can stay until it is time to fly home. Their services include such conveniences as a private car for pickup at the airport and a guide to help get the baby a Social Security number and passport...

If he were ever asked, I have little doubt that Howard Dean would approve of this scheme.

More here.

Posted at 08:57 PM | Comments (5)

"Memo From O.C. To D.C."

IBD discusses Tuesday's election featuring Jim Gilchrist:

When a one-issue activist from a fringe party holds the Republican candidate to under 45% in GOP territory, it's time to take notice...

...Republicans in the New York-Washington axis may not see it, but there's a deep divide in their party between elites and grass-roots voters. In places like Southern California, it's impossible to ignore. Voters want to see the law enforced, both at the border and against employers, and they see their elected leaders doing nothing.

When fringe candidates do a better job addressing mainstream concerns than establishment politicians do, the latter can expect trouble. This week they got their warning shot.

Posted at 03:49 AM | Comments (1)

Peggy Noonan, the American Way, and massive illegal immigration

Noonan has a column (I guess) opposing massive illegal immigration and chiding our corrupt elites for supporting it:

There are people who want to return to the old ways and rescue some of the old attitudes. There are groups that seek to restore border integrity. But they are denigrated by many, even the president, who has called them vigilantes. The New Yorker this week carries a mildly snotty piece by a writer named Daniel Kurtz-Phelan in which he interviews members of a group of would-be Minutemen who seek to watch the borders with Mexico and Canada. They are "running freelance patrols"; they are xenophobic; they dismiss critics as "communists" and "child molesters."

...Again: What does it mean when your first act is to break the laws of your new country? What does it mean when you know you are implicitly supported in lawbreaking by that nation's ruling elite? What does it mean when you know your new country doesn't even enforce its own laws? What does it mean when you don't even have to become an American once you join America?

Posted at 08:44 PM | Comments (2)

Is Bush blackmailing the U.S. into giving him his "temporary" worker scheme?

Pat "Pitchfork" Buchanan opines:

...This is a national crisis, an existential crisis. But after five years of ignoring it, and now finally addressing it, what did Bush say in Tucson? I can't defend the border if you won't give me a guest worker program. Said Bush, "(W)e will not be able to effectively enforce our immigration laws until we create a temporary worker program."

But this is preposterous. Bush is saying he cannot do his constitutional duty to protect the nation from invasion -- unless we let 12 million illegal aliens become guest workers and allow greedy U.S. businesses to go overseas and hire foreigners for jobs that U.S. workers won't take at the paltry wages they offer.

But not since the "bracero" program of decades ago have we had a national guest worker program. And never in our history have we given business carte blanche to go abroad and hire foreigners to come and take American jobs. Yet Bush says if we don't, he can't control the border. What he means is, he won't control the border.

The president's speech in Tucson was a kind of extortion of those who have fought for tough border protections. Bush is saying: Unless you give me what I want, a guest worker program, you're not getting what you want. But what a majority of Americans want is what they have a right to demand: That Bush do his sworn duty and enforce the immigration laws of the United States...

Posted at 05:34 AM | Comments (1)

Jim Gilchrist "wins" in CA-48

Minuteman Project co-founder Jim Gilchrist lost tonight's special election in California's 48th District, but he got 25.1% of the vote and perhaps has put a bit of a scare into at least the GOP. Republican John Campbell won with 44.7% despite spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on his campaign, and Democrat Steve Young picked up 28%.

In 2000 it was 62% R vs. 26% D, and in 2002 it was 68% R vs. 28% D.

Gilchrist ran on basically one issue: opposition to illegal immigration and support for border control. Despite attempts by both the Dems and the GOP to say otherwise, he didn't run on an "anti-immigration" or "anti-immigrant" platform, just anti-illegal immigration.

For examples of such confusion, there are a large number of almost completely clueless comments over at Daily 'Screw 'em' Kos, however this earlier thread contains this comment that probably went in one collective ear and out the other:

This is the hypocrisy and lunacy of the Democratic party on display. The point is, it was not too long ago that construction firms did pay $15 an hour and up, and they were union jobs. Now you want your cake and you want to eat it too. You want to whine that the Republican party has destroyed the unions, the Republican party has destroyed middle class, the Republican party doesn't want to pay a living wage, and in the same breath you want to defend the rights of ten percent of the population of Mexico to come here and put on roofs for seven dollars an hour... You can't have it both ways. The fifteen dollar an hour union framer that was put out of work in Texas was likely a Democrat. Who does he vote for now? Who does he turn to now? Who speaks for him or her now?

More here and here.

UPDATE: I should have crunched the numbers in more detail, because they're very (very) important: on election day, more people voted for Gilchrist than for Campbell. If Gilchrist had gotten more mail-in votes, he would have won. Apparently Campbell flooded the district with absentee ballots and his election materials, while Gilchrist did not.

UPDATE 2: More at The Corner here, here, and here.

UPDATE 3: For the unofficial vote totals, see this. Gilchrist might not have gotten 35% vs. 30% of the election day votes, but if you do the math, those numbers say he got 274 more votes. Now awaiting the official results...

Posted at 11:34 PM | Comments (5)

Will the GOP sneak immigration "reform" through?

From "GOP forms strategy to OK guest workers":

Republican leaders will try to pass President Bush's controversial guest-worker proposal without putting it to a direct vote in the House.

Observers say the new GOP strategy that begins today is for the House to deal only with the more politically palatable issue of increasing border security and clamping down on employers. Republican leaders then will let the Senate pass some form of a guest-worker plan.

After that vote, senators and House members will merge the House's border security bill with the Senate's legislation in closed-door meetings.

The House will then vote on the final package, which will include some guest-worker provision, according to a GOP aide familiar with the plan, a Colorado lawmaker and other observers.

The strategy is designed to avoid a divisive debate and contentious vote in the House...

Please contact all your representatives and let them know exactly how you feel and how you'll vote in the future if they pull something like this.

Posted at 04:12 PM | Comments (0)

AP: "Illegal hiring fuels problem"

The AP has a roundup of the Bush administrations various failures to enforce the laws in "Illegal hiring fuels problem".

While it has some bias, it also has some useful facts and figures concerning raids or lack thereof.

Posted at 10:22 AM | Comments (0)

Have Herndon officials conspired to violate federal law

As previously discussed, Herndon VA is home to a shiny new illegal alien hiring hall. Now comes "U.S. asked to probe labor center":

The U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia is being urged to look into a charge that Herndon officials have violated federal criminal conspiracy laws by creating a day-labor center that helps illegal aliens.

U.S. Attorney Paul J. McNulty has received from Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican, a letter accusing Herndon officials of conspiracy in seeking to aid illegal aliens, the congressman's office said.

In his letter, Mr. Tancredo noted that officials for Project Hope and Harmony -- a group of community leaders and churches that will operate Herndon's day-labor center -- have refused to screen job seekers based on their legal status in the country.

He said their proposed action constitutes a conspiracy to violate federal law because a June 2004 study by Fairfax County indicates that at least 85 percent of laborers who would use the center are illegal aliens...

Of course, whether anything will happen remains to be seen, but note that despite being supported by the corrupt elites, day laborer sites are supported by only a small number of voters.

Posted at 12:12 AM | Comments (0)

Congress: $4 million for National Council of The Race

From this:

Thanks to a congressional earmark, an open-borders advocacy group that pushes for driver's licenses, free in-state tuition and healthcare for illegal aliens and bilingual requirements for state agencies and ballots is slated to get $4 million in new taxpayer money to add to the more than $30 million it has received from various federal agencies since 1996.

The National Council of La Raza (NCLR), Spanish for "the race," will get its latest grant through an appropriations bill passed by Congress on November 18. The Joint Explanatory Statement of HR 3058, available on the House's Rules Committee website lists 1,100 plus earmarks in the bill, including La Raza's grant under the Housing and Urban Development Department's Self-Help and Assisted Ownership Programs. Under this account La Raza will receive four times as much as the Special Olympics, which won a $1-million earmark.

It's not known exactly who got them this earmark; NCLR wasn't expecting it. However:

One possible culprit is Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) who sits on the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that handled the bill carrying the earmark. In 2001, Reid sent a letter to the Senate Appropriations Committee requesting $5 million for La Raza's housing programs. That same year Reid also received NCLR's Capital Award for "his commitment to advance legislation priorities of the Latino Community." In gratitude, Reid told NCLR, "La Raza is like the biblical David, fighting all these Goliaths."

Reid's office did not respond to calls asking whether he inserted or even supported the earmark...

Posted at 11:33 AM | Comments (2)

Hugh Hewitt, Ken Mehlman on illegal immigration

Slightly popular partisan hack BushBot Hugh Hewitt conducted a radio interview with RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman and discussed the word "illegal immigration". As it turns out, the GOP is declaring war on that word. As regards the actual process of massive illegal immigration, if the GOP had their druthers that would continue and get even worse. Here's a transcript of the interview. But, first a warning: you have to be really, really drunk on KoolAid to believe anything Mehlman or Hewitt say.

HH: [...Bush's speech...] John Campbell's running on strong borders. What was the president's message? What's your message today on illegal immigration?

KM: Well, our message is there can be zero tolerance for illegal immigration in this country.

Obviously, Bush enables and encourages massive illegal immigration through things like: refusing to do workplace enforcement, dropping hiring requirements after Katrina, helping illegal aliens open bank accounts and buy houses, and so on and so forth. Obviously, there's a bit of a conflict: the Bush administration encourages illegal immigration while saying they oppose it.

How does one explain this? As he goes on to describe, the Bush administration wants "comprehensive" reform. That would result in changing all those illegal aliens into "temporary" workers. Thus, they intend to keep massive immigration, but just change the nomenklatura.

As regards John Campbell, he has supported and AFAIK still supports some of the same things that Gil Cedillo does: tuition discounts and driver's licenses for illegal aliens.

[...KM plays WOT card...] If we're not controlling our borders, then we're not fundamentally protecting our homeland security. And that needs to be something that the president has a comprehensive plan to accomplish.

It's good to know that he has a plan. However, Bush has been in office for five years, and during all that time the borders have been as porous as could be. By Mehlman's own definition, the Bush administration has been putting this country at risk and president Bush has been failing to do the job he swore he would do.

Then, after a raftload of BS from KM, Hugh takes a swipe at the much higher rated John and Ken Show. HH is right: discussing illegal immigration does get them ratings, because it's an important issue that has our U.S. president acting more like the president of Mexico. If HH isn't as popular as they are, perhaps it's because few people believe what he says. Then, KM plays the WOT card again. Then:

There seem to be some people, unfortunately, who like talking about it, but don't want to solve it. He wants to solve it. I want to solve it. I know you want to solve it. But if it's not comprehensive, we won't solve it.

Bush has had five years to "solve it". He could have started by not doing the things that he did. He could have cracked down on employers. He could have refused to support Mexico's ID for illegals, the Matricula Consular card. He could have refused to support giving home loans to illegal aliens. Instead, he supported massive illegal immigration. Don't trust anything that Mehlman or Hewitt say.

Posted at 04:33 AM | Comments (3)

President Bush, Howard Dean aligned on immigration

Despite Howard Dean trying to pretend there's a difference on immigration policy between the leaderships of the GOP and of the Democratic party, what they want - and even how they want it - are very similar. Speaking before a DNC meeting in Phoenix, Dr. Gov. Howard Dean M.D.:

Saying Bush had used race and gay rights to divide the electorate, Dean said, "In 2006, it's going to be immigration; that's who he's going to scapegoat next." He said Democrats must favor tougher enforcement of existing immigration laws and provide tighter border security, but said a balanced immigration policy would provide a way to give many of the 11 million illegal immigrants a path to legal status.

In other words, he wants a massive amnesty for those who are here now. A position like that makes it very difficult to refuse amnesty for any other illegal aliens who come here. And, of course, untold millions more illegal aliens will come here just to be a part of those future amnesties. (Kennedy-McCain could result in 36.5 million new residents.) How many dozens of millions of new (temporarily) illegal aliens do the Democrats want? And, isn't that position identical to the one supported by the GOP?

Needless to say, the American public from all sides except the far left and the corrupt right want many few illegal aliens, not millions more.

Why is Dr. Dean unable to see this? Why is he unable to see that you can't support massive amnesties while expecting to keep illegal immigration in check? Is Dr. Dean unable to think things through?

Note also that Dean is complaining about Bush being a divider, at the same time as he's trying to portray those who oppose illegal immigration as "scapegoaters".

And, Dean can't even get his facts straight:

But Dean confused President Bush's proposals for a guest worker program with criticism from other Republicans who believe even a temporary visa for undocumented immigrants would reward illegal behavior.

Dean suggested Bush wants to round up and deport all illegal immigrants. In truth, the Bush plan would allow a guestworker program. But immigrants would have to return to their home countries when their work visas expire after six years.

I don't exactly know why Dean would be mistaken, but I have an idea: he's an out-of-control, irresponsible dolt.

The DNC passed three resolutions about immigration. The first supported the massive amnesty described above. The second condemns Colorado's version of Arizona's Proposition 200. And, the third condemned the Minuteman Project.

Obviously, the position of the DNC is closer to that of far-left race groups than the vast majority of Democrats. Perhaps they'll wake up much as those on the other side have.

Posted at 08:46 PM | Comments (1)

Is DHS head Michael Chertoff refusing to do his job?

We already knew that, but just in case you needed more proof, consider this:

"If we don't have a temporary worker program, I think it's going to be extraordinarily difficult to ask our Border Patrol agents and our ICE agents to stem the tide that is driven by a huge economic engine of employers looking for people who can work [in jobs that] won't be done by Americans," Chertoff told reporters during a briefing on the administration's Border Security Initiative.

Obviously, another way to stem that tide would be for the DHS to do their job: enforce the laws against hiring illegal aliens.

Why won't they do that now?

Why do we have to wait for their dream legislation until they'll start doing their job? Isn't that more or less blackmail?

Should we trust the DHS and the Bush administration to do their job later if they refuse to do it now? Obviously, the answer to that question is no.

My jaw is literally dragging on the floor as I ponder just how many votes the Democratic Party could pick up if they decided to be on the opposite side of this issue from the Bush administration. It's too bad that that party has been taken over by far-leftie idiots, otherwise they could use this issue to coast to easy victories.

Previously:
"Secure Border Initiative": Should anyone trust what Bush or Chertoff say?
With 400,000 employees using the same SSN, can you trust anything Bush says?
Chertoff promotes "Temporary Worker Program" at Senate meeting

Posted at 10:41 AM | Comments (2)

Endorsement: Steve Young for Congress (48th District on Mars)

This site is officially endorsing Steve Young for Congress in the 48th District on Mars.

For the 48th District in California, USA, Earth, this site endorses Jim Gilchrist, co-founder of the Minuteman Project.

Regarding the race on the Red Planet, Steve Young has his own proposal on how to end illegal immigration. Your goal is to find a five year old who cannot immediately see all the flaws in his plan:

I have a real solution to the "immigration problem" that is a business approach. It does not demonize immigrants, is self-funding, and benefits America.

Immigrants pay on average $3000 each to smugglers. Why not have the immigrants pay America the $3000 and create a system under which we can monitor who is coming into the country and what they are doing? I propose that the government establish ICE centers at the borders. Those wishing to enter the country will pay the $3000 to ICE (US Immigration, Customs and Enforcement Agency). ICE will take the immigrant's photograph, fingerprints, and administer tuberculosis and other health tests...

...I propose a "green card bounty" program to halt employer cheating. Any undocumented worker who gives ICE a paycheck showing the worker worked within the last month will receive a "green card bounty." ICE will not have to spend precious resources investigating cheating employers. The immigrants will bring the evidence to ICE to get an expedited green card...

It is time for America to adopt my direct solution. It benefits America, eliminates the cheaters, generates $90 billion for the treasury...

The "bounty" deserves some slight consideration. However, it would lead to both false allegations against employers, more document forgery, and even more abuse of illegal aliens. Considered as a whole, his plan would massively increase illegal immigration and, in short, it's insanely naive and just plain stupid.

Please vote for Gilchrist on Tuesday, December 6.

Posted at 08:17 AM | Comments (1)

"America's produce industry is facing a crisis"

Nothing says propaganda like the annual whine from growers demanding more serf labor lest their crops rot in the fields. There have been a few recent newspaper articles about it, and the latest is "A drought of farm labor".

"We are trying to sound the alarm without being alarmist, but the situation has become extremely serious," says Tim Chelling of the Western Growers Association, whose members grow, pack, and ship half America's produce. "We are now talking of losing the production of key commodities to foreign competition. America's produce industry is facing a crisis."

Although the shortage was worsening before 9/11, it's now extreme, Mr. Chelling and the three California farmers say. Without an emergency guest-worker program, they will be dramatically short of the minimum number of workers needed to harvest the current crop. Without long-term immigration reform that acknowledges America's reliance on foreign workers, farmers will not be able to make ends meet, they say.

Oh well. I'm sure they can figure something out, like for instance farm mechanization rather than relying on foreign serf labor. As an alternative, perhaps they could pay the full price for that labor, instead of paying a low wage and sticking everyone else with the true price.

Remember: anyone who sides with the growers in their search for "cheap" workers is supporting massively subsidized stoop labor and the abuse of illegal aliens. And, they also oppose high-tech innovations that would make farms more efficient and enable us to compete against countries where labor is even cheaper.

While many politicians are basically paid to be on the growers' side, do they really want to end up supporting everything that goes with it?

Related:
"The Mirage of Mexican Guest Workers"
Hanson on illegal immigration and guest workers
"The new grapes of wrath"
Miami Herald "endorses indentured servitude"

Posted at 07:24 AM | Comments (5)

"Why Bush's border scheme won't work"

Clarence Page says the latest version of Bush's immigration "reform" scheme is an amnesty. And:

...What's missing is a serious crackdown on the biggest magnet that draws illegal immigrants: jobs. Employers and consumers love cheap labor, as long as it is not competing directly for their jobs. Bush shows no desire to get in the way of that cozy relationship.

We don't need tougher penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegals; we only need to enforce the tough penalties that already have been legislated. Instead, employer sanctions have been so poorly enforced that prosecutions of employers have plummeted in recent decades. When the law lacks teeth, it is ignored.

The result has been a make-believe immigration policy: The president pretends that undocumented workers will police themselves, and the rest of us pretend to believe him.

We need something more sensible. America thrives on immigration. It is part of our national character. But we also need some semblance of order--and fairness!

Posted at 05:41 AM | Comments (6)

Ken Mehlman constructs strawman about illegal immigration

Ken Mehlman, Chairman of the RNC, was spotted yesterday constructing massive strawman arguments at a meeting of the Republican Governors Association. To hear the WaPo tell it:

Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman urged his party Thursday to oppose rising anti-immigrant sentiments in the debate over border security and illegal immigration, suggesting that the GOP risks being on the wrong side of history and electoral politics alike if it embraces an exclusionary message.

Could Mehlman give examples of wide-spread "anti-immigrant sentiments"? While some have "anti-illegal immigrant sentiments", and many have "anti-illegal immigration sentiments", I'm not aware of too many people who oppose legal immigrants. In that light, isn't Mehlman basically, well, lying?

If Mehlman wants to have an inclusionary message, he should stress that we admit almost a million legal immigrants per year. Wouldn't reaching out to those be the best way to show that the GOP is an inclusive party? If Mehlman can't figure that out by himself - or knows that but for one corrupt reason or another refuses to admit that distinction - does he really deserve his job?

He issued a strong call for tougher enforcement of immigration laws but extolled the contributions of immigrants and denounced those who have sought to close the country to foreigners.

What exactly is he talking about? Could Mehlman or the WaPo provide any examples of people who want to do what he claims they want to do?

Most Americans want to close off this country to illegal aliens. Anyone who pretends that implies all "foreigners" is simply lying. And, is it really a good idea to lie about what your base wants?

Previously:
Jorge Arbusto has a new site
Democrats, Republicans grovel before National Council of The Race
And: Mehlman attended Bilderberg

Posted at 12:49 AM | Comments (3)

Tamar Jacoby downplays threat of dual citizenship

Let's say you were the Washington Post, and you were seeking a reviewer for the book "The 50% American" by Stanley A. Renshon. While I haven't read the book, it discusses the pernicious threat posed by dual citizenship.

Who would you choose to do the review? Well, obviously, if you're the WaPo, you could choose Frank Sharry, or perhaps the head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, or perhaps Bob Avakian. Unfortunately, the latter personage wasn't available or something, and they ended up choosing cheap labor cheerleader Tamar Jacoby.

Needless to say, she downplays the risk, even going as far as saying that Mexico offering dual citizenship is a good thing:

But now that they don't have to shed one association to embrace the other, many are much more comfortable becoming U.S. citizens.

Would you like to play? "Not being forced to decide which team I was on in the basketball game made playing much easier. And more fun!"

We're told that even for those who are conflicted, it's just a "passing phase":

First-generation Americans have always lived between two worlds, one foot in the old place and the other in the United States. And eventually they have always tilted in one direction or another, with some returning home and others putting down roots here.

Of course, the problem is that they'll tilt in the wrong direction while still remaining here. If someone is going to be a Mexican partisan, then they should do that in Mexico. Being so here is bad for this country. For just one example, consider the Mexican-"Americans" in the California legislature. And, of course, those foreign countries that provide dual citizenship do so in part to obtain political power inside the U.S.

Posted at 11:50 PM | Comments (1)

"Bush Talks Tougher on Immigration, but It's Still Amnesty"

From this:

[...Bush's hot air...]

It is hard not to be skeptical of this White House when it starts saying it will enforce our immigration laws because it has utterly failed to do so to date. Its de facto immigration policy has been the Clinton administration's...

After Hurricane Katrina, Homeland Security declared a holiday (though it has no legal authority to suspend laws) from employer sanctions laws – not only in the storm-tossed areas, but nationwide. This opened the doors for unscrupulous employers to hire illegal aliens – thus displacing or hedging out hurting Americans whose jobs had been destroyed.

As the administration negotiates behind the scenes as Congress drafts immigration enforcement legislation, the Bush crowd continues to oppose the most promising ideas, such as the CLEAR Act to get state and local police a constructive response from federal authorities and mandatory employment verification to shut off the “jobs magnet.”

All the while, the administration has hawked a massive amnesty to legalize virtually all 10-12 million illegal aliens. This scheme has been, and continues to be, packaged as a “guestworker” program.

Regardless of how the president labels it, the plan he described in his Arizona speech is his same old amnesty plan. The illegals get legalized, they get to keep the jobs they came here to steal, and six years later no political will will exist to make them go home. Politicians will end up giving them green cards and then citizenship.

Do we need the foreigners? The fact is that there are no jobs Americans won’t do or don’t want. For instance, Census figures show that in the most immigrant-filled jobs, in farming, fishing and forestry occupations, 61.2 percent of workers are Americans. But Americans can’t afford to take jobs for immigrant-caused wage-depressed low pay and lacking decent benefits.

We really don’t need more foreign workers. We need consistent enforcement of the immigration laws on the books. We need to let market forces regulate themselves without government command-and-control manipulating the labor supply...

Posted at 02:33 PM | Comments (2)

"Boob Bait for Bubba"

Rich Lowry:

The late Democratic Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan called it "boob bait for bubba" — tough-sounding rhetoric designed to placate conservative voters. Moynihan applied the phrase to Bill Clinton's 1992 pledge to "end welfare as we know it," which it later became clear that he had no intention of following through on when he became president (eventually, Republicans pressured him into it). President Bush is offering his own "boob bait" in the form of speechifying at the border about a crackdown on illegal immigration.

It's not that Bush doesn't intend to use better technology to police the border and end the "catch and release" policy that waves illegals into the country, as he is now saying. But these steps are primarily meant to diminish opposition to a new guest-worker program and what would effectively be an amnesty for illegal aliens. It's a crackdown as prelude to a letup; in other words, Rove bait for red-staters.

A Republican close to the White House has told Time how Bush wants to lull his conservative supporters into swallowing some sort of amnesty and a guest-worker program, i.e., a "comprehensive" approach: "Bush decided to give these guys their rhetorical pound of flesh. In return, he wants a comprehensive bill, which is what he has always wanted. He's just going to lead with a lot of noise about border security..."

Posted at 09:48 PM | Comments (3)

Bush promotes "temporary" worker scheme, tries to pull wool even further over citizens' eyes

For the past four years, president Bush has managed to fool millions of Americans into thinking that he's the "homeland security" president. Figuring "once a sucker, always a sucker", he's now reiterated his push for a "temporary" worker scheme and pledging to get tough on border security.

Speaking today, he said in part:

"Together with Congress we are going to create a temporary worker program that is going to take pressure off the borders, bring workers out of the shadows... People in this debate must recognize that we will not be able to effectively enforce our immigration laws until we create a temporary worker program..."

The full WH fact sheet is at whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051128-3.html

Anyone who even pretends that these "guest" workers wouldn't stay here and end up bringing even their most distant cousins to join them is simply lying to you.

UPDATE: Video of the big speech here.

Posted at 02:37 PM | Comments (10)

"Sanctuary Cities: A New Civil War"

From this:

What is most remarkable about sanctuary cities is that they are illegal. In 1996 Congress passed two laws dealing with the subject: the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. Under both statutes state and local governments could no longer prohibit employees from inquiring about immigration status or tipping off immigration authorities. The Court of Appeals upheld both provisions in New York v. U.S. (1999).

The Appeals Court remarked that "the City's sovereignty argument asks us to turn the Tenth Amendment's shield against the federal government's using state and local governments to enact and administer federal programs into a sword allowing states and localities to engage in passive resistance that frustrates federal programs." The court concluded that where the federal government has undoubted power to act, as in the case of immigration, the Supremacy Clause "bars states from taking actions that frustrate federal laws and regulatory schemes. We therefore hold that states do not retain under the Tenth Amendment an untrammeled right to forbid all voluntary cooperation by state or local officials with particular programs."

Posted at 08:55 AM | Comments (4)

"Guest-worker concept doomed to fail"

J.D. Hayworth writes another letter about an AZ Republic article.

Posted at 06:54 AM | Comments (1)

"College Grads Who Are Illegal Immigrants Face Barren Job Market"

The NY Sun offers today's "well, duh" article.

Posted at 03:53 AM | Comments (4)

Fred Barnes supports "comprehensive immigration reform"

From the Tamar Jacoby file comes Fred Barnes with El Grande Old Party?. Summary: Bush should capitulate to corruption and embrace a massive illegal alien amnesty.

Posted at 10:52 PM | Comments (3)

Open border advocate Rep. Jim Kolbe won't run again

That Arizona representative made the decision a few days ago, and here's a fitting tribute:

When someone retires or passes away, we try to say something nice about that person, we downplay his negatives and point out his positives. I would like to do the same for Congressman Jim Kolbe, but I really don't have the time to do that much research, other then to say, I wholeheartedly approve of his decision to leave Congress.

A possible replacement is Randy Graf, who, unlike Kolbe, is opposed to illegal immigration. Kos thinks that district is a potential opening for the Dems. The WSJ-wing of the GOP would probably be willing to let a Dem win rather than help elect someone who wants to stop the illegal labor. Hopefully Graf will be able to show that they're both wrong.

Posted at 07:50 PM | Comments (2)

Gullible US News reports on illegal immigration

US News has a four-screener called "Border Wars". Despite all the words, they don't delve too deep into the issue, such as the seamy corruption underlying the efforts to keep the cheap labor flowing. And, they take Tamar Jacoby, the AILA, and DHS head Michael Chertoff seriously.

Posted at 03:36 AM | Comments (0)

Will Julie Myers get a recess appointment?

The cronyism of the Bush administration would be comic if it weren't so bad for the country. As previously discussed, Bush nominated Julie Myers to head the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau. She's the niece of Air Force Gen. Richard Myers, she worked for Michael Chertoff when he was at the Justice Department, and she's now married to his current chief of staff. Oh, and she has no experience in immigration or with heading up such a large agency.

And, according to Debbie Schlussel, Bush might give her a recess appointment (nofollowpolicy) while no one is looking.

Posted at 07:39 PM | Comments (1)

"Word war muddles immigrant debate"

This article goes in to the use of loaded language to obscure the immigration "debate", something that you are probably familiar with, but if you aren't check it out. I note, however, the following:

George Lakoff, a Democratic political consultant and linguist at UC Berkeley, said anti-immigration groups so far appear to be winning the language war, and the word "amnesty" is their most powerful rhetorical weapon.

I hope that "linguist" is the one who used the term "anti-immigration".

Posted at 02:35 PM | Comments (2)

Mexico to US: take our potential rioters, please

The column "Could riots such as in Paris occur elsewhere?" from Mexico's Ana Maria Salazar says that Mexico could have similar riots to those that occurred in France. But:

One important factor, however, has greatly helped reduce the risk of riots and violence in Mexico. There is an "escape valve" that the poor and discriminated in Europe do not have: the possibility of crossing illegally into the United States and getting a job. Authorities have calculated this "escape valve" has permitted more then 400,000 Mexicans to cross into the United States each year. Perhaps it is this factor alone that has stopped major uprisings in Mexico during the last couple of decades...

And, all America thanks the Mexican government for sending its people to us, thereby avoiding necessary reforms. But, what about all those potential rioters that Mexico has gifted us with?

As Paris burns, U.S. legislators will probably push for a bill that systematically seeks to close the "escape valve" by closing the U.S.-Mexico border. Ironically, they would be shutting down the very thing that could be preventing the riots that they fear.

Of course, if that were coming from a government official it would be a threat. As it is, it's just a warning.

We need to slowly back away from this issue by working to disincentivize illegal immigration and encouraging as many potential rioters as possible to go home.

Better the riots occur there than here. After all, our elected politicians are paid to prevent things like rioting, and perhaps they should do their jobs.

Posted at 12:26 PM | Comments (1)

Home loans for illegal aliens: Fresno TV station tries real reporting

KFSN ABC-30 out of Fresno tries a little real reporting on the issue of banks giving mortgages to illegal aliens. It's not an in-depth report, but it's more than other sources have done.

They report on the experiences of an illegal alien known only as "David". It includes this:

But getting a loan from the bank almost didn't happen. An employee from the bank called and said it seemed they had a problem.

The problem was David's social security number ... it's a fake.

I thought that was a crime? And, why would a bank give a home loan to someone who lied on their application by providing a fake SSN?

Who's involved?

The Valley non-profit group Acorn is helping people like David. They set him up with Citibank in Fresno, where a social security number is not required.

Who's on the American side?

But [Diana Hull from Californians For Population Stabilization] says the [potential $60 billion market from this practice] is not just a bad idea ... she insists it's also against the law. "There is a law against aiding and abetting illegal aliens to continue to live in the United States. Issuing a mortgage to an illegal alien is helping him establish himself and remain the United States, which is clearly illegal. It's a felony," she says.

Hall says the problem goes all the way to the top, and she pins much of the blame on the largest of government institutions, like the FDIC, the IRS and the Social Security Administration.

Is "David" confused about his status? Let's find out:

"I work hard like any other citizen and I try to live just like a normal citizen. And I have everything, I think I still have my rights."

The problem, of course, is that "David" is not a citizen. He does have certain rights, but not the same rights as a citizen or a legal immigrant. Pretending otherwise simply devalues American citizenship, something that our leaders are probably also in favor of.

Then, comes a little bit of real reporting:

Despite the accusations that what they're doing is illegal, Citigroup and Acorn stand by the program.

Acorn issued a statement saying everything about their program is legal. They say in the United States, it is perfectly legal for non-citizens to own property.

When asked about its opinion on whether the program is indeed legal, or unlawfully entices illegal immigrants to stay, the U.S. Attorney's office refused an answer.

That last bit is certainly interesting, and simply reinforces what Hull says above.

Posted at 04:38 PM | Comments (3)

"Uniformed Mexicans with guns, bulldozer seize drug-bust truck from Border Patrol"

From this:

U.S. Border Patrol agents were backed down this week by armed men, dressed in what appeared to be Mexican military uniforms and carrying military weapons, who seized a captured dump truck filled with marijuana from the U.S. agents and dragged it across the border into Mexico with a bulldozer.

The border incident occurred Thursday evening when Border Patrol agents attempted to pull over a dump truck on Interstate 10 in Hudspeth County, Texas. The driver fled from the agents, exiting the freeway and driving toward the Rio Grande which runs within 2 miles of the interstate in this portion of West Texas.

The driver abandoned the truck after it became stuck in the river bed, escaping into Mexico...

The BP agents called for backup and began removing marijuana bales from the truck. Then, the uniformed Mexicans showed up. No shots were fired.

Posted at 01:13 PM | Comments (2)

Greeley, CO: proposed ICE office meets illogical resistance

From this:

...Since October, when [Weld County CO] District Attorney Ken Buck started seeking support for bringing a federal office to Greeley to expedite and increase deportations of illegal immigrants who've committed crimes in the county, proponents of the move have squared off against detractors.

Big-name supporters of a new Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in Greeley include Republicans such as Buck, the Weld County commissioners, U.S. Rep. Marilyn Musgrave and U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard.

Removing illegal aliens who’ve committed crimes, joined gangs and added to an overburdened criminal justice system, they say, is a no-brainer...

Speaking of which, let's fast forward a bit:

[Genie Canales, a professor of Hispanic Studies at the University of Northern Colorado] and many of the 600 demonstrators who packed city hall Nov. 15, she said, already worry about the public's ability to distinguish between people of Hispanic heritage, documented foreign-born residents and undocumented workers — referred to as "illegals." An ICE office would add fuel to the fire for the ignorant and intolerant, she said.

If there were no illegals there, there would be no chance of confusion. It's the demonstrators who are making that confusion worse, trying to conflate the terms "Hispanic" and "undocumented" and leading people to believe that all "Hispanics" are either illegal aliens or supporters of same.

Posted at 07:21 AM | Comments (0)

"U.S. Spends Hundred Times More on Illegal Aliens Than on Assisting American Homeless Veterans"

From this press release:

America is spending hundreds of times more money on benefits for illegal aliens than it is helping homeless veterans, charged a national veterans' leader.

U. S. taxpayers are footing a bill of over $70 Billion annually in benefits for illegal aliens, in education, health care, housing and prison costs, charged MAJ Brian A. Hampton USAR (ret), President of the Circle of Friends for American Veterans. Meanwhile, Hampton said the federal government is investing less than 1% of that amount helping 300,000 homeless veterans on our streets tonight.

Posted at 03:12 AM | Comments (1)

Illegal aliens arrested at WalMart construction site in Allentown PA

This one has an interesting union angle:

...Wal-Mart spokesman Marty Heires said the company would cooperate fully with federal authorities.

"We have written contracts with these subcontractors requiring that they follow all applicable local, state and federal employment laws," he said in a statement.

At least 120 illegal immigrants, most of them from Mexico, were detained, Schuylkill County Sheriff Frank McAndrew said. He said he began investigating the site and contacted federal officials after getting complaints from local tradespeople.

"You've got a situation here where illegal immigrants are coming into Schuylkill County and taking (local union workers') jobs for eight bucks an hour. They are working for poverty wages, and creating unemployment because our skilled tradesmen are out of work," McAndrew said...

Last we looked, unions like the far-left SEIU and the AFL-CIO are strong supporters of illegal immigration. Perhaps this is just a local exception. Needless to say, if unions got on the right side of this issue they might be able to bring all but the most racist Dems around.

Previously: A 2003 affidavit said WalMart knew subcontractors were hiring illegal aliens in the case for which they were fined. And, WM says they won't hire illegal aliens.

Posted at 03:24 PM | Comments (2)

Massachusetts: discounts for illegal aliens stalled; Boston Globe bias

The MA bill that would let illegal aliens take discounted college educations away from U.S. citizens has been delayed until 2006: "House delays tuition bill vote".

In other news, the Boston Globe isn't telling their readers the whole truth about this matter.

First, they don't use "illegal aliens", prefering instead "undocumented immigrants."

Second, let's consider their summary of the bill:

Under the proposed law, they would qualify for in-state tuition if they graduate from a Massachusetts high school after attending it for at least three years and if they sign an affidavit affirming that they intend to seek citizenship.

The truth of the bill is a "bit" more broad. As discussed here, they don't have to actually have graduated: they just need the "equivalent" of it. And, they don't even have to sign the affadavit: they can do that at a more convenient time. In other words, practically any illegal alien who lived in MA for three years would be eligible, and they wouldn't have to really do anything to take a discounted college education away from a citizen.

Previously: "Boston Globe does hit piece on Kerry Healey" and "Boston Globe's Yvonne Abraham makes fun of Minuteman Project".

Posted at 03:47 AM | Comments (2)

Could Paris happen here?

Mark Krikorian offers "L'Intifada en Los Estados Unidos", which discusses a few points previously made here:

1. The guest/temporary worker schemes will result in millions of people coming here to stay.
2. Those millions - mostly from Mexico - will give that country even more power over us than they already have.
3. If we tried to kick them out, it would result in civil unrest similar to that in Paris.

...a Mexican immigrant population of 20 or 25 million is qualitatively different from today’s already-huge 11 million. It would create more of a constituency for the Aztlan irredentism that is already a normal part of political debate on the Left in California; more immediately, it would facilitate the Mexican government’s anti-assimilation initiatives (described in detail here by Heather Mac Donald) designed to create a regime of shared Mexican-U.S. sovereignty over much of our population, with Mexico City serving, in effect, as a second federal government that local and state officials would be answerable to. And when we rouse ourselves to reassert our exclusive sovereignty, as the French state tried to do in the no-go zones of its immigrant suburbs, the pushback might well be as intense...

Then, he provides information on other countries we could get serf labor from (see my Bangladesh example):

if you want huge amounts of really cheap labor, go to Indonesia (242 million people, 88 percent Muslim, per capita GDP $3,500) or Pakistan (162 million, 97 percent Muslim, GDP $2,200) or Bangladesh (144 million, 83 percent Muslim, GDP $2,000) or Egypt (77 million, 94 percent Muslim, GDP $4,200).

Someone from the Cato Institute actually suggested that we bring tsunami victims here as guest workers. No, I'm not joking.

Neither George Bush nor John McCain - nor even Ted Kennedy - want immigrant uprisings in America's cities. But their immigration proposals would move us in that direction. We need to choose a different path.

Posted at 03:58 PM | Comments (2)

"The Myth Of No-Cost Immigrants"

From this:

The University of Florida finds that immigrant families have been costing that state a net $1,800 per household per year, a financial burden much larger than previously thought. [by David Denslow; article here, snippet here]

...In fact, a recent study by the Center for Immigration Studies found that the average welfare payout to immigrant households, both legal and illegal, has changed little and remains about $2,000 a year, which is 50% higher than the payout for natives.

In 1996, 22% of immigrant households were on the dole (compared with 15% for natives), according to CIS. By 2001, the share rose to 23%. Over that period, average Medicaid payments to immigrants jumped to $1,495 from $1,203.

Immigrant households account for a growing share of the welfare caseload.

The number of immigrants using at least one major welfare program has steadily increased, with the exception of a small drop in 1997.

Between 1996 and 2001, the number of immigrant households using the welfare system grew by 750,000 to more than 3 million — accounting for almost 18% of all U.S. households on welfare. That share is expected to rise with continued high rates of immigration.

And if you think immigrants, most of whom are poor Mexicans, will stop depending on U.S. welfare as they settle into jobs and even careers here, think again...

Posted at 06:34 AM | Comments (0)

"Gulf rebuilders concede hiring illegals"

From 11/12:

Contractors working in the Gulf Coast region say they are actively looking for local workers, but some acknowledge they are turning to day-laborer programs, which often include illegal aliens. "We are primarily working through a large number of subcontractors and being proactive in achieving local hiring. And, yes, they do access day-laborer type of forces whenever possible," said Chris Sammons, spokesman for the Shaw Group Inc. The Baton Rouge, La., engineering and construction firm, a prime contractor for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, has worked with 150 subcontractors to provide a range of services, including roof repairs, temporary housing and rebuilding assessments in hurricane-ravaged parts of Louisiana. "I think you'll see more of that," Mr. Sammons said of the day laborers. He did not give any details about the employment practices used by Shaw's subcontractors...

Posted at 03:33 AM | Comments (9)

NBC's Law & Order and their anti-Minuteman Project propaganda

Wednesday's Law & Order from NBC featured an episode about a member of the "Countryman Project" murdering a trucker who smuggled illegal aliens in to the U.S. Details in "'Minuteman'-like murderers convicted on 'Law & Order'".

However, as you see in the screengrab from their site, they refer to it there as the "Minutemen", a name which I believe is a trademark. Now, NBC certainly has a lot of lawyers, but hopefully the MMP can find some of their own for what might just be a slamdunk case. Their promo, which I've cached just in case, also uses that trademark and not NBC's similar name.

While controversies sell, and some times the media creates a controversy simply to make money, I believe this goes a bit deeper. I believe this episode qualifies as propaganda. The writers and producers of the show are members of a certain class, what we might call the Nanny Employing Class: those who can afford a nanny and a housekeeper and other domestic servants. And, the last thing those people want to do is have their domestics be deported. The next to last thing those people want is for their domestics to think they're racists. And, since they aren't capable of understanding all the complexities inherent in illegal immigration - they're artists not thinkers - they come up with things like this.

The fact that propaganda such as this benefits those major corporations that profit off illegal labor may also play a part. After all, why bite the hands that might have advertising money in them.

And, apparently it was topsy-turvy land all over NBC: "NBC's E Ring: Christian Terroists Take Over Mosque!"

Please send a short, polite email to the president of NBC Entertainment letting him know what you think: Jeff.zucker *at* nbc.com

Posted at 10:54 PM | Comments (3)

Sean Hannity doesn't read this site

Sean Hannity interviewed DHS head Michael Chertoff and (perhaps he was being disingenuous) got a little confused:

HANNITY: Because you had made a controversial statement, and you seem to be backing off of it now, and it was that people that are here illegally, that they all ought to be sent back... And it seems like now you've sort of backed off that position a little bit, because there are million that we estimate that are in this country illegally...

CHERTOFF: Well, what I said, Sean, was this. I said everybody that we apprehend, that we catch at the border, who's coming in illegally, we ought to send back...

Now, of course, I was about the only person who didn't simply take Drudge's and AFP's word for it, and actually read what he said at the time: Chertoff promotes "Temporary Worker Program" at Senate meeting. Needless to say, the interview goes on, sounding very similar to what's in his prepared remarks discussed at that link:

Well, Sean, you know, it's really an issue of practicality [why we can't just tell all the illegal aliens in the U.S. to go home].

I mean, as a practical matter, we've got to identify these people and pull them out of the shadows.

Now, this is not an amnesty. This is not — the president's proposal is not a path to citizenship. It's clearly temporary, and it clearly envisions people who would have to commit to go back...

See the last link. Their scheme is clearly not temporary. Then, Hannity realizes the awful truth:

The only thing I would respectfully question you on or disagree with you slightly on is those that are here illegally, those that didn't respect the laws of the United States or our sovereignty, I want to go back to that question again, because basically you're saying they can stay.

Then, Chertoff lets Hannity in on the awful truth:

And we also want to punish employers who don't use the legally available channel for getting workers across to do temporary work.

And that's tough. I mean, a lot of people are not going to like the fact that we're cracking down on employers who — we're doing it now in nuclear plants, we're doing it now in critical infrastructure.

Those are about the only places where they do it. And, I wonder what would happen if the DHS decided to crack down on employers. Would those employers stop donating money to the GOP?

In other words, the choice to the GOP is as follows:
- Look the other way and get donations
- Enforce the law and don't get donations

Question: isn't one of the major differences between successful and unsuccessful countries the level of corruption in the country?

Posted at 11:31 AM | Comments (2)

Danbury newspaper threatened, called "traitors"

A Brazilian-oriented newspaper in Danbury, Connecticut took part in a WTNH-TV investigative report about illegal housing and documentation. Now, other Brazilian-oriented newspapers in that town have turned on them, including one calling them "Traitors". And, there have even been death threats. Details and pictures here:

Breno da Mata is the publisher of the newspaper Community News.

"They point out some stuff that's not their job," says da Mata. "Like what?" asks Alan Cohn. "They point out the bad stuff, bad things about the Brazilian community," says da Mata.

In an editorial, da Mata's newspaper says Tribuna should be punished, although it doesn't say how.

Another Brazilian newspaper The Immigrant calls for a revolt against Tribuna...

Of course, none of this would be an issue if those "immigrants" weren't here illegally. Waving a magic wand and making them legal won't solve the problem: more illegal aliens will just move in.

See also "New Haven CT to issue IDs for illegals".

UPDATE: See also "Boughton says immigration issue will remain at the top of his agenda":

Mayor Mark Boughton said he will keep illegal immigration at the top of his agenda as he starts his third term in City Hall... In fact, the Republican said his controversial stance on the issue helped win him re-election by a wide margin Tuesday... "People are very much concerned about illegal immigration in Danbury. That is evident. I think it was one of the top two or three issues in the election," Boughton said. "The public is genuinely frustrated."

Posted at 07:07 AM | Comments (3)

Illegal aliens working at U.S. Customs warehouse

Imagine the fun that "good-hearted people" could get up to in such a job:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested 105 foreign nationals who officials say were working in the United States without authorization at warehouses in Fife, Washington.

The arrested individuals were working at Regal Logistics, which provides storage space for customs "in-bond" merchandise entering the United States from abroad...

Posted at 02:50 PM | Comments (2)

Collins, Lieberman to Chertoff: improve or we'll take action

From this:

Concerned that the nation's borders are not properly protected against terrorists, illegal aliens and drug smugglers, a Senate committee warned Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that if he fails to correct the situation promptly, they will.

Sen. Susan Collins, Maine Republican and chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, the panel's ranking Democrat, want to know whether U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) should be merged to "enable them to operate more effectively..."

Posted at 08:08 AM | Comments (2)

Reading Massachusetts' bill to give discounted college educations to illegal aliens

This guy actually read the bill text. (As previously discussed, various legislators - including those who would appear to be racially-inclined - want to take in-state tuition away from U.S. citizens and give them to illegal aliens. Candidate for governor Tom Reilly supports that scheme.)

According to the bill's text, eligible students would only have to have lived in MA for three years and have the "equivalent" of "graduation from a high school" in the state. That's a massive loophole and, according to the first link, it's very much intentional...

And, consider this bit from the bill:

..the individual shall provide the University of Massachusetts, or the state or community college with an affidavit stating that the individual has filed an application to become a citizen or permanent resident of the United States or shall file an application at the earliest opportunity the individual is eligible to do so.

Can't you just hear the future conversations in high schools throughout MA? "Oh, and one final thing. You need to fill out this form before we can give you your discount."

Alternatively: "Don't worry about that now. You can file later. If you know what I mean..."

This bill would be more appropriately called the "Officials Screwing Citizens Act". Even the "liberals" in MA need to strongly oppose this, and no one in that state should ever vote for any of its supporters.

Posted at 05:39 AM | Comments (3)

"Mexico uses U.S. to avoid change"

From the editorial by Patrick Osio, editor of HispanicVista.com:

...And, while supposedly guarding the border, it was miraculous how, after the cancellation of the Bracero program, during agricultural high seasons border guards seemed to evaporate, allowing a steady flow of workers in the country. And this, too, spoiled Mexico because that flow of workers acted as the steam-valve on a pressure-cooker holding social unrest at a minimum. This also allowed Mexico to ignore investing on needed economic development infrastructure to create more jobs that in turn would have kept more people home. With each succeeding administration the situation grew worse, and more and more Mexicans sought economic opportunity in the U.S.

While our government was indifferent to the plight of the Mexican people, the Mexican worker spoiled many U.S. industries. Do you want someone to work 60 minutes an hour and not complain - to the contrary, be grateful for the job at half the rate paid domestic workers? Hire Mexicans. Do you want someone to pick vegetables in temperatures over 100 degrees? Hire Mexicans. Do you want someone to pour hot tar on roofs in the heat of summer? Hire Mexicans. Do you want someone to clean better than 20 hotel rooms a day? Hire Mexicans. Do you want someone to clean over 30,000 square feet of office space in a shift? Hire Mexicans.

Fox's administration is well aware of the U.S. dependence on low-wage, hard-working Mexicans and feels he has a strong hand insisting that Mexicans already here be granted residency, and create a guest-worker program allowing several hundred thousand more workers to legally enter the U.S.

This again lets the Mexican government off the hook from investing on job creation infrastructure, while gaining close to $20 billion annually on remittances sent home by Mexicans in the U.S.

So let's hear from Mexico. What are you going to do to better the life of your own people so they won't have to leave?

Posted at 12:37 AM | Comments (2)

Just how horrific is the Kennedy-McCain amnesty scheme?

That question is answered at this page (or this PDF file) from FAIR's staff attorney Michael Hethmon.

Back in June, FAIR offered to debate Sen. John McCain, and the PDF discloses that they're still waiting for him to set a date.

And, here's the bottom line on their amnesty scheme:

A conservative rough-magnitude tally of the additional amnestied or legal immigrants authorized by S.1033 [Kennedy-McCain] is 36.5 million new permanent residents after eight years

Some other snippets from the first link:

...S.1033 incorporates the worst features of every failed amnesty program since 1986, but in numbers greater than all the illegal and legal aliens who entered the U.S. in the past fifteen years combined...

...S.1033 would both massively increase the numbers of aliens immediately eligible for permanent immigrant status, and significantly reduce the existing waiting time between applying for a visa in the home country and becoming a U.S. citizen, able to sponsor the widest range of derivative relatives.

...The initial phase of the S.1033 amnesty program, the "H-5B visa program," would work essentially like the 1986 amnesty for farm workers, the notorious Special Agricultural Worker (SAW) program. SAW is considered by experts to be perhaps the most fraud-ridden program enacted by Congress in the 20th century... As a rough estimate, about 10 million illegal aliens would be immediately eligible to apply for an H-5B visa,

...it would be conservative to estimate that a half million other criminal aliens would be ineligible for a H-5B visa because of crimes they have committed. However, the rigid confidentiality provisions and weak documentation standards carried over from the SAW program would, as in the 1986 amnesty, make it difficult to detect ineligible criminal applicants...

...With their new green cards, adjustment-phase beneficiaries would be able to begin sponsoring members of their extended families for immigrant visas. S.1033 Title VI provides for a very large increase in the numbers and kinds of derivative relatives of illegal aliens eligible to enter the U.S. as immigrants... the definition of immediate relatives, who are exempt from any visa limits, is expanded to include the children of children (i.e. grandchildren), children of spouses (i.e., step-children), and children of parents (i.e., siblings) of U.S. citizens.

...It is important to remember that these shockingly large numbers of amnestied aliens and additional immigrants do not include the additional 400,000 H-5A "Essential Worker" visas in a new guest worker program that would be authorized by S.1033 Title III.

It goes on. And on. And on.

What would be helpful here is a list of all the endorsers of Kennedy-McCain, the better to discredit them with.

UPDATE: I added the HTML link to the report.

Posted at 12:48 PM | Comments (8)

Sen. John Cornyn linked to Jack Abramoff and Ralph Reed?

In 2001, Lobbyist Jack Abramoff was working for Louisiana's Coushatta Tribe in an apparent attempt to shut down the competition in Texas, which were costing that tribe customers. Ralph Reed worked as a consultant and allegedly tried to shut down two Texas casinos (including that of the Tigua Indians, which has a Hueco Tanks connection).

And:

Former Christian Coalition director Ralph Reed claimed in a 2001 e-mail to a lobbyist that he choreographed John Cornyn's efforts as Texas attorney general to shut down an East Texas Indian tribe's casino.

...In the Nov. 30, 2001, e-mail, Reed told Abramoff that 50 pastors led by Ed Young, of Second Baptist Church in Houston, would meet with Cornyn to urge him to shut down the Alabama-Coushatta tribe's casino near Livingston. He said Young would back up the request in writing.

"We have also choreographed Cornyn's response. The AG will state that the law is clear, talk about how much he wants to avoid repetition of El Paso (where the Tigua casino was) and pledge to take swift action to enforce the law," Reed wrote. "He will also personally hand Ed Young a letter that commits him to take action in Livingston."

Cornyn, now a Republican U.S. senator, had filed a lawsuit in 1999 to shut down the casino operated by the Tigua tribe in El Paso, saying it violated the state's limited gambling laws. In 2002, federal courts shuttered the Tiguas' casino and Cornyn used that ruling to shut down the Alabama-Coushattas' casino.

Cornyn, who has not been accused of any wrongdoing, has denied knowing Abramoff. He also has said he was unaware of Reed's work with Abramoff.

He said he did not remember receiving a letter from Young or Reed, or providing a letter to Young; he acknowledged meeting with the minister...

It certainly has a he said-she said flavor to it, but see also The David Safavian, Grover Norquist, Chris Cannon connection and Chris Cannon, Grover Norquist, WSJ, Fox News all linked together?

More on Cornyn and by using the search box above.

Posted at 06:20 AM | Comments (1)

Has the Washington Post finally lost it?

Have they "gone around the bend?" Will we soon spot former WaPo editorial writers muttering to themselves as they wander around suburban Virginia collecting bits of string from the sidewalk? Let's see if their latest editorial "Minutemen, Go Home" gives us a clue. Well, first of all, there's the title, and that tone is carried throughout their tantrum:

"undocumented day laborers"

"the Minuteman Project, a national organization bitterly opposed to illegal immigrants"

"Anti-immigrant crusaders"

"hassling undocumented day laborers"

"anti-immigration cranks such as the Minutemen"

"so what they are really up to is simple harassment" (Isn't that actionable? Maybe someone should find out.)

"Reveling in self-importance"

"In Vermont one such group got lost in the woods while hunting for undocumented infiltrators and had to ask for directions, the Boston Globe reported." (Now, see Washington Post repeats Boston Globe smear on Minuteman Project.)

What, you might ask, has got the WaPo so... "excited"? Should a major newspaper like the WaPo really take this tone and attempt to mislead their readers about what groups like the MMP want (example: "anti-immigrant" and "anti-immigration")? What happens when, for instance, their readers decide to take a look at what the MMP really wants, won't they realize that the WaPo tried to deceive them?

And, why isn't the WaPo able to understand things from a Big Picture standpoint? This editorial reads more like the rantings of a Chamber of Commerce hack who wants to keep the boom times rolling in those "boom-'burbs" outside Washington, or like the rantings of various race groups.

The WaPo should look outside its parochial boom-'burbs bubble and take a look at all of the side-effects of that "cheap" labor: corruption, corporate subsidies, lowered wages for American workers, massively increased social welfare costs, and on and on. All the things that California currently enjoys and that Virginia will enjoy in short order. In fact, both California and Virginia driver's licenses played a role in 9/11. There's so many issues involved in illegal immigration, but the WaPo doesn't seem capable of understanding them.

By failing to understand everything involved in this issue, and by misleading their readers about the MMP, the WaPo is running the risk of lowering their credibility even further.

Posted at 10:19 PM | Comments (4)

Does Howard Dean support U.S. Citizen Students of Color?

Howard Dean appeared on Meet the Press earlier today, and explained that the Democratic Party has no plan, as this highly redacted yet accurate snippet shows:

...We have plenty of time to show Americans what our agenda is and we will long before the '06 elections... Right now it's not our job to give out specifics... When the time comes, we will [tell the Dem position on Iraq]... The time [to tell what their plan is] is fast-approaching. And I outlined the broad outlines of our agenda. We're going to have specific plans in all of these areas...

And, he said:

we played a big role in Tim Kaine's campaign

But, since Tim Kaine wants to give in-state tuition to illegal aliens, I'm having trouble reconciling this with something else the good Doctor said:

I saw a show last night which showed a young African-American man in California at the UC of Davis who hoped to go to law school. The Republicans want to cut $14 billion out of higher education so this kid can't go to law school. We're going to do better than that, and together, America can do better than that.

Let's call him "Mike", as in my fictional story about "Mike Jackson". Why does Howard Dean want to hurt all the Mike Jacksons in the U.S.? Why do Howard Dean and countless other Democrats want to take discounted college educations away from U.S. citizens - many of them Of Color - and give them to illegal aliens?

Posted at 09:18 PM | Comments (3)

Is "undocumented immigrant" a euphemism?

Yes, it's just a politically-correct way of saying the legally correct term: "illegal alien". They're "aliens" - people who are citizens of some other country - and they're here illegally.

From this:

The politically correct term undocumented immigrant started with former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) Commissioner Leonel J. Castillo during the Carter Administration (1977-81). The word undocumented wormed its way from the widely discredited and now defunct INS to politically-correct media, cheap labor corporations, ethnic vote pandering politicians, and pro-illegal alien 'rights' organizations, many of which are race biased. Even the highest officials including President Bush and former House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt pander to the extent they even call illegal aliens citizens.

An alien is a person who comes from a foreign country. The term illegal alien is broader and more accurate because it includes undocumented aliens and nonimmigrant visa overstayers. An undocumented alien is an individual who has entered the U.S. illegally, without entry documentation. Any alien who violates the terms of his or her admission may be deemed to be out of status. Becoming out of status occurs when a nonimmigrant remains in the United States beyond the expiration date of their visa or when a nonimmigrant engages in employment in the United States for which she is not authorized. Roughly 60% of the illegal alien population are undocumented aliens and about 40% are nonimmigrant visa overstayers. Thus, the term illegal alien, being broader in scope, is the accurate term to use...

A caller to Rush Limbaugh says:

...you'll be glad to know that the term "undocumented immigrant" goes back to the peanut presidency when Jimmy Carter (Watch the Malaise Speech) pointed to a guy named Lionel Castillo as the commissioner of immigration he bragged that his father was an illegal alien, sent out directives that it be called illegal immigrants or illegal worker. Or not illegal, "undocumented workers" or "undocumented immigrants."

More on the distinctions here, and here. See also Euphemisms for "illegal" abound in media coverage of the Minuteman Project. Note that the USCIS doesn't define "undocumented", but they do use "illegal aliens" ( uscis.gov/graphics/glossary3.htm#permanent ). At least, they do that in their glossary. In the article entitled "Illegal Alien Resident Population" (uscis.gov/graphics/shared/aboutus/statistics/illegalalien/), they use "undocumented" in place of the titular phrase.

And, here's a quote from Alberto Gonzalez: Personally I would worry about a policy that permits someone, a local law enforcement official, to use this authority somehow as a club to harass uhh they might be unlawful aliens but otherwise lawful citizens. That would be troubling. That would be troubling to the President.

Posted at 02:23 PM | Comments (1)

Illegal immigration supporters, all: WaPo embarrasses self

The Washington Post has an editorial about birthright citizenship entitled "Citizens, All". Let's see if we can spot errors in their "thinking":

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) has a bold idea to stop illegal immigration: Deny automatic citizenship to the children of undocumented immigrants. "There is general agreement about the fact that citizenship in this country should not be bestowed on people who are children of folks who come into this country illegally," he told the Washington Times. General agreement? Perhaps among Mr. Tancredo's friends in the House but not among the framers of the 14th Amendment. Indeed, any such modern consensus would have a small problem in the text of the Constitution, which is, inconveniently for anti-immigrant demagogues, not subtle on the point.

Obviously, the WaPo has a bit of a problem with their choice of words: it should be clear by now that anyone using the word "undocumented" is a politically correct fool. And, opposing illegal immigration does not equal being opposed to immigration; calling someone "anti-immigrant" is even worse, implying that they're trying to victimize immigrants.

And, it's not just the language they use. As pointed out many times in the past:

At the time the amendment was approved, the author of the clause, Sen. Jacob M. Howard, said the phrase relating to jurisdiction meant, "This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners...." ...In subsequent years, the courts invalidated the assurances of Howard; at this stage, an amendment to the Constitution seems the only means available to change the law...

More on that here.

Previously:

Sleazy pro-Kaine, pro-illegal immigration editorial from Washington Post

Kilgore, Kaine, the VA governor's race, and the WaPo's bias

Washington Post repeats Boston Globe smear on Minuteman Project

WaPo gives free ad to Colorado's ProgressNow outfit

Crime, illegal immigration, and media bias

Marcela Sanchez: historical facts, analysis are extremist

WaPo opposes the REAL ID Act, supports illegal immigration

The WaPo has finally overloaded my circuits

Posted at 10:48 AM | Comments (9)

Dick Morris offers thoughts on Bush and immigration

Dick Morris to president Bush: "Get serious about immigration reform". Unfortunately, the reform he has in mind is the kind with quotes around it.

In the hawk category, he supports the idea of a fence, an idea that does have its downside. Perhaps big fences in some areas and DMZ zones in others would be the better approach.

However, in the "reform" category, he supports Bush's Temporary Worker Plan, with one minor refinement: he wants to turn it into the Kennedy McCain massive amnesty by offering a "path the citizenship". The result?

A guest-worker program will end the leper colony within our borders of disenfranchised, invisible illegals who have no rights and no responsibilities.

Well, they aren't really that though. First, illegal aliens count towards determining congressional districts.

And, there are plenty of far-left organizations working night and day to get them more and more benefits. Are those organizations going to just disband if we get a wonderful new guest worker scheme? No, they're going to keep plugging away trying to get more and more for anyone who doesn't have everything that U.S. citizens have. Nothing in Bush's or Morris' scheme does anything about that. Some of those organizations even have links to the Mexican government.

And, there are plently of far-left racial demagogues who currently basically represent illegal aliens. The name Gil Cedillo springs to mind. And, people like him would get even more power in the case of a guest worker scheme, enabling them to bring in more people of their same race, thereby getting even more power. Once again, neither Bush nor Morris have a solution to that.

Morris also confuses OTMs with visa overstays. The reason we can't do anything about the latter is because there are hundreds of thousands of them, and just a few dozen agents who go out and pick them up. Meaning they only concentrate on the really bad ones. And, even when they do that the far-lefties whine.

Continuing with our tour of bad ideas:

A vital form of foreign aid for Mexico and the impoverished countries of Central America is the remittances sent each week by illegal immigrants to their families back home.

The "foreign aid" line is straight out of the Cato Institute playbook. When even the Bush administration says they're bad, you know they must be really, really bad: U.S. Amb. Tony Garza: "Reliance on remittances from the U.S. is not a viable economic policy."

It's not "foreign aid", it's an unhealthy crutch. And, it's also a huge incentive for those countries to keep sending us more people and to make sure that those people keep sending money home. How do they do that? One way is sending consuls to pitch city councils to accept Mexican ID cards.

Then, Morris uses the word "Anglo". And:

But it is also in our interest to allow immigrants to come and settle here legally.

Generally speaking, it is. However, we also can't allow Mexico to worm their way into our political system, something that massive immigration from that country - legal or illegal - will allow. All those people sending billions back to Mexico provides a huge incentive for them to keep the money flowing, and that threatens the U.S. Morris should think about this whole issue in a bit more depth.

Posted at 04:21 AM | Comments (2)

Mexico to US: the illegal aliens we sent aren't hurting your healthcare system

Rarely does the WashTimes bury the lede, but they've done so with "Illegals require health services".

A study sponsored by the University of California and by the National Population Council of the Government of Mexico purports to show that illegal aliens don't use emergency room services more than others, and thus are not dragging down our healthcare system. In other words, what's actually happening in California and elsewhere is not happening at all.

According to the study:

fewer than 10 percent of Mexicans living in the U.S. legally or illegally for less than a decade visited an emergency room in the past year

Among those living in the U.S. for more than a decade legally or illegally, nearly 14 percent visited an emergency room during the past year

However:

Dr. Todd Taylor, an emergency physician at Banner Good Samaritan Medical Center in Phoenix, said he thinks the study was conducted improperly because it excludes people younger than 18, a large segment of the legal and illegal populations that use emergency rooms.

"Of the 3.9 million Mexican-headed households, almost 70 percent include immigrants under 18," he said. "If a proper analysis were done, I think what you're going to find is the Mexican immigrant population [emergency-room use] is fairly close [to that of U.S. citizens and Mexican-Americans as] other studies have shown."

The article also has the thoughts of an apologist:

"I think [illegal aliens burdening the healthcare system is] a myth," said Michael Freedman, outreach medical director at Anne Arundel Medical Center's Annapolis Outreach Center. "For the most part, people that are coming over here, particularly illegally, have a pretty arduous trip to get into this country, and by nature of that trip have to be a pretty healthy person."

Now, what does that remind you of? It vaguely reminds me of this. While hardly an exact match, there are enough parallels that Dr. Freedman might want to think about this whole subject in a bit more depth.

Posted at 01:34 AM | Comments (1)

Home loans for illegal aliens facing resistance in Wisconsin

The Wisconsin Assembly recently passed a bill requiring the Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority (WHEDA) to only give home loans to people with Social Security Numbers. As discussed here in the past, WHEDA has been giving home loans to illegal aliens, and the head of that organization, Antonio Riley, fully supports that practice: "Wisconsin Program Helps Illegal Aliens Get Mortgages". For more, see this and this.

One can expect that the linked article would provide the other side's best points, and the only one that's not just a specious far-left talking point is this:

The fact that immigrants have taxpayer IDs does not mean that they are here illegally, said Rep. Tamara Grigsby, D-Milwaukee. "The process of becoming a citizen takes time."

Unfortunately, I believe she's either wrong or just supporting illegal immigration. See socialsecurity.gov/pubs/10107.html Legal immigrants can get SSNs. So, either she's wrong about the law, or she's referring to illegal aliens who are trying to become legal.

With that out of the way, let's see if Anita Weier isn't telling her readers the truth about this matter. First of all, the title of the article is "Assembly passes bill that would curtail immigrants' mortgages". That's false: they aren't "immigrants", they're illegal aliens. Likewise with this:

In a move targeting immigrants, the state Assembly voted 58-38 to bar the Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority from making, buying or assuming home mortgage loans for a person who does not have a Social Security number.

"Targeting" has such negative connotations, does it not? I guess that's why she used that word. And, once again, they're illegal aliens and not "immigrants".

The proposal, yet to be considered by the state Senate, could stop a program begun in 2004 that backs mortgage loans that banks make to immigrants who have individual taxpayer identification numbers. It is a program that has helped Latinos obtain mortgages...

Once again, her language isn't precise, resulting in her readers not being told the truth. And, there's that little race-baiting at the end: if you oppose giving mortgages to illegal aliens, you're opposed to helping "Latinos" get mortgages.

If it says "madison.com" in the address bar, don't believe it. Write their editor with your thoughts: dzweifel *at* madison.com

Posted at 02:45 PM | Comments (2)

Poll: half oppose birthright citizenship, 60 percent favor border fence

From this:

About half of Americans say children of illegal aliens should not receive automatic citizenship, and three in five support a barrier along the U.S.-Mexico border, according to a poll that will boost Republicans looking to make those proposals part of immigration bills.

Independent pollster Scott Rasmussen said Americans favored a barrier 60 percent to 29 percent, with even higher support -- 75 percent -- among self-identified conservatives.

His poll of 1,500 adults, taken over the weekend, also found that 49 percent favored ending birthright citizenship and 41 percent opposed such a change. That proposal scored 58 percent support among conservatives, was opposed by 54 percent of liberals and split moderates evenly at 46 percent...

Posted at 03:00 PM | Comments (4)

Pro-illegal immigration propaganda from "The World According to Jim"?

That's the Jim Belushi TV show, and according to this somewhat confusing report it featured some pro-illegal immigration propaganda on a recent episode.

Posted at 01:58 PM | Comments (3)

Internal DHS memo on the "Secure Border Initiative"

There's a copy of an internal Michael Chertoff memo on their latest scheme here. There's nothing really of note in the memo; in fact, their fact sheet contains more details. But, the link has a couple comments from those on the front lines. They, like almost everyone else, can see right through this.

Posted at 04:25 AM | Comments (2)

The Bush administration de facto "Temporary Worker Program"

Wrap your mind around this AP report:

Officials with the U.S. Department of Labor and Mexico's Foreign Ministry pledged Monday to protect the rights - especially fair pay and safe working conditions - of immigrant workers, whether they are in the United States legally or not.

But, I thought the Bush administration was getting tough on illegal immigration? Why, here's a DHS quote from just a few days ago:

Since the events of 9/11, President Bush has placed ever-increasing importance on immigration control, including border security, and has devoted significant resources to the stark challenge of illegal migration.

So, which is it? The DOL is going to look the other way and in effect treat illegal aliens as legal workers, and at the same time the Bush administration is about to vanquish illegal immigration? Do they really expect anyone to believe what they say?

Then, we get word of two agreements between this country and Mexico:

One, signed in 2004, sought to increase safety for Hispanic workers in the U.S. The other, signed in May, aims at extending housing and rural development programs to immigrant agricultural workers...

One of the major problems facing immigrant workers is that they don't know their rights under U.S. labor laws and suffer many violations for fear that exposure will mean deportation, [Bosco Marti, Mexico's Foreign Relations Department's point man on North American affairs] said...

...The Department of Labor and the Mexican government are collaborating on an outreach campaign to distribute publications that inform immigrants on workplace safety, minimal wages and other rights they have while working in the United States...

Employers of illegal aliens must comply with our wage laws? Could the Bush administration be a practical joke?

Even the AP notices this cognitive dissonance, pointing to the press release linked above. Even the AP realizes there's a problem...

Then, comes this creepy bit:

"The ultimate goal is an immigration agreement that benefits the U.S. economy and ... that ensures respect for the human and labor rights of the Mexican population that is planting roots in the United States," Marti said.

When a foreign population "plants roots" in another country, isn't that normally termed an invasion? And, what do we call people who allow another country to invade their country?

Posted at 05:20 AM | Comments (7)

NYT's David Rieff very confused about immigration

The New York Times offers "Migrant Worry" from contributor David Rieff. It reports that the concerns of those... people in those far-off border states have finally spread to the little people in those other states out there beyond Manhattan.

It also appears to have been written a couple weeks ago, because it includes the following into which I've inserted some helpful links:

...the undeniable fact that the new wave of immigration was bringing the best and the brightest of the poor world to Western Europe, Australia and the United States...

And, Reiff doesn't seem to know that we admit almost a million legal immigrants each year. Instead, he tries to paint opponents of illegal immigration as against all immigration, setting up a false choice between open borders and closed borders.

While it's a mostly worthless waste of words, it does provide yet more evidence (as if it were needed) that the leaders of this country have absolutely no clue about this issue.

Posted at 03:55 PM | Comments (3)

2003 Warrant says Wal-Mart aware of cleaners' status

Bentonville: Warrant says Wal-Mart aware of cleaners' status

Wal-Mart management knew people who cleaned dozens of their stores in 2003 were illegal aliens, some of whom lived in poor conditions and, in one case, slept in the back of a store, a federal affidavit released Wednesday said.

The affidavit was used to secure two search warrants in October 2003 to raid Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s home office in Bentonville as part of Operation Rollback — an investigation that led to the arrests of 245 illegal aliens working at 61 Wal-Mart stores, including five stores in Arkansas.

U. S. District Magistrate Judge Beverly Stites Jones in Fayetteville unsealed the two search warrants Wednesday at the request of a New York attorney representing more than 200 of the former employees in civil lawsuit against the Bentonvillebased nation's largest retailer.

"The corporation's fingerprints are on this from the highest levels," said attorney James Linsey, whose firm represents former workers worldwide. "They wanted to keep their stores clean and not pay a lot of money."

Linsey said the information from the search warrants — which had been sealed since they were obtained — will be used to refile the lawsuit in New Jersey district court. The lawsuit alleges that Wal-Mart knew the cleaning companies they worked with employed illegal aliens and did nothing to end the work.

Earlier this month, a federal judge in New Jersey dismissed part of the lawsuit that said alleged Wal-Mart conspired with the cleaning contractors by allowing the illegal aliens to work in their stores.

Previously: Janitors' lawsuit against WalMart still on

Posted at 04:34 AM | Comments (1)

"GOP mulls ending birthright citizenship"

From this:

House Republicans are looking closely at ending birthright citizenship and building a barrier along the entire U.S.-Mexico border as they search for solutions to illegal immigration.

...Most lawmakers had avoided the issue, fearing that change would require a constitutional amendment -- the 14th Amendment reads in part: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."

But several Republicans said recent studies suggest otherwise.

"There's been recent scholarship that says we can do it by statute, and we ought to try," said Rep. Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican, who usually finds himself on the opposite side of immigration issues from Mr. Tancredo...

In fact:

At the time the amendment was approved, the author of the clause, Sen. Jacob M. Howard, said the phrase relating to jurisdiction meant, "This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners...." ...In subsequent years, the courts invalidated the assurances of Howard; at this stage, an amendment to the Constitution seems the only means available to change the law...

Posted at 12:39 AM | Comments (6)

Does Jason Zengerle support American workers?

The titular person contributes to a New Republic page called "The Plank", and he offers "If Ray Nagin bashes immigrants, does he make a sound?"

That post links to the NYT article "In Louisiana, Worker Influx Causes Ill Will".

And, the post and the NYT article discuss the Nagin remark which was featured in NCLR, NUL, NAACP, AAJC, and LCCR confused over words "Mexican" and "American". In fact, that link applies to Zengerle as well, since he doesn't seem to understand the difference between those two words.

In fact, while the NYT clearly indicates that most of the workers it's discussing are illegal aliens, Zegerle refers to them as "out-of-state workers", "Hispanic immigrant workers", and "Latino workers".

And, he discusses how they're subjected to "resentment", "animus", "hostility", and "anti-immigrant animus".

Obviously, no one wants to be tarred with such inflammatory rhetoric. So, let me suggest that we just ignore the fact that illegal aliens from Mexico are coming to New Orleans to take jobs that American citizens - many of them African-Americans - could and should be doing.

And, let's ignore the fact that those illegal aliens will send their paychecks - perhaps including money indirectly from the federal government - back to Mexico, further enriching the corrupt oligarchy of that country.

And, let's ignore the fact that corrupt contractors are making out like bandits, paying illegal aliens low wages under the table while getting federal contracts.

And, let's ignore the fact that - unlike American workers - those illegal aliens will be living and working in unsafe conditions.

Everyone in American should ignore that, because the last thing we want is Jason Zengerle to call us haters.

Let's contact TNR and congratulate them on supporting American workers: theplank@tnr.com

Posted at 08:51 PM | Comments (3)

Sleazy pro-Kaine, pro-illegal immigration editorial from Washington Post

The WaPo offers a sleazy pro-Kaine editorial in "Scare Tactics in Virginia". PostWatch has already covered what I would have written, so check that out.

Posted at 03:09 PM | Comments (0)

NCLR, NUL, NAACP, AAJC, and LCCR confused over words "Mexican" and "American"

On 10/18, the National Council of La Raza ("National Council of The Race"), the National Urban League, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the Asian American Justice Center, and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights issued a joint press release concerning remarks made by NO Mayor Ray Nagin.

Let's see if we can help those putatively American organizations with their understanding of common words:

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin's unfortunate comment at a public forum on October 6, "How do I ensure that New Orleans is not overrun by Mexican workers?" is an example of remarks that can divide Americans at a time when we need to be united.

Obviously, these organizations are putting their respective races ahead of their country and their abilities to think. The words "Mexican" and "American" represent disjoint sets: unless one has dual citizenship, one can't be both at the same time.

Nagin wasn't referring to "Hispanics", "Americans of Mexican descent", or "Mexican-Americans". He was referring to illegal aliens from Mexico who are coming to take jobs from American hurrican victims. Those illegal aliens are not "Americans", and no Americans should support them in their efforts to take jobs that Americans should be doing.

Those who gave Nagin a standing ovation after his remarks should explain to these groups just how "unfortunate" their press release really is.

Posted at 02:32 PM | Comments (0)

Boston Globe does hit piece on Kerry Healey

The Globe continues their sleaze with "Healey tuition remarks draw outrage". See "Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly supports illegal immigration (Massachusetts)" for the backstory. As the last link says, Reilly wants to take discounted college educations away from citizens and give them to illegal aliens. And, he called in to a WRKO radio show on which Healey was appearing. Reports indicate that it made Reilly look like a fool, and now the Globe has stepped in to try to save his bacon.

On the radio, she said "Let them go to private schools if they want to". Why should citizens and legal immigrants support illegal aliens, and give them more than they get?

What is the Globe's malfunction? Why would they subtitle the report "She takes a swipe at undocumented"? Why would they concentrate on this angle of the story and quote far-left, pro-illegal immigration groups, rather than concentrating on the fact that the AG of their state wants to ignore laws he doesn't like? Why don't they concentrate on the citizens and legal immigrants who would be harmed by this bill?

Please write to ombud *at* globe.com and let them know what you think.

Previously: "Boston Globe's Yvonne Abraham makes fun of Minuteman Project"

Posted at 09:40 AM | Comments (0)

Worksite arrest of illegal aliens plummeted under Bush

This article contains a chart of the number of worksite arrests of illegal aliens per year:

1997:  	17,554
1999: 	2,849
2000: 	953
2001: 	735
2003: 	445
2004: 	159

And, here's the letters sent out warning of a fine over violations for hiring illegal aliens:

1997:  	865
1999: 	417
2000: 	178
2001: 	100
2003: 	162
2004: 	3

Now, president Bush says we need to reform our immigration laws? Should anyone trust anything they say?

Posted at 07:59 PM | Comments (3)

Virginia Postrel: "Yes, Immigration May Lift Wages"

The former editor of the lunatic libertarian magazine Reason is positively frothing at the mouth as she announces a new study by two economists.

The study is "Rethinking the Gains From Immigration: Theory and Evidence From the U.S.", and it's available here. Since it soon gets into mathematical formulas and the like, I'm going to leave it to other academics to dispute its findings. However, I couldn't find anything in there making any kind of a distinction between legal and illegal immigration, or indicating what exactly they meant by immigration. The fact that they would not do that leads me to question the study.

From the article:

Immigrant engineers, for instance, may create demand for native-born patent lawyers and marketing executives.

It might also throw native-born engineers out of work. Or, they might start new companies and hire more native-born engineers. Or, those new hires might be immigrants from the same country. And, all of that might have an impact on the desirability of engineering as a career. And, if engineering is not as desirable, schooling for engineers will be cut back, leading to us having to import more foreign engineers, leading to us becoming dependent on them, leading to us losing our competitive edge. Oops! I guess we can't just look at things as a matter of dollars and cents, but instead we need to look at the whole, big picture.

And, of course, increased immigration increases the influence in our internal politics of the sending countries. But, oddly enough, you never hear lunatic libertarians discussing vital issues like that.

The lesson there is simple: libertarians really have no qualifications making policy because they just don't know what they're doing.

Posted at 11:47 AM | Comments (9)

"Secure Border Initiative": Should anyone trust what Bush or Chertoff say?

From this DHS press release on the new "Secure Border Initiative":

Since the events of 9/11, President Bush has placed ever-increasing importance on immigration control, including border security, and has devoted significant resources to the stark challenge of illegal migration.

Obviously, that's only even slightly true in some strange, KoolAid-besotten alternative universe. Isn't the Bush administration simply lying? What next will they tell us, that shoelace production was up 34% last quarter and that Eurasia is on the ropes?

It goes on:

DHS will strengthen interior enforcement efforts to target those who enter illegally by unequivocally enforcing our laws and making sure that removal is achieved. Strong worksite enforcement is key to effective interior enforcement. DHS must be able to ensure that employees are in our country legally and are properly authorized to work.

The fact sheet for this initiative (dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?content=4922) gives us the not-entirely-unexpected details:

DHS will implement an employer self-compliance program that will link government and business in a united effort to reduce the employment of unauthorized aliens in specific industries. The partnership will assemble a "best practices" methodology that employers will use to minimize certain known vulnerabilities in the legally required employment eligibility verification process. The employers will assist DHS by using their corporate and industry leadership to influence competitors, vendors, and contractors to adopt the best practices methods to ensure all businesses dealing with participating corporations are in compliance with legal hiring requirements.

Perhaps we should try that same "self-compliance" approach with, say, dumping dioxins into the Mississippi River. After all, if you can't trust corporations who stand to make millions off illegal immigration, who can you trust?

Most politicians shade the truth and spin like whirling dervishes. But, it takes a group like the Bush administration to look you straight in the eye and tell you the sky is green.

Posted at 08:45 AM | Comments (3)

Janet Napolitano still coming around

Slowly and haltingly, Arizona governor Janet Napolitano is slightly somewhat partially to a certain extent opposing massive illegal immigration into her state. The latest: "Governor orders state contractors to ensure hirings are legal".

The governor recently ordered state contractors to guarantee their employees aren't illegal immigrants and to let state agencies inspect employment eligibility records for those workers to see whether the rule is being followed...

While the governor's order laid out requirements for state contractors, [spokeswoman Jeanine L'Ecuyer] said Napolitano has taken no position on whether the state should follow the federal government in establishing punishments for employers who hire illegal workers...

Employer sanction proposals have failed at the Legislature over the last two years after they faced opposition from the business lobby...

...Republican state Sen. Dean Martin of Phoenix said the Democratic governor is trying to make her immigration record look stronger. "This is her weak area," Martin said.

Even though she signed a law creating the state crime of migrant smuggling, Napolitano vetoed a few immigration proposals earlier this year, saying they wouldn't lessen Arizona's immigration problems. Napolitano also has declared a state of emergency in the state's four border counties, freeing up money to help authorities confront illegal crossings...

Previously: "Rich Lowry, illegal immigration, and president Bush", "U.S. AG disagrees with AZ Gov. Napolitano on Voter I.D. at Polls", "Feds try to stiff Arizona; Arizona sends Feds bill", and "[AZ Gov. Janet Napolitano] critical of Mexican manual".

Posted at 01:07 PM | Comments (1)

"In-State Tuition Benefits for Illegals Stir Controversy"

From this:

Brigette Brennan feels pretty well educated after more than four years at the University of Kansas - but there's something she can't understand.

She doesn't understand why Kansas won't grant her the same in-state tuition status that it happily bestows on illegal immigrants.

In other words, why is she - a U.S. citizen, a Kansas high school graduate and a four-year resident of Kansas - paying more for her college education than those who aren't legally supposed to be in the U.S. in the first place?

Surprisingly, Brennan's experience is fairly common. Indeed, state colleges and universities in nine states openly provide in-state college tuition benefits to illegals that they do not offer to U.S. residents. Defenders of U.S. students' rights to receive equal tuition rates in their own country say such policies are flatly illegal...

The article goes on with more information on the legal aspects, including the Washington Legal Foundation's attempts to get the DHS to follow the law.

See also: "Kobach gets support in fight for Citizens Rights".

Posted at 04:09 PM | Comments (3)

Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly supports illegal immigration (Massachusetts)

The AG of Massachusetts, Thomas Reilly, supports illegal aliens taking discounted college educations away from citizens and legal immigrants. Details in "Reilly backs immigrant tuition bill".

His argument for this - and his candidacy - appear to be based solely around emotionalism. He intends to sell himself as a Blue Collar Hero and the Son of Immigrants, contrasting that with the more silver-spooned upbringing of Governor Mitt Romney.

However, things might not be going as planned:

- The Lt. Governor, Kerry Healey, excoriated AG Reilly during an impromptu debate on Boston's talk station WRKO. Reilly was reduced to calling her "mean-spirited."

- Was that the strangest interview you have ever heard? What was his reason for supporting this unlawfull activity? So not to be unfair to kids? He made no sense at all. I hope he runs for Gov. on this platform. I think Kerry did a nice job. I think she should have asked for his resignation.

- She was exceptional. The voice of logic and reason in the face of idiocy. Did you notice that Reilly wouldn't even respond to anything Healey or the host said? He better hone his listening skills because the legal voters in this state are going to show him the door during the 2006 election.

- It really was odd. He's catering to a constituency who can't even vote for him. What about the rest of us? The legal taxpaying residents of this state? He couldn't offer one substantial point beyond our "lack of compassion." I'm for the rule of LAW, not the rule of emotion...and here Reilly is, threatening to ignore it.

Posted at 01:14 PM | Comments (1)

Washington Post repeats Boston Globe smear on Minuteman Project

Two weeks ago I offered "Boston Globe's Yvonne Abraham makes fun of Minuteman Project", which had that reporter repeating anti-Minuteman Project smears from a frequent contributor to the North Eastern Federation of Anarchist Communists website (nefac.net). Needless to say, the reporter did not identify the source's affiliation, despite it taking me less than 10 seconds to find that using google.

I sent an email to their ombudsman, who said that either he or the reporter would be back in touch. Needless to say, I haven't received a follow-up.

Now, the Washington Post offers their own similar report in "On Patrol in Vt., Minutemen Are the Outsiders". And, it repeats the earlier smear, once again without mentioning who made it:

Then came their first official patrol two weekends ago, which was dogged by protesters who assembled downtown and shouted slogans such as "Take your hate out of our state." The Minutemen had to patrol a bike path away from town, and then -- as the Boston Globe reported -- got lost and had to ask a local for directions.

If a drunk in a Montpelier donut shop at 3am said that slogan, most people would tend to give it very little credibility. And, the same goes for someone associated with the North Eastern Federation of Anarchist Communists. And, the same goes for the Washington Post.

Please send your thoughts to ombudsman@washpost.com.

Note also that the DUmmies discuss this article, resulting in "beam me up scottie" supporting Bush, cheap labor performed by serfs, and the Mexican government. On the American side, "hansberrym" is subjected to comments from bmus which, as he points out, are nothing but smears and the like.

"bmus" even reprints Xeni Jardin's smear in which she identified a non-MMP poster as coming from the MMP. When "hansberrym" calls him on this, this is the reply:

It came from Boing Boing's photos of Minute Men on the Mexican border. Are you actually suggesting that those Boss Hogs in camo wear are above that sort of thing? Right. Of course you are.

Ah, the lasting power of anti-American propaganda.

Posted at 11:55 PM | Comments (2)

Arizona Daily Star supports amnesty for illegal aliens

The editorial "It's not 'amnesty' when the law is a shambles" is signed by a "D.J", but I have no idea who that is since there doesn't appear to be anyone with those initials in either the administration or editorial departments.

Be that as it may, they hit all the usual notes:

"Amnesty" is entirely the wrong word for any plan that would allow illegal immigrants to remain in this country. Amnesty is a pardon for political offenses, according to Webster's New World Dictionary, and the offense in this case is difficult to recognize. People who cross our borders without the proper paperwork do indeed violate the federal code. They are judged guilty by the thousands every week, usually through the rump court of practicality administered directly by the Border Patrol.

The easiest way to show they're full of it is to look at this:

But 11 million people do not establish themselves as an integral part of a national economy without the tacit approval of society as a whole. Businesses willingly hire illegal labor to save money; they can fend off blame, thanks to a system of enforcement that is broken. For their part, consumers reap the benefits of cheap and illegal labor without complaint.

Obviously, that's complete BS. The great majority of American oppose illegal immigration, and it's only through corruption, lies, and various shenanigans that its supporters are able to do what they've been doing.

Posted at 04:05 PM | Comments (1)

California Border Patrol rally draws crowd, questionable editing

Assemblyman Ray Haynes, R-Murrieta held a rally in Sacramento yesterday in support of his proposed ballot measure to create a California Border Patrol.

According to the AP, about 1000 people turned out, 700 on the other side. The protest was "mostly peaceful", and the "underlining issue" was the Minuteman Project.

The same AP report is featured in these articles:

Calif. Border Police Plan Draws Throngs

Hundreds stage immigration rallies at Capitol

Rivals face off over border police issue

Unfortunately, all those cut off the end of the article, only mentioning a little about those on the wrong side. For what appears to be the full version, see "Border security attracts big protest, rally at Capitol". Here's the end, only part of which is featured in the other reports:

Peter Camejo, the Green Party's vice presidential candidate in 2004, led the counter-protest. He agreed the current system is not working, but said the other side's effort to seal off the borders is wrong.

"The American people need to know that only a tiny number of people are entering illegally," he said. "And these people are desperately needed by our economy. The Minutemen are saying that these people are criminal, but what they are refugees of poverty."

Participants in both events waved flags and chanted back and forth as horns blared and drums pounded. Signs read: "No bosses, no borders," and "Who's illegal Minutemen?" while the other side countered "Secure the border Mr. Bush, you're letting terrorists in."

Dave Kimball, 62 of Sacramento, was drawn into the counter-protest event, but said he was torn over the issue.

"There's got to be a better way of handling all of this," he said. "Both sides have points that maybe the other side would agree with."

Somehow, I think only a very small percentage of patriotic Americans would support what the other side wants if they positions were fully explained.

The WaPo report has "Green Party" changed to independent, which appears to be accurate. But Camejo is not just a former candidate of that party, he also ran as a socialist in 1976. And, here he says, "It is a hopeful sign for the Green Party that many of the [International Socialist Organization] members and Solidarity are helping the Green Party."

And, see his "thoughts" on immigration here:

Q: Do you support the proposal allowing illegal immigrants to obtain drivers licenses?
CAMEJO: The Europeans came over here illegally, they are 45% of our population. I say we let them stay and give them a drivers license. The people who have been here 20,000 years on this continent, desperately needed, no one is for them leaving, how can we not give them a drivers license.

He wants to end the distinction between "illegal" and "legal" immigrants, which, of course, would have the effect of declaring open borders.

And, take a look at the signs in the pictures from the first two reports, and you'll note that ANSWER was a prominent part. That group is, of course, linked to the Marxist Workers World Party.

And, of course, there are the other signs mentioned above, calling for "No Borders" and accusing the Minutemen of being "illegal". That latter is explicitly anti-American, showing no respect for our country and our laws.

Posted at 01:10 PM | Comments (5)

Kobach gets support in fight for Citizens Rights

Law professor Kris Kobach sued Kansas on behalf of several American students who paid full price for college educations that some illegal aliens were able to get at a discount. A district court judge threw it out, saying those students didn't have standing to sue, and Kobach is appealing.

Now, he's gotten some "heavyweight" help from the Mountain States Legal Foundation and the Washington Legal Foundation. Former Senator Allen K. Simpson and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) are involved as well. And:

WLF backed FAIR's claim that Kansas has denied the students' constitutional right to equal protection of the laws, and pointed out that DHS has refused to respond to two administrative complaints filed by WLF in New York and Texas, asking the Bush Administration to enforce the 1996 law.

Note the title of this post, because that's what this boils down to. Everyone should be concerned that the government wants to give illegal aliens a better deal than citizens.

UPDATE: There's more on this case here.

Posted at 07:04 AM | Comments (1)

Senate Selling American Jobs to Close Federal Budget Deficit

What? From this:

In a twist of logic so bizarre that it could only be hatched in Washington, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a plan to increase revenues by selling over 368,000 American jobs to foreign workers and their families who will enter the United States and stay permanently. The proposal authored by Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA.) will be added to a larger deficit reduction bill the Senate will consider as early as next week. Under the plan, the fees employers pay for high tech, executive, and other employment-based permanent visas for foreign workers will rise, generating an estimated $120 million per year. The federal budget shortfall for the current fiscal year is projected to be in the neighborhood of $400 billion...

Posted at 04:43 PM | Comments (1)

Virginia governor candidate Tim Kaine spins, misses on pro-illegal immigration stance

The WaPo reports on a new ad from Republican Virginia gubanatorial candidate Jerry Kilgore in "Ad Attacks Kaine on Immigrant Issues". Obviously, it should be "illegal immigration issues", but, well, that's just how the WaPo sees things.

"Illegal immigration: a growing crisis," the ad's narrator says. "Kaine favors taxpayer-funded job centers and supports in-state tuition discounts for illegals. Taxpayer benefits for illegal immigrants? What part of 'illegal' does Tim Kaine not understand?"

They object to that ad:

But Kaine's campaign aides said the ad distorts the facts. The Democrat has said local governments -- not the state -- should decide whether to use public funding for day-laborer sites, such as the one that was approved in Herndon in August, the aides said.

That's just a dodge. Kaine could blame local Herndon officials, as well officials in any other town that decided to spend public money helping illegal immigration gain a foothold in their communities. Someone needs to take a stand, and Kaine isn't up to the task.

And they said that Kaine opposes in-state tuition for immigrants in the country illegally. He would make an exception for tax-paying immigrants brought to the country by their parents and educated in the state's public schools, provided they were seeking to legalize their status. Gov. Mark R. Warner (D) vetoed a bill that would have barred illegal immigrants from the tuition benefits in 2003 because it did not grant this exception.

So, under the Kaine plan, millions of illegal aliens could bring their teenage children here, stay a while, and then as long as they made an amorphous pledge get discounted college educations?

And, since there are only a finite number of such discounts available, what would Timothy Kaine say to those American citizens who had their discount taken away by a citizen of some other country?

Previously: "VA: Kilgore, Kaine pledge to crack down on illegal alien employers" and "WaPo Virginia poll: only 8% support illegal alien hiring halls".

Posted at 11:54 AM | Comments (2)

Kennedy-McCain gets Mexican government stamp of approval

If the government of Mexico had to choose, they'd take the immigration "reform" legislation proposed by (U.S.) Senators John McCain and Teddy Kennedy.

Presidential spokesman Ruben Aguilar today said the bipartisan proposal is the one that comes closest to what Mexico wants... Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez discussed such issues yesterday during meetings in Washington.

No doubt those two fine Senators welcomed this endorsement of their proposal. While we don't want to engage in guilt by association, many other people also endorse their scheme, and many of those are a bit shaky on that whole patriotism thing.

Note also that our amigos seem to be playing both sides of the artificially-created street: "Mexico approves of Bush Temporary Worker Scheme".

Posted at 06:55 AM | Comments (1)

"Congressional delegation wants action on immigration policies"

From this:

Upset with what they say is the federal government's failure to prosecute illegal immigrants, the entire 19-member California Republican congressional delegation has asked the U.S. attorney general for a meeting to discuss the matter.

In an Oct. 20 letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, the Congress members also criticized the U.S. attorney's office in San Diego for what they called its "lax prosecutorial standard" of only prosecuting those illegal immigrants with two felony convictions in the San Diego District.

"We write to request a meeting with you to discuss our frustration with the current policies within the Administration related to the prosecution of criminal aliens," the letter states.

The letter goes on to say that too often, illegal immigrants who should be jailed instead benefit from "the current practice of 'catch and release.' "

The Republicans' letter to Gonzalez appeared to be the latest sign of a growing level of conservative Republican frustration with the Bush administration on several issues, including what they say is its failure to enforce the country's immigration laws.

Last week, nearly one-third of the House's 231 Republican members sent a letter to President Bush, saying that if he expects to get their support for a temporary guest worker program, he first needs to clamp down on illegal immigration by strengthening the nation's borders and enforcing immigration laws.

Reached by phone in Washington on Wednesday, U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Vista ---- one of the signatories of the letter ---- said that he and other Republican members of Congress took a more diplomatic approach with the Bush administration until late 2004.

"Before the president was re-elected, all of us felt what we had to say had to be said behind the scenes ---- and it was," Issa said...

Posted at 02:27 AM | Comments (4)

Richmond Kentucky halts plan to issue ID cards to illegal aliens

From Richmond postpones immigrant ID program amid confusion:

A "misunderstanding" between city officials and a migrant outreach has delayed a controversial plan for the city to offer identification cards to immigrants.

"We were under the impression it was for legal residents," City Manager David Evans said Monday. "The Hispanic outreach office wanted it to be offered to everyone," regardless of their immigration status.

The city is asking federal immigration officials for an opinion on whether the program conforms to agency regulations. National experts said last week Richmond would be the first municipality in the country to offer immigrant ID cards...

Oddly enough, I have trouble believing Evans. However, I have no trouble believing that almost all "Hispanic outreach offices" would be willing to put their race above this country's laws. The AP also says this:

The cards would help immigrants do things most people take for granted, such as writing a check in a store.

Awww... What sort of mean-spirited xenophobe would deny "immigrants" their right to do things "most people take for granted"? Note, of course, that the AP doesn't go in to all the downsides of this scheme.

Send an email to feedback *at* ap.org and let them know their bias is leading them to be an even more inaccurate source. The earlier article "Hispanic advocates press for ID cards" has some more interesting quotes:

[Mayor's Hispanic Workforce Development Task Force co-chair Alayne White says:] "It clearly is a very sensitive issue... When you bring up the issue of not having documentation or being here in the country illegally, that stirs passion in people."

Well, obviously people are going to get slightly upset when they see local officials doing something that would probably be against federal law and would allow local businesses to make money off illegality. Just slightly upset. Of course, on the other side, this also stirs up race-based passions:

[Josh Santana, attorney and president of the Lexington Hispanic Association says:] "Some of the opposition is rooted in bigotry. Some of the opposition is rooted in fear. Some of the opposition is rooted in the concept that we're rewarding folks for having done something wrong," he said. But issuing the cards is "the just and right thing to do... We as a society have a moral obligation to do what we can to protect those God has placed in our midst," Santana said.

A hat trick to Josh, as he scores with the race card, the xenophobic fear card, and the churchy card all in just two paragraphs. One might think those "immigrants" just fell out of the sky into their city, when in actual fact they were pulled and pushed there by corrupt politicians, corrupt businessmen, and the corrupt oligarchy of Mexico.

Posted at 08:22 PM | Comments (0)

WalMart: no more "undocumented" workers for us!

Our guiding light Insty links to the site walmartfacts.com for some reason or other. Doing a search, our crack team came upon this bit:

We have been such a successful retailer because we focus our efforts on running our stores. Like many companies, we entrust our suppliers and contractors to do the hiring - and that means hiring only documented workers.

Wal-Mart has literally thousands of service and product suppliers - and it just is not feasible for us to verify documents for every employee in every outside company.

...Wal-Mart did not profit in any way from the use of undocumented workers...

Since the raids, Wal-Mart has terminated all of its contracts with outside cleaning contractors. In addition to lowering costs, this move will give Wal-Mart greater control in verifying employees' documentation.

They're also sorry that some of those illegal aliens were allegedly abused while allegedly locked in their stores.

Posted at 05:18 PM | Comments (1)

State and local police can enforce civil immigration violations

Any time a state or local official says they can't enforce civil immigration violations, send them this:

Bowing to pressure earlier this month, The U.S. Department of Justice released a 2002 legal memorandum revealing the department's official position on state and local enforcement of federal immigration law. To the chagrin of many, the memo's author, then Assistant Attorney General, Jay S. Bybee, says state and local police possess the inherent right to enforce civil violations of federal immigration law. The Assistant A.G.'s memo concludes it is "unreasonable" to assume Congress intended to deprive the federal government of "whatever assistance States may provide" in identifying and detaining individuals who have violated federal immigration laws... In other words, the Department of Justice believes state and local police are entitled to act when they believe federal immigration laws are being violated...

Posted at 06:48 AM | Comments (1)

"Labor's Hurricane George"

From Froma Harrop:

New Orleans offers a quick study of Bush labor policy in action: On Aug. 29, Hurricane Katrina strikes, causing widespread destruction. Four days later, President Bush commits $10.1 billion of the taxpayers' money to rebuilding New Orleans. Four days after that, he suspends the Davis-Bacon Act — the law that requires federal contractors to pay workers the going local rate.

Illegal immigrants, willing to work at less-than-prevailing wages, stream into New Orleans. And a mere six weeks after the last evacuee leaves the Superdome, we hear of complaints by illegal workers that employers are stiffing them of their meager pay.

So here you have it, a lesson on how to crush the market for blue-collar labor. And it could have been done in four PowerPoint slides...

There's only one sane explanation of why Bush would try to lower wages in a tight labor market: He intended all along to flood the market with cheap foreign workers.

It's a simple setup: (1) Get rid of Davis-Bacon, so contractors can offer below-market pay that Americans and legal immigrants won't touch; (2) continue to disregard the law that forbids companies to hire undocumented workers; (3) when people complain that the workers restoring New Orleans are not legal, say that they are taking jobs no American wants.

The one price that may never rise, in the Bush mindset, is the price of labor. Companies must cope with rising costs for energy, drugs or land. If they can't deal with it, they go out of business. But cheap labor is somehow an entitlement...

The other sweet thing about this (for the Bush administration and other "free" marketeers) is that the Dems are too p***y to say anything about this. After all, what if MALDEF calls them "mean-spirited"? Or, what if the National Council of The Race says they're xenophobes? At all costs, the Dems must sell out American citizens to far-left race-based groups with questionable loyalties to this country.

Posted at 09:48 PM | Comments (2)

Bush reinstates Davis-Bacon on Gulf Coast

Shortly after Katrina, Bush lifted the Davis-Bacon Act, a union favorite that provides a prevailing wage for workers on federal contracts. Grover Norquist was one of those pushing for the suspension.

Now, our president has reinstated D-B.

Around the same time that he suspended that Act, Bush also suspended fines for those who hired illegal aliens.

That gave the green light for illegal aliens from other U.S. states as well as from Mexico to swarm in to the Gulf Coast to take rebuilding jobs.

Perhaps those Republicans who say they favor a D-B suspension because they're thinking of the Katrina victims will come out against illegal aliens taking rebuilding jobs from those victims.

And, perhaps those Dems who complained about D-B being suspended will speak out about this as well.

Uh-huh.

Posted at 03:07 PM | Comments (0)

Daniel Griswold's libertarian fantasy world

Dan Griswold is with the Cato Institute, and he appeared on KFI's John and Ken Show yesterday. You can hear his interview in their audio archives.

The interview concerned immigration and Bush's temporary worker plan. In a perfect world, people like Griswold would be considered extremist nuts. Unfortunately, in president Bush's world, people like him help set policy.

A heating contractor called in and said that in 1984 HVAC installers earned $21 an hour, but today they earn just $18 an hour. With inflation, that $21 would become $38. He said that illegal aliens were willing to work for $12 an hour because they lived three families to a house and drove a piece of crap car.

Griswold immediately threw down the race card, saying to John and Ken that they were "stoking some very ugly stereotypes" and that they were trying to "rile things up with inflammatory rhetoric".

Just one problem: the caller is correct, and Griswold is wrong. Whether it's just because he's willing to deny all of the evidence that his lunatic libertarian ideas are completely wrong, or because he's ignorant is not known. However, he, Bush, and all those on that side are on the other side from the vast majority of Americans.

Posted at 03:02 PM | Comments (3)

"Hayworth's plan won't fix problem"

From the editorial Hayworth's plan won't fix problem:

Real immigration reform or demagoguery? This year, Congress has opened a dialogue on an issue that the American people have long deemed pressing.

Finally, our legislators are facing up to the fact that current immigration law is not in tune with the economic or societal realities of our country. Change must happen – and soon.

If we are to fix our broken system, we must target the core. We must acknowledge the root causes driving immigration...

In most cases, the root cause is simple: corruption. If there were no money involved in massive illegal immigration, only a few politicians would support it. Those who would support it even if it personally cost them money would be far-left, racial demagogues with questionable loyalties.

By the way, this editorial is from Rep. Raul Grijalva of Arizona. Not only is he a Democrat, and not only does he support the Kennedy-McCain massive amnesty scheme, but he's also a proud former member of the racial separatist group MEChA. You know, the one that wants to "liberate" the U.S. southwest and turn it into a Chicano homeland.

Posted at 06:25 AM | Comments (2)

"Just How Temporary are 'Guest Workers?' Let's Ask Their Grandchildren"

From this:

...The idea was very appealing: [Germany] would import large numbers of Turks, Italians, Greeks, Yugoslavs, Spaniards and Moroccans to cheaply do the jobs that "no German wanted to do." Such impoverished foreigners would be happy as pie with piddly wages (by German standards) and then they would all go home after a few years. This second part was very important to the Germans, who had never been a nation of immigration and were rightfully proud of their long history as a distinct and continuous people.

So how did it work? Great -- right up until the part where the guests were supposed to go home. They didn't. Employers became dependent on them and were reluctant to find and train replacements or adapt through innovation. And the workers found life as a janitor in Germany somewhat more attractive than life as a Goatherd in the backwoods of Anatolia.

So the employers and guests both fought for constant renewals and extensions and loopholes. The (very comfortable) guests then brought in their families at the first opportunity (or married other guest workers) and baby guests were born. Today, it has been forty to fifty years since the guest worker agreements were signed (depending on the guest-providing country in question), and the guests are still there.

There are two million Turkish guests, one million Yugoslav guests, half a million Italian guests, one third of a million Greek guests and a quarter million Polish guests, along with thousands of Moroccan, Tunisian, Middle Eastern, Russian, and assorted other guests. Guests are now 10% of Germany's population. And many of these guests were born in Germany, being the children and grandchildren of Germany's "temporary" workers from the fifties and sixties. Oh, and they've tired of the guest room, so they all expect to be made citizens now.

Posted at 03:03 AM | Comments (2)

"Give illegal immigrants a chance, [Sen. Chuck] Hagel says"

That's the title of this Omaha World-Herald story: "The plan Hagel is expected to introduce Tuesday also will include stronger controls at the border to stem the flow of undocumented workers into the United States." But, it's basically a massive amnesty scheme just like the other ones. Full text of the article here.

Your job if you'd be so kind: find out where Hagel gets his campaign contributions from, and the revenues of the top illegal immigration-employing industries in Nebraska.

It sounds like a job for ex-acquaintance "Ann D. Bome", who at one time was in Omaha researching a documentary... on Boy's Town.

Posted at 09:43 AM | Comments (5)

The end of the line for illegal immigration supporter Douglas Duncan?

The WashTimes predicts that he's bitten off more than he can chew and, once he loses the Maryland governor's race his career will be finished: "Doug Duncan's end?"

Since 1974, no Maryland politician except Sen. Barbara Mikulski has ever lost an election for statewide office and managed to salvage a political career. Of course, Mr. Duncan could be the once-in-a-generation politician who overcomes the odds. If he does, it won't be because of his record in Montgomery County.

As we've pointed out on this page, most recently in connection with Gaithersburg's debate over "day labor" sites, Mr. Duncan thinks fostering an illegal-alien underclass serves Montgomery County's best interests and has been known to play partisan hardball in support of it. He has supported lower in-state college tuition for illegals. He supports allowing immigrants to use ID cards like Mexico's fraud-ridden matricula consular to obtain county services. He also has suggested that his critics equate illegals with terrorists.

If this turns out to be the last gasp of Mr. Duncan's political career, Maryland will be the better for it.

Based on my past coverage of him, I heartily agree. Previously: Montgomery County's Douglas Duncan paying price for supporting illegal immigration. Unfortunately: Martin O'Malley also supports illegal immigration.

Posted at 02:02 AM | Comments (0)

Richmond Kentucky to issue ID cards to illegal aliens

From Richmond to offer ID cards to immigrants:

In Richmond, City Manager David Evans said the cards will be used for identification purposes only and should help immigrants more easily perform tasks most citizens take for granted, such as cashing a check or properly identifying themselves to authorities.

"I think it would be more of a help than anything else," he said. "I think it will be an asset for everybody."

Unfortunately, due to political corruption, there's probably little chance that he needs to be concerned with this. But, there is a small chance, and we can only hope.

Posted at 04:12 AM | Comments (0)

With 400,000 employees using the same SSN, can you trust anything Bush says?

The WaPo's "Little Support for Bush Immigration Plan" has comments about his scheme from Mark Krikorian of CIS as well as from Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, referred to by the WaPo as "liberal". Let's consider this:

But sooner or later, under the administration's proposal, there would be an immigrant exodus of historic proportions.

Maybe it's just me, but I get the feeling they're trying to portray Bush as Herod. But, they needn't worry, for the reasons I outlined in Chertoff promotes "Temporary Worker Program" at Senate meeting.

The WaPo also points out that in last week's testimony:

...administration officials acknowledged that about 400,000 employees are using a single Social Security number, all zeroes. But there was little discussion about penalizing employers who accept such numbers, Krikorian said... "There's no effort to inform employers regularly of fake Social Security numbers," he said. "That's something the president can do [Saturday]."

Needless to say, the president didn't do it today. From whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051022.html :

To defend this country, we have to enforce our borders. When our borders are not secure, terrorists, drug dealers, and criminals find it easier to sneak into America. My administration has a clear strategy for dealing with this problem: We want to stop people from crossing into America illegally, and to quickly return the illegal immigrants we catch back to their home countries.

Despite what you might think, the president of the United States is not lying. Rather, he's simply trying to mislead you. You need to parse his remarks in the correct, Clinton-approved fashion. Note that he only wants to "stop people from crossing into America illegally". If millions of cheap laborers can cross legally, that would be OK with him. And, once they're in the U.S., he's clearly not going to do anything about it.

While many examples could be provided, consider that Bush gave the green light to employers to hire illegal aliens after the hurricane, and, as can be seen, employers did just that.

And, consider this: "GAO: ICE all but ignores workplace enforcement". That last report is also discussed in the recent "Report: Immigration workplace fines and arrests plummet":

Between fiscal year 1999 and fiscal year 2003, the report shows that the number of work-site arrests in the United States by government immigration agents fell by 83 percent, dropping from 2,849 arrests in 1999, to 485 in 2003, the last year for which Immigration and Customs Enforcement provided data to the accountability office.

Another indicator of the downward trend revealed in the report was the number of employers who were fined for hiring undocumented immigrants.

In 1999, the Immigration and Naturalization Service issued 427 "Notices of Intent to Fine" to companies across the nation.

But in fiscal year 2004, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which was formed in 2003 to do the job of the INS, issued just three such notices in the entire country, according to the report.

It's difficult for people to realize that someone they like is just bs'ing them. But, I'm sure many of that small number of people who still support Bush will come to terms with it in time.

Posted at 09:02 PM | Comments (2)

Ruben Navarrette Jr. or Vicente Fox?

The column "A city about to change colors" says it was written by San Diego Union-Tribute editorialist Ruben Navarrette Jr., but it reads like it was written by Vicente Fox.

I strongly urge you to read the column and use the email addresses below to let those papers that printed this know what you think. While most might appreciate the attention, some might also reconsider whether they want to continue being associated with his views.

After Katrina, Americans gave millions of dollars to help the victims, and our federal government will give untold billions more. This should be an opportunity for Americans of all races and backgrounds to come together and help each other. Unfortunately, some others tend to put their race before their country and their fellow citizens.

If you thought the destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina was ugly, then you should take a look at what's happening now. It's not pretty.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson and New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin are up in arms because what has historically been a mostly black city may be on its way to becoming a largely brown city. Latino immigrants are coming to New Orleans from as far away as California to repair homes, clear debris, rebuild roads and do other jobs...

The vast majority of them are citizens of Mexico and other countries. Some are new crossers, others are illegal aliens who've been here for a while. The vast majority are not Americans.

Folks such as such as Jackson, who has also complained that too many of the government contracts to rebuild the city are going to firms outside Louisiana. Jackson has gone so far as to propose chartering buses to bring black evacuees back to New Orleans so they could claim jobs that Jackson insists are rightfully theirs.

First of all, not all the people on his buses were black, and I don't think even Jackson would have restricted it just to blacks. And, don't those former residents have a greater right to those jobs than illegal aliens? Would someone who's willing to put their country and their fellow citizens ahead of their race think the same thing as Navarette does? How could any American support such a position?

City officials say that one thing that keeps former residents from wanting to give New Orleans another chance is the lack of subsidized housing.

Guess what? Latino immigrants have to contend with the same shortage. The difference is that the immigrants are not sitting around and waiting for government to come to the rescue. They're probably living two or three families to a house, and saving money to buy a home of their own.

That's how it used to be in this country before the advent of the welfare state. And, if the immigrant values win out in this struggle — over those of the New Orleans officials — it could be that way again.

Those "immigrant values" include unsafe working and living conditions, hardly American values.

What's the American thing to do in this case? Let's do whatever we need to do to get those former residents - or at least other Americans - to do the jobs. Considering the subtext of those preceding paragraphs, if this had been written by a white person it would never have seen the light of day. Even if some of our fellow Americans are as shiftless as Navarrette wants us to believe, then we need to deal with that directly, and not just send them to other states where they'll continue to be a part of the welfare state.

Note that similar thoughts have been expressed by Raul A. Reyes of USA Today, Linda Chavez, and the Los Angeles Times' Gregory Rodriquez.

As stated above, I suggest writing to each of the sources that printed this and let them know what you think:

Here come the Latinos - Jesse and Nagin are up in arms (schmooze@jewishworldreview.com)

The Struggle for Competing Values in New Orleans ( feedback@realclearpolitics.com)

New Orleans leaders fret over growing Latino population (jpbowman@angnewspapers.com,ttuttle@angnewspapers.com)

Will it be Nuevo Orleans? (twinckler@sanmateocountytimes.com,ttuttle@angnewspapers.com)

New Orleans leaders bemoan Latino influx (feedback@sgvn.com)

Efforts to repair, rebuild New Orleans engulfed in racial politics (shidlay@app.com)

Welcome to Nuevo Orleans (publiceditor@sacbee.com)

Why not Nuevo Orleans? (don_holland@link.freedom.com,smw@link.freedom.com)

Posted at 07:34 PM | Comments (5)

Arizona Poll: employers should verify immigration status

From this:

Echoing the results of an Arizona Republic Poll published today, the poll by Phoenix-based ThinkAZ said that 64 percent of these voters believe that putting the onus on employers would be "effective." Existing U.S. law requires employers to verify employees' legal status and allows authorities to fine organizations that do not comply. However, the law is not rigorously enforced.

The approach that respondents to the ThinkAZ poll support the least is granting "immediate U.S. citizenship or amnesty" to undocumented immigrants who have lived in the United States for at least three years. Only about 30 percent favor it...

A 44 percent plurality of respondents said eliminating automatic U.S. citizenship for babies born to undocumented immigrants in the United States would be "effective" in controlling illegal immigration. A proposal to limit access to a public school education to U.S. citizens was seen as "effective" by a leading 42 percent...

Posted at 02:40 PM | Comments (0)

Kilgore, Kaine, the VA governor's race, and the WaPo's bias

From this:

There are two things every American should know about Virginia's governor's race: 1) It's the first sizable political contest to turn, largely, on the issue of illegal immigration. 2) As such, it spotlights the pathetic state of political discourse on the subject.

Just to be clear, there's nothing pathetic about the position of Republican nominee Jerry W. Kilgore. He's the guy I like. I like him simply because he says he wants to enforce the law -- for example, the law prohibiting illegal aliens and other non-citizens from voting. He would even like to see the law tightened to become more easily enforceable. I also like him because he says he doesn't want to break the law -- such as laws prohibiting welfare and other benefits from being distributed to illegal aliens.

But this is precisely where the debate becomes pathetic: In the United States, in the year 2005, just trying to help carry out immigration laws already on the books, and just trying not to break them, marks one as a veritable subversive with a program, as The Washington Post hysterically put it, "tinged with nativism and opportunism."

...Timothy M. Kaine, Kilgore's Democratic opponent, calls this approach "mean-spirited"; Kaine's solution, meanwhile, is both to defer to local officials and rely on federal enforcement -- which is no solution at all. An independent candidate, H. Russell Potts Jr., calls Kilgore's law-and-order position "the worst form of demagoguery." A Kaine spokesman called it "grandstanding." Kilgore had succumbed to "the temptation to fan the flames with a naked appeal for votes," according to The Washington Post, itself succumbing to the temptation to mix metaphors. The newspaper also dubbed the Kilgore plan to follow the law "populist nonsense" and "a wedge issue..."

Posted at 12:35 PM | Comments (2)

Bush promotes immigration "reform", "temporary" worker scheme

Here are his remarks from Monday. If you removed all the lies, hot air, and just plain ol' BS from these three paragraphs you'd be left with little more than three "the"'s and two "it"'s:

As we improve and expand our efforts to secure our borders, we must also recognize that enforcement work -- that enforcement cannot work unless it is part of a larger comprehensive immigration reform program. If an employer has a job that no American is willing to take, we need to find a way to fill that demand by matching willing employers with willing workers from foreign countries on a temporary and legal basis. The best way to do that is through a temporary worker program that gives those workers we need a legal, honest way to come into our country and to return home. I'm going to work with members of Congress to create a program that can provide for our economy's labor needs, without harming American workers, without providing amnesty, and that will improve our ability to control our borders.

You see, we got people sneaking into our country to work. They want to provide for their families. Family values do not stop at the Rio Grande River. People are coming to put food on the table. But because there is no legal way for them to do so, through a temporary worker program, they're putting pressure on our border. It makes sense to have a rational plan that says, you can come and work on a temporary basis if an employer can't find an American to do the job. It makes sense for the employer, it makes sense for the worker, and it makes sense for those good people trying to enforce our border. The fewer people trying to sneak in to work means it's more likely we're going to catch drug smugglers and terrorists and gun runners.

A critical part of any temporary worker program is work site enforcement. To deal with employers who violate our immigration law, this bill strengthens our enforcement capabilities by adding new agents and doubling their resources. We've got to crack down on employers who flout our laws. And we will give honest employers the tools they need to spot fake documents and ensure that their workers are respecting our laws. America is a country of laws, and we're going to uphold our laws for the good of the citizens of this country.

Compare the middle paragraph to the highly similar spiel he played to O'Reilly last year.

Posted at 08:32 AM | Comments (5)

Mexico approves of Bush Temporary Worker Scheme

Our friends to the south, specifically the Foreign Relations Secretariat, have issued the following statement on the scheme laid out yesterday by DHS head Chertoff:

"The Mexican government considers it significant that the Bush administration has a solid and unified position on immigration reform that allows safe, legal and orderly migration, and takes into account those migrants who are already residing in the United States... Mexico understands the link between regional security and the immigration issue but stresses that both issues should be viewed as shared responsibilities. [MX will maintain contact with Bush et al] to make suggestions to help the immigration situation and standards of living of our countrymen."

Previously: Chertoff promotes "Temporary Worker Program" at Senate meeting

Posted at 05:44 AM | Comments (0)

Colorado poll: yes to immigration, no to illegal immigration

Rocky Mountain News/CBS 4 did a poll of 500 "likely Colorado voters":

"Overall, immigration is a good thing.":
61 percent said they "strongly" or "somewhat" agree

"Illegal immigrants are a burden on the United States, because of their impact on things like schools, jobs, and health care":
50% "strongly agree"
23% "somewhat agree" (73%)
"somewhat" or "strongly" disagree 26%.

"highest priority for the federal government?":
"the budget deficit" 20%
"the cost and supply of energy" 18%
the "war in Iraq" 16%
"terrorism" 14%
immigration 10%
job creation 10%

Tancredo, a statewide and national lightning rod on the issue, earned a 31 percent favorable rating from the respondents. Nearly as many, 29 percent, said they have an unfavorable impression of him. One in five said they'd never heard of him and 18 percent had no opinion.

Needless to say, M.E. Sprengelmeyer of the RM News has a little difficult understanding the "complex" results. He starts discussing their "harsh view toward illegal immigrants", then quotes an open borders advocate, then discusses "resentment to illegal immigration" that:

cuts across ethnic and other lines, although more Republican males (18 percent) viewed the issue as the country's highest priority. Only 11 percent of Republican women ranked it the top priority. Among whites in the survey, 78 percent agreed that illegal immigrants were a "burden," and so did 47 percent of Hispanics.

Here's a hint: don't put "burden" in quotes if it's in your survey question. If you feel a need to put words like that in quotes, don't put them in your own survey.

Then, the crack reporter follows with this:

Val Forsmark, a retired journalist who took the survey, said she's not surprised so many people blame illegal immigrants.

I'm sure we should let Val set our immigration policy.

Posted at 02:31 AM | Comments (4)

Chertoff promotes "Temporary Worker Program" at Senate meeting

Don't believe everything you read about DHS head Michael Chertoff's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee today.

First, from Drudge, come these headlines in red:

HOMELAND SECURITY CHIEF: EXPEL ALL ILLEGALS... 'Our goal is to return every single illegal entrant, no exceptions'...

Those headlines and the first two paragraphs of the AFP article Drudge references are wrong. Read Chertoff's prepared remarks here: dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?theme=45&content=4890

He wasn't referring to deporting all illegal aliens. He was in fact only referring to those OTMs ("Other than Mexicans") caught at the border. Most of them are given a notice to appear and released into the U.S. and never heard from again. He pledged to end that "catch and release" by adding new detention space. There's background on this issue here, here, and by searching for OTMs in the search box.

And:

The Cabinet officials emphasized that the president strongly opposed an amnesty for illegal aliens, and Chertoff agreed with Kennedy that trying to deport all illegal immigrants would not be possible. "It would take billions and billions and billions of dollars to do it," Chertoff said.

Shades of Asa Hutchinson. And, from his prepared remarks:

Ending illegal immigration means both tough enforcement and action to reduce the very demand that draws illegal migrants into the country. Therefore, our strategy of reforming our immigration system is a three-pillar, comprehensive approach that focuses on controlling the border, building a robust interior enforcement program, and establishing a Temporary Worker Program.

That's the new word for their "guest" worker program. A question: what happens when those "temporary" workers have U.S. citizen children? Does anyone in their right mind think that we would be able to deport mixed families if they don't want to return? Can't you just imagine Sen. Teddy Kennedy joining with Rep. Nancy Pelosi to propose an "adjustment" of their status allowing these millions of formerly "temporary" workers to stay here permanently? Isn't anyone who would call them "Temporary" workers just lying to you?

And, note that this appears to be part of a larger Bush administration offensive. Also today the U.S. Chamber of Commerce held a Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Fixing a Broken System confab featuring First Data (owners of Western Union), Wal-Mart, Tyson Foods and other immigration "reformers". For more on the ties between "reform" and big business, see "Big Business Balks at Bush Propaganda Plan".

And, this is days after Tamar Jacoby entertained the crowds at the LAPL.

And, a new push poll on immigration "reform" was released on Monday.

It's unfortunate that almost every person commenting on this has simply taken the AFP's report above at face value without understanding what Chertoff really said and what this all means.

If you want to do something about this, please help set the record straight.

And, contact your representatives and tell them to just enforce the laws.

UPDATE: From this:

Labor Secretary Elaine Chao provided a general outline of the plan Bush introduced last year, emphasizing that undocumented workers accepted into the program would receive no advantages over immigrants in the country legally and that they would be required to return home after their work period ends. "Those who come forward will not be offered an automatic pass to citizenship and should be expected to pay a substantial fine or penalty to participate in the temporary program," she said. Under the president's plan, she said, guest workers would be able to extend a three-year work visa for another three years, but would then have to leave the country for a year to apply for a new work permit. She said they would be issued biometric, tamper-resistant cards that would allow them to cross U.S. borders during their stay.

And, from the same article, John McCain borrows my talking point:

McCain said any plan centered on sending illegal immigrants home ignores that businesses rely on immigrant labor and that many immigrants have children born in the United States, who are citizens. "Somebody is going to have to explain how that is workable," he said of the idea of deporting illegal workers.

It isn't. And, McCain's scheme is even worse than the Bush scheme.

Could someone please keep track of editorials supporting these various amnesty schemes? Here's the Miami Herald: "EDITORIAL: Border enforcement doesn't get job done".

Posted at 11:58 AM | Comments (5)

"Deportation often an empty threat, as illegal immigration rises"

From this:

Illegal immigration is increasing rapidly from countries other than Mexico, federal officials are telling Congress. And the ease with which these foreign nationals can stay in the United States is fueling terrorism concerns.

Testimony at a recent congressional hearing and a report to House members said the lack of detention space to hold this growing category of illegal immigrants means 70 percent of them remain free until deportation. Most disappear into the United States.

Last week, Congress passed a homeland security bill that included funding for 2,300 more detention beds. This brings the total to 20,300, which is 3,750 fewer than the Sept. 11 commission wanted.

Long an issue between the United States and Mexico, the international scope of illegal immigration has grown substantially since 1997. But the diversity of people coming through the southern border has ignited a debate over their motives for coming.

"Terrorists can use South America as a launching pad to slip into Mexico and from there into the United States," says Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif. Others say such talk is overblown.

Would those "others" be willing to put their money where their mouths are? If they turn out to be wrong, would they, for instance, be willing to take full responsibility for being wrong? Hey, where'd those "others" go?

Posted at 06:29 AM | Comments (1)

Immigration "news" from the Wall Street Journal

As discussed here several times, the editorial side of the WSJ favors open borders, smearing opponents and outright lying as necessary. The news side of the WSJ seems to have a few problems as well. Consider "California Race Highlights Split On Immigration" from Miriam Jordan. It reports on Jim Gilchrist getting 14% of the vote in California's 48th District, the same topic as that discussed in the editorial covered in How unserious are the free enterprise types? The WSJ's "news" piece even uses some of the same language as that piece. Why, it's almost like they're reading from the same talking points or something.

A full discussion of the WSJ's "news" article will have to wait, but let's consider this:

Economic conservatives tend to favor [Bush's anti-American plans.] Meanwhile, cultural conservatives vehemently oppose the Bush proposal...

Being so simplistic makes things so much easier, doesn't it? I'm positive that many more people than just "cultural conservatives" are opposed to guest worker schemes, just as long as those schemes are correctly described to them. Which brings us to the next bit of "news" from the WSJ:

New public-opinion data, generated by the Republican polling firm Tarrance Group, indicate that Republican voters nationwide don't necessarily agree with a deportation- and enforcement-only immigration policy. Instead they favor solutions that will deal with both future immigrants and the millions of undocumented workers already here. The national poll of 800 likely Republican voters, released yesterday, found that only 16% want to stop the flow of illegal immigrants entirely. Nearly 80% would support an enforcement package that increases penalties for employers, registers workers and -- provided those workers pay taxes, learn English and stay on the right side of the law -- offers a path to eventual citizenship.

What wonderful "news"! But, doesn't that paragraph almost sound a bit like a Soviet infomercial? So, let's look a little deeper:

The poll, of 800 American "likely voters," was conducted March 20-22. It was commissioned by the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the National Immigration Forum.

The full questions and results are in PDFs at that link; the survey is a bit like asking people whether they want chocolate or vanilla ice cream without telling them both have lead in it. They haven't given those polled the full facts and they haven't offered them other choices. For instance, they get a good response when they ask whether fines for illegal aliens and employers should be increased; they don't ask about fines for politicians who refuse to enforce those laws. They even get people to agree that America's immigration system is broken, and needs to be fixed; what they don't reveal is that that's a favorite talking point of the open borders lobby.

A very similar poll was conducted by and for the same organization six months ago; see "FAIR Responds to Sham Immigration Poll". The Tarrance Group is risking their credibility by conducting polls of this sort for organizations like the AILA and the NIF. And, after reading this Pravda-level "news report" from the Wall Street Journal, I'll let the reader decide whether they have any credibility remaining.

Posted at 05:50 AM | Comments (1)

Houston Chronicle on OTMs

Here's yet another long article on "Other Than Mexicans", including this:

More than 47,600 illegal border crossers from "countries other than Mexico," so called OTMs, have been caught in South Texas this year. But 42,000, or more than 88 percent, have been promptly released and most have simply melted into society, failing to show up for required immigration court hearings, according to the Texas governor's office.

Posted at 03:25 AM | Comments (1)

How unserious are the free enterprise types?

Do the "free" trade, "free" enterprise types - those libertarians and conservaties who advocate generally open borders - have any kind of an argument? Have they thought things through? Are they, in a word, serious?

If the guest editorial "Nativism and the immigration issue" is any guide, the answer to all questions is "No". It's from Phil Kerpen, who's only identified as a "policy analyst". A couple links later, we find out he's with the Free Enterprise Fund. Their chairman is Mallory Factor, and those on their Policy Council are Jack Kemp, Lawrence Kudlow, and Arthur Laffer. From the screed:

The results of the recent special election in California's 48th Congressional District are a sober wakeup call to economic conservatives who believe in the free movement of goods, capital and labor.

I don't need to tell my readers that there's a difference between goods and people. The former just sit there on shelves in warehouses. On the other hand, people do things, they need things, they start revolutions, they commit crimes, they form communities, and on and on. If we import bad products we can just dispose of them. If we import bad people, things get much, much more complex.

And, of course, it's good to note that the "free" market types are scared of the voters finally waking up.

Self-appointed, vigilante immigration restrictionist Jim Gilchrist received a sizable 14.4 percent of the vote for Congress on a single-issue, immigrant bashing platform. Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, who endorsed Gilchrist, is trying, with some success, to raise immigrant-bashing to a top-tier issue in the 2008 elections.

I count six smears in just two sentences. Bravo! Of course, the SDUT might want to consider whether what little reputation it has is enhanced by printing food-throwing articles.

Anti-immigration sentiment is one symptom of a larger neo-Mercantilist disease that is also threatening the globalization of trade and capital flows. Unless true free-market conservatives tame these emotional arguments with the force of logic, much of the economic progress of the past century could be reversed.

You can see the "force" of logic in that and the preceding paragraph, although this latest para has just two smears so he's improving! The "force of logic" is on the side of Gilchrist and Tancredo; their arguments make sense and are supported by the vast majority of Americans. The only way the "free" market forces can win is through smears, lies, and propaganda.

Posted at 12:32 PM | Comments (4)

Boston Globe's Yvonne Abraham makes fun of Minuteman Project

That reporter offers a hit piece entitled "Volunteers get cold reception in Vermont". The overall attempt of the article seems to be to mock the MMP and make them look like fools. However, as we'll see later, the joke appears to be on the Globe. From the article:

It's hard to save the United States from illegal immigrants when you can't find the border... [...they got "forced out of" one town...] So the volunteers set off to watch a stretch of border on a bike path that runs along Lake Memphremagog... Only they got lost...

Ha ha! Those dumb fools! Look at them, the dumb fools!

But, back to the circumstances for them leaving the first town they went to:

But these Minutemen were forced out of town by a larger crowd of protesters, who denounced their opposition to illegal immigration as a front for racism.

Why, you might ask, is the Boston Globe supporting a mob forcing people out of a town?

And:

"They are outsiders, and we don't want them here," said David Van Deusen of Moretown, Vt., who helped to organize the protest. "We don't want their racist policies in Vermont."

Oddly enough, the Globe doesn't tell us more about van Deusen. Did their reporter or an editor bother to find out more about him? Did the Globe bother to find out that he's a frequent contributor to the North Eastern Federation of Anarchist Communists (nefac.net)?

Really now. Why is a supposedly reputable newspaper supporting the side of anarchists-communists? Is there something they need to tell their readers? If they're going to repeat the racism charge, shouldn't they also disclose that the person making the charge appears to be an anarchist-communist? Is van Deusen basically just a sock puppet for the Boston Globe?

Let's write to ombud *at* globe.com and ask them to clarify their position. Is the Boston Globe an anarchist newspaper, or a commie rag? Or, a little bit of both?

Or, is the Boston Globe just a supporter of those corrupt politicians and businesses that profit off illegal immigration?

Posted at 09:13 AM | Comments (2)

Does USA Today support illegal aliens taking rebuilding jobs?

USA Today offers a very strange column from Raul A. Reyes entitled Katrina's next expose: Immigration woes. Reyes is "an attorney in New York and a member of USA TODAY's board of contributors", and his article reads like a hasty, amalgamated summary of recent pro-illegal immigration essays from other professional Hispanics. It's almost like they're all reading from the same script. (And, needless to say, the titular expose is not that illegal aliens are taking jobs that should go to those Americans who were affected by the storm.)

Reyes' editorial starts with this:

I predictably didn't see many Latinos amid the news coverage of Hurricane Katrina. After all, New Orleans has never had a large Hispanic population. Not only might this soon change, Katrina's aftermath might also become an immigration issue.

How very similar to something Linda Chavez recently said in her racial-cheerleading column.

Then, Reyes provides some backstory on Bush's backstabbing of American workers:

To stimulate relief efforts, President Bush suspended portions of the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires that construction workers on federal projects be paid the prevailing local wage. Then the Department of Homeland Security said it would not penalize employers who hired illegal workers. While the idea behind these actions is to lower costs, cut red tape and accelerate rebuilding, the reality is that contractors will have free rein to hire undocumented workers.

Upon reading the last sentence, I (foolishly) briefly thought he might end up supporting rebuilding jobs going to our own citizens. As we shall see, I was quite gullible to consider that even for a millisecond. And, compare his backstory with that in the S.F. Chronicle's "As locals struggle, migrants find work in New Orleans":

Recognizing the demand for migrant labor, and to help speed reconstruction in the areas devastated by Hurricane Katrina, the Department of Homeland Security temporarily suspended rules mandating employers to prove that workers they hire are citizens or have a legal right to work in the United States. In addition, President Bush suspended application in the Katrina-affected region of the 1931 Davis-Bacon Act, under which employers must pay prevailing wage rates on federally financed construction projects -- in order, Bush said, to "permit the employment of thousands of additional individuals."

Returning to USA Today:

The construction industry already relies on Latino immigrant labor...

In fact, President Fox pointed this out a few weeks ago:

"If there is anything Mexicans are good at, it is construction."

Switching from President Fox back to the USA Today editorialist:

The USA has always relied on immigrant workers. Irish laborers built the Erie Canal. Chinese ones laid the transcontinental railway.

How odd! That's just about the same thing the Los Angeles Times' Gregory Rodriquez said in his essay "La Nueva Orleans". Imagine - two pundits using the Chinese Coolie system as a paradigm within days of each other. Seriously now: what are the chances of that?

But, it doesn't stop there. Reyes ends with the same call for "reform" as the LAT contributing editor did in his version:

...it is time for Congress and the president to move toward meaningful reform.

Otherwise, just as Katrina exposed a black-white economic divide, the reconstruction effort might ultimately highlight another disaster: our broken immigration system.

Isn't it odd how all these people come to the same conclusions and even use the same examples? Why, it's almost like there's some racial mothership feeding them lines.

Perhaps America's Newspaper might want to raise their standards a bit and only print people who are able to put their country before their race. Please contact them through this form and suggest a change.

Posted at 02:48 AM | Comments (5)

Is the South Florida Sun-Sentinel an American newspaper?

I have my doubts after reading Many migrants flocking to Gulf Coast are exploited, advocates say from William E. Gibson and Ihosvani Rodriguez.

It starts with twelve paragraphs describing various abuses those "migrants" (for you who prefer the truth, they're illegal aliens) are enduring, followed by this transition:

Despite these problems, immigrant workers could become an important part of the reconstruction, just as they have helped communities in Florida and other states that needed labor to build facilities or recover from natural disasters.

And, that's followed by several more paragraphs with a standard discussion of immigration "reform".

In my world - one hopefully shared by 90% of Americans - the idea that illegal aliens are taking rebuilding jobs that should be going to our own citizens - especially those affected by the storm - is shocking and despicable. With hundreds of thousands of Americans thrown out of work by a horrific natural disaster, the idea that anyone would support importing illegal aliens to do jobs that our own citizens could do is distinctly un-American.

Yet, oddly enough, there's nothing in this article that would give anyone any indication that this might not be such a good thing.

Plus, if the jobs were going to American workers, any abuses would have severe ramifications. And, their whole article wouldn't have had to be written, freeing up those reporters for more important tasks.

Does the South Florida Sun-Sentinel support illegal aliens taking jobs from Americans? If they don't perhaps they should start writing articles about what steps are being taken (if any) to get our own citizens working to rebuild the Gulf Coast.

Let's ask Gail Bulfin, their "reader editor": gbulfin *at* sun-sentinel.com

Posted at 05:32 PM | Comments (2)

Has the Bush immigration "reform" scheme been scrapped?

MySA says that Bush's Guest worker plan being shelved. I'm a bit skeptical. First, DHS head Michael Chertoff and Labor's Elaine Chao will be testifying about something as described in "Bush immigration "reform" to be unveiled Tuesday October 18, 2005?"

And, we can see Bush's defacto plan currently underway in New Orleans, as illegal aliens take jobs that should go to Americans.

And, in their article, MySA only provides one statement from those on the other side:

...Conservative Republicans have vowed to block any initiative that would give work visas to immigrants in the country illegally — even if the permits are good only temporarily.

In any case, lawmakers say they are just too busy to pay any attention to the Bush proposal.

"I think Katrina and Rita knocked it off the fall Senate calendar," said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who is sponsoring a bill modeled after Bush's guest worker initiative. "Given the crunch caused by two Supreme Court nominations, and Katrina and Rita, it's looking like January" will be the earliest the Senate will consider comprehensive immigration bills, Cornyn said.

But in 2006 — an election year — many Republicans won't be eager to wade into a contentious fight over immigration while also confronting rising gas prices and growing concerns over the war in Iraq.

The administration's guest worker proposal is the latest item on Bush's second-term agenda to go on life-support, joining now-stalled plans to overhaul the tax code and the Social Security system...

I fully expect the Bush administration to push ahead with some form of "reform", whether via legislation or via just opening the borders even more than they already have.

Posted at 02:00 PM | Comments (0)

Tennessee Small Business Development Center working with Mexican consulate

Like me, there's a 99.9994% chance that you had never heard of the "Tennessee Small Business Development Center" before. However, it provides another small example of the degree to which the government of Mexico has been able to infiltrate their way into our country.

That Center is:

"partially funded by the U.S. Small Business Administration, Tennessee Board of Regents, and the State of Tennessee. SBA's funding is not an endorsement of any products, opinions or services. SBA funded programs are extended to the public on a non-discriminatory basis."

The article "State helps Hispanics start businesses" reports on a race-based outreach program they're conducting:

The mayors of Shelbyville and Wartrace met recently with local Hispanic business people and the state executive director of TSBDC, Gregory Sedrick. The focus of the meeting was to inform the Hispanic community about small business development and training that is available free of charge.

Two meetings will be held within the next few weeks: one for start up businesses on Tuesday, Nov. 8, and on Nov. 9 for existing businesses at noon until 2 p.m. on both days. The location for the meetings are to be announced and will be open to all, not just Hispanics wanting assistance...

It's good to know that people of all races will be invited; last time I was in Tennessee I read a report in a small-town paper about the KKK, and I'm sure they're trying to move away from anything even remotely like that.

Unfortunately, the article also contains the following:

The organization also has a partnership with the Mexican government offering classes in Spanish literacy, so that the same counselors can work with Hispanics with their small business needs.

I hear Berlitz has excellent foreign language classes. And, that wouldn't involve what is basically a public agency from getting involved with a mostly hostile foreign government.

For more information about the meetings and service available for those wanting to get into small business, contact [state executive director of TSBDC, Gregory Sedrick] at (615) 653-1293 or e-mail gsedrick *at* mail.tsbdc.org

I'll try to reach him and ask a few questions.

Posted at 08:24 AM | Comments (0)

TX Gov. Rick Perry unveils "blueprint for border security"

From this:

...Saying he is tired of waiting for the federal government to do its job, Texas Gov. Rick Perry unveiled what he called a comprehensive blueprint for border security, which includes the use of the Texas National Guard for training and for deployment in emergencies...

The governor said the National Guard troops would be used only for emergencies and not for routine patrolling of the 1,200-mile long Texas-Mexico border...

...Perry's plan calls for state money to hire additional police officers in border counties, and deployment of four 50-member teams of state troopers who can quickly move to an area where border violence or an upsurge in illegal immigration is reported.

He also called for the construction of "border jails," saying the U.S. Border Patrol apprehends tens of thousands of illegals and suspicious persons each year that it releases on their "promise to appear in court" simply because there is no place in the sparsely populated border region to hold them...

Posted at 05:58 PM | Comments (3)

Memo to Congress: Exercise Authority Over U.S. Citizenship

From this:

U.S. Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., presided at a House hearing last week entitled "Birthright Citizenship, Dual Citizenship and the Meaning of Sovereignty." It's unfortunate that this important subject received little media coverage.

The statistics are shocking. At least 383,000 babies are born in the United States every year to illegal immigrants; that's 10 percent of all U.S. births and about 40 percent of indigent births.

The cost to U.S. taxpayers is tremendous because all those babies, called anchor babies, claim birthright citizenship. Their mothers and other relatives then sign up for a vast stream of taxpayer benefits...

Posted at 10:51 AM | Comments (4)

Petition: build a fence along the Mexican border

The site WeNeedAFence.com has a petition urging the creation of a 2000 mile fence along the Mexican border. They envision more of a barrier zone, consisting of two chain link fences and an interior road for patrol vehicles. Cameras and similar devices would monitor intrusions. One or two hundred entry points would be provided along the length of the fence. The cost would be four to eight billion.

Alternatively:

Lee Plank, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Diamond Manufacturing Company in Wyoming, Pa., says his company has not been approached about border security fences, but, he said, they would be a good idea. "I think they'd have to be about 10 feet high," he told WND, and would cost "about $636,000 a mile" to build. That's about $1.27 billion for 2,000 miles of border fence, similar to the government's figures.

You need a buffer zone for patrols and also to provide a backup in case the first fence is breached, so they'd need to double those figures or construct a second fence out of wire.

Posted at 04:31 AM | Comments (4)

"Immigration Deja Voodoo"

Here's more on the 1986 amnesty scheme and how the current amnesty schemes will end up doing the same things. A snippet:

It is clear the 1986 immigration "reform" legislation was an abject failure. It did not stem the flow of illegal aliens, since we now have many more times the number of illegal aliens in the US than we did before 1986. The legalization process created a huge venue for fraud. Legalization included a Special Agricultural Worker (SAW) provision that allowed illegal aliens who could establish they worked in certain types of agriculture during certain time periods to gain legalized status. This opened the door to massive fraud.

And, as detailed in Chapter 3 of the 9/11 Commission Staff Report, "Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program".

The legalization adjudication system, counting on the "expert" numbers in the few hundred thousands, was soon completely overwhelmed. Temporary adjudicators were quickly hired on contract and given little training. Documentary evidence provided by the alien applicants was given little review and analysis and sometimes none. When aliens had no such supporting documentation, they were allowed to simply present a sworn affidavit attesting to their work background, along with an affidavit of another "witness" and these affidavits were accepted as the totality of their supporting evidence (what, an illegal alien lie to get an immigration benefit?). As noted, fraud was rampant and there were few investigative resources to pursue it.

Posted at 01:49 PM | Comments (1)

Montgomery County Maryland encounters resistance to day laborer center

From this:

Neighborhood opposition has derailed plans for a day-labor center in Gaithersburg that city and Montgomery County officials agreed this year to create...

Gaithersburg Mayor Sidney A. Katz said yesterday that the city will consider alternatives but declined to say that he remains committed to such a facility in the municipality of about 52,000 at the center of Montgomery County. He would say only that he remains "committed to solving the concerns" raised by a daily gathering of immigrant laborers on the grounds of a Gaithersburg church.

Until now, Montgomery officials have not encountered serious resistance to day-labor centers. The county has operated one such facility in Silver Spring for years and opened one in Wheaton last month...

Previously: .

Posted at 05:25 AM | Comments (2)

Is Mickey Kaus right about Davis-Bacon?

As previously discussed, president Bush lifted the Davis-Bacon Act early last month. This was done supposedly in order to speed Katrina rebuilding efforts.

Now, Glenn "Insty" Reynolds links to this Mickey Kaus post that has an email from "a seemingly well-informed source deep within the federal bureaucracy".

The source says Bush did this to make it as easy and quick as possible to get things done, and Kaus ends with this:

In sum: 1. Contra Reed, Bush had a perfectly good, non-political reason for suspending Davis-Bacon. 2. Contra Drum, Davis-Bacon doesn't just boost wages. It creates lots of "archaic red tape" and wastes much more money than just the increase in workers' pay...

This government source might be completely right, or he might be feeding Kaus a line, or he might just be looking at the elephant's tail.

Other parts of the elephant might include:

- Why didn't this need to be lifted for all those other hurricanes and natural disasters under both Bush and his predecessors? Surely, the argument that Katrina was just so big will not wash.

- Why was Davis-Bacon lifted for three south Florida counties (Broward, Miami-Dade, and Monroe) that, AFAIK, just suffered more or less minor damage? (Someone should find out how much in new contracts or old is being spent in those counties to deal with Katrina).

- Weren't the first contracts used for Katrina actually pre-existing contracts that had been negotiated well in advance? (Someone verify how much please).

Of course, while lifting Davis-Bacon could have been a noble gesture on Bush's part, I tend to doubt it.

Instead, I put this in the same corrupt category with Bush's continual support for cheap labor and illegal immigration.

I'm sure Glenn Reynolds will cover this disgusting, anti-American scandal any day now.

UPDATE: Poppy did the same thing during Hurricane Andrew. See "Repealing contract rules is repeat Bush blunder".

Posted at 12:26 AM | Comments (0)

Lou Dobbs on illegal aliens rebuilding New Orleans

From 10/10's transcript:

There is new evidence tonight that good-paying New Orleans construction jobs which should, of course, be going to out-of-work Gulf Coast residents are being filled by foreign workers. With most of New Orleans still abandoned, contractors are in a desperate need for workers, even if those workers are in the United States illegally, they say.

...LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): A steady flow of Hispanic workers is arriving in New Orleans to clean debris and repair houses and businesses. At least one job placement company has been actively importing foreign-born laborers. This flyer reads, "Add Mexican workers as part of your long-term workforce planning. Supply limited. Order now."

The ad directed at contractors is from Barton Rouge-based Accent Personnel Services, which is finding documented Mexicans for hire under the H2B visa program.

VIRGINIA PICKERING, THE ACCENT GROUP: The amount work that's necessary to be done is unprecedented. We're going to need more than we can have here. We have people coming from all over the United States to come down and help in this event, but even they are having trouble finding enough people to be here to work.

SYLVESTER: But critics are quick to slam the ad, saying it abuses the H2B visa program that is supposed to bring in foreign workers only if American workers are not available.

ROSEMARY JENKS, NUMBERS USA: It seems difficult to believe that in the wake of Katrina there are no American workers willing to do these jobs. And, of course, this is -- essentially, it sounds like a body shop that's renting out cheap workers.

SYLVESTER: The Davis-Bacon Act was waived, allowing companies to pay less than the prevailing or average wage in the rebuilding efforts. New Orleans is now a magnet for low-skill, low-wage employees.

Councilwoman Cynthia Willard-Lewis has two concerns, that some of the new workers may be illegal aliens and jobs are not being kept open for local residents.

CYNTHIA WILLARD-LEWIS, NEW ORLEANS COUNCIL MEMBER: It's critical that the people who live in this city, who give it its heart, its soul, its spirit come back. And so it is essential that the jobs be there for them to return.

SYLVESTER: And the Reverend Jesse Jackson shares that same view. He's leading a caravan of buses bringing 600 New Orleans residents back to the city. They're scheduled to arrive here tomorrow around noon -- Lou.

Posted at 10:46 PM | Comments (0)

I stumped Tamar Jacoby

Earlier tonight, I attended the appearance at the Los Angeles Public Library of immigration "reform" maven Tamar Jacoby. I managed to ask a stumper of a question; more on that after an overview of her remarks.

What she said was basically a live performance of one of her columns. My summary is very long, so feel free to skip ahead.

She started out discussing a focus group that she watched through two-way glass. It consisted of 12 women and 12 men from Dallas discussing immigration matters. She couldn't belive her ears and eyes! These yahoos wanted to send them all back, install machine gun nests on the border, etc. etc.

Then, she went into a standard bit about facing the reality that we have 11 million illegal aliens in the U.S. In fact, we wouldn't be rebuilding New Orleans if not for those "immigrants." Yes, that's right, she supports illegal aliens ("IAs") taking rebuilding jobs from U.S. citizens.

Then, she said that IAs don't get welfare. I'm sure that they do indeed get various forms of welfare in many states. And, of course, there's also all of the other spending that could be considered under the welfare banner: increased schooling and medical costs and on and on.

Then, she actually said it was a good thing that IAs have now displaced American workers in meatpacking plants. The IAs do the dirty jobs that keep the rest of us employed; she actually referred to "anglo teenage kids working in the summer" who are kept employed by the cheaper laborers below them.

Then, she urged the audience to face the "reality of existence" in our modern world. And, she accused Americans of "closing our eyes" to illegal immigration and "sticking our heads in the sand": enjoying the benefits while denying it exists.

Then, she said there was "no dent" in illegal immigration despite increased border enforcement.

Then, she discussed the building consensus in Washington in favor of immigration "reform". Politicians "from Bush to Kennedy" support it. (Are they really that far apart?)

Then, "most employers would rather use legal workers". She said that Tyson would rather use legal workers than face prosecution. (As if!)

Then, she discused how all these IAs live "in the shadows" and we don't know who they are.

Then, guess what: she described how the Dallas yahoos started to come around after discussing this matter amongst themselves.

Then, she claimed we're pretending all those illegal alien children aren't here. (The $11 billion school bond for California - which, even after that's spent won't have built enough seats - tends to contradict that).

Then, another call to face reality, and a statement that "enforcement only" systems don't work.

Then, finally, guess what again: after discussing this amongst themselves for almost an hour, the yahoos in Dallas came around! They realized that we can't deport them all. They realized that "making them miserable so they'll leave" wouldn't work. They realized how dependent they were on their smiling foreign workers. The yahoos came around!

After the speech, only a few people got to ask questions and I was not among those. While a couple people had OK questions, a couple were mostly coherent far-lefties.

I thought the session was going to be two hours, but it was only an hour and I thought I was out of luck. However, we all adjourned to a buffet outside and I was able to ask a couple questions before a much smaller audience.

So, here's the stumper: I stated that all those "guest" workers will have U.S. citizen children and because of the sympathetic (euphemistically speaking) media and Democratic politicians, we won't be able to force them to go home. I'll give her this: rather than trying to duck the question she flat out stated that she didn't know what to do about that. Then she, I and another attendee briefly discussed the 14th Amendment, but this is clear: this is one of those questions that you have to ask those who promote "guest" worker programs. If our "guests" end up staying, it's not a "guest worker" program at all. That, when asked enough and publicly enough, will tend to erode whatever credibility the promoters might have had to begin with.

I also asked if she knew of a guest worker program that had worked, and she said no. She says that whatever new program we'll come up with will be better than the Bracero program and those in France, Germany, Japan, Saudi Arabia, et al.

Then, I stated that Bush does almost no interior and workplace enforcement now, and we shouldn't trust him to do it in the future under a new program. Once again, she goes on faith and says that with the right program that won't be a problem. Ditto when I pointed out that the 1986 amnesty's enforcement provisions were gutted by the Dems.

Then, finally, I brought up the matter of Illinois state Senator Martin Sandoval. She believes that the "fifth column" effect (her words) is of no real consequence, and we don't need to worry about it.

Needless to say, the hundreds of entries here and all those on other sites pointing out Mexico's continual attempts - and successes - at interfering in our internal politics tends to cast a great deal of doubt on her rosy scenario.

So, let me suggest that every chance you get, you yourself go out to such events and start asking tough questions. And, make sure they're questions that can't be answered with just a "trust Bush", such as the stumper above.

Posted at 09:13 PM | Comments (2)

Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UT) to lose in 2006

I'm making a prediction that in 2006, Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UT) will lose - and lose big - if fellow Republican John D. Jacob runs against him.

As previously discussed, last year Cannon faced off against Matt Throckmorton. Cannon won in the primary 58 to 42. He also spent a great deal of money: $600,000. They're both millionaires and Jacob could spend up to a million of his own money on this. So, it will be a bit more of a fair fight, and, in that case I expect Cannon to lose.

Previously: "The David Safavian, Grover Norquist, Chris Cannon connection".

Posted at 05:39 PM | Comments (2)

Georgia murders prompt calls for reform

Remember Randall Robinson's wild allegation? Well, he's got competition from Tisha R. Tallman, the "southeast regional counsel with the Mexican American Legal Defense & Educational Fund".

She comments on the recent robbery-murders of illegal aliens in the guest editorial "Stop anti-immigrant violence". As I predicted, an "immigrants rights" group has stepped into the breach to call for reform:

Our current broken immigration system has fueled, among other things, violence against contributing members of our community.

I am referring to the recent murders, beatings and rape of Latino agricultural farm workers in South Georgia. Has our society gotten to the point that labels such as "illegal" connote "otherness" to such a degree that our immigrant brothers and sisters are beaten to death as a matter of course?

Considered in isolation, those allegations are bordering on the insane. The perps were apparently black, a fact that isn't mentioned in her screed. Were they motivated by racism or xenophobia or anti-immigrant sentiment, or were they motivated by money? Has beating to death illegal aliens been made a reduced charge, or is it just as illegal as legal residents and citizens?

But, wait, there's an even more inflammatory allegation to come:

Instead, we ignore the dysfunctional immigration system and go after the individual immigrants who are trying to provide for their families. We are quick to point out scarce resources, job loss and depressed wages, without digging deeper. Now, the blood is on all our hands.

Posted at 03:15 PM | Comments (4)

Huntington speech protested; "Mexican rights"; a different kind of assimilation

Harvard professor Samuel Huntington spoke at Texas A&M yesterday as part of their Distinguished Lecture Series. Two hundred or so protesters were outside telling him to go home.

...But the current wave of immigration, which has been going on since 1965 and has been dominated by Mexican immigrants, has been different, Huntington contended. Because there have been so many such immigrants - legal and illegal - and they are so near the country they were born in, they have been able to resist assimilation and instead create pockets of the country where their culture dominates, he argued.

"To the Mexicans, the Southwest is their turf, after all," he said, reminding the audience that at one point the land he was standing on Monday belonged to Mexico. "They feel they have a particular right to be there."

The splitting of America from one strong national identity into two already is starting to show the signs of a developing backlash, he said...

Outside, the protesters were working overtime to prove his points:

Nearby, professor Armando Alonzo, a founding member of the Mexican American Latino Faculty Association and a researcher of Southwest history, took a similar stance. His organization could not support such defamatory views, he said.

Hispanics have been coming to America since 1848 and have constantly assimilated, he explained. The current process might end up being slower than in the past, but it is occurring, he said.

"I think if he was to look at the newer research, it would show that Mexican immigrants are in the process of making those adjustments," he said. "These immigrants make valuable contributions in their own ways."

Obviously, there's a bit of a problem. For instance, from the picture above we see one of the signs saying, "You're standing on stolen land". That doesn't sound too much like assimilation to me. The other signs I can't make out, but one looks to be from LULAC, some of them are in Spanish. Yet more Alonzo-style assimilation for you. And, here's some more:

Outside the building in the minutes before the speech, Father Raymond Chavez of Santa Teresa Catholic Church in Bryan stood among dozens of members of his flock as he wore a T-shirt stating "Mexican!" underneath his black jacket...

The Mexico native said it wasn't difficult to rally his parishioners - many of whom are immigrants themselves - to attend the protest.

"We don't agree with him, of course," he said. "We have to defend our Mexican rights, our human rights."

Previously: "More lame attempts to diss Samuel P. Huntington".

Posted at 12:53 PM | Comments (1)

Jim Gilchrist: The Crushing Economic Burden of Illegal Immigration

There's a long speech with a lot of facts and figures here.

Posted at 02:11 AM | Comments (1)

Does the L.A. Times support displacing African-Americans from New Orleans?

I'm left with that distinct impression after reading the scandalous article "Immigrants Rush to New Orleans as Contractors Fight for Workers". Perhaps the black community should ask that paper to clarify its stance, especially after publishing an editorial from Gregory Rodriguez which supported illegal aliens taking rebuilding jobs from Americans.

From the latest LAT article:

...Word has gotten out and each morning day laborers - who come from Central America and Mexico by way of California, Texas and Arizona - gather on street corners in the Kenner and Metairie neighborhoods on the western edge of the city.

With 140,000 homes destroyed or damaged by Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans is undergoing the nation's largest reconstruction effort and its new workforce is largely Latino. No one knows how many immigrants have descended here since Katrina ravaged the city five weeks ago, but their presence is visible throughout the city.

[reports on a couple who wired "half of their paycheck to their family back home"; "If we can make enough money, we would like to buy a house and bring our children to New Orleans."]

So, illegal aliens are not just rebuilding an American city. Many of them are probably being indirectly paid out of federal or state money. And, they're then sending a large portion of that money out of the country. If you're an American, that's an outrage. If you're the Los Angeles Times, that's just a news story.

[...contractor Perry Custer is importing workers from Atlanta and Houston; a "temporary employment service of sorts for laborers" has been created...]

...Contractors say one advantage in using [the service] is that they don't have to deal with paperwork or check to see whether the workers are in the U.S. legally.

"There is a 'don't ask, don't tell,' mentality right now," Custer said. He added that there didn't seem to be any effort to crack down on illegal immigrants. "If they do who will rebuild New Orleans?"

How about we do what we have to to encourage and enable New Orleans residents to rebuild their own city? Or, at the least, other Americans rather than illegal aliens? What's the American way?

Only in the twenty-fourth paragraph do we get some hint that this might not be such a good thing after all:

The influx of Latino workers is raising concern among city officials. Last week, Associated Press reported, New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin asked local businesspeople, "How do I ensure that New Orleans is not overrun by Mexican workers?"

Believe it or don't: out of 34 paragraphs, that is the only contrary information in the whole article.

"They may be the new service class in New Orleans," said Lawrence Powell, a historian at Tulane University. "It only takes a few people to put down roots and begin the chain of migration. I'm wondering if we're seeing the first signs of a population swap."

Yes, indeed. And, un-American sources will be there, cheering it on. If you still subscribe to the Los Angeles Times, just stop.

Posted at 02:02 PM | Comments (5)

Janitors' lawsuit against WalMart still on

NEWARK, N.J. -- A federal judge has allowed a group of illegal immigrant janitors to proceed with a lawsuit seeking overtime pay from discount retailer Wal-Mart.

U.S. District Judge Joseph Greenaway on Friday threw out a motion from Wal-Mart lawyers to dismiss the collective action suit filed by the janitors, who were among those rounded up in immigration raids at Wal-Mart stores two years ago.

While allowing claims on overtime pay and paying below the minimum wage to stand, Greenaway did dismiss three other claims against Wal-Mart, including one that alleged workers were subject to involuntary servitude.

The judge also tossed out a charge that the company violated federal racketeering laws but gave the plaintiffs 45 days to submit more evidence to support their claim...

Previous coverage of this suit here, and see this similar case.

Suits like this are a good thing, as they tend to drive up the cost of illegal labor and disincentivize it. If the government won't do their job, let greedy lawyers effectively do it.

Posted at 07:00 AM | Comments (1)

Bush immigration "reform" to be unveiled Tuesday October 18, 2005?

According to this, Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff will appear on that date at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on immigration, and they might unveil president Bush's plan to drive his popularity under 30%, otherwise known as his immigration "reform" plan.

Posted at 02:18 AM | Comments (1)

More Morton Kondracke immigration idiocy

Like a minor league member of the Open Borders lobby, Morton Kondracke of Roll Call magazine continues to discuss immigration "reform", the latest in "Will Bush Step Up - Or Let Immigration Issue Fester Further?". Just like another minor leaguer, he references Tamar Jacoby in the piece. Not only that, he even briefly mentions "Frank Sharry, executive director of the pro-reform National Immigration Forum". And, he ends with this:

It's up to Bush to step into this morass and lead. He claimed in his Tuesday press conference to still have "plenty" of political capital left to achieve his goals. Keeping immigration out of the hands of demagogues is worth his expending some.

Like David Brooks, TJ, and others of that ilk, he's just on the other side.

Previously: "FAIR Responds to Sham Immigration Poll" and "Mor-TON! Didn't you get the memo?"

Posted at 09:05 PM | Comments (2)

Tifton Georgia flies Mexican flag; illegal aliens do "very important work"

The mayor of Tifton, GA is flying the Mexican flag over his (American) city to honor the six illegal aliens who were killed in robberies recently.

Seven people called WTIF radio station Thursday, saying the gesture was inappropriate and that the Mexican and U.S. flags should not fly together.

"I did that as an expression of sorrow to the Hispanic community," Mayor Paul Johnson said. "For those who we offended, I apologize, but I think it was the right thing to do."

...Johnson said he considers immigrants to be a part of the community, who do very important work. "They're here to find the hope of America," the mayor said.

I'm sure he could have found another way to do this that didn't involve flying the flag of a country that continually seeks to violate our laws. And, that last paragraph sets off warning bells. I have no knowledge of this particular mayor, but if someone says something like that I wonder if they or their associates are profiting off illegal immigration in some way.

Tifton claims to be the reading capital of the world. You can read all the books in the world and still learn nothing.

(And, regarding the original crime, you'll note how it seems to have disappeared off the MSM's radar. To see why, look up pictures of the perps, if you can find them.)

Posted at 02:50 PM | Comments (3)

Linda Chavez' "ethno-centric rant"

Remember the Linda Chavez column where she supported illegal aliens taking Katrina rebuilding jobs?

A letter to the editor of the Daily Republic in Northern California responds to her article:

[Chavez] speculated that the reason we don't see sob stories about the 200,000 Hispanics from New Orleans is that they had their act together so much better than other minorities. The real reason is that they didn't really exist.

New Orleans had a population of about 500,000. By the government's best estimate, including likely illegal aliens, there were just fewer than 15,000 Hispanic people in Orleans Parish in 2000. Even if that population doubled over five years, Ms. Chavez's 200,000 is off by a factor of six or more. Maybe Linda misplaced a decimal point, or maybe she didn't bother checking her facts before launching into an ethno-centric rant...

Posted at 08:29 AM | Comments (3)

Julie Myers clears Senate committee

From GovExec:

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee today approved, on a 7-2 vote, President Bush's nomination of Julie Myers to lead the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau.

The Senate Judiciary Committee now has 30 days to vote on the nominee...

As Reuters' report says here:

Her uncle is Air Force Gen. Richard Myers, the just retired chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. She worked for Chertoff when he was at the Justice Department, and she is married to Chertoff's current chief of staff.

Please contact the Judiciary Committee members and urge them to oppose Myers. Previous coverage of this latest instance of Bush not doing his job starts here.

Posted at 09:48 PM | Comments (0)

Crime, illegal immigration, and media bias

There's a transcript of a discussing by Heather MacDonald and others here. From her talk:

[... discussing the Washington Post editorial from August 10th "The Reality of Gangs"...]

Even as the Post called for more social spending, it completely ignored the most salient feature of Mara Salvatrucha, which is the astoundingly high number of illegals within its ranks. The Justice Department estimates that more than 50 percent of all members of Mara Salvatrucha are illegal. I talked to an LAPD Officer who deals with this gang daily, and he puts the figures much higher. I've heard cops tell me they think it's almost 100 percent. I think that's too high, but it's somewhere between there.

Now, there seems to be a taboo on talking about the contribution that illegal aliens make to criminal activity in this country. When I first started writing about this I would ask people in the LAPD, and I felt like I was violating some nicety of social convention. It was something that polite company is not supposed to address...

...In all of the stories that the [L.A.] Times has been running about [the Jose Raul Pena case], they've mentioned only once the fact that Pena was here illegally. The New York Times has written about…the evil LAPD. They haven't deigned to mention Pena's status a single time...

[The Los Angeles Times digs into the events preceding the Temecula town hall meeting and] the L.A. Times concluded, and I quote, "The agents may have scoped out the areas on their own, finding areas where large numbers of undocumented immigrants gather." Now, this to the Times was a scandal. This is the sort of investigative reporting that the Times prides itself on: the fact that immigration agents actually took some initiative to make arrests on their own...

Posted at 02:34 PM | Comments (5)

New Haven CT to issue IDs for illegals

Mayor John DeStefano of New Haven CT wants to give the illegal immigrants living in his city an ID card of the city's own design:

"Let's be real about why this is happening first of all," said the mayor, who is also a gubernatorial candidate, during a bilingual press conference in City Hall. "The failure of the federal government to recognize and embrace thousands and thousands of hard-working residents, is subjecting those people and their families to abuse and exploitation," he said.

Obviously, we shouldn't "embrace" the 10 million or more people who are here illegally. We should encourage them to go home. Moves like this will just encourage more to come here. And, unfortunately, not all of them will go to New Haven.

The Mayor should be recalled. If he pushes forward with his plan, the state or the federal government should step in and do what's necessary to make sure he doesn't get what he wants.

Unfortunately, it appears that the powers that be, including the local rag are on the wrong side. While their article "City to offer ID for illegal aliens" does have a correct title, they twice refer to an "anti-immigrant group":

"Does anybody in New Haven understand that they are breaking the immigration law?" said Elise Marciano, Danbury chapter president of the Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control.

"You are not supposed to aid and abet illegal aliens," Marciano added. "They have no documents. They could give you any name. They could go and get 15 different ID cards with different names. How would you know?"

..."That was a concern, so we consulted the Yale Law School on the legality of doing this," said Kica Matos, executive director of JUNTA for Progressive Action, which hatched the program...

The new program, dubbed Hablamos Espanol, literally, We Speak Spanish, is a four-pronged approach aimed at making City Hall more user-friendly to Spanish speakers.

The ID cards is one aspect, and another is urging local banks to allow immigrants to open accounts without required Social Security numbers.

[...Police Chief Francisco Ortiz Jr. plays the "they need IDs to avoid carrying cash" card...]

...DeStefano has dismissed calls by anti-immigrant groups to crack down on illegals living in New Haven, and on Monday, Ortiz reiterated the administration’s position.

"We are going to lead the discussion and policy-making on how police will enforce immigration, I promise you that," Ortiz said.

...Latino politicians reached later Monday applauded the new bilingual forms, but said far more needs to be done, including hiring more bilingual city workers...

Let's contact CT reps and encourage them to take action. Also, please contact this paper and suggest they stop using "undocumented" and "anti-immigrant": abromage@nhregister.com and jkram@nhregister.com

Posted at 11:57 AM | Comments (12)

OTMs dropped off in San Angelo; Kay Bailey Hutchison responds

"Dumping Ground" is a long article on "Other Than Mexicans", aka OTMs. Since there are no detention spaces to hold them, they're given a notice to appear and dropped off at the bus station. And, needless to say, they're never heard from again. It contains this:

Such a situation has caused grumbling in Washington, particularly among Texas' delegation to the House of Representatives, where 24 of the 32 members - including Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Midland, who also represents San Angelo - signed a letter to President Bush urging action along the Texas-Mexico border.

''The influx of OTMs into our Texas communities is an immediate threat and an embarrassment,'' the letter states.

The growing problem along the border is a top priority among the House's leadership, Conaway said, adding that representatives from across the country are eager to pass legislation before Congress recesses in November.

Likewise, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison's office said she supports allowing local police to have the authority to arrest and detain illegal immigrants, rather than keeping that solely in the hands of the federal government.

Hutchison will use San Angelo as a ''glaring example of when government fails its people'' in a meeting next week with Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, said Chris Paulitz, a spokesman for the senator.

Such a porous immigration system is dangerous, he said.

''Any of these (disaster) scenarios you can imagine, a terrorist has thought the same thing,'' Paulitz said. ''This is a real threat to our national security.''

Posted at 08:26 PM | Comments (1)

ICE employees: Julie Myers is "unqualified"

From this:

President Bush's nominee to head U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has drawn the ire of several ICE supervisors and agents who say she is "unqualified" because she has never held a law-enforcement management position.

The nomination of Julie L. Myers "just doesn't pass the smell test and is another indication that this administration created the Department of Homeland Security as window dressing and does not care whether ICE is successful," said Matthew Issman, national legislative vice president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA).

"What we need is a strong, law-enforcement leader, not another inexperienced, well-connected lawyer with friends in the White House."

...[Sen. George V. Voinovich (R-OH] later met with Mrs. Myers and is expected to support the nomination.

But several ICE supervisors and agents complained last week that the agency has struggled in its attempt to establish a specific mission strategy, despite the expenditure of billions of dollars in tax money and said a strong leader is vital for improvement.

They also criticized what they called poor administrative systems, ongoing budgetary concerns, a hiring freeze, morale problems and a lack of cohesion and identity.

Mr. Issman has been at the forefront of a movement within ICE to point out to members of Congress what supervisors and field agents say are major "systemic issues and concerns."

"With a lightweight like Myers, we will just continue to lose more ground and will be relegated to becoming an also-ran," Mr. Issman said...

Her nomination is still pending.

Posted at 01:30 PM | Comments (0)

Cynthia Tucker's illegal immigration strawman; a challenge

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist offers "Don't blame illegals; blast their bosses", which shall be mini-fisked as follows:

In every time, and in every place, there are demagogues who ride to power by whipping up the fears and resentments of an anxious populace.

Believe or don't, she's referring to Tom Tancredo. She is not referring to people like Gil Cedillo (see, for instance, "Gil Cedillo: using a horrible crime for political purposes" or "Pro-illegal immigration advocates seemingly have no shame"). Does she even know that name? Is she even aware of the constant demagoguery of those who support illegal immigration, even in her own state? And, if she is aware or were made aware, would she have the guts to call them on it? I highly doubt it.

Our current Joseph McCarthys are the contentious cranks and nativists who want to drive every illegal immigrant - especially Mexicans, Hondurans and Guatemalans - out of the country.

If it sounds like she's playing the race card, that's because she is. Just one small problem: the vast majority of illegal immigrants are from Mexico and Central America. And, her "argument" is a variation on the standard "you can't deport all illegals so why bother" false choice. And, of course, there's that little matter of referring to those who want to enforce our laws as "cranks and nativists".

...But the demagogues who whip up the anti-immigrant frenzy rarely say a word about companies that hire illegally.

That's absolute BS. The problem, as Tucker points out, is that those companies have money and a corrupting influence. They are able to buy what they want, and what they want is opposed by the great majority of Americans who rightly perceive it as against America's best interests.

So, why is Cynthia Tucker effectively on their side by writing smear articles like this?

Perhaps instead of constructing the nativist strawman, she might consider doing something good and fighting against those corrupt businesses, corrupt politicians, and racial demagogues. After all, she seems to be somewhat against illegal immigration, right?

I look forward to her having the guts to take on the real enemies rather than strawmen. Let's keep a close eye on the AJC and eagerly await their exposes on the Open Borders Lobby. I'm sure such articles will be forthcoming any day now.

Posted at 12:57 PM | Comments (3)

Reuters on Gilchrist; Campbell is actually pro-illegal immigration; Hoffenblum changes tone

The Reuters article "Border activist a wild card in Calif. election" discusses the race in California's 48th District. Said "wild card" is Minuteman Project co-founder Jim Gilchrist, who's facing off against "moderate Republican" and state Assemblywoman Marilyn Brewer and the front-runner, former Republican state Sen. John Campbell. The dynamics of this race were previously discussed here.

As for the article itself, it says:

Campbell won the endorsement of California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and has also taken a strong stance against illegal immigration -- coming out against Bush's controversial "guest worker" program.

Unfortunately, Reuters needs to use Lexis-Nexis a bit more strenuously. Two older OC Register article excerpted here have Campbell coming out in favor of illegal immigration, including this from 2000:

Campbell favors school vouchers, but only in poor areas. He opposes abortion rights, but is not willing to create a law to ban them. And he says illegal immigrants should be given the same benefits as everyone else, since the federal government has not controlled the border to prevent the immigrants from coming in.

I note also that Republican political strategist Allan Hoffenblum seems to have moderated his Bushian tone. Back in November, speaking of Political Human Sacrifice, he said this:

"Immigration is a very emotional issue, and there is a group of voters who have an intense, intense dislike for illegal immigrants".

However, the current article has him changing that slightly:

"Gilchrist has the most emotional issue. A lot of people hate illegal immigration."

I never said he was dumb, just very wrong.

Note also that the Reuters article linked above is the corrected version, the change was minor and is explained here.

Posted at 07:41 AM | Comments (1)

Elliot Spagat of AP offers biased article on border watchers

Here's the second paragraph of the AP article "Civilian patrols branch out, though poll finds opposition" from Elliot Spagat:

Many of the hundreds who make up the self-appointed civilian patrols monitoring the border to deter smuggling of people and drugs are unemployed or underemployed ex-military men who have long resented Mexicans who come to the United States illegally and, in their view, compete for jobs, crowd hospitals and schools and threaten English as the nation's dominant language.

Let's analyze that to the extent that our patience will allow. "Hundreds" implies at least two hundred, right? What subset of two hundred people would you consider "many"? Ten? No, that won't do. "Many" would have to be at the very least thirty or fourty. Did Spagat interview that many people and can he say they all share that profile?

And, is Spagat sure that the "resentment" is directed at the illegal aliens themselves? Even if some is directed at them, isn't most of it directed at those leaders who enable massive illegal immigration?

And, is it only "in their view" that those illegal aliens do the things specified, or aren't those facts?

The AP does mention some of the harrasment those on the other side inflicted on the border watchers, but I'm still waiting for anyone in the MSM to do a similar piece on the pro-Mexico, open borders types. It doesn't have to be a hit piece at all. Just something telling the truth would be very damaging to those who oppose the MMP and similar groups.

If the AP doesn't do that, shouldn't we just assume that they're completely biased? Let's send an email to feedback *at* ap.org and encourage them to provide their readers with the whole truth.

Posted at 12:39 AM | Comments (0)

Killers target "immigrants", guess what happens next

Illegal aliens in Georgia were the targets of a burglary spree, including five murders: "Police: Killers target immigrants". The killers reportedly spoke English, although if there is any clue to their race that hasn't been provided.

Let's examine this paragraph and use that as a clue to what might happen next:

Colquitt County Sheriff Al Whittington stressed that the attacks didn't appear to be hate crimes. Many immigrants are undocumented and therefore can't open bank accounts, which means they tend to carry a lot of cash or keep it in their homes.

We do need to ask whether this was a "hate crime" but, since there appears to be money involved and since it was presumably taken that would tend to cast a great deal of doubt on that. Note also on the right side of the page that CNN has helpfully provided a list of email alerts, including one for "Hate Crimes".

Despite the obvious motives, no doubt rumors will spread, perhaps with the assistance of "human rights" and "immigrant rights" groups in the area.

And, no doubt someone will step up with a "solution" to this "problem": allow those illegal aliens to open bank accounts. In fact, Wells Fargo says it started accepted Mexico's Cracker Jack ID card because they were asked to do so after similar crimes in Texas; see "New ID Cards Help Immigrants Keep Their Money Safe" for a similar example.

See also "Gil Cedillo: using a horrible crime for political purposes".

Posted at 04:42 PM | Comments (1)

"1965 Immigration Reform Cost Blacks Minority Primacy"

This long article discusses the declining status of blacks as America's chief minority, focusing on Katrina and mentioning 'La Nueva Orleans' from Gregory Rodriguez of the Los Angeles Times.

Note that Teddy Kennedy was responsible for that 1965 legislation.

Posted at 08:42 PM | Comments (0)

Is the New York Times a Mexican newspaper?

I'm left with the distinct impression that the New York Times is a Mexican newspaper after reading "Way North of the Border" by Eduardo Porter and Elisabeth Malkin.

Here's the paragraph on which they construct the rest of their story:

The location of Mexico's latest American consulate [in St. Paul] provides a stark illustration of how economically improving groups of Mexican immigrants are establishing themselves across the country, in ways that experts say point to the futility of current attempts to plug the border and stem the flow of illegal migrants in search of a better life.

Rather than respond directly to the NYT's propaganda, let's think up some questions they could have asked but did not:

1. Aren't they misleading their readers into thinking that the only way to "stem the flow of illegal aliens" is by "plugging the border"? There's nothing in the article about cracking down on employers or reducing public benefits. Wouldn't those stem the flow? Why didn't the NYT discuss those?

2. Could the NYT tell us more about those "hometown associations" they mention? Don't they result in "Americans" who also represent Mexicans? Don't they result in people with divided loyalties? Why didn't the NYT discuss that issue? (To see the Las Vegas Sun ignoring this issue, read up on Alan Torrez).

3. What exactly do those hometown associations have to do with the emergency declarations of Napolitano and Richardson?

4. The NYT seems to be implying that it's good that those declarations didn't stop Mexico. Why is that? Are they confused about something or other?

5. When "J. Edward Taylor, a professor at the University of California, Davis" refers to "too big to be counteracted by enforcement", isn't he only referring to "border enforcement"? Why didn't the NYT point that out in order to avoid misleading their readers?

And, that's just from the first screen! Here's two final questions:

6. Even if the NYT doesn't think massive illegal immigration is bad public policy, shouldn't it give at least a paragraph near the end of the article to those who don't share its views?

7. Is the New York Times in effect supporting the Mexican government rather than the wishes of the vast majority of Americans and what's best for this country? Is the NYT confused about something or other?

Please send an email to public *at* nytimes.com and suggest that, at the very least, they reconsider assigning these two reporters to the immigration beat.

Posted at 08:31 PM | Comments (0)

Do Connecticut McDonald's discriminate in favor of Hispanics?

The Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control did a bit of a study and determined that most employees of McDonalds in America's drive-throughest state are Hispanic. The study is available at their website in a PDF file, and it's not exactly an academic study, although it appears they visited all or almost all the Mickey D's in the state, many in one long day. (Here's a similar feat involving CT's county highpoints). They counted the people working there, and they wonder whether some of them are illegal aliens. In New Haven and Fairfield counties, almost all the employees are Hispanic.

A news report is here:

But activists say his research methods were unsound and motivated by racism. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal has rejected Streitz's call for an investigation, saying the study is not reliable or relevant.

Obviously, the race baiting can and should be ignored. As for whether the study is unsound, I personally don't consider it an academic-level study. Also, there's the question of whether all the workers are Hispanic because managers want that, or because they are the only applicants.

That would need to be determined through other means, and I get the impression that Blumenthal is too PC to conduct such an investigation.

For that, I'd suggest contacting that state's Senators or Reps and encourage them to look into this.

Posted at 09:43 PM | Comments (3)

Pew: more illegal aliens than legal immigrants during 2000-2004

From this:

More immigrants came to the United States illegally from 2000 through 2004 than the number who were granted legal status in those years, according to a study released yesterday that attributed much of the historic shift to visa slowdowns since 2001 and to the nation's strong job market before that.

The study by the Pew Hispanic Center said that immigration to the United States -- legal and illegal, from all regions of the world -- totaled about 1.1 million each year during the 1990s, peaked in 2000 at 1.5 million and declined substantially since 2001 to earlier levels. The number of new arrivals increased in 2004, the study said, though it is too early to say that the rise will last.

Now, let's get even scarier:

A spokesman for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the government agency that oversees the granting of green cards, said he could not comment on the study in detail because officials had not examined it closely. But Bill Strassberger questioned its conclusion that new illegal immigrants outnumber legal ones.

"I don't know that there are any indications that the undocumented population is growing faster than the legal population," the spokesman said.

"Undocumented"? The correct legal term is "illegal alien". One would hope that someone from the federal government wouldn't speak newspeak.

Posted at 08:59 AM | Comments (1)

Anti-American, violent, racist report from the Pacific News Service

For future reference: Pacific News Service.

Posted at 04:20 AM | Comments (0)

Steve Cooley has unkind words for David Dreier

Rep. David Dreier (R-CA), along with Adam Schiff (D-CA), is the author of the "Justice for Peace Officers Act" that seeks to do something about cop killers who've fled to Mexico.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley says that newly-modified bill ends up helping those suspects:

...On Tuesday, Cooley and [Los Angeles Police Protective League President Bob Baker] both said they still weren't satisfied with the changes and that Congress needs to force the administration to impose sanctions against Mexico until the country changes its policy of refusing to extradite criminal suspects who could face the death penalty or life in prison without parole...

Speaking on KFI, Cooley says the bill "does nothing except cause problems, inject the federal authorities into an area they aren't familiar with, and just provides political cover for Dreier... the law's not protecting us..."

Cooley accuses Dreier of advocating for either Mexico or for those who want to appease that country, and in the linked article talks about capitulating to them.

For more on temporary House Majority leader, start here. More posts on him will be coming later.

Posted at 05:17 PM | Comments (0)

Martin Sandoval, Illinois senator, wants to represent Mexicans too

Martin Sandoval is a state Senator from Illinois. He's also running for a seat on Mexico's "Institute for Mexicans Abroad" advisory council:

Sandoval would be the first elected official in the U.S. to serve on the advisory council. That raises the peculiar prospect of the Cicero Democrat offering policy advice in an official capacity to Mexican Cabinet members while creating laws in Illinois...

As it turns out, no law or rule prohibits it, in Mexico or in Illinois. Mexican officials call it an honorary position...

... "I see no conflict at any point. There are always people who will have questions," [Sandoval] said. "I have looked at the four corners of this. I see upside all over the place."

Sandoval said his participation is especially logical because a large share of his constituents were born in Mexico. More than 42 percent of Sandoval's Senate district is foreign-born, the second-highest rate in the state...

Apologists continually claim that all those millions of illegal aliens are "just here to work." [1] While that might be true for individuals, when you have millions of them it forms a political base that the Mexican government - as well as people like Sandoval - are trying to take advantage of.

If those apologists are allowing Mexico to establish a political beachhead in the U.S. - and possibly influence our laws - shouldn't we question whether they have the U.S.'s best interests at heart?

And, just because no current laws prevent him from serving two countries at the same time doesn't mean that legislation can't be introduced to either prevent that or to strip him of his office. Please contact (non-conflicted) representatives in Illinois and urge them to introduce such legislation.

[1] From president Bush's O'Reilly interview:

"Now look. People are comin' 'cause they wanna work ya' know. Family values don't stop at the border... If you can make fifty cents in the interior of Mexico and five dollars in the interior of the United States, you're comin' for the five bucks and, therefore ... and so long as moms and dads feel the necessity to feed their children, they're gonna come and try to make a livin'."

5/14/07 UPDATE: Martin Sandoval won his election some time after this was posted, and, among other things, he's now pushing for discounted college educations for illegal aliens (see the link). You can see his name on the Mexican government's list of CCIME advisors here: www.ime.gob.mx/ccime/directorios/dir_ccime_06_09.htm

Posted at 10:40 AM | Comments (3)

Los Angeles Times on Matricula Consular cards

Jennifer Delson and Anna Gorman of the Los Angeles Times cover the latest on Mexico's Matricula Consular cards (aka "IDs for illegals") in "Mexico's ID Makes Major Gains in U.S.".

They report that other countries are getting into the act, including Colombia, Argentina, El Salvador and Honduras. They don't offer word on whether, for instance, Yemen has similar plans.

It features quotes from James Ballentine, outreach director for the American Bankers Association and a Blue Cross spokeshole ("They were wage earners who had money... a great source of potential customers").

And, College of William & Mary professor George Grayson says that Bush refuses to do anything because he doesn't want to alienate Latino voters. Of course, there's also the fact that he's corrupt, but I guess the LAT ran out of space.

Now, let's deal with the LAT's biases:

The matricula's growing acceptance... also highlights the contradiction between immigration laws, which forbid the presence of undocumented workers, and immigration reality, which encourages them to spend their paychecks here...

Well, actually, that's wrong. The conflict is between what the U.S. citizens and many legislators want, and what corrupt politicians are able to do. In Bush's case, he simply refuses to enforce the immigration laws. In the case of other corrupt legislators, they push through laws giving rights to people who shouldn't be here in the first place. There's no "contradiction"; there's a conflict between Americans and those with "conflicted views."

They also provide this quote:

It "is a de facto amnesty," said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington think tank that favors tighter immigration controls. "It's a way of incorporating illegals into our society. It allows [the immigrant] to embed himself in our institutions."

I believe that the LAT takes that as the basis for their inaccurate subtitle:

Use of the matricula consular is helping many to assimilate, which is one reason those against illegal immigration oppose the card's use.

Somehow I don't think Krikorian was refering to the same kind of "assimilation" that the LAT headline writer is; perhaps they should consider whether they're lying to their readers for future articles.

They also report on corrupt local officials:

Several local governments across the state — including Los Angeles, Santa Cruz, Santa Clara and Ventura counties — accept the identification cards as valid identification for county services and programs. The cards can be used for admittance to a hospital, to obtain a federal tax identification number and to borrow books from libraries.

Now, if the LAT wanted to do some real reporting, they'd look into that in a bit more depth. Why would those localities do that? Is it because the local Boss Hoggs profit off that illegal labor, and the local officials do what they want? Is it because those local officials stand in solidarity with people of their same race, putting their race above their country? The LAT also doesn't mention that Mexican consults attend local council meetings pitching such laws.

I look forward to reading some real reporting from the Los Angeles Times in the near future.

Posted at 01:59 PM | Comments (1)

Why does the Burlington Free Press hate the Minuteman Project?

Vermont's Burlington Free Press discusses the plans of the Minuteman Project to patrol that state's border with Canada in "Just a minute, Minutemen; Vermont says 'No thanks'".

It's a downright nasty editorial, ayup. Nasty like sour maple syrup, Cyris. In fact, it reads more like something one of those people from New Hampshire might write, ayup.

A preliminary search only showed two articles from that paper discussing either "illegal aliens" or "undocumented", and Vermont isn't a big illegal immigration state. Now, VT is certainly a "liberal" state, in fact they're the ones who inflicted Howard Dean on America. Is this lack of neighborliness due to "liberalism" or something else?

The virtually unanimous message from Vermont residents and leaders alike is, "Stay home." ...If common sense won't deter these silly plans, let's hope Vermont's winter will do the trick. After all, the temperature drops well below zero along our border on a winter night, a shock to anyone used to the Southern desert... The Minutemen shouldn't come where they aren't wanted. But if they do, let's hope that along with those lawn chairs and binoculars they bring their long johns.

What xenophobia! Could someone who's familiar with the Burlington Free Press provide a clue why they might say things like this?

Posted at 06:07 AM | Comments (5)

Mexicans demand citizenship rights... in Aurora, Illinois

"Nearly" one thousand people - many or most of them illegal aliens from Mexico and other countries - marched through Aurora IL demanding that House Speaker Dennis Hastert support the Kennedy-McCain massive amnesty scheme. The march was organized by the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. See the link for more information on that organization. They're also supporters of the AgJobs amnesty.

Maybe we should give them what they want. And, let's bring in several million more illegal aliens and give them citizenship too.

Of course, all those new voters might have... different ideas about things. In fact, they might end up supporting politicians who are even further left than people like Gil Cedillo or Fabian Nunez. And, those far-left politicians might pass even more restrictions on businesses, like banks. In fact, maybe someone close to Venezuela's Hugo Chavez might be elected and start on some kind of "land reform", American style...

Gosh, do you think those business leaders and the "conservative" politicians that they pay off would find those events a little discomforting?

Along the same lines, see "Will illegal aliens get voting rights because of corrupt Republicans?"

Posted at 11:06 PM | Comments (8)

Gregory Rodriguez supports illegal aliens taking rebuilding jobs from Americans

Los Angeles Times contributing editor Gregory Rodriguez offers "La Nueva Orleans". That discusses how illegal aliens from Mexico and other countries will help rebuild New Orleans. He says that they will then settle there, displacing the original population of blacks and whites.

Of course, if we were talking about whites displacing blacks and Hispanics that would be considered racist, but - of course! - "liberals" will be quick to explain that encouraging Hispanics to displace black and white Americans is not racist.

Rodriguez covers the points previously discussed here in Will Bush give Katrina rebuilding jobs... to illegal aliens?, Illegal aliens doing rebuilding jobs in Biloxi, and they want visas, Vicente Fox's offer to make money off Katrina spurned, this post about Senator Harry Reid, and others.

If you've been following along, the only new thing is this:

Former President Clinton recently hinted as much on NBC's "Meet the Press" when he said New Orleans will be resettled with a different population.

This scheme that our leaders have is obviously un-American; it's not good public policy and it's not the direction that we as a country should be heading in. Consider this little history lesson:

Charles Crocker, head of construction for Central Pacific railroad, recognized that the Civil War was creating a labor shortage. So he turned to Chinese immigrants to do the job.

It's so rare nowadays to find a defender of the Coolie system, but the Los Angeles Times is just lucky I guess.

Just so you know where he's coming from, here's the last paragraph:

Last week, the White House said it will push its plan to allow illegal immigrants already in the U.S. to become legal guest workers. Good. Hurricane Katrina exposed the nation's black-white divide. Post-Katrina reconstruction will soon spotlight the hypocrisy of refusing to grant legal status to those who will rebuild the Gulf Coast and New Orleans.

If we don't allow illegal aliens there, we won't have such a problem. But, if our leaders succeed with their anti-American goals, we will have problem after problem. First it will be driver's licenses, followed by local voting, followed by demands for citizenship, followed by dual citizens representing both Americans and illegal aliens, followed by Mexico suddenly discovering that New Orleans was once their territory, and on and on. It's much better for all concerned not to have to deal with more of this same junk.

He even says that New Orleans will end up like Los Angeles, and I'm absolutely positive that the people there would not want that.

Please take a few moments now to contact your representatives and urge them to make sure that rebuilding jobs go to Americans. And, if there's anyone out there who still subscribes to the LAT, please just stop.

Posted at 05:55 AM | Comments (3)

Main reason for poverty: massive illegal immigration

Robert J. Samuelson offers "Discovering Poverty (Again)":

...Given these trends, the overall poverty rate should be drifting down. It isn't. The main reason, as I've written before, is immigration. We have uncontrolled entry of poor, unskilled workers across our southern border. Although many succeed, many don't, and many poor Latino immigrants have children, who are also poor. In 2004, 25 percent of the poverty population was Hispanic, up from 12 percent in 1980. Over this period, Hispanics represented almost three-quarters of the increase in the poverty population...

Posted at 12:40 AM | Comments (2)

"American Legion Makes Illegal Immigration Major Priority"

Details here:

Pointing to the current huge resident population of illegal aliens and the estimated 500,000 new illegal aliens that enter the country each year, the Legion finds a clear threat to the fabric of American society. The resolution also recognizes the increasing public frustration with the "federal government’s failure to stop the invasion and the actions by some states to provide taxpayer funded services and other benefits to illegal aliens..."

I wonder if Poppy is a member?

Posted at 08:37 PM | Comments (0)

Loony Texans oppose Minutemen; Perry offers lukewarm support

"Minuteman border patrol raises opposition in Texas" has a roundup of the open borders types that oppose the Minuteman Project.

Those include Sen. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa, D-McAllen and 10 other state senators as well as U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, Texas Democrat. Plus:

In Brownsville, the Cameron County Commissioners Court unanimously passed a resolution opposing civilian border patrols, citing respect for immigrants, confidence in federal law enforcement and a shared history with Mexico.

"The safe and legal passage of immigrants and foreign visitors to Cameron County is important to the civic life of our county," the resolution said. "The future growth of Cameron County depends on the continued good will of our brothers in Mexico."

Officials in Laredo also voted unanimously to oppose the Minuteman project, saying they were "not welcome here." The Laredo City Council called on citizens and property owners along the border to refuse to cooperate with the Minutemen, referring to them as "spies" on suspected illegal aliens.

For more on Brownsville, see "Howard Dean to embarass self August 5 2005". Now, if Karl Rove went to visit party reps who just a few days before had welcomed a paramilitary, racist group to speak at a Republican Party headquarters, I'm sure we would never hear the end of it. But, when Howie goes to a similar situation, we never heard a peep about it except from me.

As for Texas Gov. Rick Perry, here's what he says:

"I fully understand and can appreciate the frustration that many Texans and others across the nation have with illegal immigration... The federal government can and must do more to close the border to illegal immigration... Until that happens, these kinds of citizen-initiated efforts likely will be the result. If you want to send the Minutemen home, I urge you to make sure we have enough federal agents on the border to secure it."

Posted at 03:18 PM | Comments (1)

70% of OTMs detained this year were released into the U.S.

"OTMs" are "other-than-Mexicans": illegal aliens who are from Honduras, Brazil, Yemen, Communist China, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and other fun countries.

"DHS lets go 'other' illegals" gives us this fun statistic:

Nearly 70 percent, or 68,000, of the more than 98,000 OTMs detained so far this year were released almost immediately because of the government's inability to return them to their home country and a lack of detention facilities to hold them while here, federal authorities said.

Nevertheless, we're informed that our homeland "security" administration is working on doing a better job.

Posted at 02:31 AM | Comments (0)

Jupiter Florida's illegal alien hiring hall coming soon

From the Palm Beach Post:

JUPITER — Town and church officials are on the verge of negotiating a deal that would establish the first day-labor hiring center for immigrant workers in Palm Beach County.

The town council's approval on Tuesday of two proposed neighborhoods in Abacoa — Windsor Park and Mallory Creek — has allowed the town to pursue buying the LifeSong Community Church building near town hall. Once the two neighborhoods are built, the church will move to Abacoa.

The church building is expected to cost the town $1.95 million and will be leased to Catholic Charities to open the Neighborhood Resource Center, which among other things would be a day-labor hiring center...

Previously: Jupiter Florida's seamy, corrupt, "liberal" underbelly and "Palm Beach Post prints PIIPP on home loans for illegal aliens".

Posted at 08:26 PM | Comments (1)

GAO: ICE all but ignores workplace enforcement

From "Homeland security action against illegals lacking":

The agency charged with interior immigration enforcement all but ignores going after illegal aliens in the workplace, the Government Accountability Office said in a report released yesterday.

The GAO found that an antiquated system for businesses to verify employees' right to work has hindered U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in its mission of tracking and deporting illegal aliens in the nation's interior. In addition, the widespread use of fraudulent documents has made it difficult for both employers and ICE to detect illegal workers.

GAO investigators also said ICE, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security, is devoting more attention to preventing terrorism, but that has meant less attention to illegal immigration in general...

A spokesman promises that targets will be set, etc. etc.

Posted at 04:18 PM | Comments (0)

Most Americans support the Minuteman Project

Despite the media's countless attempts to smear them - and despite Our Leader calling them "vigilantes" - 54% of Americans support the Minuteman Project, a Rasmussen poll reports. Only 22% have an unfavorable view of them.

A little under half support the government encouraging volunteers to patrol the entire Mexican border. A little over half think that if that happened illegal immigration would be reduced.

Posted at 01:58 PM | Comments (2)

$500 million to observe the entire Mexican border with military technology?

Sounds like one heck of a deal. From "Renzi wants military technology to track immigrants at border":

Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Ariz., says state-of-the-art military technology should be employed to help the U.S. Border Patrol peer into Mexico to locate and track the movements of immigrants, smugglers and potential terrorists before they cross the border.

Aerostat balloons, equipped with night-vision capabilities and other intelligence equipment, already are in use by the Defense Department in various other regions, Renzi said in an interview Wednesday...

He wants to look into Mexico, which prompts an embassy spokesman to say that could conflict with Mexican law. Of course, one way around that would be to refer to the balloons as "undocumented observation platforms". Remember: no balloon is illegal.

...Renzi estimates the cost of putting this technology in place along the entire 1,951-mile U. S.-Mexico border at about $500 million. Arizona's 389-mile share of the border with Mexico includes remote, treacherous expanses of desert and well-established smuggling corridors.

John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a think tank based in Alexandria, Va., said Renzi's plan to use military technology to peer across the border for potential undocumented immigrants and smugglers does not, in his view, raise any privacy concerns.

After all, he said, those individuals, if spotted, are clearly "out in the open."

But Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, said a build-up of law enforcement and equipment along the border has not worked so far in stemming the tide of illegal immigration. He said ideas to improve or tighten border security, such as Renzi's, must still be combined with the creation of more legal channels for people to come to this country and work.

Click the link to find out more about that fine American organization. While I don't want balloons or similar monitoring U.S. cities, on the border that's perfectly acceptable.

Posted at 12:28 PM | Comments (0)

DUmmies' childish view of illegal immigration

The best and brightest minds of the left have contributed their wisdom to the DU threads "East Coast cold to Minuteman Project" and "Minutemen planning national action at U.S. borders".

You might be tempted to think that some of those posting the childish remarks are COINTELPRO-style operatives designed to assist in reducing the wages of American workers. But, you'd be wrong. Those are real lefties there:

Those maids and gardeners and masons aren't hurting anyone, and make great neighbors, by and large, bringing with them their traditional, earthy family values.

Well, millions of the maids and gardeners and masons can certainly have an effect on many aspects of American life, but no one said DUmmies were smart.

Further, while I don't think the poster was joking, his comment is very similar to... an article from The Onion. From "Man Who Thought He Was On Date Actually Just At Work-Related Get-Together":

"Thinking I was covering my tracks, I said I had a thing for our supervisor, Michaela [Torres]," Rolen said. "I started babbling about how I like to date Hispanic women, because I find them very 'earthy' and 'spiritual.' I was out of control."

Perhaps I should start a new subcategory: "DU, or The Onion?"

However, not every single last one of them are dumb, as there's one intelligent reply:

This is not a race issue, it's an economic issue.

Everyone of those landscapers, maids and clerks are taking jobs from American citizens.

When every American in the job market is gainfully employed, then let's throw the doors open to our neighbors.

And please no racist rhetoric about how nobody wants the jobs they take. Talk to the 400 people who applied for 12 McDonald's jobs in my city.

The influx of illegals is depressing American wages and in the long run helping very few except CEOs who are only too happy to oblige.

Posted at 03:35 AM | Comments (1)

Mexican bishop in "hot water" over accepting drug money

Oddly enough, Reuters has placed the news that the bishop of Mexico's Aguascalientes accepted donations from drug runners in their Oddly Enough category.

The bishop says:

"You don't have to burn the money just because it's bad. It's better to transform it ... I've known of cases (where) it's been purified."

Our wacky funny friends from the south! We're also informed that:

Bishops in northern Mexico said earlier this year that the multibillion-dollar cross-border trade in cocaine, marijuana and amphetamines went against church teaching.

Unfortunately, they don't seem to have the same prohibition on massive illegal immigration.

If you think this is a wackily funny report, you might also enjoy "Illegal Immigration and the Mexican Archbishop" (about the archbishop of Mexico City), "Catholic workers for open borders", "Catholic Church & Charities Illegally 'Aid and Abet' Aliens", "Yet another Bishop for Open Borders", "The Bishop is a cheap labor pimp", "Mexican archdiocese criticizes Arizona law limiting migrant benefits", or "Bishop: Keep America Great!"

Posted at 09:33 PM | Comments (2)

Linda Chavez supports illegal immigrants take Katrina rebuilding jobs

Linda Chavez offers "Hispanics and Hurricane Katrina". She was watching TV and looking for others of her race:

...Most are immigrants -- often illegal -- from Honduras and Mexico. Then, just when I thought they were nowhere to be found, I spotted a few Hispanic men in the television footage this week of crews cleaning up the debris... Wherever they went to escape the storm, they're back -- because there is work to be done, and they are eager to do dirty jobs that many others shun...

Well, Linda, perhaps those aren't Louisiana natives or even residents. Perhaps, oh I dunno, they're from Texas.

And, I wonder who might be those "many others" she's refering to. Now, clearly, those "many others" are not Hispanics. Which race would they be? Whites? Blacks? Asians? Asian-Pacific Islanders?

I wonder if these images will sink in with the anti-immigrant crowd that imagines that Mexicans come to the United States looking for a handout.

Wow, that's quite a load of straw she's got there. While abuse of public services is part of the opposition to illegal immigration, isn't there a whole lot more? Like, just as one example, corrupt corporations getting massively subsidized labor and ripping the rest of us off? Say, did you know that Linda Chavez is a signatory to the "Conservative" Statement of Principles on Immigration as well as a supporter of Bush's guest worker scheme?

My suspicion is that few of New Orleans' Hispanic immigrants -- especially the illegal ones -- stuck around for the hurricane to hit. Immigrants in general tend to have strong initiative and good coping skills.

Yes, they're so much better than the lazy natives. As for me, I suspect that many of New Orleans' illegal immigrants have no real ties to that city and got out because they had as much at stake as Linda Chavez does to Nanking. Then, they - as well as their co-workers from other states and from Mexico - came back to make a buck.

There will be plenty of jobs to go around, and, as always, immigrants will be among the first lining up to do them.

Unfortunately for Chavez, the American thing to do is to make sure that - one way or another - those jobs go to Americans. It's explicitly un-American to allow illegal aliens to underbid Americans for those jobs.

But, at least we know whose side Linda Chavez is on.

Posted at 08:10 PM | Comments (5)

Citizenship and Immigration Ombudsman is fmr prez of AILA chapter

The Ombudsman of the Department of Homeland Security's Citizenship and Immigration Services is a former President of the Central Florida Chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association:

...the AILA is directed by approximately 100 associates who also serve as members of the pro-Communist National Lawyers Guild... AILA has joined with other leftwing groups to denounce, in their entirety, the security measures taken by the U.S. government in the wake of [9/11]... Before [Jeanne Butterfield] was elected to head AILA, [she] was executive director of the Palestine Solidarity Committee... Besides excusing PFLP terrorist attacks and campaigning against U.S. aid to Israel, the PSC under Butterfield also supported Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and was active in the antiwar movement opposing American intervention to liberate Kuwait. The PSC and PFLP are Marxist organizations... However, when one looks at specific issues, AILA embraces illegal entry into the United States as well. The AILA "solution" to the illegal immigrant problem is to legalize everyone. "People who work hard, pay taxes, and contribute to the U.S. should be allowed to obtain permanent residence," says an AILA issue paper...

Read the link for more on that organization.

As footnote 1 here shows, they're deeply integrated into the open borders network. They support the Agjobs amnesty, which they allegedly helped Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UT) write (also here). They support illegal aliens counting towards congressional representation.

Now, you might wonder, how did this all happen?

Prakash I. Khatri, Esq. was appointed by Secretary Tom Ridge in July of 2003 to serve as the first Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Ombudsman at the Department of Homeland Security. He will identify areas in which individuals have problems dealings with the CIS, assist individuals and employers in resolving service or case-related difficulties, and propose changes in the CIS administrative practices to mitigate identified problems. In addition, Mr. Khatri will provide policy, planning and program advice to the DHS Secretary, Deputy Secretary and other key officials regarding immigration matters.

How soon before even the most KoolAid-besotten BushBot is forced to admit that the Bush administration is just on the other side?

(I just found out about this via this post on Julie Myers, President Bush's nominee to head the the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency under the Department of Homeland Security. I covered her starting here.)

Posted at 06:39 AM | Comments (0)

Illegal alien advocates want special rights because of Katrina

From "Group Wants Special Status for Illegals Affected by Katrina":

Illegal immigrants affected by Hurricane Katrina should have "protected humanitarian status," representatives of Latin American and Caribbean communities said Tuesday in an appeal to the White House.

The groups said the protection is needed because immigrants fearing deportation, including some with U.S.-born children, are not seeking help at shelters because officials are asking for Social Security numbers in order to enter.

"The immigrants are the invisible victims of the hurricane," said Gloria Saucedo, of Hermandad Mexicana of Los Angeles, Calif., whose group is a member of the National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Communities, which is pushing for immigration reform...

I'm sure our "American" president would love to give those kind-hearted cheap laborers as much assistance as he can sneak by the American people. It's our job to make sure that doesn't happen: we need reconstruction jobs to go to Americans, not to illegal aliens. This article also includes a quote from the National Council of La Raza.

Previously: "Vicente Fox's offer to make money off Katrina spurned" and Harry Reid wants amnesty for illegal aliens who are taking jobs that could go to Katrina victims.

Posted at 04:14 PM | Comments (1)

National Council of La Raza: illegal aliens are its "constituents"

National Council of La Raza has made quite an interesting admission. This shouldn't be shocking, but it does tell you where they're coming from:

"If federal authorities are using [Katrina] as an enforcement opportunity, it creates a moral dilemma for us in how do we advise our constituents," Cecilia Munoz, vice president of policy for the National Council of La Raza, the largest U.S.-based Hispanic advocacy group, said Monday.

Posted at 02:05 PM | Comments (3)

More on Bush's pick to head Immigration and Customs Enforcement

As previously discussed, Bush has selected someone with little or no immigration experience to head the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. Her name is Julie Myers, and she's never managed a large bureacracy.

On the other hand, Myers is not, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the former head of a horse show association. So, she's at least got that going for her.

The previous report said that George Voinovich (R-OH) had questions about her qualifications, but according to the WaPo's "Immigration Nominee's Credentials Questioned" he's since changed his mind.

They also reveal this:

Myers worked briefly as chief of staff to Michael Chertoff when he led the Justice Department's criminal division before he became Homeland Security secretary.

Myers also was an associate under independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr for about 16 months and has most recently served as a special assistant to President Bush handling personnel issues.

Her uncle is Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, the departing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. She married Chertoff's current chief of staff, John F. Wood, on Saturday.

It all sounds like one big cozy family. Yet, some people still have questions:

"It appears she's got a tremendous amount of experience in money laundering, in banking and the financial areas," said Charles Showalter, president of the National Homeland Security Council, a union that represents 7,800 ICE agents, officers and support staff. "My question is: Who the hell is going to enforce the immigration laws?"

I. Michael Greenberger, a former Clinton administration official who heads the Center for Health and Homeland Security at the University of Maryland, said the Myers appointment represents "pre-Katrina thinking, where political relationships were a very large factor."

"Post-Katrina, we now see that people need to be eminently qualified," Greenberger said.

I don't know whether she can do the job or not, but - even just in the interests of looking good - shouldn't the Bush administration - just once - choose someone who's overqualified? I mean, don't they have a tiny little wee bit of a fiduciary duty to we the populace?

Of course, there's also the question of whether the Bush administration really cares whether the head of the immigration agency will enforce the immigration laws, or, as we've seen in the past, whether they'll work to sidestep them.

See also "Poor leadership at ICE cited as security threat" for more on the issue of choosing the best people for the job.

UPDATE: There's much more on Myers here. Meanwhile, over in the Democratic Party's fantasy world:

[Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.] threatened Tuesday to block approval of a Homeland Security Department nominee until he receives a secret FBI memo about terror suspect interrogations that he's been seeking for months.

Of course, if he gets that then he'll probably just go ahead and approve her, rather than considering all the reasons why he shouldn't.

Posted at 10:28 AM | Comments (2)

Geraldo Rivera supports illegal immigration, opposes Minuteman Project

If, in the past, you've just laughed at Geraldo Rivera, now's the time to send an email to Fox News suggesting they find someone else:

Geraldo Rivera, senior correspondent for Fox News, told a group of Hispanic journalists vigilantes had created "hysteria along the borders" and advised his colleagues not to "let your newsroom push you around on the issue of immigration."

[He uttered:] "Bust them on their hypocrisy... In vast sections of the country, there would not be a lawn mowed or a dish washed but for illegal immigrants... I'm for not being embarrassed about who we are. If we make it, you can't forget where you come from."

Lest you think Geraldo is Chicano or Mexicano:

His mother is of Russian Jewish ancestry and his late father was a Puerto Rican of Spanish ancestry.

Posted at 08:53 AM | Comments (2)

Should the Sierra Club's Carl Pope resign?

Kristen Gelinau of the AP offers "Sierra Club member calls for director's resignation over immigration debate". The Sierra Club's executive director, Carl Pope, was speaking in Richmond VA. Outside, two protestors were calling for his resignation because of his immigration stance:

James McDonald, a 60-year-old Springfield attorney, said Carl Pope accepted more than $100 million from California donor David Gelbaum in 2001 only after promising Gelbaum the club would stay out of the immigration debate.

As previously discussed, here's what the donor, David Gelbaum, told the L.A. Times:

"I did tell Carl Pope in 1994 or 1995 that if they ever came out anti-immigration, they would never get a dollar from me..."

Here's what Pope says now:

"I personally, and subsequently the membership of the Sierra Club, voted that we would remain neutral on immigration, years before Mr. Gelbaum made those large gifts... It is true that Mr. Gelbaum said that if we had taken the opposite position, he would not have given us the gifts, but we had already taken that position."

An SC spokesperson says:

"Our members overwhelmingly rejected a change to our policy, so any allegations of wrongdoing here with regard to that policy are just totally unjustified."

Not entirely accurate, as the AP would know if they were trying to do their job. Only a small number of SC members voted; see "13% of Sierra Club members support massive immigration".

As for the AP, they get in a few "liberal" zingers:

Like most of the club's members calling for immigration control, McDonald insists he has nothing against immigrants, adding that his wife is from the Philippines...

Obviously, in the AP's mind anyone who supports proper public policy can be suspected of having something "against immigrants".

At the end, the AP also gets in the the SC's founder was an immigrant himself. Can it be assumed that that mention was just an accident?

This isn't the first time I've caught the AP doing things like this.

Posted at 05:30 AM | Comments (0)

Border watchers attacked; L.A. Times downplays incident, gloats

From "Border watchers attacked during training session":

A group called Gente Unita confronted volunteer border watchers in San Diego yesterday with obscenities, shoving and U.S. flag desecration, causing Friends of the Border to abandon a planned deployment and an apology by the group's leader for not having police protection for senior citizen and other members of the group...

One eyewitness told WND he saw members of Gente Unita assault four members of the border-watch group, including organizer Capt. Drew Johnson, a retired Navy officer.

"Gente Unita stole an American flag, ripped from its staff and trampled it, as captured on film by cameraman Larry Morgan," said Roger Canfield, a former Republican congressional candidate...

"Shouting obscenities and slogans, Gente Unita shoved, jostled, and twice pushed their way into the center in 32 minutes of disorderly conduct as also witnessed by center staff and others at the center to take a state notary exam," Canfield said.

One man allegedly shouted, "We''re going to shut you the f--- down," in the face of several volunteers.

Others, he said, broke off from the group to attack the check-in table located under a flag pole. While the larger group was charging the entryway of the Scottish Rite Center, two others grabbed a U.S. flag on a wooden staff, a confidential list of names, knocked over the table, knocked a hat off Johnson and roughed up volunteer Beverly Crawford...

Needless to say, if the SD sheriffs had been there in the first place, there's a possibility that they might have done something. However, there have been past reports of them not being sympathetic to pleas for help from other border watchers.

But, if they had been informed, no one could say that there's the possibility that the FOBP intended this to happen the way it did. So, in the future they need to let the cops know where they're going to be.

Now, turning our attention to the Los Angeles Times, how do you think they handled this matter? Certainly, if Minutemen had attacked lefties, wouldn't they highlight that? Of course.

Instead, we get "Minuteman-Style Border Patrol Is Over in No Time" from Anna Gorman and Richard Marosi.

Senior citizens attacked by violent far-lefties, and that's what the LAT offers?

They refer to what WND described above as a "minor scuffle":

...Pushing and shoving broke out early Saturday after about 20 counterdemonstrators marched into the Scottish Rites Center in San Diego, where Border Watch volunteers had come to register for training, according to witnesses and police. One counterdemonstrator was cited for battery after he allegedly knocked down someone unaffiliated with either group.

Pushing and shoving broke out early Saturday after about 20 counterdemonstrators marched into the Scottish Rites Center in San Diego, where Border Watch volunteers had come to register for training, according to witnesses and police. One counterdemonstrator was cited for battery after he allegedly knocked down someone unaffiliated with either group...

[On Friday, FOBC] were drowned out by a mariachi band and about 30 jeering counterdemonstrators waving Mexican flags and chanting in Spanish for the "caza migrantes" — migrant hunters — to go home...

I'd imagine that about the only differences between the LAT report and that offered by, for instance, the CPUSA would be that the CPUSA report would have even more triumphalism, and it would also be more accurate. The L.A. Times might as well be a Mexican newspaper for all their support of the U.S.

UPDATE: There are purported videos of the "scuffle" at these addresses, but I haven't watched any of them:

media.putfile.com/scene2
media.putfile.com/scene147
media.putfile.com/scene3

Posted at 12:34 PM | Comments (0)

Vicente Fox's offer to make money off Katrina spurned

Last week, George Bush's amigo Vicente Fox offered to help us out with the Katrina rebuilding, specifically saying that "if there is anything Mexicans are good at, it is construction." Of course, as readers of this blog know, that would translate into millions or billions of remittances for Mexico: the money that illegal aliens send home.

Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-GA) responds to Fox:

"Rebuilding our Gulf Coast with labor from Mexico would divert a large part of the estimated $200 billion cost to rebuild -- paid for by American taxpayers -- out of our economy and into 'foreign remittances,' the monies sent back to Mexico from the U.S. by illegal immigrants... While we appreciate the disaster aid assistance Mexico is providing by sending a military convoy across our southern border, we cannot afford to pay them back with the jobs of our hurricane victims."

And:

Mr. Norwood said at least half a million Americans from the affected areas have permanently lost their jobs, suggesting that it "makes perfect sense" that as many of them ought to be employed as possible in the rebuilding efforts -- "for their personal good and the good of the country."

And:

"We should not allow our national tragedy to become Mexico's gain. The time for talk is over. The time for pleas for the administration to simply enforce the law is over... Hardship has a way of bringing families together... If there is anything positive that can come from such an incomprehensible disaster as Hurricane Katrina, it could likely be in forcing us to come back together to help defend each other, instead of letting potential taxpayer-funded jobs for storm victims to be looted by illegal immigrant labor cheered on by Mexican President Vicente Fox."

Hello!

Of course, the problem is that our putatively American president and the "liberals" are probably going to end up helping Fox with Plan B: just sending the illegal aliens anyway. See "Harry Reid wants amnesty for illegal aliens who are taking jobs that could go to Katrina victims".

Every chance we get, let's ask them whose side they're on.

Posted at 06:53 AM | Comments (2)

Report on Mexico's San Antonio encampment

No, not the century before last, this century, in relation to Katrina relief. A report is here, disclaimers apply:

...The Officer said he has friends and family throughout the United States and has traveled here extensively. He admitted his children will be attending the last two years of high school and college in the United States, because they will have more opportunity here. The officer admitted that Mexico only requires its children to attend school until the 6th grade. Many families are so poor they need their children to work to help support the family and the Mexican Government endorses it by allowing 6th graders to stop the education.

The officer agreed with Tully that Mexico is a wealthy nation, has numerous resources, but provides little or no opportunity to Mexican citizens. The officer stated that it is difficult to get Mexicans to work in Mexico even though jobs exist. He said they prefer the United States dollar to the peso, and they find it easier to enter the United States then to live with a lesser wage...

Posted at 05:45 PM | Comments (0)

Is Bush's pick to head Immigration and Customs Enforcement qualified?

Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) wants to know. And, I'm sure that both he and I mean "qualified" in the normal sense, not in the Bush administration sense.

Julie Myers was nominated by President Bush to head Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the agency that is charged with hunting down money launderers, sanctions busters and human traffickers and that is the sole enforcer of U.S. immigration laws.

Yesterday, she faced a confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs.

"I'm really concerned about your management experience," Sen. George V. Voinovich, Ohio Republican, told her, pointing out that ICE, with 20,000 employees, is the second-largest investigative agency in the federal government.

"I think that we ought to have a meeting with [Homeland Security Secretary] Mike Chertoff ... to ask him ... why he thinks you're qualified for the job," Mr. Voinovich said. "Because based on your resume, I don't think you are."

Posted at 11:48 AM | Comments (0)

Jessie Mangaliman sits, listens to loonies decry Minuteman Project

Jessie Mangaliman of Knight Ridder offers us "Immigrants, leaders rally to decry Minutemen" which could have been written by the "immigrants" themselves. He basically just repeats their claims without any analysis. Then, as with other articles, he turns to the object of those groups' hate for their denial of the obviously false charges.

I need a new name for this type of propaganda, perhaps "Have you stopped oppressing immigrants" or similar.

This paragraph is typical:

In East Oakland, about 60 people, many of them immigrants, held a vigil in front of Centro Legal de la Raza, an immigrant legal advocacy organization. The group expressed solidarity with immigrants and attacked citizen border patrols as "hate-filled, white supremacists."

Let's all speculate on what a real reporter would do. In fact, let's contact the S.J. Merc and ask them.

Perhaps a real reporter would translate that group's name: "Legal Center of/for the Race". Or, they might wonder where those people came from: were they bused in by some other group? Where does the funding for the Center come from? And, of course, is calling them "immigrants" accurate, when what they want are benefits for illegal aliens?

And, there's this news:

A county resolution, recommended this summer by the county's Santa Clara County Human Relations Commission, is pending in committee and waiting recommendation for a vote later by the board of supervisors. If it is approved by the board, Santa Clara County could be the first municipal government in the state to take a formal stand against the Minuteman Project.

Other participants mentioned:

Rev. Jon Pedigo, "a San Jose pastor and member of People Acting in Community Together"

Salvador Bustamente, "regional vice president for the Service Employees International Union, Local 1877"

Larisa Casillas, "policy director for Services, Immigrant Rights and Education Network"

Maria Jimenez, "director Mujeres Unidad e y Activas, a Latina women's group in Oakland"

Bay Area Immigrant Rights Coalition

Posted at 04:14 PM | Comments (1)

Open borders groups to harass border watchers

From "Border friends, foes to face off":

...Friends of the Border Patrol, organized by Andy Ramirez, 37, of Chino, begins its monitoring today with an estimated 130 volunteers, he said...

Jesse Diaz Jr., 41, of Ontario, is an organizer of La Tierra es de Todos, a coalition of groups formed in Riverside in May to oppose such Minuteman spin-off groups. Coalition members will caravan to the border Saturday for a rally in Calexico and to join an attempt to close the border at Tecate, to deny California retailers business from Mexican shoppers, Diaz said...

Diaz said opposition groups would go out at night looking for Minutemen border-watch groups in order to confront them with light and noise and video cameras and to disrupt their efforts at stealthy monitoring...

Posted at 01:58 PM | Comments (0)

White House unveils guest worker scheme

On Wednesday, Karl Rove discussed Bush's scheme to bring in millions of kind-hearted folks with select (U.S.) representatives:

The White House is preparing to unveil an immigration-reform plan that would allow millions of undocumented residents to remain in the United States as guest workers, two Arizona congressmen said...

[...our "guests" get a three-year visa...]

As explained to the congressmen, the plan gives workers the opportunity to renew that visa for another three years before requiring them to leave the country. They could then apply again to return.

Rep. Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz., one of the congressmen who spent an hour and 15 minutes with Rove and other administration officials Wednesday, said he was taken aback by the "comprehensive" nature of the plan.

"I was surprised to find that they have gone as far as they have in preparing a specific proposal," said Kolbe, who has long championed a guest-worker plan as a way to control the tide of illegal border crossers. "We thought we were just going down for a discussion of different proposals."

Rep. Jeff Flake, also at the White House meeting, was struck by the level of detail. "I was impressed with the time and effort they put into it," said Flake, also from Arizona. "I expected more of an outline. We got more flesh than expected."

I'm a bit confused. What should Americans do? Impeach Bush now? Or, wait until his plan fails miserably and his popularity plummets even further, thus rendering impeachment unnecessary?

UPDATE: There's a little more info here, which will be put into its own post.

Posted at 01:16 PM | Comments (1)

Morrow responds about Carlsbad heckler's veto suit

State Rep. Bill Morrow held an anti-illegal immigration forum in Carlsbad a while back, and first the city tried to cancel it. They rescinded that after being threatened with a suit; at issue is whether a "heckler's veto" is able to block First Amendment rights. The event when through as scheduled, but Carlsbad then came back and sent Morrow a bill for security.

Morrow has in turn sued Carlsbad, and he says the suit is necessary to protect everyone's right to free speech. Details in this letter.

Posted at 07:57 PM | Comments (1)

VA: Kilgore, Kaine pledge to crack down on illegal alien employers

On Tuesday, Virginia gubanatorial candidates Jerry W. Kilgore and Timothy M. Kaine debated with Tim Russert as moderator. One of the main topics was illegal immigration.

They both pledged to crack down on businesses that knowingly hired illegal aliens, but somehow I trust Kilgore's pledge quite a bit more.

Kaine wants localities to determine what's best for their communities. That would allow, for instance, Herndon to establish a day laborer hiring hall knowing full well that most of those using it were here illegally.

Kilgore doesn't think that's right.

In a perfect display of Democratic thinking, Kaine called that "mean-spirited." That light-weight response appears to be the best that the Democrats can do when asked to discuss important policy matters.

Reports from WaPo in "Virginia Candidates Push Hot-Button Topics From Debate" and WashTimes in "Kilgore urges penalties for employers of illegals".

Posted at 04:49 PM | Comments (1)

FAIR on border security

FAIR has a new report entitled Code Orange: Diminishing the Terrorist Threat to America.

The WashTimes offers an overview in "Watchdog says borders still unsecured".

Posted at 06:29 AM | Comments (0)

Bill: No benefits for illegal aliens in Georgia

ATLANTA - There will be no welcome mat in Georgia next year for illegal immigrants if Republicans in the Georgia Senate have their way. A bill they are backing as a top priority would block taxpayer-funded benefits for individuals who are not citizens...

"We cannot afford to take care of everybody," Johnson said in a news conference with Sen. Chip Rogers, R-Woodstock, whose bill to prohibit benefits to illegal immigrants is pending in the upper chamber. "Our priorities should be on Georgia's neediest citizens ... (and) our neighbors, our friends who are hurting - the evacuees from the Gulf," Johnson said. "Those should all be a higher priority than somebody who has broken the law and come to this country illegally."

See, this is what happens when you don't use the correct terminology. In the first paragraph, they imply this could extend to legal residents who aren't citizens. But, in the second paragraph they say it only includes illegal aliens.

Sen. Sam Zamarripa, D-Atlanta, said the measure will only accelerate the black market in false ID papers and documents. "If you really want to fix this, you need to go audit the biggest employers in the state. You're going to discover inappropriate documentation for people that work. If they want to stop it, find the people that hire people," he said.

That's a good one! Click his name to find out more about that fine legislator.

And, for more on his colleague Pedro Marin, see "Mexican agents in the state houses? Part 2". That case is something everyone should be very concerned about.

Posted at 04:13 AM | Comments (0)

Bush to wall off 3.5 miles of border near San Diego

From this:

The Bush administration said Wednesday it will fortify the westernmost stretch of the U.S.-Mexico border over the objections of environmentalists and California regulators, who feared the project would harm a refuge for endangered birds. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff signed an environmental waiver Tuesday night that expedites the Border Patrol's long-standing plans to fill in canyons and erect additional fencing along the final 3 1/2 miles of the border before it meets the Pacific Ocean...

Chertoff said the fortifications would help reduce illegal border crossings, while Border Patrol Chief David Aguilar told reporters the project was "not directly related to illegal immigration," but a broader effort to close gaps that terrorists and others could exploit. "This is about border security," Aguilar said...

Aguilar said the Border Patrol may move to fortify the border in other areas, although both he and Chertoff said the administration had no plans to wall off the entire 2,000-mile Southwest border with Mexico.

Concern over illegal immigration led Congress to pass legislation in 1996 requiring the Border Patrol to strengthen the westernmost 14-mile stretch of the border. Nine miles were fortified, but environmental concerns and lawsuits held up construction on the last 3.5 miles leading to the ocean and 1.5 miles farther east. Earlier this year, Congress gave Chertoff the power to sign a broad environmental waiver to finish the job, citing fears that terrorists could slip through an unsecured border...

Posted at 05:55 PM | Comments (2)

Chandler, Arizona tries to divert illegal aliens to day laborer center

The article "Chandler deters day laborers" starts out with the good news that city workers have been posting "No Stopping" and "No Parking" signs on streets in Chandler AZ where day laborers congregate looking for work. "Specially-assigned" police even gave out warnings to potential employers.

Then, it goes downhill fast:

...But still, at least 100 day laborers [were on those streets] on Monday morning waiting for work instead of going to a nearby day labor center city officials encourage them to use.

...Police and city workers are also handing out fliers that explain the new restrictions and advertise the day labor center...

The cost: $30,000 to start, and $14,000 per month for the cops. While this is a privately-funded center (as the city website informs us), local government money is still being used to assist rather than stop illegal behavior: hiring illegal aliens.

From the city's website:

The privately funded and operated Center meets several needs in the community. It provides laborers a safe place to negotiate a fair wage, while contractors and residents are provided with a one-stop shop for the help they need. The Center is open from 5 a.m. to 1 p.m. daily. For safety reasons, those needing the assistance of day laborers are asked to refrain from stopping along the roadway.

I'm vaguely reminded of this, but that would never fly outside rural Nevada. But, perhaps as a Swiftian satire someone in Chandler should propose something similar.

Alternatively, someone should look into who's profiting from this scheme.

Previously: "Arizona tries to stop public funding of illegal alien day laborer centers" and "Arizona legislators move to cut off funding to day laborer centers".

Posted at 06:40 AM | Comments (0)

"Why Some Would-Be Immigration Reformers Don't Have the Answer"

Mark Krikorian discusses the "reality" of those who are pushing for immigration "reform":

The Senate is again considering various proposals to address our massive illegal-alien problem, and the competing bills have one thing in common: They claim to offer "realistic" solutions to the supposedly unrealistic desire to enforce the law. Writer Tamar Jacoby, perhaps the most energetic salesman of the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill, used some form of "realistic" ten times in her testimony at a July Senate hearing. Senators Kennedy, Cornyn, Brownback, and Feingold all touted the realism of their preferred solutions at the same hearing, and the New York Times and Washington Post have done the same in numerous editorials.

The problem, of course, is that no one has checked whether our very real immigration bureaucracy is capable of implementing any of these proposals...

...The point is not that these requirements are inappropriate; if you're going to be registering illegal aliens, you'd certainly want to know about their health status and involvement with terrorism. But the most pressing question remains: Is it achievable? What would happen, in the real world, if one of these "realistic" solutions were to become law?

Two words: "fraud" and "paralysis."

...So, if an immigration package anything like McCain-Kennedy or Cornyn-Kyl were to pass, the following would almost assuredly occur: Immigration offices would be deluged by millions of applications that would need to be approved under a tight deadline; harried DHS employees would be forced to put aside their other duties to meet the onslaught; candidates for citizenship - foreign spouses of Americans, refugees, skilled workers sponsored by employers - would effectively be pushed to the back of the line; political pressure would force DHS to cut corners in adjudicating the applications; and huge numbers of ineligible applicants would be approved (in addition to the huge numbers of eligible applicants)...

...Instead, the illegal population needs to be decreased via muscular, across-the-board immigration enforcement over a long term. Rather than wait for a magic solution, we can implement an attrition strategy right now, using available resources. We could, for instance, immediately reject fake Social Security numbers submitted by employers on behalf of new employees (the government currently looks the other way). Or the Treasury Department could instruct banks that the Mexican government's illegal-alien ID card is no longer a valid form of identification. Or a small portion of enforcement resources could be devoted to random raids at day-labor gathering spots. This has an added advantage: As more resources become available - be they monetary or technological - they could easily bolster the attrition approach, as opposed to current proposals, which from the get-go require vast and untested programs...

Posted at 04:27 AM | Comments (2)

El Centro Sector apprehensions decline

From this (also here):

U.S. Customs and Border Protection Border Patrol agents said apprehensions of illegal immigrants have been on a decline in the El Centro Sector compared to last year due to an increase in Border Patrol specialty units.

[A spokesman said...] fiscal 2004 apprehensions were at 72,000 by the end of September.

"This year we have 51,000 apprehensions thus far," he said.

[The spokesman] said a number of different things could have contributed to the decline in apprehensions, including a shoring up of the sector's infrastructure...

Of course, it could also mean that they're just crossing in other sectors along the border.

Posted at 03:51 PM | Comments (0)

Illegal aliens doing rebuilding jobs in Biloxi, and they want visas

Isn't it wonderful in Bush's America?

From "Undocumented aliens rebuilding Biloxi, say they deserve visas":

As Biloxi rises from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, it is doing much of it on the backs of undocumented foreign workers. Some are starting to suggest that their contributions are worth at least a temporary visa.

"If we are working and helping to raise this city, at least they should give us a work visa," said Manuel Armenta, a 44-year-old Mexican who came to Biloxi five months ago to do cleaning work at a hotel...

So far, there's been little risk [of getting deported]. The Department of Homeland Security has announced a 45-day period in which employers would not be fined for hiring undocumented workers. It said that was because many people had lost their proof of citizenship or legal residence in the storm...

Previously: "Give Illegal Aliens' Jobs to Unemployed Katrina Victims".

Posted at 03:00 PM | Comments (2)

"Give Illegal Aliens' Jobs to Unemployed Katrina Victims"

Phyllis Schlafly:

Katrina has displaced hundreds of thousands of Americans who now need food, housing, and cash. Relief for those necessities will have to be temporary and it will be many months before they can return to New Orleans, if ever, so what they need most of all is jobs.

Our government should act immediately to put these displaced Americans in the jobs now held by illegal aliens. Some 10 million illegal aliens are now working in our country, so there is no excuse for not replacing a million of them with unemployed American citizens...

Of course, it's going to be difficult to get our American president to favor American citizens over "kind-hearted people" who've entered our country illegally.

There's also the matter that many victims of Katrina have been brought up in the Welfare State. Perhaps "leaders" like Jesse Jackson could encourage refugees to take low-wage jobs even if they think they're below them. From his "Hurricane looting not over yet":

...President Bush characteristically issued an executive order effectively lowering the wages of reconstruction workers -- and hiking the profits of their companies. He wiped out the requirement to pay prevailing wages in the disaster region, apparently thinking that $9 an hour for construction workers was too high a price to pay. The government can save money, no doubt, by exploiting illegal immigrant labor...

OK, so it looks like The Right Reverend Jesse Jackson and the pant-suited ERA opponent Phyllis Schlafly have something in common.

Let's build on that: get Jesse Jackson to join with the Democrats to ensure that rebuilding jobs are going to American citizens.

It just makes common sense, which is why the Democrats won't do anything about it.

Posted at 01:25 PM | Comments (1)

Corrupt California employers: the cost of your labor is about to go up

The L.A. Times article "State Helps Domestic Workers Who Are Fighting for Fair Pay" describes how:

[Domestic workers] and their advocates are confronting employers, forming collectives and pushing for legislation to guarantee more rights. They also are filing wage claims with the labor commissioner's office, part of the state Department of Industrial Relations, which is responsible for enforcing labor laws.

And, as the Dog Trainer informs us, we're discussing illegal aliens here:

Nannies, housecleaners and caretakers work in a largely unregulated industry, usually without contracts, timecards or any other detailed records. There are pluses for both sides: Employers can generally count on employees' flexibility and willingness to work cheaply, and employees readily find work even if they don't have immigration documents. Frequently, neither side pays taxes.

But the deal can go sour. Because the arrangements are unofficial, labor violations are common, according to employees, their advocates and academics. Workers have few protections and often are hard-pressed to prove they were wronged.

Such a wonderful deal for (almost) all concerned, it's so terrible that it might go sour. Of course, it's not such a good deal for society as a whole, but, at least those in the same weight class as L.A. Times editors get nice, compliant maids and nannies.

But, the bottom line is that moves like those described in the article will end up driving the cost of employing illegal aliens up. Now, corrupt employers might counter that by bringing in new illegals from Mexico, or even illegals from, say, Yemen. But, eventually they'll wake up too. (Before that happens, the L.A. Times will be there to support our newcomers from the Arab Emirates).

The article has a few more stomach-churning bits, including a mention of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (my coverage of their links to the City of L.A.) and CA state Assemblywoman Cindy Montanez.

Posted at 11:09 AM | Comments (0)

WaPo Virginia poll: only 8% support illegal alien hiring halls

WaPo conducted a poll of registered voters in Virginia, and the results are discussed in "Immigration's Impact Is On the Minds Of Va. Voters".

I'd like to find the complete set of questions and results, but I've been so far unable to do so. However, from the graphic here:

Question: Would you support or oppose using public money to help pay for designated places where day laborers could gather while they wait to be hired?

All: 56% against, 42% for
NoVa: 47% against, 50% for

Question: (Only if they said they were supporters..) What if some of these day laborers were in the country illegally. In that case, would you support or oppose using public money to help pay for places where day laborers could gather to look for work?

All: 78% against, 19% for
NoVa: 61% against, 34% for

("NoVa" means Northern Virginia; they broke out the results for that area.)

Most or almost all workers at these centers are illegal aliens. And, in Herndon, they have no intention of checking immigration status.

So, let's do some math. Among all Virginians, only 19% of 42% support centers for illegal aliens.

In other words, if you include all respondents, that means that only around 8% of Virginians would support what Herndon and other locations are proposing: hiring halls for illegal aliens.

And:

33 percent of registered voters think "the growing number of immigrants" has been bad for their communities, compared with 21 percent who say it has been good. In Northern Virginia, where most of the state's immigrants reside, residents split almost equally on whether immigration has been good or bad for their communities.

The article discusses this in the context of the race for VA governor. The pro-borders candidate is former Atty. General Jerry Kilgore. Given the massive numbers on his side, you might think anyone would be crazy to support massive illegal immigration. Well, you'd be wrong. See "Dems crazy enough to downplay danger of violent Central American gang" and, from the article:

State Sen. H. Russell Potts Jr. (R-Winchester), who is running for governor as an independent, called Kilgore's actions "the worst form of pandering." Lt. Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, the Democratic candidate, said Kilgore is trying to find a wedge issue in what was an attempt by local officials to solve a difficult problem. "I think that's kind of slimy," he said Thursday.

See also "Herndon VA approves illegal alien hiring hall" (although that's since met some resistance from the neighboring county).

Posted at 04:06 AM | Comments (1)

Will Bush give Katrina rebuilding jobs... to illegal aliens?

Recent actions by our American president will make it easier for illegal aliens to take Katrina rebuilding jobs. Now, in our America, those jobs should go to American citizens, with those affected by the hurricane at the front of the list. That's just proper public policy.

But, of course, in the America of the GOP elite, things are a little bit different.

First, from this comes word that "U.S. officials have suspended for 45 days a requirement that employers check workers' identification." Some survivors of the hurricane will have lost their IDs, but that will also make it even easier for illegal aliens to gain employment.

And, Bush has suspended the Davis-Bacon Act. Federal contractors in the affected region now don't have to pay the prevailing wage, which is around $9 an hour. That Act was suspended in a wide Gulf Coast region including... three counties in south Florida: Broward, Miami-Dade, and Monroe.

There's already competition in Houston, as the WaPo says in "Trying to Absorb the Newly Unemployed":

About 250,000 of those displaced by Katrina have come to Texas... "Skilled people will certainly find jobs, [but] in terms of unskilled jobs the labor market is pretty tough," [Daniel S. Hamermesh, an economics professor at the University of Texas at Austin] said.

...Over the past few years, the state's unemployment rate has remained around 5 or 6 percent, but that figure does not reflect the increasing competition in the market for low-skill jobs, Hamermesh said. In Texas, those jobs -- mainly in hotels, restaurants, manufacturing and construction -- often are filled by the state's large population of first-generation immigrants from Mexico, he said...

Of course, a very large part of those "immigrants" are actually illegal aliens.

Who, besides Bush, is responsible for lifting Davis-Bacon? Sep. 9's "Bush Suspends Prevailing Wage Laws for Katrina Clean Up" has the details:

Last week, Americans for Tax Reform, an organization founded by long-time Republican activists Grover Norquist, sent Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao a letter [PDF file] asking that she suspend the Davis-Bacon Act in order to free taxpayers from paying too much for the disaster clean up and management. Wednesday, Representatives Tom Feeney (R-Florida), Jeff Flake (R-Arizona) Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colorado), sent Bush a similar letter, stating that the Act drives costs up and "effectively discriminates against non-union contractors."

Posted at 09:46 AM | Comments (1)

Illegal aliens doing the jobs American hurricane victims could do

From the AP propaganda piece "Illegal immigrants afraid to get storm aid":

Rumors of deportations are rife, although U.S. officials have suspended for 45 days a requirement that employers check workers' identification. [Vicente] Fox also said the United States has promised not to send people home in the immediate aftermath, although Washington has not confirmed that.

From the WaPo's "Trying to Absorb the Newly Unemployed":

The one-day job fair here attracted about 3,000 Hurricane Katrina evacuees settling into Dallas. It also enticed a few local unemployed residents, some of whom worry that the inflow of new workers will intensify competition for work in an area where jobs -- particularly in low-skill sectors -- are already tough to come by...

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that 400,000 jobs were lost throughout the Gulf Coast due to Katrina...

...Fewer positions for general labor were available. A recruiter for $10-an-hour meat-packing positions at Tyson Foods said that he often places people in jobs at one of the company's plants in rural Kansas but that fewer positions have been open in Texas.

Over the past few years, the state's unemployment rate has remained around 5 or 6 percent, but that figure does not reflect the increasing competition in the market for low-skill jobs, [Daniel S. Hamermesh, an economics professor at the University of Texas at Austin] said. In Texas, those jobs -- mainly in hotels, restaurants, manufacturing and construction -- often are filled by the state's large population of first-generation immigrants from Mexico, he said. [those are no doubt mostly or almost all illegal aliens -- LW]...

[...The League of United Latin American Citizens, a "national Latino advocacy group", thinks things are going to work out A-OK. Uh-huh...]

...Ramona Rayford, 25, lives in Dallas and has been looking for retail positions for six months. She said her last job was in a clothing warehouse without air conditioning and with low pay.

..."It's like [employers] push us out [of] the way. They know the Hispanics will do it and take $7 an hour or $5 an hour," Rayford said. "I know they have it hard, too..."

So, to summarize:

The Bush administration and the GOP leadership have a distinct cheap labor policy, designed to benefit employers at everyone else's expense.

Meanwhile, over the Democratic Party's fantasy world, it's all sugarcanes and ice cream. We can have both millions of "undocumented immigrants" and jobs for all!

But, over in reality, thousands of those who survived the hurricane will now have to deal with tremendous job competition from millions of illegal aliens. We need a political party that isn't corrupt to straighten all this out.

Posted at 12:49 PM | Comments (0)

Iowans get exotic treat: Central American gangs

MARSHALLTOWN, Iowa The Midwest seems an unlikely hideout for Osama bin Laden's hired hands. But an ongoing federal crackdown shows an increasing presence of a violent gang with suspected links to al-Qaida. The gang, M-S-13, was founded in El Salvador and is known for smuggling drugs and immigrants into the U-S. [...and there's a possible terrorism connection...]

Iowa was part of nationwide sweep of gang members last month in "Operation Community Shield." At least ten M-S-13 members were arrested in Marshalltown, Perry and Des Moines.

Marshalltown is home to a meatpacking plant that in the last decade has drawn Hispanics seeking work. Police Chief Lon Walker says that growing population is a draw for M-S-13 members looking to "hide and operate."

Walker was one of five police chiefs who met in Washington last month to talk with homeland security officials about the crackdown on M-S-13 and other gangs. He says it should be a concern because of the terrorist situation.

From this sociology article:

Marshalltown hosts a Swift pork packing plant that employs about 900 Mexican workers, and Villachuato supplies more than half of these employees. The plant would shut down without a continued supply of workers from this community-documented and undocumented-and the workers, their families, and their home town would suffer without the plant.

And, from "Meatpacking industry brings change to Iowa town":

Swift & Company — a predecessor to Dakota Pork Industries in Huron - "has always been here," said Ken Anderson, president of the Marshalltown Area Chamber of Commerce for the past 12 years.

"Meatpacking has been here for 100 years," he said. With the local labor market tapped, Swift, which processes more than 15,000 hogs a day, began reaching out to Hispanics and members of other ethnic groups. Marshalltown's 1990 census showed less than 300 Latinos in the community. But the latest count in 2000 indicates there are now more than 3,200...

In the late 1990s, Gov. Tom Vilsack announced he would select three Iowa cities to be model communities. He provided state resources to help them develop models for the state on how to deal with rapidly changing demographic profiles.

The governor picked Marshalltown, Fort Dodge and Mason City...

Here's more information on Iowa's problems.

And, you might not believe that one person could be wrong on so many things, but there's actually a Tamar Jacoby connection. From a letter discussing one of her articles:

[She] claims that the meatpacking industry in the Midwest would have collapsed without an influx of illegal alien workers.

The cure for these problems is simple, albeit very difficult to implement: start charging those responsible for the problems they cause. If you don't want a super-violent Central American paramilitary gang relocating to rural Iowa, demand that the BICE start conducting sweeps of the workers at the Swift meatpacking plant. And, the local officials should start cracking down on the plant before their community goes down the drain. And, the residents of Iowa should start a recall of Tom Vilsack.

Posted at 03:33 PM | Comments (2)

"Nativo American"

Nativo Lopez is California's Mexican-"American" alternative to Al Sharpton (who, bad as he is, is at least an American). Lopez gets featured in the Weekly Standard:

Here's a suggestion for [the Mexico-traveling Fabian Nunez]: In order to bridge California's illegal-immigration divide, [Nunez] should start on the northern side of the border, with the more militant elements of California's Hispanic community, who shamelessly interject race into the public discourse--and whom Democratic leaders dare not offend.

And that means standing up to the likes of Nativo Lopez.

LOPEZ IS PRESIDENT of the Mexican American Political Association and a leading force behind Hermandad Mexicana Nacional (Mexican National Brotherhood), a tax-exempt non-profit formed to aid undocumented workers which nevertheless dabbles in partisan affairs--so much so that it's been the subject of an election-fraud investigation.

Until last year, "Nativo" (his real first name is Larry) was a Democrat. Then he switched to the Green party to join the Nader-Camejo presidential juggernaut. Lopez's own brush with elected office was even more calamitous. Elected a decade ago to a seat on the Santa Ana school board of trustees, Lopez was recalled by residents of Orange County (just months before Gray Davis met the same fate) for his refusal to comply with California's Proposition 227, which ended bilingual education in public schools. The recall vote wasn't close: Lopez lost by a 40-point margin. He said he wanted to make Spanish California's primary language; he was rejected in every precinct of the most Spanish-speaking city in America.

Normally, that would be the end of the story--gadfly gets swatted. However, Lopez continues to write new chapters in the art of race-baiting...

...Lopez's approach to the sensitive topic [of driver's licenses for illegal aliens] is to liken it to the Holocaust. When asked by La Opinion newspaper about an alternative that would place a special mark on California drivers' licenses to distinguish between legal residents and illegal aliens, Lopez declared that the latter "do not want to be the Jews of Nazi Germany in California" and "will not be the new black slaves of the sureños states of the United States in this state." He added, "We will not be the Palestinians either that in their own earth undergoes an oppression. We are pioneering in California, a creative town of values, peace and fighters..."

Posted at 09:25 AM | Comments (1)

NYT: Devastating hurricane hits Gulf Coast; illegal aliens hardest hit

No, it's not a parody. With all the possible coverage of Katrina, the New York Times actually wrote an article on the plight of "undocumented" immigrants in the disaster zone.

From Ian Urbina's "Foreign Workers Are Caught in a Double Trap" (abbreviated version here):

BILOXI, Miss., Sept. 5 - Like so many other people here, Pedro, a landscaper from Chiapas, Mexico, is desperately trying to get out of Biloxi. He wants to take his wife, Anna, who is eight months pregnant, someplace cleaner and safer, wherever that might be. [Whereever it might be, it will probably be in the U.S. After all, he's just one month from an anchor baby, and why spoil that opportunity? -- LW]

But aside from being low on gas like everyone else, Pedro, who would not give his last name because he is undocumented, is nervous about traveling in a city swarming with police officers and National Guard troops...

I repeat: this is not a joke. This is an actual NYT article.

Please send a short, polite email to public *at* nytimes.com suggesting they not print self-parodies.

UPDATE: For those who aren't familiar with this subject, various newspapers including the NYT have published an endless list of pro-illegal immigration puff pieces. The fact that the NYT found the time to print yet another pro-illegal immigration article during Katrina is the point here.

"Liberal" visitors might want to spend a few minutes or hours thinking about this comment from another "liberal":

Do you really want to toil in unsanitary, unsafe, underpaid fields to feed your family?

Why is that something that "liberals" like the NYT should support?

Why not support ending illegal immigration and all of its associated abuses and public and private corruption?

By supporting illegal immigration, "liberals" end up supporting the Bush administration and its corporate backers' desire for cheap labor. They also end up supporting ethnic nationalists and the Mexican oligarchy's desire to pawn off their excess population.

Hopefully I'm not asking too much to expect "liberals" to be able to think things through.

UPDATE 2: Apparently it is asking too much. The NYT article is a news report with propagandistic components. That propaganda is designed to make illegal immigration respectable, even desirable.

As for the "such a preposterous assertion venomously" etc. sentence, that's in a comment. It was never in the post.

While I've now added two updates to this post, I haven't modified it or deleted parts of it, and I haven't deleted or modified any comments. No, I think the comments from the "liberals" below are quite informative. Like Howard Dean, let them speak.

Posted at 06:16 AM | Comments (28)

Montgomery County's Douglas Duncan paying price for supporting illegal immigration

From WaPo's "Gang Attacks, County Troubles Cloud Duncan's Introduction to Md. Voters":

It wasn't the kind of summer Montgomery County Executive Douglas M. Duncan had in mind when he set out to introduce himself to the rest of Maryland as their best hope for governor.

Duncan's strategy to defeat Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley for the Democratic nomination next year has been to match his rival's telegenic glamour by presenting himself as the man of substance. His calling card is his 11 years at the helm of The County That Works.

But this summer, he has had to contend with gang violence and a planning department in which documents were altered to cover up violations by developers...

Previously: "Hey, illegal aliens! Head to Douglas Duncan's Montgomery County!" and "Martin O'Malley, Douglas M. Duncan support illegal immigration".

Posted at 04:30 PM | Comments (1)

DHS to support illegal aliens over citizens?

The previous post discussed the article "Migrant tuition break blasted", which also contains this shocking statement:

...The Homeland Security Department said it received the complaint about Texas from the Washington Legal Foundation and was reviewing it. But a department official, who requested anonymity, went further, noting that the department may not act on the request because the foundation has not exhausted all other legal avenues.

One judge may have ruled against the group in Kansas, but the issue has not yet been raised in Texas courts, the official said. And it remains unclear whether Homeland Security has jurisdiction over this matter, the official said...

The way I read that, the DHS is going to refuse to do anything about this on a technicality. Clearly, to many of those in the federal government illegal aliens - or their corrupt employers - have more rights than U.S. citizens.

Posted at 01:48 PM | Comments (0)

Robert Zeigler, Raymund Paredes support illegal aliens getting better deal than citizens

The article "Migrant tuition break blasted" discusses the Texas law that gives illegal aliens who (illegally) reside in Texas a discount on college tuition. Meanwhile, U.S. citizens who live in another state but who want to attend college in TX are forced to pay the higher rate:

...A complaint filed with the Department of Homeland Security charges Texas is violating a 1996 federal law that says if public colleges offer discounted rates to undocumented students, they must do the same for U.S. citizens from out of state. Students who live out of state typically pay significantly higher tuition than in-state students at public schools.

Lamar Smith, the Republican congressman from San Antonio who wrote and sponsored that federal law, said he supports the foundation's effort.

"States shouldn't treat illegal immigrants better than American citizens," Smith said.

Educators don't see it that way.

"These are members of our community," [San Antonio College] President Robert Zeigler said. "We want to encourage them to get an education and better their lives. We do not want to make it more difficult for them."

SAC, part of the Alamo Community College District, enrolls the second highest number of undocumented immigrants in the state, after the Houston Community College System...

But, wait, it gets worse:

"It's absurd to claim these students are taking money away from legal residents," said Raymund Paredes, the state's higher education commissioner.

The foundation's complaint comes at a time when Texas is struggling to enroll more Hispanic college students, and as Paredes said, "We count all students who go to college," whether they're documented or not.

Paredes said the law is intended to assist undocumented immigrants who unknowingly broke the law when their families brought them to Texas as youngsters. Those who take advantage of the law's benefits typically are high-achieving students and must prove they are taking steps to become legal citizens, he said...

Obviously, there's only so much money to go around. Any money spent giving a discount to someone who's here illegally could be spent giving a discount - or a greater discount - to citizens.

Posted at 12:35 PM | Comments (2)

Bank Calumet giving home loans to illegal aliens is protested

Indiana's Bank Calumet gives home loans to illegal aliens. On Saturday, about 15 Americans protested outside one of their branches:

Organized by the Indiana Federation for Immigration Reform and Enforcement, the protest drew honks and shouts of encouragement as well as jibes and insults from people driving past...

[The leader of the protest] accused the bank of aiding and abetting illegal immigration by extending such loans, which allow a borrower to use Internal Revenue Service-issued Individual Taxpayer Identification Number on loan applications in place of a Social Security number...

Bank Calumet Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Cal Bellamy, contacted by phone Saturday, said the bank respected the protesters' right to express their opinions.

"What makes the community strong, people can disagree about that, but Bank Calumet is coming down on the side of home ownership," he said...

Awww. Why, you could almost say he's a humanitarian, as he gives home loans to people who under our laws shouldn't be in our country.

Previously: Indiana's Bank Calumet gives home loans to illegal aliens

Posted at 09:01 AM | Comments (0)

"Census Bureau: American Living Standards Now Seriously Impacted By Immigration"

The numbers are crunched over here.

...This implies that more than half of the decline in native income last year was due to immigration.

These are averages. Among natives without a high school education, the impact will be larger. Similarly, the negative effect of immigrants on black workers will be greater than average, because they are in direct competition.

Immigration enthusiasts to the contrary, there was always a tipping point at which the impact of immigration on the living standards of native-born Americans would start to show up seriously in the data.

Looks like we reached that point in 2004.

Posted at 01:06 PM | Comments (4)

Does Catholic Charities respect our laws?

Unfortunately, it appears that the Catholic Charities USA has no respect for our laws, prefering instead a world where anyone who's having troubles in their own country can come here. Once here, they should be allowed to obtain all the rights of citizens. In other words, a continual amnesty for illegal aliens.

On Saturday, September 17 in Phoenix, they'll be holding their annual meeting to set their social policies. This year's topic: "Justice for Newcomers: A Call for Solidarity and Reform". That page has a PDF to their policy paper, as well as an email address that their members can use to comment on it.

The term "newcomers" is their word for refugees, asylum seekers, legal immigrants, and illegal aliens. However, the document mainly concerns illegal aliens (who are not, of course, refered to by that legally correct term). From the PDF:

Migrants and newcomers possess all the rights and corresponding responsibilities recognized by the Church. These do not derive from membership in a state or from immigration status, but from the inherent dignity of every person. In our view, citizenship does not confer rights, personhood does...

...[The Church] recognizes a human right not to have to leave one's nation. If a person's rights cannot be realized at home, however, he or she can migrate to seek conditions consonant with human dignity. The right to migrate applies to persons fleeing persecution, violence, natural disaster and other refugee-like conditions. It also extends to the economic migrants who increasingly characterize our inter-dependent world. While international agreements allow for the free flow of goods and services, states do not provide sufficient legal avenues for the movement of people in search of work. This anomaly lies at the heart of much "illegal" migration...

...We do not trivialize "rule of law" concerns. However, U.S. immigration policies deny many immigrants a legal way to meet their most solemn responsibilities, particularly to their families.

...Migrants also have a right to humane treatment on their journeys. At the very least, government policies should not contribute to the separation of families, to human rights abuses or to crossing deaths. Receiving states should normally embrace newcomers as full members, allowing them to assume the rights and responsibilities of their adopted country.

...Critics of immigration reform legislation dislike the idea of "rewarding" those who have violated our immigration laws. Yet as the Bush Administration has recognized, expanding the legal avenues to immigration - to reflect labor and family realities – will reduce illegal migration, a result that enhanced immigration measures cannot achieve on their own. [65] While effective reform must go beyond a temporary worker program, we would note that the "bracero" program – a "guest worker" program for agricultural laborers from Mexico from 1942 to 1964 - significantly diminished illegal migration to the United States. [Actually, illegal immigration increased during the bracero program, and that program created the networks that allowed subsequent illegal immigration --LW]

65 Statement of Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Jul. 13, 2005), available at http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/speech/speech_0255.xml. ("A second imperative is the need to strengthen border security and interior enforcement, as well as to improve our immigration system .... We are developing a new approach to controlling the border, one that includes an integrated mix of additional staff, new technology and enhanced infrastructure investment. But control of the border will also require reducing the demand for illegal border migration by channeling migrants into regulated legal channels to seek work.")

It says so much that they rely on the Bush administration and even Tamar Jacoby to make their argument.

The bottom line is that they want McCain-Kennedy, together with many other socialism-style "reforms". Hopefully there are some Catholic organizations that respect our laws and our sovereignty and can answer what I hope is just an extremist group.

Posted at 06:44 AM | Comments (9)

Residents sue Herndon VA over illegal alien day laborer center

Six residents of Herndon, VA have sued that town over its plans to build an illegal alien hiring hall. Judicial Watch is representing them in the suit.

Herndon officials have acknowledged that the center would likely provide help to day laborers who are in the country illegally, but said they are not equipped to sort out individuals' immigration status, which can at times be murky.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said that no matter the problem, facilitating the hiring of illegal immigrants is not an acceptable solution.

"The Town Council understands it would be helping illegal aliens" by establishing a day laborer site, Fitton said Thursday during a news conference at the group's Washington headquarters. "It has essentially admitted it in some proceedings."

Herndon Mayor Michael O'Reilly said in a statement Thursday that Judicial Watch is misdirecting its concerns over federal immigration policy at the town.

"Clearly the national immigration issue needs to be handled by Congress and the executive branch and not by small local governments such as Herndon," O'Reilly said...

Clearly, buck passers like O'Reilly need to be recalled.

Previously: Herndon VA: illegal alien hiring hall won't check immigration status.

Posted at 03:29 AM | Comments (3)

Inside the Open Borders mindset

The following comment came in to this thread about Orrin Hatch's anti-American DREAM Act recently. It was posted from a small college in California's Central Valley. It was all uppercase, which I've converted to lowercase:

No one should beg for anything or even beg those racism people like those who make comments in this web site who all they care about is them self and not about others who need some help. after all those immigrants who live in this country, who many american citizens dont want in this counrty are the ones who do all the hard work for those lazy as citizens who arent brave enough to do the hard work in the hot fields. if it wasnt for these immigrants the economy of supposly your country woulduv crashed down ones again. you american citizens should give thank's to all immigrants who do all the field work so you lazy asses can have food on your table. [etc. etc. etc...]

It seems we're having a wee bit of a problem with our assimilation policy.

While there's the possibility that this person is only pretending to be an Open Borders loon, based on the many other similar comments posted there and especially at this earlier thread I tend to doubt it.

Posted at 04:02 PM | Comments (4)

Sen. John Cornyn: "rampant lawlessness" because of illegal immigration

According to Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX):

Illegal immigration threatens the United States' reputation as the "nation of laws"... "We have rampant lawlessness within our borders because our immigration system is simply broken... It's harmful to our reputation and harmful to the immigrants operating outside the protection of the law."

He's right about that, but he's definitely wrong on the "fix" that he and Sen. Tom Kyl (R-AZ) are selling: a massive amnesty scheme.

The Cornyn-Kyl amnesty appears to be the "tougher" alternative of the two false choices offered to the American public, the other being the Kennedy-McCain massive amnesty scheme:

At issue is how to create a system that takes a tough stance on national security while simultaneously allowing immigrants to keep working. Currently, some immigrants are applying for work permits and legal citizenship. Others are taking advantage of United States' loose borders.

Huh? No, the idea is to reduce the number of illegal aliens in the U.S., not simply to change what we call them and keep them here. The article (by Nathaniel Jones of the Star-Telegram Dallas Bureau) goes on to stress that the Cornyn-Kyl amnesty is not an amnesty.

Posted at 03:20 PM | Comments (0)

Douglas Mayor Ray Borane sells illegal immigration to L.A. Times

Ray Borane is the mayor of Douglas, AZ, which sits almost right on the border with Mexico. The town has 15,000 residents, 90% of whom are "Latino". From the LAT article "In a State of Emergency, City's Relaxed":

But on the front lines in Douglas, senior government leaders, federal agents and many residents are hard-pressed to identify the emergency conditions. Borane said the city of 15,000 was in generally good shape and had learned to live with the annoyances that accompanied the flow over the border...

To be sure, illegal immigrants cause substantial damage in and around Douglas. They have trampled sensitive ecosystems in the nearby mountains, dumped many tons of litter in the countryside, vandalized ranchers' property and caused havoc with local healthcare systems.

But those burdens are part of a much larger relationship with Mexico. On balance, Borane said, immigration has been a benefit.

"The damage these illegals commit is minimal compared to what they contribute," said Borane, who is chairman of a group of U.S. mayors on the Mexican border. "This country can absorb these people. They are producers. Their children can become productive citizens."

The mayor's contributions have been noted. Borane is the recipient of Mexico's Ohtli Award for:

"efforts to improve U.S.-Mexican relations, contributing to their communities and promoting their Mexican heritage and culture."

Borane also formed the core of Marc Cooper's Minuteman Project hit piece.

There's much more about this fine "American" here.

Further, the LAT buys what the feds are selling:

U.S. Border Patrol agents don't agree with [Napolitano] that they are not increasing enforcement or with the mayor that immigration cannot be controlled.

Border Control Chief David V. Aguilar said his agency had made significant progress in stanching the flow of illegal immigrants in the Tucson sector, which includes Douglas...

The LAT goes on to report on problems the ranchers and other residents are having, and that most of the residents of Douglas are opposed to illegal immigration.

Posted at 11:13 AM | Comments (0)

The 1986 amnesty failed spectaculary, why repeat the mistake?

Georgie Anne Geyer discusses the 1986 amnesty, that was supposed to be the amnesty to end all amnesties. (Also here).

...Pete Nunez, the former U.S. attorney for San Diego and a lifelong fighter for immigration control, told me in a recent talk: "Why are those numbers today so high? Because of the amnesty of 1986! Those 2.7 million illegals amnestied were then able, in the decade of the '90s, to sponsor their family members. That decade turned out to have the highest number of legal immigrants practically in our history, because of the amnesty."

Here at the busy port of entry, in my long conversations with officials of the Department of Homeland Security, which encompasses immigration, border patrol and customs, there is unanimous agreement with this interpretation.

"The '86 experience definitely led to family reunification," Lauren Mack, customs and border protection public affairs officer, agreed. "We watched that amnesty -- it only created more fraud and more problems."

...The 1986 amnesty was not to be the first of many amnesties, nor a kind of experimental plug in the flow of human beings from a poor country to a rich one. To the contrary, it was to be the "last amnesty." Pushed by liberals in Congress like Teddy Kennedy, it was supposed to settle and legalize the illegals already in the United States, while controlling future immigration. It was to be the solution.

Instead, those 2.7 million settled in America and, under the dominating "family reunification" policy, were able immediately to sponsor almost any number of relatives, some bringing in 80 or 90 persons. And because the enforcement aspects of the law were never put into practice, the 1986 amnesty left the gate open to still more massive numbers. Meanwhile, the proposed new guest worker programs before Congress almost all provide for some kind of amnesty that will lead only to a repeat of 1986...

It is truly scary how the same organizations (such as the National Immigration Forum) and politicians (such as Big Ted) that were involved in the 1986 amnesty are trying to fool the U.S. once again.

Posted at 07:53 AM | Comments (17)

Mexico still jockeying to be our #1 cheap labor supplier

Mexico is considering reinstating visa requirements that might help keep out Brazilians who intend to cross into the U.S., Bloomberg reports. On a cynical note, this is probably not for humanitarian reasons or related to cooperation with the U.S. It is probably at least partly because when illegal Brazilians send their money home it goes to Brazil, not Mexico. Needless to say, Mexico would prefer that that money was sent to their country instead.

The article also describes the Brasilian telenovela "America" about illegal aliens, and how "half of Brazil's 180 million people live in poverty, earning less than $2 a day". Unless we intend to open our bleeding hearts to 90 million people, we'd be advised to strongly encourage them to stay home and build up their country rather than coming here.

Posted at 03:55 AM | Comments (0)

The Dallas Morning News' "best thinking" isn't good enough

The DMN joins the long line of papers and pundits who've taken the opportunity lately to push for immigration "reform". As I pointed out here, all of these editorials seem to follow the same pattern and offer the same advice. The DMN is no different in "Feeling the Heat: Citizens are pushing the immigration fight":

...When Congress reconvenes after Labor Day, it will have some very good ideas in front of it for how to fix this mess. Our best thinking is to start with Arizona Sen. John McCain's guest worker program, which would allow foreign workers to apply for two three-year visas, and combine it with some of Texas Sen. John Cornyn's border security ideas, such as investing in more cameras...

Sounds comfy! A little of one amnesty, a little of another. But, whatever you do, don't even consider the revolutionary idea of simply enforcing our current laws.

Obviously, the Dallas Morning News' "best thinking" just isn't good enough.

Posted at 01:29 AM | Comments (0)

Blacks lose jobs to immigrants; do "liberals" care?

The Boston Globe's labor reporter offers "Job hurdles grow larger for black men":

...In 2004, fewer than 39 percent of black men between the ages of 16 and 24 had a job. The comparable national numbers for Hispanics and whites were 60 percent and 59 percent. All three groups lost ground between 2000 and 2004. Blacks started from a lower point and fell further...

[The article discusses the findings of the paper "What Explains the Continuing Decline in Labor Force Activity Among Young Black Men?" from Georgetown University public policy professor Harry Holzer, which says that prison and child support play a role. The article doesn't mention it, but the paper - for some wacky reason - doesn't appear to cover another major issue. The article, however, does mention that issue:]

...intensified competition in the labor market. In a series of reports they have written, Northeastern University economists Andrew Sum and Paul Harrington have documented the success new immigrants have had in landing jobs. Since 2000, 3.7 million new immigrants -- those who arrived in the past five years -- have found employment. In low-wage jobs, immigrants have displaced young people of all races.

But young black men have been hit hardest, Sum said, because they compete most directly with immigrants for jobs at stores and fast-food restaurants, especially in urban areas.

Harrington saw that rivalry up close on a recent visit to Philadelphia where he conducted a focus group with employers. Philadelphia is a city with a large black population and a growing number of immigrants. The employers at the meeting didn't say anything disparaging about black workers. In fact, some of the employers themselves were black. But to a person they were effusive in their praise for immigrants.

"All they could talk about was the work ethic of their foreign-born employees," Harrington said. Work ethic seems to be a term that covers a lot of ground -- everything from showing up on time, to treating customers well, to willingness to learn new skills.

Racism may be a factor, but probably not a big one. Harrington and Sum's research shows that black male immigrants without a high school diploma are twice as likely to hold a job than their native-born counterparts...

Obviously, the correct public policy is to reduce the amount of foreign competition for American jobs and inculcate a "work ethic" among the 61% of 16-24 black men who are unemployed. The absolutely incorrect public policy is for the president of the U.S. to promulgate propaganda in support of cheap foreign labor.

How do "liberals" respond to this issue? While no "liberal" site appears to have commented on this specific article, let's turn to this January 7, 2004 thread from Daily "screw 'em" Kos about Bush's guest worker amnesty scheme:

"Catsy" says: The downside: pardon me for being shrill, as this affects me directly as one of the nation's unemployed, but what the great bouncing cherry-flavored gummi christs are we doing taking steps to legitimize illegal workers and provide job placement for potential immigrants when there are so many American citizens who can't find work?

"manyoso", who I believe to be raza, replies: This is one of the things I hate about Republicans... and you are echoing them. This is the classic Republican argument against immigrants. It is also one of the primary arguments in every racist bigot's arsenal. I am disgusted to see this coming from a progressive site. Fear of brown people coming in to take all of our jobs is anathema to the progressive, inclusive view. Let's not turn into Republicans by turning on one of our primary constituencies.

Then, the Great Kos himself chimes in: Immigrants do the shit work that Americans think they are too good to do. Landscaping. Slaughterhouses. Agricultural drudge work. Housekeepers... Don't shit on immigrants... And considering that I am an immigrant, I wonder whose job I "stole"?

Obviously, they live in a magic place where illegal aliens always did those jobs and furthermore where the market doesn't apply. While some of the "liberals" on that thread make some slight sense, they usually spoil it by supporting a massive amnesty or by being restrained by political correctness. That said, it seems like there is the possibility of some of the great thinkers on that thread of having their minds changed if presented with more information.

Posted at 01:11 PM | Comments (2)

Big Business Balks at Bush Propaganda Plan

President Bush has created the Orwellian-named "Americans for Border and Economic Security" to push for his massive guest worker amnesty scheme. Now, Bloomberg reports, Big Business is balking at the plan:

..."There is a reluctance to sign up for something that might turn out not to be the type of immigration reform bill we want to see," said John Gay [1], who runs a coalition in support of guest-worker programs that includes the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, First Data Corp. and Marriott International Inc.

Republican lobbyists including Ed Gillespie, the party's former national chairman, and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, are seeking to raise money for a public relations- campaign of as much as $3 million to support Bush's plan. The lobbyists are asking companies such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Microsoft Corp. to contribute between $50,000 and $250,000 to pay for the effort.

Bush's plan aims to allow employers to hire immigrant "guest workers," which companies want. Supporters say their concern is that Republican lawmakers pushing for tighter borders on national-security grounds will pressure Bush eventually to accept a measure making it harder rather than easier to hire workers from overseas.

"We are still uncertain what the policy is that the group will advocate for," Lee Culpepper [2], a lobbyist for Bentonville, Arkansas-based Wal-Mart, said of the Gillespie-Armey effort. "Will it be only whatever the White House wants, or will it be independent policy goals formed by the members of the group?"

In other words, will it be almost completely against the wishes of the vast majority of Americans, or will it be completely against the wishes of the vast majority of Americans? That is, to them, the question.

What will Bush's propaganda consist of?

The campaign being planned by Gillespie and Armey is aimed at emphasizing the economic benefits of immigrant workers, said Terry Holt, a former Bush campaign spokesman who is working with them on the effort.

..."We want to communicate the great message of what immigration means to the American economy," Holt said. "In this political climate, it's also necessary to talk about how our borders must be secured."

..."Immigrants aren't being talked about in a very endearing way [by " Talk-show hosts and newspaper columnists"]," Armey said. "But we're talking about real good people who are doing what we all are trying to do, which is feed our babies."

Translation: "Aww... Why do you hate-filled people hate our cheap laborers? They're wonderful people, despite what you evil xenophobes say about them!"

Gillespie's group, which also includes former Democratic Representative Cal Dooley of California, is courting companies such as Greenwood Village, Colorado-based First Data and Springdale, Arkansas-based Tyson Food Inc. as well as groups representing landscaping businesses, restaurants, hotels, nurses and hospitals.

Obviously, the great majority of Americans are opposed to these various plans. It's also extremely dangerous for our country when corporations are listened to and the people are not: "Would a Bill of Impeachment Wake-Up President Bush?"

[1] In 2003 John Gay was identified as "Vice President, Governmental Affairs, of the American Hotel & Lodging Association". In 2004, he was identified as "vice president at the International Franchise Association". In both cases he was also identified as "co-chair of the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition". The latter group is at ewic.org. Their membership consists of a large number of big business advocacy organizations, together with... the American Immigration Lawyers Association. In the "small world, eh" dep't, there's also a link between the AILA and Rep. Chris Cannon.

[2] Lee Culpepper is also Chairman of the National Immigration Forum and works for the National Restaurant Association. Last mentioned here.

Posted at 11:43 AM | Comments (2)

Arkansas Republican governor Mike Huckabee and the "underground economy"

Arkansas' "compassionate conservative" governor, Republican Mike Huckabee, paid a visit to New Hampshire over the weekend. The details are in "Arkansas governor talks politics, immigrants at GOP gathering". In the original version, the following two paragraphs have several paragraphs between them. But, when excerpted they are quite striking:

"Politics does not matter to a single mother working two jobs and needing medical care for her child or to someone wanting a pothole patched, he said... Politics, [Gov. Mike Huckabee] said, is of little consequence to someone who does not have a job...

He said people complain illegal immigrants are taking their jobs. But, he said, when he asks individuals to give him names and addresses of people who want to work in a poultry-processing plant deboning chickens, no one does...

Obviously, his "compassion" seems to have interfered with his ability to form commonsense, American, public policy.

Huckabee wants to bring in a foreign serf class to do the jobs Americans won't do. But, his "compassionate" side feels the pain of Americans who are out of work.

I'm sure those who don't let "compassion" stand in their way of doing the right thing could think up a better way than importing helots.

Here's a suggestion: reduce the number of foreign serf workers. That would raise the wages for poultry workers. And, that would provide an alternative for those out of work Americans he feels such compassion for. And, as it happens, those are the same people who presumably voted for this loser and whose welfare he should put before other concerns.

Huckabee agreed a "hot" issue today is illegal immigrants. He said the country’s borders need to be protected, not so much from those trying to get into this country to earn a living, but to keep out the person trying to sneak in a dirty bomb.

Obviously, we don't want terrorists coming over. But, that doesn't mean we can't prevent illegal low-wage workers from coming over at the same time. Apparently Huckabee isn't concerned about the latter.

He said the country's 11 million illegal immigrants and the companies that employ them have created an underground economy. Without them, he said, our economy would collapse.

I'd dearly love to call him a supporter of that "underground economy," but just because he appears unwilling to fight against corruption and other anti-American activity doesn't necessarily mean that he's involved in it. But, clearly, it doesn't appear to be much of a concern of his. He is obviously unfit not just for president, but for any elected office.

If the Dems were smart, they'd start trying to tie the word "Republican" to the word "corruption." The problem, as usual, is that the Dems aren't smart enough to see opportunity, even when handed to them on a silver platter.

Previously: "Arkansas' Huckabee, Tyson Foods, LULAC all aligned", "New Americans welcomed to Iowa, Arkansas", "Arkansas: discounted college for illegal aliens blocked", and "AR Gov. Mike Huckabee goes on the attack".

Posted at 07:35 AM | Comments (1)

"Immigrants" get Matricula Consular cards in Watsonville; some downsides noted

The Santa Cruz Sentinel article "ID card gives immigrants more opportunity" describes a visit of the Mexican consul to Watsonville, CA to pass out Matricula Consular cards, aka "IDs for illegals." Those ID cards are only of use to illegal aliens, and the Mexican government travels between their outposts in our country passing them out to its citizens who are here illegally. The Bush administration supports the use of the cards.

The article starts out in the "standard" way, but then includes some downsides of the cards:

To the Mexican immigrant, especially the one who is in the United States illegally, the card is the key to opening bank accounts, obtaining credit with credit card companies, even paying income taxes to the U.S. government.

Yet to the state of California and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, issuing such a card is of big concern.

Not only has the card been criticized for lending legitimacy to illegal immigration in California, it has come under fire for being the end-round for terrorists in a post-9/11 era...

As pointed out at the second link above, the Bush administration fought to allow banks to accept these cards. The only official criticism has come from the FBI, the GAO, and some pro-America congressmen and other elected officials. If this article's reporter has evidence of the DHS leadership opposing the card, I'd like to see it.

"Obviously, Mexico isn't our number one concern, but open borders are always a problem, and we're not entirely convinced that the background process to determine identity and criminal background (for acquiring the national cards) are being done satisfactorily," said Gary Winuck, chief deputy director for California's Office of Homeland Security in Sacramento.

Perhaps the report is confused that agency with the federal DHS.

The fact of the matter, he said, is that the United States has no jurisdiction over the matter.

Strictly speaking, that's wrong. If a country's consulate really does something wrong, we can always ask them to leave. Of course, that's a very rare occurence. But, there's always the possibility of a formal complaint from the State Dep't to their opposite numbers. That needn't be a rare occurence, but for some reason or other the Bush administration refuses to do anything about Mexico repeatedly stepping over the line. And, a consulate passing out the cards wouldn't do it any good if they were considered to be the Mickey Mouse IDs that they are. Unfortunately, that's not the case: the Bush administration fought to allow banks to accept the cards, and the Mexican government has gone to cities throughout the land and convinced gullible, racist, corrupt, or just "liberal" local officials to accept the cards (an example from Napa).

"Whether they’re here illegally or legally, it is not our job to determine," [Jose Loreto, San Diego's deputy general consul] said.

Loreto said 70 percent of the people who apply for the card... are here illegally...

Posted at 04:12 AM | Comments (1)

Article promoting anti-American DREAM Act covers some downsides

The article "Tests illegals can't pass" is yet another article promoting Orrin Hatch's anti-American DREAM Act. That Act would give discounted college educations to illegal aliens. Out-of-state U.S. citizens would continued being forced to pay the full price. Of course, under no circumstances should a citizen of another country be given a better deal than a U.S. citizen, but some people - far-lefties as well as corrupt politicians - remain unclear on that commonsense concept. The current article is a bit different from others that promotes that Act, as it includes a few of the downsides and it's not as weepy as the others:

The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act forbade states from granting in-state tuition to illegal immigrants based on residency because those students would be paying less than out-of-state U.S. citizens...

...some [NJ] colleges are allowing undocumented students to pay the lower in-state tuition, apparently violating federal law...

...[out of several others, the reporters found two pro-American colleges:] William Paterson University and the County College of Morris reject all applications from undocumented students...

...Partha Banerjee, executive director of the New Jersey Immigration Policy Network, says the few four-year colleges that grant in-state tuition to illegal students - three of 10 - probably "just don't know or they are just not following" the federal rules. He says he's concerned that "once they find out this is something they cannot do, then perhaps they will stop doing it," and that would further harm the immigrant students...

Quick! No one tell them they're violating federal law.

..."People who are here illegally should not benefit on the backs of taxpayers," says Assemblyman Michael Carroll, R-Morristown. "Far from being welcomed with a discount, [they] should be evicted immediately."...

...State officials worry that an influx of students suddenly able to afford college might strain a system already filled to capacity. For the class entering last fall, the New Jersey Commission on Higher Education says, its four-year public schools received 88,467 applications but enrolled only 15,912 freshmen...

"We have huge capacity needs; we are short of space," says Jean Oswald, the commission's executive director. "If thousands more of these undocumented students are able to go to college because they can afford it, it absolutely will knock more of the legal people out..."

Obviously, there's only a limited number of available slots, and none of those should go to anyone who's here illegally. Obviously, there are some who don't see it that way. They would be willing to allow a citizen of another country to take the spot of a U.S. citizen. Of course, a small number of those people aren't necessarily un-American: they just haven't thought about this enough.

Immigration advocates [sic; make that "illegal immigration advocates"] insist that opportunities for achieving students, legal and illegal alike, should be based on merit.

But others argue it is wrong to secure a college slot for an illegal immigrant, particularly at the expense of a legal resident.

"A college might admit the undocumented student on merit," Oswald says, "but the bottom line is that some residents will say, 'Why should my daughter compete for a college spot against someone who is illegal?' "

Now, come the scare tactics:

"Those who create obstacles for immigrant students will find that in the end they will have a bigger problem," says Rafael Fraguela, the principal at The Learning Center in Passaic and a former vice principal of Passaic High. "Instead of spending more money on education, they will have to spend more money on prisons and on fighting gang violence.

Well, the cure for that is to prevent illegal immigrants from coming here in the first place. That way everyone discussed above wouldn't be an issue.

Posted at 11:47 PM | Comments (6)

The AP on the "divided GOP" and their "immigration debate"

The AP offers a helpful "summary box" of the "debate" so far. It consists of just three short bullet points:

MAKING A MOVE: President Bush is considering allowing illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. before February 2004 to qualify for guest-worker visas. Those who arrived later would be deported.

Of course, almost 2/3 of Americans - from across the spectrum - oppose those visas, but what matters their opinion?

And, the idea that Bush would have the will to deport anyone who arrived here since 2/04 is ludicrous at best. If he had that will, why don't we set the cutoff date a year or five years earlier? What will actually happen is those who came here after that date will just become part of the first wave of the new group of illegal aliens who'll come here because of his amnesty.

WARRING FACTIONS: In crafting a proposal, Bush is caught between conservatives who want to stem the tide of illegal immigrants and supporters in the business sector who think the economy needs the workers.

Obviously, the AP needs to start reading some of these polls. It's not just conservatives who are opposed to Bush's plan. Those who support his or the similar plans are actually a small but powerful minority consisting of not just businesses but the racial lobby, the media, and the far left.

CRISIS POINT: Arizona and New Mexico have declared immigration emergencies, and the Senate is set to consider competing plans — one would allow workers to stay in the U.S. while applying for visas, and the other would not.

Once again, the AP seems unable to present a choice that would actually work: enforcing the laws we currently have. This appears to be a stock tactic employed by the cheap labor lobby: just ignore that workable idea and concentrate instead on offering a false choice.

Posted at 04:24 PM | Comments (3)

Wacky stunt to highlight dangerously insecure border

The headline tells you most all you need to know, but there are a few ironic twists. "Human cannonball to be fired across U.S.-Mexico border" informs us that David Smith Sr. is going to perform the stunt from Tijuana over to Border Field State Park in San Diego. This might be next Saturday, or it might have already occurred. In any case, since no one really cares:

The feat is the brainchild of Venezuelan artist Javier Tellez and is part of a series of public art projects in the two border cities...

Tellez organized the cannonball launch with psychiatric patients at the Baja California Mental Health Center in Mexicali, Mexico as a therapeutic project...

Although it is against the law for anyone, including U.S. citizens, to enter the country outside an official port of entry, Smith Sr. won't be crossing illegally. U.S. Border Patrol Chief David Aguilar made an exception for him...

Isn't that cute? Of course, all he needed to do was become a citizen of Mexico, Brazil, or Yemen and he wouldn't have needed permission, just a corrupt employer and corrupt politicians to support him.

Posted at 11:51 AM | Comments (1)

Carlsbad Heckler's Veto, Part 2

As previously discussed, Carlsbad CA wants to charge state Sen. Bill Morrow for the costs that city incurred providing security at the illegal immigration forum held there earlier this month.

Now, the SDUT weighs in with "The price of speech", saying that the cities affected should pay for it:

...So, is it fair for the taxpayers of Carlsbad – and Oceanside, San Diego, La Mesa, El Cajon and National City, whose police went to Carlsbad's mutual aid – to bear the expense? Yes, because protecting free speech from a "heckler's veto" can carry a high dollar price, and it's the duty of government, local and otherwise, to pay it.

Posted at 04:17 AM | Comments (0)

Illegal aliens stay in the U.S.; Mexican, American response compared

Because of increased border protection in some areas, the prices to be smuggled into the U.S. have risen and muy malo groups have gotten involved rather than the previous "mom and pop" groups. This has caused some illegal aliens who had previously returned home occasionally to not only stay in the U.S., but to send for their families.

This is discussed in "Officials: Strengthening border has domino effect", and two alternative ways of dealing with this issue are presented.

From the Mexican side of things comes their general consul in San Diego, Luis Cabrera:

"It's a labor market and it obeys the laws of supply and demand... You can't control such a thing as migration into a developed country only by law enforcement. With all due respect, it's very clear that we have to deal with immigration in all its aspects and adjust the legal framework to reality."

Is it any surprise that Bush, Cornyn, Kyl, McCain, Kennedy, and all the other amnesty proponents including those in the media all want to "adjust" the "framework" to fit their "reality", just like the Mexicans want to do?

Meanwhile, from the American side of things, comes Andy Ramirez of the Friends of the Border Patrol:

...the problem is not that border enforcement has increased, he said. The problem is that it hasn't increased enough.

"It's been strengthened in Tucson (Ariz.), but not elsewhere," he said. "They must strengthen the borders with manpower and technology."

In addition, Ramirez said, the government needs to start doing immigration sweeps in cities throughout the Southwest, increase workplace enforcement and stop allowing banks to accept illegal immigrants' Mexican identification card, or matricula consular, for bank business.

Posted at 11:35 PM | Comments (0)

When do-gooder do more harm than good

While there have been cases where "liberals" have actually done more good than harm, in many cases it's the opposite. A case in point is those groups that provide water stations in the desert for "migrants". From "Arizona residents grow weary of dealing with illegal immigration":

...children's book author Byrd Baylor, 81, believes it's her duty to help. She owns the 35 acres of land where No More Deaths, a coalition of volunteers that offers humanitarian aid to illegal immigrants, has its summer camp. Originally from San Antonio and a member of the Baylor mining family, she said it's obvious that the border policy has to change.

"My policy right now is just to keep people from dying who don't have a reason to die – just because they're crossing the border," Ms. Baylor said.

Her policy should be to prevent illegal immigration in the first place. That would be much more effective than in effect helping that to occur.

Before printing her "liberal" remarks, that article has the thoughts of other area residents who are tired of the trash and the large groups of "migrants" asking for stuff.

Posted at 09:28 PM | Comments (2)