Archives
This is a very large file. For the full smaller digest version, click here.Owen Thomas/ValleyWag has no clue about immigration or much else (Peter Thiel, Facebook)
Owen Thomas of ValleyWag offers "Billionaire Facebook investor's anti-immigrant heresy" [1]:
Insiders at Clarium Capital, the $5.3 billion hedge fund run by Facebook investor Peter Thiel, are buzzing about their boss's $1 million donation to NumbersUSA, an anti-immigrant group. The donation is an open secret within Clarium, and it has enraged several staff members who joined Clarium because they believed Thiel shared their libertarian ideals... What's interesting about this is his shift from outspoken Libertarian. At PayPal, he had ambitions of using his payments startup to undermine illiberal economies and create a new world financial order... Thiel once aimed to overturn the system. Now he just wants to work within it. As much as his anti-immigration views render him noxious to the Northern California mainstream, his turning away from an embrace of freedom make him an enemy to the rebellious thinkers he's hired.
Jejune, to the max! Real libertarians aren't likely to use phrases like "new world financial order", except ironically. And, NumbersUSA isn't "anti-immigrant" or "anti-immigration"; they support reducing and properly managing immigration. And, if libertarianism requires open borders, then libertarianism is as much a failed ideology as complete unilateral disarmament. Thomas also in effect argues for supporting the housing market through a Ponzi scheme involving immigration, without realizing the role that low-skilled immigrants played in the current issue.
If you want to do something about this, go leave a comment at [1], and also leave a comment at this Facebook group that Kyle de Beausset started: facebook.com/group.php?gid=57995012344
[1] valleywag.com/5083655/billionaire-facebook-investors-anti+immigrant-heresy
Agriprocessors CEO arrested on bank fraud charges
Earlier this year, ICE conducted a raid of the Agriprocessors plant in Postville, Iowa; see this recent post for links about it. Now comes this:The arrest of Agriprocessors CEO Sholom Rubashkin on bank fraud charges earlier today marked the fourth time that he or his brother has been alleged to have engaged in financial deception.
Sholom’s older brother, Moshe Rubashkin, was sentenced in 2002 to 15 months in prison and ordered to pay more than $225,000 in restitution for bank fraud. The case was linked to his ownership and operation of Montex Textiles, a Pennsylvania company. Moshe was also recently sentenced to 16 months for the company’s illegal storage of hazardous waste.
Last year, Agriprocessors executives agreed to pay $1.4 million to resolve allegations that the company participated in a scheme to hide another company’s assets during a bankruptcy...
NPR's "Tell Me More" spreads disinformation on hate crime statistics
NPR's "Tell Me More" show offers the misleading "Latinos Increasingly Targeted For Hate Crimes" (link):
The FBI reports that hate crimes against Latinos rose almost 40 percent between 2003 and 2006, and Hispanic activists say they are being targeted with threats and intimidation. Tony Asion, of El Pueblo, a Latino advocacy group, is joined by Kevin Johnson, of the University of California-Davis Law School, to discuss the statistics that are sending shockwaves through some Latino communities.
Now, for the facts that NPR won't tell you: the 40% rise was obtained by choosing a low year (2003) as the starting point and by not adjusting for population gains. And, when that adjustment is done, hate crimes against Hispanics are actually down since 1995 (as a percentage of their population).
That show is apparently produced or hosted by Michel Martin, but her involvement with the segment isn't known. Note that Johnson was a member of an Immigration Policy Group for the Obama campaign.
FIRM, CHIRLA, NYIC demand Obama stops raids, grants amnesty; will march in DC on January 21, 2009
A group of illegal immigration supporting groups held a press conference in DC yesterday, demanding that as president Obama grants amnesty and halts workplace raids. They also announced that they'll be marching for the same demands in DC on January 21, 2009.
Those involved include Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM) and their member organization CHIRLA. The latter has allegedly collaborated with the Mexican government, and another member group is headed by someone who belongs to an advisory council to that government. Other attendees included the New York Immigration Coalition and the National Capital Immigration Coalition/National Capitol Immigration Coalition.
Because of immigration, Democrats think Texas, Georgia, and Arizona might turn blue (Peter Wallsten/LAT)
Peter Wallsten of the Los Angeles Times offers "Democrats set sights on Texas" (link):Texas is one of several reliably red states that are now in Democrats' sights as party strategists begin to analyze a victorious 2008 campaign that they believe showed the contours of a new movement that could grow and prove long-lasting.There's more at the link, but I'm still waiting for someone to crunch the numbers to determine how much trouble the GOP has got itself into by thinking that allowing millions of potential Democrats to move here is a winning strategy.
A major shift in the Latino vote took place in Florida and the Southwest, where the Obama campaign spent at least $20 million on targeted appeals and organizing, including one television ad in the final days featuring the candidate reading Spanish from a script.
Latinos made up a greater share of the electorate than in the past in every Southwestern state, according to exit polls compiled by CNN. And in each Southwestern state, as well as Florida, the Democrat pulled a bigger percentage of the Latino vote -- a turnaround from 2004, when President Bush cut deeply into Democrats' hold on Latinos and won that bloc in Florida, where many Cuban Americans remain loyal to the GOP.
Julie Myers to leave Immigration and Customs Enforcement (DHS)
Ah, the end of an era. Just three years ago we were arguing over whether Bush's obvious nepotism pick of Julie Myers to head the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was qualified. Now, sadly to all those who've marveled at her courageous attempts to look like she was enforcing the laws while not really enforcing the laws, she'll be stepping down in a couple weeks (link). She hasn't explained what she'll be doing in the future, but if we're lucky it won't involve her attempting to enforce our laws.
Great: Sarah Palin immigration stance magically same as McCain's
Sarah Palin was recently interviewed by Jorge Ramos of Univision [1], and she repeatedly asked him why he - a citizen of Mexico who has no interest in becoming a U.S. citizen - keeps interfering in our internal politics. She repeatedly asked him why he was allowed to take up valuable time during a CNN debate where he wasn't even identified as a foreign citizen.
Unfortunately, I'm kidding.
Actually, her responses to his questions were virtually identical to what John McCain himself would have said. Bear in mind that the following is their incompetent translation, but the gist is quite understandable. After first being asked about the number of illegal aliens in Alaska and her not knowing, Ramos asked what she'd do about all the millions of illegal aliens in the U.S. She responded.:
There is no way that in the US we would roundup every illegal immigrant -there are about 12 million of the illegal immigrants- not only economically is that just an impossibility but that's not a humane way anyway to deal with the issue that we face with illegal immigration.
That is, of course, the same line that McCain, Obama, Bob Barr, and an endless line of other hacks have used. The current situation is not humane, and the proposed fixes would only make it worse. And, of course, the implication is that our choices are between amnesty and mass deportations, a false choice.
Then, he asks whether she favors amnesty. She replied:
No, I do not. I do not. Not total amnesty. You know, people have got to follow the rules. They've got to follow the bar, and we have got to make sure that there is equal opportunity and those who are here legally should be first in line for services being provided and those opportunities that this great country provides.
As detailed many times, that non-amnesty amnesty will be perceived as amnesty, and also because there's no real end to the line, large numbers of prospective legal immigrants will end up waiting much longer than they would have. Ramos then tries to verify whether she supports a "path to citizenship" for illegal aliens; she replies:
I do because I understand why people would want to be in America. To seek the safety and prosperity, the opportunities, the health that is here. It is so important that yes, people follow the rules so that people can be treated equally and fairly in this country.
So, to encourage people to follow the rules we're going to reward millions of breakages of those rules? And, of course, illegal aliens have some rights in the U.S., but more rights in their home countries. When they came here illegally they knew what they were getting into, and if they want more rights they can simply return home. It isn't our responsibility to give more rights to those who refused to acknowledge our perfectly reasonable laws.
[1] univision.com/content/content.jhtml?chid=3&schid=10414&secid=25534&cid=1716304
UPDATE: Apparently the transcript only included part of the interview. She also discussed Hugo Chavez, and she also spouted McCain's "secure the border" nonsense.
Colin Powell in 2001: Mexico, U.S. united by "common aspirations, values and culture"
A February 4, 2001 New York Times article contained this:
"Our common border is no longer a line that divides us, but a region that unites our nations, reflecting our common aspirations, values and culture," said Colin Powell last Tuesday in Washington at his first news conference as secretary of state, held jointly with the new Mexican foreign minister, Jorge Castaneda.
A couple other quotes - including his support for amnesty - at the link.
Nebraska xenophobes object to influx of willing workers (hate, mean-spiritedness)
I am literally sobbing as I link to this article (from Kirk Semple of The New York Times) about hate, racism, xenophobia, and mean-spiritedness in Grand Island, Nebraska:Like many workers at the meatpacking plant here, Raul Garcia, a Mexican-American, has watched with some discomfort as hundreds of Somali immigrants have moved to town in the past couple of years, many of them to fill jobs once held by Latino workers taken away in immigration raids.
Garcia has been particularly troubled by the Somalis' demand that they be allowed special breaks for prayers that are obligatory for devout Muslims. The breaks, he said, would inconvenience everyone else.
"The Latino is very humble," said Garcia, 73, who has worked at the plant, owned by JBS U.S.A. Inc., since 1994. "But they are arrogant," he said of the Somali workers. "They act like the United States owes them."
Garcia was among more than 1,000 Latino and other workers who protested a decision last month by the plant's management to cut their work day — and their pay — by 15 minutes to give scores of Somali workers time for evening prayers...
Judge Peter Busch: San Francisco can pass out ID cards to all, including illegal aliens
From this:A lawsuit to block San Francisco from handing out municipal identification cards to anyone who has lived in the city for at least 15 days regardless of their immigration status was tossed out of court Tuesday.A quote from Julia Harumi Mass from the American Civil Liberties Union follows; the ACLU joined with Frisco in the suit. On another matter, the ACLU is directly collaborating with the Mexican government (here are some questions you're urged to ask them about that).
San Francisco Superior Court Judge Peter Busch ruled against the Immigration Reform Law Institute of Washington D.C., which left open the possibility of an appeal.
The IRLI might appeal (link). At that, Mass says:
The municipal ID program is a modest public safety measure, meant to ensure that all San Franciscans have access to services and police protection... Our clients are organizations whose members -- as youth, homeless people, immigrants, and transgender San Franciscans -- face particular obstacles to obtaining identification cards... Access to ID cards is important for all San Francisco residents to feel comfortable reporting crime and standing up for their rights...It would only be "modest" in the sense that not that many illegal aliens would move to Frisco due to the high cost of living there; however, many would move there by living 20 or 30 to an apartment. Others from less expensive Bay Area locations would "maintain an address" in the city. And, legal immigrants have a plethora of documentation, and thus don't face difficulty obtaining ID. And, of course, citizens of other countries have no right to come here illegally and then obtain ID cards. And, if this program succeeds it would probably be pushed in other cities, such as Los Angeles. The ACLU is just offering a tortured explanation for their support for illegal activity.
Related:
Feds investigating San Francisco over sanctuary policy
"Governor" Gavin Newsom defends San Francisco's sanctuary policy
Gavin Newsom's San Francisco violated federal law? Perks for illegal aliens, and much more
San Francisco's IDs for illegal aliens plan may spread to East Bay
Bill Clinton, Arnold Schwarzenegger promote corruption, try to fool people about "unbanked" program
Chicago City Council passes pro-illegal immigration resolution
Back in June we offered Chicago Aldmn Cardenas, Flores introduce anti-"hate speech" resolution; Mexico-linked ICIRR cheers. The usual suspects are back:Chicago lawmakers added their [unanimous] voices Wednesday to the call for a moratorium on raids and deportations, an action they hope will lead to comprehensive immigration reform.As detailed at the last link, the ICIRR is headed by someone with a series of links to the Mexican government.
..."Immigrants are being uprooted, they are being persecuted. They are losing their jobs, they are losing hope," said Ald. George Cardenas (12th).
...The "Ya Basta" Campaign, an initiative launched in August by the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, called the resolution's passage a successful first step in stopping the raids...
Another person quoted in support of the resolution was Emma Lozano of Pueblo Sin Fronteras:
"This is torture. Families will breathe a sigh of relief when Congress and the president call for a moratorium, which is the first step to legalization... We're sending the message from Chicago, saying we're not going to tolerate this."
"HUD: Five Million Fraudulent Mortgages Held by Illegals" ?
I'm not willing to put much faith in this until I see evidence from HUD; a very basic search didn't bring up anything but if anyone has another news report or link to hud.gov please leave it in comments.
Greenville SC immigration raid at House of Raeford's Columbia Farms
From this:Federal agents swept through a chicken processing plant Tuesday, detaining more than 300 suspected illegal immigrants, sending panicked workers running and screaming through the hallways. Worried relatives collected outside, fearful their loved ones would be deported.
Police and agents during a shift change ordered all workers at the House of Raeford's Columbia Farms to show identification, according to officials and witnesses. The business had been under scrutiny for months and the raid comes on the heels of even larger roundups at plants across the country...
Arkansas state Senator Joyce Elliot backs in-state tuition for illegal aliens
Former Arkansas state representative Joyce Elliott - after November a state Senator - has signaled that she'll re-introduce legislation to give in-state tuition to illegal aliens. This will have the impact of taking college educations from U.S. citizens, and I urge everyone in that state to work to discredit her.
Elliot was the author of a previous bill, one supported by Mike Huckabee; the mainstream media frequently lied about the details of what he supported.
Current Arkansas governor Mike Beebe says her plan won't work due to federal laws providing that any such offer given to an illegal alien must also be given to a U.S. citizen. She's relying on attempts in other states to evade the spirit of that law.
What she doesn't know is how incredibly vulnerable she is on this issue. If anyone in AR wants to do a public service, go to one of her appearances, ask her tough questions about this issue, and then upload her response to video sharing sites. For instance, ask Joyce Elliot this question.
Tysen Kendig (associate vice chancellor of the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville), University of Arkansas at Fort Smith Chancellor Paul Beran, and Tom Courtway, interim president of the University of Central Arkansas didn't want to comment on Joyce's proposed bill.
However, Robert Potts - chancellor of Arkansas State University in Jonesboro - says that, speaking only as a private citizen, he supports her efforts.
And, there's this ironic note:
Lawrence Davis, chancellor of the predominantly black University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff, compared the current plight of undocumented Hispanics to the plight of black students in the South before integration.
What he's actually supporting is taking college educations from poorer, largely black U.S. citizens in order to give them to poorer citizens who are here illegally and who should be supported by their own governments. Someone should make that point to him publicly.
Feds investigating San Francisco over sanctuary policy
From this:A federal grand jury is investigating whether San Francisco's policy of offering sanctuary to undocumented immigrants violates U.S. laws against harboring people who are in the country illegally, city officials say.It'd be great if they were however.
City Attorney Dennis Herrera said his office has hired a criminal defense lawyer to represent employees who might be questioned or asked for documents. He and Mayor Gavin Newsom said they would cooperate with the investigation...
Herrera's office was notified of the investigation several weeks ago when the grand jury issued a subpoena for documents. It's not clear whether prosecutors are seeking evidence of possible criminal violations by city officials...
New York Times: if the "nativists" weren't really "anti-immigration", they'd support massive immigration
The New York Times editorial board is back with yet another very special editorial (link):
One of the false pieties uttered by anti-immigration politicians is that they love immigrants. If that were true, Congress would not be having so much trouble passing a simple law to smooth out a serious kink in the legal immigration pipeline.
Seriously, does anyone - even those in their target market - buy this? One doesn't have to support all types and all levels of immigration in order to "love immigrants". That should have been obvious to even the writers of their screed.
What they're advocating for is "visa recapture", where visas that weren't used for one reason or other can be applied to the current year's limit. If this were a video they'd have a Harry Shearer-narrated animation of their sales job:
Every year thousands of potential green cards vanish, like unused cellphone minutes.
The visas they're discussing are green cards, although I haven't checked whether H1Bs and the like would be covered as well. The two bills they mention are sponsored by immigration lawyer Zoe Lofgren and Robert Menendez, so there's probably a lot more they aren't mentioning; see also this.
Bob Menendez, Teddy Kennedy still trying to hamper immigration enforcement (S.3594)
Senator Robert Menendez has introduced S.3594, the "Protect Citizens and Residents from Unlawful Raids and Detention Act", co-sponsored by Teddy Kennedy (link). The PCRURDA appears to be as bad as you might expect; some of the differences between his bill and the current law are more in the realm of those who are immigration lawyers. However, some are clearly designed to tie the hands of ICE in order to make immigration enforcement very difficult, which is a recurring crusade by Bob Menendez.
In fact, one of his provisions could undercut enforcement efforts entirely:
In any immigration-related enforcement activity that is expected to target more than 50 individuals, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall... notify State and local child welfare authorities of such immigration-related enforcement activity not later than 24 hours before the commencement of such activity...
In one case, an illegal immigration supporter was proud about being tipped off to a raid by the spouse of a local official. Menendez is proposing what could become an early warning system for illegal aliens and crooked businesses.
He also wants illegal immigration supporting groups like CHIRLA to be involved in the process:
"State and local social service providers to [be allowed to] determine whether nongovernmental organizations may participate in screening individuals detained by the Department for humanitarian purposes"
In addition to being very immigration lawyer-friendly, there's also a sop to another profession:
ensure that not fewer than one independent certified interpreter who is fluent in Spanish or any language other than English spoken by more than 5 percent of the target population of the operation for in-person translation is available for every 5 individuals targeted by an immigration-related law enforcement activity
And, there will be a talk:
[The DHS should] provide a legal orientation presentation for any individual detained through an immigration-related enforcement activity through the Legal Orientation Program administered by the Executive Office for Immigration Review
More on the EOIR here.
He also wants to get the Department of Labor and state counterparts involved, including this wide open provision under which even more illegal aliens could be allowed to remain:
An alien against whom removal proceedings have been initiated pursuant to chapter 4 of title II, and who has filed a workplace claim or is a material witness in any pending or anticipated proceeding involving a workplace claim, shall be entitled to a stay of removal and an employment authorized endorsement unless the Department establishes, by a preponderance of the evidence in proceedings before the immigration judge presiding over that alien's removal hearing, that (I) the Department initiated the alien's removal proceeding for wholly independent reasons and not in any respect based on, or as a result of, any information provided to or obtained by the Department from the alien's employer, from any outside source, including any anonymous source, or as a result of the filing or prosecution of the workplace claim; and (II) the workplace claim was filed in a bad faith with the intent to delay or avoid the alien's removal.
I have a sneaking suspicion that there would be many "anticipated" claims made in entirely bad faith that would clog up the system and let many illegal aliens remain here.
But, wait, there's more. He also wants to:
- extend Miranda-like rights to those caught in immigration raids; note that they'd have to be read those rights in their own language and in some cases that might be an obscure Indian language. Any statements made if they aren't read their rights would be inadmissable in removal proceedings...
- have ICE agents hand out a list of free legal service organizations to detainees...
- allow detainees to be represented throughout the process...
- impose time limits that might result in some illegal aliens being released...
- "An official of the Department of Homeland Security may not issue a detainer unless the official (A) has confirmed that the individual who is the subject of such detainer is not a United States citizen; and (B) notes the information collected regarding the individual's alienage on the detainer." I'm going to guess that that would also result in many illegal aliens being set free...
- the DHS Secretary should "avoid the apprehension of persons on the premises or in the immediate vicinity of day care centers, schools, legal service providers, courts, funeral homes, cemeteries, colleges, victim services agencies, social service agencies, hospitals, health care clinics, and places of worship; and (B) [require agents to] tightly control investigative operations at the places described in subparagraph (A)."
- prevent moving detainees from one facility to another in some cases and weigh a long list of conditions before making a move...
Pew: enforcement, economy caused fewer illegal aliens to enter U.S. in 2007
From this:Illegal immigration appears to have fallen last year, marking the first drop in years and coinciding with Congress' failure to pass a legalization bill and the Bush administration's stepped up raids and enforcement.Ginger Thompson of the New York Times has a similar story here. Note that the NYT has acknowledged that attrition would work, they've just falsely tried to claim that it would be inhumane.
In a study released Thursday, the Pew Hispanic Center estimates the illegal immigrant population fell by 500,000 from 12.4 million in March 2007 to 11.9 million this year.
The study's authors caution that the finding is "inconclusive" because of the margin of error of the estimates, though the findings mirror those of the Center for Immigration Studies, which also estimated a drop in illegal immigration.
The Pew study says there could be many reasons for the drop: a slowdown in U.S. economic growth that has dried up opportunities for illegal workers, economic growth in Latin American countries that has kept some workers at home, and heightened enforcement in the U.S...
ICE: Houston, Phoenix blocking immigration enforcement against gangs
From this:[Julie L. Myers, the assistant secretary of homeland security in charge of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, or ICE] on Wednesday released a report that showed Houston has fallen short in a nationwide crackdown on violent, predominantly Latino street gangs that draw strength from undocumented immigrants.Somewhat surprisingly, someone from ICE's Houston office defends that city's efforts. Myers was also unable or unwilling to discuss specific instances of those cities blocking enforcement.
Houston, the nation's fourth-largest city, accounted for just 71 of the 1,759 arrests in the roundup in 53 cities over the past four months...
Myers said the reluctance of police departments in cities such as Houston and Phoenix to fully cooperate had forced federal immigration authorities to negotiate narrow, targeted enforcement efforts.
[Myers said] "We have had certain instances where the cooperation has not been as full as we'd like... It's definitely a problem for us if local law enforcement are encouraged not to cooperate with ICE or not to work with ICE even when we're talking about known gang members who may have committed very, very serious crimes..."
However, considering that the mayor of Phoenix is a corrupt illegal immigration supporter (Phil Gordon), I'm sure they've put up as many roadblocks as they can get away with. Also see "'Sanctuary' practice in Houston draws fire" from 2004.
Barack Obama supports community college for illegal aliens (North Carolina, "good citizens")
North Carolina is studying whether to allow illegal aliens to enroll in community colleges, and over the weekend Barack Obama brought his pander express there and told Greensboro's WUNC this:
"For us to deny [illegal aliens] access to community college, even though they've never lived in Mexico, at least as far as they can tell ... is to deny that this is how we've always built this country up"... Obama said many children of Mexican immigrants have spent nearly their entire lives in the U.S., and "for all practical purposes, they are an American kid... I think we don't want them in the underground economy... We want them contributing, and it makes sense for us to provide them some pathway. If they've been here a certain period of time, and they've been good citizens, let's try to figure out how we can work them into the fabric of our society."
1. If I were inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt, I might say that "good citizens" doesn't necessarily imply that he thinks that citizens of Mexico are citizens of the U.S., it could just be a cutesy locution. However, based on his other statements, I'm not willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I think he really is confused over the entire citizenship concept.
2. Needless to say, we haven't "built this country up" through illegal immigration and through allowing a corrupt neighboring country to send us 14% of their working age population.
3. The only solution to this problem that is good public policy is to encourage/"encourage" Mexico and other countries to take their citizens back and give them educations. Anything else will lead to more problems as more people bring their children here illegally and as educations are taken from U.S. citizens in order to give them to foreign citizens who are here illegally.
1150+ arrested in SoCal immigration fugitive sweeps
From this:U.S. immigration authorities said Monday they arrested more than 1,150 people in California in a three-week sweep, the state's largest of its type since since 2003.Expect the usual suspects to whine in 3, 2, 1...
The sweep targeted immigration violators including those who have ignored deportation orders or returned to the U.S. illegally after being deported...
[U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokeswoman Virginia Kice] said of the 1,157 immigrants arrested statewide, 595 had outstanding deportation orders and 346 had prior criminal convictions. Those arrested were from 34 countries, she said.
UPDATE: As it turns out, this was part of ICE's annual Operation Community Sweep where they go after gangs. Cynthia Dizikes of the Los Angeles Times offers straightforward coverage here. Solomon Moore of the New York Times offers straightforward coverage here. I'm going to guess that the vast majority of their readers won't notice what's missing from both. If the raids were of, say, a sweatshop both sources would wave about sympathetic "victims" of the raid in order to support sweatshops and illegal activity. The LAT and the NYT might want to do that in cases like this, but if so they probably realize that would be going too far. (The LAT article does quote New Jersey Union City police department chief Charles Everett as saying something sanctuary city-like).
From the NYT article: "[a GA state official] said the government had provided invaluable assistance in an investigation of eight killings, from 2000 to 2006 in Cedartown, Ga., that were related to a methamphetamine-running operation". That town has a population of barely 10,000 and appears to be about 70 miles from Atlanta.
Also see the CIS report "Taking Back the Streets: ICE and Local Law Enforcement Target Immigrant Gangs" (link).
And, Julie Myers says Houston and Phoenix are trying block even this type of immigration enforcement.
Irish government gives $1.5 million to help immigrants to U.S., including lobbying for illegal aliens (ILIR)
The Irish government has given $1.5 million to 16 groups in the U.S. that help both legal immigrants and illegal aliens. That comes on top of an earlier $3.16 million they've given towards that effort this year.
Around $50,000 of the new amount went to the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform (source link), a group that lobbies for immigration "reform" (i.e., amnesty) and to which several major politicians have given speeches (John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and so on).
Per Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheal Martin (link):
"The allocations that I am announcing today are to organisations that are to the forefront in providing essential frontline services to Irish communities across the US, particularly to the elderly and those in need. They also work with the undocumented Irish, whose status remains an issue of the highest priority for the Government and which I have raised with key US legislators in the course of my visit."
Related:
John McCain promotes illegal alien amnesty to Irish group; Irish government link; no Barletta
Latino, Irish Catholics in illegal immigration march (Archdiocese of San Francisco, Irish government)
What Paula Zahn forgot: the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform gets money from the Irish government
Barack Hussein Obama promotes illegal immigration... to the Irish
Allen Martin of CBS 5 failed to note where ILIR gets its money, as did Tyche Hendricks of the S.F. Chronicle
Felipe Calderon bringing Mexican consulate to New Brunswick, New Jersey (Jim Cahill, Richard Kaplan)
On his way to a U.N. meeting, Mexican president Felipe Calderon recently visited their colonies (link) and met with the mayor of New Brunswick, New Jersey, Jim Cahill. That's him pictured right along with Calderon and his wife.
Among other things, Calderon promoted what's called "regional integration" and promised to build a new consulate in Cahill's city. You can contact him through officeofthemayor *at* cityofnewbrunswick.org
Not only that, but Calderon said that at a public school (Lord Stirling Elementary School). Contact the NBPS superintendent Richard Kaplan at richard_kaplan *at* nbps.k12.nj.us
Apparently the promise of the consulate was prompted by some groups [1], with Calderon saying:
"It seems to me a fair demand, so this is what we'll do, we'll put a consulate here in New Brunswick"... he said a regional approach is needed to build sound economies in North America, including the United States, Mexico and Canada. "Relaunching the economy will not happen if we don't think as a region," he said, adding that a strong in the United States must include immigration reform... "It is my personal conviction that migration is a natural social-economic phenomenon that cannot be stopped by decree... What we need to do is channel it and direct it for the prosperity of our society... One day Mexico will have the conditions to generate work and schools sufficient so that never again you have to leave due to hunger... [however, just not now]."
[1] Those quoted include the following:
* Cesar Zuniga, "who is in charge of health programs at New York City-based Casa Puebla"
* Teresa Vivar, 'the president of Lazos America Unida in New Brunswick"
* "Perth Amboy's Fernando Garcia, a construction worker studying small business management at Middlesex County College... [and] the treasurer of the Mexican Association of Perth Amboy
"Temporary" Protected Status extended until 2010 (El Salvador)
The government conducts "Temporary" Protected Status programs under which hundreds of thousands of those who are fleeing natural disasters, political turmoil, and the like get to stay in the U.S. on a "temporary" basis. And, oddly enough for a "temporary" program, its specific instances keep getting renewed when they expire, as they were in May 2007, February 2006, and earlier. However, it might not be available for all countries and all incidents; Alcee Hastings (recently in the news for despicable comments) wants it for those from Haiti (link). On the other hand, FAIR thinks the whole program should be terminated (link).The latest extension of the "temporary" program for those from El Salvador follows our beloved president George W. Bush meeting with that country's president Tony Saca. Here it is in all its absurdity (whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/09/20080924-2.html):
...PRESIDENT BUSH: I want to let my friend know, and the people of El Salvador, that the United States will extend TPS status to El Salvadoreans living in our country. This is a decision that was made to improve the lives of El Salvadoreans.I'll leave figuring out what Saca meant by "integration" to your imagination.
I'm proud to make this announcement with you standing by my side. You've been a very strong and courageous leader, and you have been a friend. And I know this is an issue of concern to you, because you care deeply about the people of your country. And so when you get back home, you can tell the people that TPS has been extended.
PRESIDENT SACA: (Remarks are partially translated.) Thank you very much. Thank you very much, President, for extending for 18 months more the TPS for the people of El Salvador. This is going to benefit our Salvadorian people with -- (inaudible) -- in liberty, in democracy, and in integration.
Thank you very much this morning for this extension.
Arizona Chamber of Commerce, MATT.org, Raul Yzaguirre start immigration "reform" ad campaign; Mexican government link?
Earlier today, the Arizona Chamber of Commerce (chief executive: Glenn Hamer), hosted a press conference where they announced an ad campaign in support of immigration "reform", presumably including some form of "guest" worker scheme (link). The ads will run in Phoenix, Albuquerque, Denver and Las Vegas and they're spending "hundreds of thousands of dollars" on it. One of their guests at the announcement is the former president of the National Council of La Raza, Raul Yzaguirre. He's also a former co-chair of this year's Hillary Clinton campaign.
The ads are from MATT.org ("Mexicans and Americans Thinking Together"), a group headed by Lionel Sosa, someone who's working for John McCain. Earlier in the year he hinted that the Mexican government was going to give him money to conduct an ad campaign, and a very good question would be whether this is what he was refering to. Needless to say, it's one that Craig Harris of the Arizona Republic doesn't ask.
Others there were:
Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, former Congressman Henry Bonilla [a spokesman for MATT]... Tucson Electric Power Chief Executive Jim Pignatelli and Ironco Enterprises president Sheridan Bailey.
UPDATE: On the midnight immediately before the press conference, the Arizona Republic printed the editorial "Arizona must lead" (link) promoting the effort. Needless to say, it reads like a hand-out from the AZ Chamber of Commerce.
UPDATE 2: From March comes this:
On January 16, 2008, the Wall Street Journal reported the following: “Mr. Sosa says he has raised $25 million for the campaign from one group he didn’t identify.” This massive donation concerns me and it should trouble every American during a presidential year. I’m all for political activism and free speech, but I want to know who is bankrolling efforts to alter our immigration laws.
More recently from the same paper comes this:
Although Sosa left the corporation [presumably MATT] to work with McCain, the organization’s entanglements with Sosa and Cesar Martinez — a video producer who has created Spanish-language TV ads for McCain (notably, one that depicts Barack Obama as a naïve fool willing to hang out with Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez) — have created the appearance of a 501 organization that is acting more like a 527 political action committee... QueQue paid a visit to MATT.org’s downtown limestone-and-log-cabin offices this week and was told by staffers that Martinez maintains a video-production office at MATT.org and keeps his equipment there. With Sosa and Martinez working together to create Latino-targeting ads for McCain, and Martinez using MATT.org facilities to do his production work, this doesn’t pass the smell taste as defined in the organization’s Certificate of Formation, filed with the Texas Secretary of State... The issue is further complicated by the fact that new Texas Secretary of State Hope Andrade, the person whose office accepts corporate filings, formerly served as executive director for MATT.org...
CNN "fact check" misleads about John McCain comprehensive immigration reform stance
Dear CNN:
JOHN MCCAIN SUPPORTS AMNESTY/COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM.
Sorry to shout, but I see that your "Fact Check: Is Obama ad right on McCain's immigration stance?" (link) continues the same lie that several of Barack Obama's other minions have tried to promulgate.
While McCain has said a wide range of things (including support for "reform" one day before you posted this), and his overall tactic at present is to support a secure border now followed by "reform" later, his overall goal of getting "reform" continues.
I don't know what game you and those others who push this lie are playing, but the simple fact is that McCain, Bush, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Mexican government, and Barack Obama all want the same basic thing. They might differ in the specific details and how they intend to get what they want, but their overall goal is the same.
P.S. Maybe you should mention the lies in the rest of the ad too.
John McCain promotes illegal alien amnesty to Irish group; Irish government link; no Barletta
Speaking at the Irish-American Presidential Forum earlier today in Scranton PA, John McCain promoted giving an amnesty to not just the supposed 50,000 Irish illegal aliens in the U.S., but others as well. The video is below, and per this he said:
"[There are] 50,000 Irish men and women in this country illegally who want to become citizens... we have to give them a path to citizenship... [My previous support for McCain-Kennedy] didn't make me the most popular member of my own party and it almost cost me the nomination of my party... To preserve that fragile coalition, I had to sometime take votes which were not popular... Senator Kennedy took votes that were not popular. Senator Obama took a hike... This nation is all the stronger -- this nation is stronger, this nation is stronger -- for the infusion of fresh blood and vitality that has come to this nation wave after wave: Irish, Italian, Poles, everybody who's come to this nation has enriched our nation, including our Hispanic citizenry. OK? That's what America's all about...
America is all about support for massive illegal activity and public corruption?
But, wait, it gets worse. According to this, there was no support evident for fellow Republican Lou Barletta, apparently due to his opposition to illegal activity. Instead, one of the other speakers at the event heads a group that's partly funded by the Irish government:
"Most of your parents and grandparents came here as poor immigrants and were welcomed here," said Ciaran Staunton of the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform. "Immigration is not a dirty word. Immigration is our fathers' word."
Of course, the report from Sasha Issenberg of the Boston Globe doesn't indicate where ILIR gets their money.
If anyone wants to do something about this, go ask McCain a tough question about this topic and upload his response to Youtube. If he's forced to foreswear against pushing amnesty it would actually help him, and if he or his surrogates were then able to attack Obama on this issue in a pro-American way it would help McCain and have a very negative impact on the BHO campaign.
Should immigrants be required to disavow Sharia law? (Tancredo, Jim Harper/Cato)
Rep. Tom Tancredo has introduced H.R. 6975 (link), a very short bill that would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to say:
(G) SHARIA LAW SYSTEM- Any alien who fails to attest, in accordance with procedures specified by the Secretary of Homeland Security, that the alien will not advocate installing a Sharia law system in the United States is inadmissible.
I'm mostly all for it, and for a lot of similar things. While we certainly want to avoid requiring loyalty oaths of those who are already citizens, there's no reason we should admit those who don't buy in to our fundamental concepts, whether Constitutional or, in the case of Aztlan, our terroritorial claims.
Needless to say, the usual suspects won't like it, and one of those is Jim Harper from the Cato Institute, a supposed libertarian group with some interesting funders and which has put forth some odiously anti- and un-American ideas. Says Harper (cato-at-liberty.org/2008/09/20/fear-of-sharia-oh-please):
But more importantly, a law like this communicates precisely the wrong thing to new immigrants and the world at large. It tells the world that we’re a weak, fearful country, and that we believe Sharia law is possible in the United States. It tells the world that we’ve come off our traditional moorings and that we no longer believe in free speech and tolerance of all opinions, no matter how wrong.
Unfortunately, we have to a certain extent come off our "traditional moorings", both because of those who put money before fundamental American concepts (see Cato) and because of those on the far-left who've been mainstreamed (see the ACLU, etc.) And, of course, Sharia law barely failed in Canada but is apparently now part of England's laws.
Why take the risk just to prove something?
However, Harper is willing to make a guarantee:
There is no possibility — none — that Sharia law will be established in the United States. Not by any government body at any level.
Of course, his guarantee means nothing; if he's wrong would anyone notice? If anyone did, he'd probably just say he was wrong or just move somewhere else. It's better to be safe than sorry, and a guarantee from Harper is worthless.
Border Patrol agent allegedly intentionally poisoned (Tucson)
Earlier this year, a Border Patrol agent in the Tucson sector named Denton Moberly was allegedly poisoned using a pesticide while eating at some sort of restaurant. The details haven't been publicly released, but a summary is here and a site with updates is here. Supposedly several agencies are involved in the investigation, and presumably his co-workers are correctly hinting that it was an intentional poisoning at a restaurant.
Related:
Barack Obama at National Council of La Raza convention (ICE as terrorists)
Enrique Morones threatened Minuteman members that their food might be poisoned
Nancy Pelosi accused ICE of conducting "terrorizing raids"
Rhode Island Catholic uses strawman argument, smear in support of illegal activity (Bishop Thomas Tobin; a challenge)
The Rhode Island Catholic newspaper offers an editorial called "Rabid response to Bishops is chilling" (link). They discuss the backlash to the U.S. Catholic Church's hierarchy strong support to illegal activity, including RI Bishop Thomas Tobin's suggestion that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents should be able to have a conscientious objector option before doing raids.
However, rather than engaging the perfectly valid arguments of their opponents, they've chosen to engage in a strawman argument and also to smear their opponents:
Vile comments in letters and vicious attack e-mails have not stopped Bishop Thomas J. Tobin from speaking out against immigration enforcement raids... This latest foray by the U.S. Bishops into the national debate on immigration will most likely result in a rather “uncivilized” response by many who oppose not only their position but also that they dare speak out at all. The usual suspects, as Bishop Tobin so sadly discovered, who utter racist and offensive broadsides against immigrants, Hispanics, Bishops and the Catholic Church will shout the loudest and with the most venom. They rail against immigrants with such savagery that their commentaries are not fit for publication. However, other, more measured responses from anti-immigrant groups often maintain that Catholic Bishops should not speak about the issue of immigration, claiming it is a violation of the separation of church and state...
I'm sure they've received a lot of hate mail. However, I'm sure they've also received a large number of "measured" responses. Oddly enough, all are not fit for publication. And, separation of church and state is certainly one argument, but not the only "measured" one from opponents.
So, here's a challenge to the Rhode Island Catholic, based on this post. Let's see if they can take on this argument without resorting to logical fallacies:
1. The "comprehensive immigration reform" that the Bishops support will send the message that we don't respect our immigration laws and we don't expect anyone else to either. Despite what it's called, it will be seen around the world as an amnesty.
2. That will lead to more illegal immigration, and from many other countries besides Mexico.
3. That will lead to more people trying to cross the desert. Aside from putting pressure on Mexico - something that generally doesn't work or our leaders are too squeamish and corrupt to try - there's very little we can do about Mexicans flocking to their northern border and people from other countries coming to Mexico in order to attempt a crossing.
4. More people trying to cross the desert will lead to more people dying along the way.
5. The borders will be even less "secure" after reform and the enforcement provisions of "reform" will be largely ignored because those pushing reform have always fought attempts to secure our borders, and they will have even more power after reform from which to fight attempts to secure the borders.
Contact their editor and suggest they try their hand at a logical counterargument to the above: mobrien *at* thericatholic.com
Kos promotes misleading New Democrat Network immigration poll
Subcommandante Markos Moulitsas Zuniga - better known as "Kos" - offers "Comprehensive immigration reform favored by those most affected"; "those affected" refers to voters in Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico and Florida. The post is a wrapper around a new poll from the New Democrat Network. You can download their PDF from here: dailykos.com/story/2008/9/18/141449/465/722/602353
Once again, Kos has selected a useless poll and used its biased findings to match his ethnic power-based goals; see the previous example in the case of this Quinnipiac University poll. That link also discusses some of the ways Kos is wrong on the general immigration issue.
As with other polls, the NDN version misleads about what exactly "comprehensive immigration reform" means. While there are several related questions, all miraculously showing support for CIR, this is the one that Kos highlights:
The federal government would grant illegal immigrants with conditional legal status permanent residency and a path to citizenship if they maintain a strong employment record, undergo a background check, learn basic English, pay any back taxes and $2,000 in fines and fees.
Those supporting that range from 72% of all voters in Nevada to 84% of all Hispanic voters in Florida. However, if the NDN had disclosed to the respondents all the fine print (and more) the results would probably be far different.
For instance, that legal status would only be "conditional" in a small number of cases; almost everyone who gets into the program would be allowed to stay if they wanted. FBI-level background checks for 10 million people would take between five and ten years at the current rate; there might be millions of new illegal aliens by the time we've finished doing checks on all the ones who applied for "reform", and the push to give those new illegal aliens their own amnesty would be on.
The recent CIR bill also only required those admitted into the program to show that they've signed up for English classes, it didn't require them to learn English. And, groups like NDN would fight to weaken English requirements in future bills. That CIR bill also briefly included a provision allowing illegal aliens to forego two out of five years of back taxes.
And, any form of amnesty would lead to more illegal immigration and more power inside the U.S. for the Mexican government.
The NDN poll, like almost all of the rest, isn't really seeking attitudes about immigration. The polls are designed to mislead those being told about them, to comfort those who support illegal and/or massive immigration, and also to guage how groups like NDN and hacks like Kos can successfully lie about this issue.
Lou Barletta - running on anti-illegal immigration - opens nine point lead against Democrat Rep. Paul Kanjorski
From this:Democratic U.S. Rep. Paul Kanjorski, who is an 11-term incumbent in the congressional district centered on Scranton-Wilkes Barre... is now in serious jeopardy of losing his seat to an anti-immigration upstart.(Note, of course, that Will Bunch of the Philadelphia Daily News incorrectly calls his campaign "anti-immigration".)
A new Franklin & Marshall poll shows that Lou Barletta, the Republican mayor of Hazleton, has opened a sizable nine-point lead on Kanjorski, even though the economically depressed district is leaning toward Democrat Barack Obama in a year when few Democrats in Congress are seen as in jeopardy.
On a related note, see the other recent loss by Rep. Chris Cannon; that may have been related to immigration although some have claimed that other issues were in play. However, those same people also tried to portray losses by those such as Randy Graf as indicative of immigration being a losing issue when the GOP in effect almost threw that election to his opponent. And, they're doing something similar with Russell Pearce.
30% of Mexicans think U.S. was behind 9/11 attacks (second highest behind Turkey)
A recent World Public Opinion survey (link) shows that 30% of Mexicans think the United States was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the second highest percentage in the entire survey, just behind Turkey at 36%. 33% said it was al Qaeda, 1% Israel, and 37% were Other or Don't Know.See also the Zogby poll in which 58% of Mexicans said that the U.S. Southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico.
See also another poll showing that only 36% of Mexicans view Americans favorably, only 26% think Americans are hard-working, 73% see Americans as racist, and only 16% see Americans as honest.
Obviously, these are the types of polls that "liberals" and other corrupt supporters of illegal and/or massive immigration would prefer to ignore. In fact, one "liberal" was kind enough to give us a glimpse into his thought processes, such as they are. Over to Ilya Somin (link):
Obviously, I know that there is anti-Americanism in Mexico and that Mexicans have various historical grievances against the US government, some of them legitimate. At the same time, Mexico derives many benefits from its relationship with the US, including extensive trade, and remittances from the large Mexican immigrant population in this country. Certainly, I didn't expect this level of anti-American prejudice in Mexican public opinion on 9/11.Although I think that Somin would consider even Barbara Jordan's recommendations "draconian", regarding the rest it's too late.
I strongly support free trade with Mexico and continued Mexican immigration and decry the recent nativist attacks on Mexican and other Hispanic immigrants. A positive relationship between the US and Mexico is, I think, very much in the interests of both countries. Before writing this post, I even wondered whether I should avoid highlighting the Mexican data, so as not to give more fodder to opponents of NAFTA and advocates of draconian restrictions on immigration.
Barack Obama lies about Rush Limbaugh in Spanish-language ads
The Barack Obama campaign has a new Spanish-language ad that features racial demagoguery and a distortion of Rush Limbaugh quotes. You can see the ad here:"They want us to forget the insults we've put up with, the intolerance," the television ad's announcer says in Spanish as a picture of Rush Limbaugh appears onscreen with quotes of him saying, "Mexicans are stupid and unqualified" and "Shut your mouth or get out."This isn't the first time that Obama smeared Limbaugh, and there's much to discuss about this ad. First let's deal with the misleading Rush quotes. The first quote is actually from 1993 (link):
"They made us feel marginalized in a country we love so much," the ad continues. "John McCain and his Republican friends have two faces. One that says lies just to get our vote and another, even worse, that continues the failed policies of George Bush that put special interests ahead of working families."
[The radio ad goes on:] "Don't forget that John McCain abandoned us rather than confront the leaders of the Republican Party. Many of us were born here, and others came to work and achieve a better life for their families -- not to commit crimes or drain the system like many of John McCain's friends claim. Let's not be fooled by political tricks from John McCain and the Republicans. Vote so they respect us. Vote for a change."
"If you are unskilled and uneducated, your job is going south. Skilled workers, educated people are going to do fine 'cause those are the kinds of jobs NAFTA is going to create. If we are going to start rewarding no skills and stupid people, I'm serious, let the unskilled jobs that take absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to do -- let stupid and unskilled Mexicans do that work."The Obama campaign misquoted Rush by omitting the context; the context certainly doesn't show Rush in a good light, but it's far different from what the Obama campaign is trying to do: pretend that Rush said that all Mexicans are "stupid and unqualified". The BHO campaign is lying.
The second quote is just as bad; it was actually from a satire in which Rush proposed a series of draconian immigration laws, only to reveal at the end that those were the actual laws of the Mexican government (link). "Shut your mouth or get out" was actually his distillation of one of Mexico's laws; see for instance this example of meddling foreigners being ejected from Mexico. For video of Rush's satire, see this.
And, the first quote referred to "Mexicans" in the sense of "Mexican citizens who live in Mexico". Democrats frequently have trouble understanding the fact that (according to our laws), Mexicans can't vote in U.S. elections. Only U.S. citizens can, including those of Mexican descent. Certainly, those U.S. citizens of Mexican descent will sympathize with actual Mexicans, but some in the former camp look down on, say, illegal aliens. Obviously, to the BHO campaign there's little difference between an actual Mexican and a U.S. citizen of Mexican descent.
And, of course, some segment of immigrants do come here to engage in criminal behavior, and all those in the U.S. receive a wide range of public benefits. Those who are low-wage workers - the great majority of illegal aliens from Mexico - do take more than they pay in. And, the crimes committed by immigrants would not occur if they weren't here in the first place. As is their habit, the BHO campaign is trying to shut down a discussion of vital matters rather than having an open debate.
As for who's helping Barack Obama spread his lies:
* The first link is to an Ed O'Keefe post at the Washington Post. Needless to say, he just passes the ad on without doing what I did: spend a few minutes searching. Please write the WaPo and ask them to stop helping BHO lie: ombudsman *at* washpost.com
* Ben Smith of the Politico likewise can't be bothered to do even basic research; he also refers to the largely non-existent "anti-Immigration wing of the Republican Party": politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Obama_vs_Rush_en_Espanol.html
* Mark Silva of the Chicago Tribune (mdsilva *at* tribune.com) also can't be bothered to do simple searches: swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/limbaugh_latinos_tv_ad_wars.html
* Eric Kleefeld is yet another searchophobe: tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/obama_spanishlanguage_ad_ties.php
UPDATE: Rush comments on this here; he also calls Obama a liar who took Rush's quotes out of context.
UPDATE 2: The end is nigh! Worthless hack Jake Tapper fact-checks the ad and the BHO campaign's response to his concerns, finishing by saying "the Obama campaign has crossed a line into misleading the viewers of its new TV ad" (blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/from-the-fact-1.html).
Meanwhile:
* Mori Dinauer passes along the lies (prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=09&year=2008&base_name=lightning_round_fiorina_gets_w)
* Jeralyn Merritt does the same, only worse (talkleft.com/story/2008/9/17/172619/529)
* Alex Koppelman comes close, but does including Rush's objections to the ad (letters.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/09/17/obama_limbaugh/view).
UPDATE 3:
* Eunice Moscoso of the Austin American Statesman does provide the McCain camp response to the ad (defending their previous support of amnesty, a support that continues) but fails to note that the BHO campaign lied. A comment I left has not been approved (link)
* Nick Timiraos of the Wall Street Journal includes some of the response from Limbaugh here, but also downplays the extent to which the BHO campaign took the quotes out of context. A quote I left was deleted; I left it again and that might be deleted as well.
* Beltway lightweight Ana Marie Cox links to the Tapper piece, but fails to note that taking quotes out of context was involved, only saying "An ad attempts to tie McCain to some particularly unpleasant Republicanness [in this case, a closed borders approach to immigration], but it turns out McCain was not at all associated with that particular nastiness." (link)
* Kathleen Hennessey of the Associated Press discusses a BHO campaign stop and works this in as well: One [BHO] commercial airing in Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado links McCain to comments apparently hostile to immigrants made by conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh. (link)
UPDATE 4: Even a day after Jake Tapper called the ad misleading, others are valiantly struggling with the truth.
* Tim Gaynor of Reuters offers "Controversial Obama ad revives immigration issue". He includes the muted response from McCain and correctly points out that, at the end of day, BHO and McCain are basically on the same page on this issue. However, Gayner completely fails to point out the problems with the quotes. A comment I left was not approved. (link).
* "shovelhood" shows the level of thinking at DailyKos by noting that Rush says the quotes were taken out of context... then using other quotes in an attempt to show that Rush is a racist and without dealing with the quotes in the ad. Whether that's an intentional attempt at distraction or an issue with the thinking processes of "shovelhood" isn't clear. Some commenters don't care about the ad being misleading, but a couple do seem to expres qualms about the BHO campaign lying (dailykos.com/story/2008/9/18/154144/680/122/602969).
UPDATE 5: Ed O'Keefe at the Washington Post - the blogger who first started promoting BHO's lying ad - offers a bit of a non-correction correction in "McCain Camp Decries Obama Spanish Ads" (link), which links to both Rush's comments and those from Tapper. I suppose the latter were key; when another member of the "club" points out that you've promoted a lying ad you just have to admit defeat.
UPDATE 6: The end is nigher! In an editorial, the New York Times says "Mr. Obama’s retaliatory ad, also in Spanish, was just as fraudulent. It slimed Mr. McCain as a friend and full-bore ally of restrictionists like Rush Limbaugh, even though Mr. Limbaugh has long attacked Mr. McCain’s immigration moderation. It quotes Mr. Limbaugh as calling all Mexicans stupid and ordering them to “shut your mouth or get out,” which he never did.".
UPDATE 7: Rush offers "Obama Is Stoking Racial Antagonism" here. This has provoked a new round of those willing to lie for Obama at any cost to whatever reputations they had.
* Digby (digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/black-kettle-by-digby-limbaugh-is-so.html) offers "Black Kettle". It uses the "shovelhood" technique (see above) without even acknowledging the bit about the BHO campaign taking quotes out of context. The quote she provides as a distraction from the original lies is probably taken out of context as well.
* Jonathan Stein from MoJo links to the Rush piece, and continues to take his second quote out of context. (link) Unbelievable? No, just in line with his previous "thinking".
* Adam Serwer first admits that the quotes were taken out of context and that' was "stupid". Then, he launches into the "shovelhood" technique (link).
UPDATE 8: Joe Klein offers "Take It Down, Barack" (link). Klein is such an obsequious hack that even Jake Tapper calling BHO out wasn't enough. It took a far greater authority to spur him to action: "The New York Times editorial board--once again calling a lie a lie--slams both McCain and Obama for their Spanish-language ads about immigration policy. I've given up any hope of McCain running an honest campaign, but if Obama really wants to present an honorable alternative to McCain's non-stop sleaze, he should take down his immigration ad immediately."
UPDATE 9 (9/22/08): * Mark Silva of the Chicago Tribune (mdsilva *at* tribune.com) - even after all the above - continues trying to help BHO lie (swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/john_mccain_immigration_reform.html) by saying "McCain's Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama, has been going after McCain lately on immigration -- attempting to tag the Republican with radio's Rush Limbaugh and intolerant words that the talk show host has had for immigrants in Spanish-language ads airing in hotly contested Western states."
Does Tanya Schevitz understand and support fundamental American concepts? (Chris Patti, Claudia Keith)
Tanya Schevitz of the San Francisco Chronicle offers "Undocumented students' college aid in jeopardy" (link) about the recent ruling reinstating a suit over the California law giving in-state tuition to illegal aliens. That law is explicitly anti-American: it gives citizens of foreign countries who are here illegally a better deal than some U.S. citizens, and laws like that prevent some U.S. citizens from going to college. In other words, illegal aliens take a chance at college from U.S. citizens. Such laws are a direct attack on the fundamental concept of citizenship.
The title of the article is about what you'd expect from San Francisco in general: putting the interests of foreign citizens ahead of U.S. citizens. While Tanya Schevitz might not be the one that come up with headline, the article itself is as bad as the title.
Before getting out your handkerchiefs, Tanya Shevitz does do one service: letting us in on the fact that the politicians who crafted the law (AB540) did it in such a way as to evade the spirit of federal law:
"The central issue in the case is whether or not the criteria for in-state fees is based on residency or not, and the Legislature carefully constructed the statute so that it was not based on residency," [University of California attorney Chris Patti] said. "It is based on whether you went to a California high school and graduated from a California high school, and those criteria are not based on residency."
The rest of the article wholy sympathizes with those illegal aliens who would be affected and doesn't show any concern for those U.S. citizens who will have their college educations taken away from them:
A state appellate court has put a financial cloud over the future of tens of thousands of undocumented California college students... ...If the law is struck down, it has the potential to financially devastate undocumented students, who are not eligible for state or federal aid. For many, it may mean the difference between attending school and dropping out, Patti said... ...The ruling was disturbing news to those undocumented students who need the subsidy to stay in school...
Unlike Schvitz, my concern is with the U.S. citizens who are victimized by laws like this. Those who are "undocumented" should be encouraged to repatriate themselves and their home countries should be encouraged in one way or another to take care of them. Needless to say, the California State University doesn't agree:
"What we are concerned about are the students who are caught in the middle of this legal dispute," said CSU spokeswoman Claudia Keith.
Near the end of the article Tonya Shevitz plays a common trick in articles like this, quoting a sympathetic "undocumented" victim. As has been done in countless other articles, the "undocumented immigrant" doesn't give her last name, and also stresses that she's only used to the U.S. Considering all the other articles containing those exact same components, a real reporter might consider whether they were being played:
Gesel, who declined to give her last name because of her immigration status, has lived in California since she was 9 but is an undocumented immigrant from Mexico with no path to legal status under current immigration laws... "We were raised in this country. Most of our life is here," she said.
Considering the number of times that something very similar to the above has been used in other articles, does anyone think Schveitz is a real reporter?
Note also that Tyche Hendricks was involved in some way with the article.
Send your polite thoughts to tschevitz *at* sfchronicle.com
Nicole Gaouette/LAT: leftwing groups on the "lookout for immigration raids"
Criminal enterprises that have fixed locations usually employ lookouts in the neighborhood where they operate who warn them of impending police raids and they frequently pay off local officials or cops. There's (perhaps) only one form of illegal activity for which the Los Angeles Times would consider that acceptable: illegal immigration, of course.
Thus it is that Nicole Gaouette of the Los Angeles Times offers "On the lookout for immigration raids" (link) about various leftwing groups that organize phone trees and collect intelligence from those in small towns regarding possible Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. For "balance" (LAT-style), she includes four paragraphs relating to those who don't support these efforts, starting at the twelfth paragraph. The rest of the two-pager comes close to a how-to guide.
She also fails to go into the social fabric-related aspects of this issue. Is it healthy for our society to have millions of people - led by a small number of "community organizers" - who don't think our laws apply to them? Doesn't the embedding of support for illegal activity in one subsector of our population have a huge social cost? Shouldn't newspapers do exposes on those involved in these attempts rather than acting as a sympathetic ear? Apparently to the LAT all that matters is that there's profits to be made.
Gaouette also says that Leos from MIRA said that one of their tips came from "spouse of a local official"; whether that's true or not isn't known, but assuming it is, isn't that a potential example of public corruption? Shouldn't the LAT look into that? What if, for instance, the spouse of an FBI agent tipped off the bad guys to a drug raid? Would that be enough to make the LAT concerned, or would they turn out to be corrupt in that case as well?
Should the LAT want to stop advocating for illegal activity and start doing some real reporting, they could look into one of their quote sources: Joshua Hoyt, executive director of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. She could, for instance, point out that their president is linked to the Mexican government, and she could look into their links to local officials, their lawsuit which would have supported Western Union, and so on.
Others quoted:
* Julien Ross, director of the Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition
* Bill Chandler, executive director of the Mississippi Immigrants' Rights Alliance
* Socorro Leos, a community organizer from that group
* Sandra Sanchez, "an immigrants' rights advocate with the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker organization." (also has an indirect link to the Mexican government)
* Diego Bonesatti, "a community organizer in Melrose Park, Ill."
"Tour of the Faithful": Catholic Church, others try to change immigration laws (America's Voice)
In September and October, the Catholic Church and others will be holding interfaith events [1] across the U.S. designed to support "comprehensive immigration reform", aka amnesty. This "Tour of the Faithful" (catholicsinalliance.org/node/20123) was apparently organized with the help of Frank Sharry's America's Voice [2] and includes an appearance by former president Jimmy Carter and many others [3]. On October 13 they'll be holding a forum featuring unnamed Illinois politicians; one of those will probably be Luis Gutierrez.
If you want to do something about this, go to one of their events and make points like these and get their responses on video. The only way these "leaders" are able to continue to support "reform" is by avoiding a real debate. Even a line of questioning that isn't "prosecutorial-style" would show the fallacy in their thinking. And, that would have a very great impact on this issue.
For instance, during the conference call announcing the tour, Rabbi David Saperstein said:
"In addition to our historic experience, our tradition also demands of us concern for the stranger in our midst. The Torah contains over 36 references to this principle, including Leviticus' command, 'When strangers sojourn with you in your land, you shall not do them wrong..."
Point out to him that the "reform" he supports would lead to more illegal immigration, and thus would lead to more people trying to cross the desert - with some dying along the way. If he responds that "reform" would include tougher border security, point out to him that those pushing reform have always fought attempts to secure our borders, and that they'd have even more power after reform from which to fight attempts to secure the borders.
[1] From catholicalliance.org: One of the events, "Voting American Catholic 2008: Platform for the Global Common Good," will be held Sept. 27 in Omaha, Neb., as part of the Archdiocese of Omaha Social Ministry Commission's 10th annual Faithful Citizenship Conference at the St. Cecilia Institute in Omaha, a conference co-sponsor... Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter is scheduled to speak at an Oct. 9 Christian immigration forum in Lexington, Ky. The tour takes in cities like Boston, Washington, Denver, Los Angeles and Phoenix -- as well as smaller venues such as Lutz, Fla.; Conway, Ark.; and Kalamazoo, Mich. -- before winding up in Chicago Oct. 19 with two U.S. representatives and two Illinois state representatives speaking at a candidate forum on immigration.
[2] americasvoiceonline.org/press_releases/entry/
national_faith_leaders_launch_tour_of_the_faithful/
[3] Those speaking on the conference call were, per [2]:
Rabbi David Saperstein, Director, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism
Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, President, National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference
Dr. Jim Ryan, Council Executive, Colorado Council of Churches
The Most Reverend Bishop John C. Wester, Archdiocese of Salt Lake City and Chair of Committee on Migration and Refugee Services for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
Mexico linked groups complain about "hate group" FAIR (FIRM, SEIU, America's Voice, NCLR)
The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is currently conducting the "Hold Their Feet to the Fire" rally in Washington DC where radio hosts from across the country and their listeners lobby their representatives to support pro-borders causes. Needless to say, the other side doesn't like that too much, and four such groups have joined together to place a scurrilous advertisement in the Politico and Roll Call. You can see the ad linked from seiu.org/media/pressreleases.cfm?pr_id=1753, which says:Today the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), America's Voice, Center for New Community, and the Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM) launched a print ad denouncing known hate group, FAIR (the Federation for American Immigration Reform), for poisoning the immigration debate with bigoted, xenophobic hate speech. In support of the ad, SEIU Executive Vice President Eliseo Medina issued the following statement:There is, of course, more ranting at the SEIU page. You can read FAIR's response here. The ad juxtaposes supposedly inflammatory comments from FAIR-related persons with pictures of Angry White Men, none of whom are presumably those being quoted. For instance, I don't believe that Dan Stein from FAIR is a skinhead. The comments also deserve a grown-up discussion, something that the SEIU and their friends don't want to have. In fact, as the quote above makes clear, they want to silence FAIR and others who oppose them by calling them names. The ad including a headline noting that the SPLC has designated FAIR as a "hate group". The ad also includes a link to the National Council of La Raza's WeCanStopTheHate.org.
"It's time that everyone learns who FAIR’s founders, leaders and followers truly are. They are not reformers, but a group of extremists whose leaders are fostering a bigoted, anti-immigrant, anti-American agenda that we must stop... ...By continuing to fan the flames of hate and fear, FAIR has contributed to rising levels of hate crimes and discrimination... ...Crude attempts to shut down our border and round up anyone who looks a certain way do not begin to solve our broken immigration system..."
What the ad doesn't note is that FIRM includes one member group that's allegedly collaborated with the Mexican government and another group headed by someone who serves on an advisory council to that government. The SEIU paid someone to organize immigration marches, and that person serves on that same advisory council to the Mexican government. In addition to occasionally attempting to mislead and being the subject of at least two exposes, the Southern Poverty Law Center has an indirect link to that government. And, of course, the NCLR funds extremists and gave an award to a vile racist among many other things.
Agriprocessors charged with over 9000 child labor law violations
From this:The Iowa attorney general's office filed child labor charges Tuesday against the owner and managers of the Agriprocessors kosher meatpacking plant, the site of one of the nation's largest workplace immigration raids.If many on the left - including national Democrats - had had their way, there would have been no raid. While there were several investigations under way at the time of the raid, some or all could have come to little, and the abuses might have continued with the investigations were underway. For more on this issue, see the links at the end of this post.
The complaint alleges more than 9,000 violations of Iowa's child labor law at the plant in Postville, saying the violations involved 32 children under age 18, including seven who were younger than 16.
An affidavit said children were exposed to dry ice and chlorine solutions and were operating conveyor belts, meat grinders, circular saws, power washers and power shears.
The attorney general's office said the violations occurred from Sept. 9, 2007, to May 12, 2008, when the plant was raided by federal immigration agents.
GOP asks young Republicans to take down "Build The Fence" signs?
Here's the caption of the following video:
Organizers of the Republican convention demanded that a group of young Republicans take down their "Build The Fence" signs, a reference to a border fence to fight illegal immigration, while at the Xcel Center last night [Sep. 3].
NCLR, LULAC, MALDEF, NALEO, SVREP send letter to John McCain about immigration
John McCain is too corrupt to stand up to the far-left and those who support illegal immigration, prefering instead - like Bush - to court those who will never support him. Now, some of those groups [1] have sent him an angry letter (PDF link):
On behalf of the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda, composed of 26 leading national Hispanic organizations, we write to urge you to lead your party's platform away from the deportation and detention path that deprives newcomers and the nation of immigrants' positive economic and societal contributions.
Translation:
We want race-based power, and any form of immigration enforcement impedes our power-grasping. While we support enforcement and "reform" and we don't want open borders, we don't really support any enforcement at all and we more or less want somthing like an open border.
Back to their letter:
The Republican Party Platform language regarding immigration repudiates your efforts to provide a legal opportunity for immigrants who have lived steady, productive and crimefree lives in the United States to come forward, pay a fine, and demonstrate they are learning English. The platform language would split families, make our communities less secure by placing federal responsibilities to enforce immigration law on local police thereby harming police/community relations, and close the door to higher education to young people who have been raised here and graduated from local schools and whose parents or themselves paid local and state taxes. It also wades into the divisive English Only debate but fails to emphasize the importance of more English language classes for adults and youth.
Needless to say, it's virtually impossible for an illegal alien to lead a "crimefree" life, but I guess that depends on how they choose to define "crime". Apparently it doesn't include things like using forged documents, identity theft, and the like.
The "learning English" parts of at least McCain-Kennedy were full of holes; they didn't have to learn it first they just needed to sign up.
It's not the "platform language" that "would split families", it's those who've made the conscious decision to come here illegally that did that.
If our laws were enforced, there would be fewer illegal aliens and thus their concerns about "harming police/community relations" would approach irrelevance.
They complain about closing the door to illegal alien students, without acknowledging that every college slot or discount given to an illegal alien is one that's taken away from a U.S. citizen. Obviously, they don't care that Americans are harmed by their policies.
And, the RNC platform says:
We support English as the official language in our nation... ...To ensure that all students will have access to the mainstream of American life, we support the English First approach and oppose divisive programs that limit students’ future potential. All students must be literate in English, our common language, to participate in the promise of America.
That's definitely stronger than I would have given the GOP credit for, but I suspect that part of the letter writers' complaints conceern the implied opposition to bilingual education.
Related:
100+ Hispanic groups send letter supporting illegal immigration, opposing raids
[1] The signatories are (see if you spot a common theme in each group's name):
* League of United Latin American Citizens
* Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
* National Council of La Raza
* National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (relatively minor link to Mexican government)
* Southwest Voter Registration Education Project (leader attended "revolution in the U.S." conference in Venezuala)
* American GI Forum
* Dominican American National Roundtable
* Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities
* Hispanic Federation
* Hispanic National Bar Association
* Labor Council for Latin American Advancement
* National Association of Hispanic Publications
* National Hispanic Council on Aging
* National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts
* National Hispanic Media Council
* National Hispanic Medical Association
* National Institute for Latino Policy
* U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
* U. S. Hispanic Leadership Institute
Miguel Bustillo,Richard Fausset/LAT confused about legal vs. illegal workers (Howard Industries raid)
Last week, Howard Industries in Louisiana was raided by Immigration and Customs Enforcement; as the raid was happening the legal workers at the plant reportedly cheered ICE, and the raid was initiated by a complaint from a union worker.Needless to say, such cannot stand to those who support illegal immigration. Thus, we find Miguel Bustillo and Richard Fausset from the Los Angeles Times offering "Immigrant raid divides a Mississippi town" (link), which includes this subhed:
Many black and white residents of Laurel applaud the crackdown; it sends fear through the Latino community. Political change may end such raids.The LAT is trying their best to racialize this issue, as well as trying to emotionalize it and make those who aren't familiar with the details of immigration feel sympathy for illegal workers. As discussed below, the last sentence shows that the LAT has been trying to fool people. Continuing with the article:
But helicopters were not what shocked [Fabiola Pena, the go-to illegal alien featured in a couple stories] the most on her last, fateful day at Howard Industries, the largest employer in this small Southern town. It was the black co-workers who clapped and cheered, Pena said, as she and hundreds of other Latino immigrant laborers were arrested and hauled away.So, basically she's saying that the black workers were lazy. Thank goodness she's not a Republican, or she'd end up being more than deported. And, it's interesting to see presumed "progressives" supporting Dickensian work hours, considering that that's one of the things yesteryear's "progressives" fought against.
"They said we took their jobs, but I was working from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.," said Pena a day after the raid last week that resulted in the arrest of nearly 600 suspected illegal immigrants. "I didn't see them working like us."
As for the Los Angeles Times trying to fool people:
But the raids might not have much of a future after the swearing-in of Republican John McCain or Democrat Barack Obama, both of whom have staked out moderate-to-liberal stances on immigration reform.One of the selling points of that "reform" is that it includes stepped-up enforcement. Yet, here the Los Angeles Times is telling us that "reform" now wouldn't include so much enforcement. Either "reform" includes magic powers, or the LAT has been trying to fool people.
If the next president decides to curtail or end raids similar to the one at the Howard Industries, it will not sit well with many residents of Laurel. The raid was welcomed by a number of native-born residents in this manufacturing hub of about 25,000 people that has been transformed in recent years by the influx of Latino workers, many of whom are undocumented.
The end of the last paragraph uses a stock device: an influx of illegal labor transformed an incipient ghost town. The rest of the article contains similar stock devices, such as someone saying the illegal aliens were just there to work, and so forth.
For an example of what Los Angeles Times would be if they weren't such wimps, see the Socialist Worker's "ICE brings panic to a Mississippi town" (link).
Ask John McCain about the impacts of amnesty ("comprehensive immigration reform")
Here's a question you're urged to ask John McCain at one of his public events. Make sure and videotape the question and the answer, and then upload it to Youtube and other sites. If anyone asks this I can provide follow-ups, and of course feel free to adapt it to your speaking style or remove parts of the first paragraph as necessary:
Senator McCain: the immigration "reform" you support will give a great deal of political power to groups on the far-left (ACLU, SPLC), racial power groups (NCLR, LULAC, MALDEF), the Democrats, the Mexican government, and others. And, all those groups currently fight against almost all forms of immigration enforcement, whether through law suits, the media, or other means.
If "reform" passes, which of these do you think is more likely:
1. Those groups will support "reform"-mandated enforcement.
2. Those groups will use their greatly increased political power to even more effectively fight against immigration enforcement.
Shipley Do-Nut president pleads guilty (hiring illegal aliens, light sentence)
From this:The sudden guilty plea to charges of hiring illegal immigrants by the president of Shipley Do-Nuts — one of Houston's most well-known institutions — is likely to send a strong message to employers about the pitfalls of hiring undocumented workers.Despite what the DOJ and the article says, six months probation and a relatively small fine aren't going to send a message to other employers. If the company is fined a large amount that might send a message, but they might also get off with something far less than half a million.
...On Thursday, prosecutors announced that Lawrence Shipley III — the grandson of Shipley Do-Nuts' founder — was placed on probation for six months and fined $6,000 after pleading to a misdemeanor charge of allowing illegal immigrants to be hired.
Three Shipley managers were also charged Thursday for employing undocumented workers.
Next week, the doughnut company itself is scheduled to enter a guilty plea to a felony conspiracy charge and could be fined up to $500,000.
First Panderer: Michelle Obama says Hispanics shouldn't have to live in fear of immigration raids
From this:Hispanics should not have to live in fear of raids by immigration agents, Michelle Obama told a Hispanic caucus to the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday.Unfortunately, AP "reporter" Steven Paulson didn't provide MO's exact quote in regards to the first paragraph, making it a bit difficult to discuss exactly how she's wrong, and I've been unable to find a transcript of that part. Another part of the speech is here: my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/laurinmanning/gG5l8b
..."We would have an immigration policy that brings 12 million people out of the shadows," she told cheering caucus members who shouted "Yes we can" in Spanish.
Hispanics are often the first to suffer in an economic downturn and the last to benefit during a recovery, she said.
She told the caucus that blacks and Hispanics share an interest in providing access to affordable health care, education and economic opportunities for all Americans, not just a select few.
"We all know our country's journey toward equality isn't finished yet. We have more work to do," she said.
And, needless to say, Paulson didn't do any real reporting by pointing out to MO that she's either peddling a fantasy or she's supporting open borders. The "comprehensive immigration reform" plan that Barack Obama supports supposedly includes stepped-up enforcement. If that enforcement is performed, then those Hispanics who are here illegally would still "live in fear". If no or little enforcement is performed, then she's supporting something approaching open borders.
Howard Industries immigration raid: largest in history; tip from union member; legal workers applauded
The largest immigration raid in U.S. history occured yesterday at a Howard Industries plant in southern Mississippi where they make transformers (link). There were almost 600 arrests, with around 100 of those being released for humanitarian reasons.
And, according to Holbrook Mohr of the Associated Press (AP), one of those arresated said that fellow workers applauded as the raid was happening. Not only that, but the raid was apparently initiated by a tip from a union member.
Expect leftwing supporters of illegal immigration to tip-toe around the last two data points. As for the reporter, he spends most of his time trying to portray the illegal aliens as sympathetic victims of our laws rather than looking into the legal workers whose wages were impacted by the large presence of illegal labor.
UPDATE: There's more in "Factory had tension between union, immigrants":
Union members said they resented immigrants, who were often allowed to work as much as 40 hours of overtime a week when other workers were discouraged from doing so. All declined to give their names, saying they feared for their jobs... Robert Shaffer, head of the Mississippi AFL-CIO, said Wednesday that members have long complained that companies in southern Mississippi hire illegal immigrants... "Jackson, Hattiesburg, Laurel and all areas along the coast, it's a little Mexico," Shaffer said. "I'm not against people trying to make living. I have a compassion for those folks. But at the same time, the taxpayers of Mississippi shouldn't be subsidizing a plant that won't even hire their own workers." ...Shaffer said offering immigrant workers union membership would depend on the situation, but he doubted it could be done if immigrants were in the country illegally.
Census Bureau releases 2007 poverty/lack of health insurance numbers: watch out for liars
The Census Bureau has released their report with the numbers of those below the poverty line and without health insurance for 2007; see this PDF file. What you'll probably hear from the mainstream media and others is that 45.7 million "Americans" are without health insurance (down from 47 million in 2006), and that there are 37.3 million "Americans" below the poverty line (up from 36.4 million in 2006).
Both of those are subtle lies: not all of those people are Americans; millions of them are citizens of other countries. A small number of them might be short-term visitors with more being legal immigrants. However, a good percentage of both figures are illegal aliens: the Census Bureau counts them as well and doesn't break out their figures by someone's immigration status.
For a more in-depth discussion of that topic using 2006 numbers, see this Barack Obama lie, and see also this related DNC lie.
Those below the poverty line in 2007 are:
* 12.5% of all those counted (37.3 million)
* 32.5 million are citizens
* 4.7 million are not citizens
The poverty rate for various statuses in 2007:
* native born: 11.9%
* all foreign born: 16.5%
* naturalized citizens: 9.5%
* non-citizens: 21.3%
Those without healthcare in 2007 are:
* 15.3% of all those counted (45.7 million)
* 35.9 million are citizens
* 9.7 million are not citizens
The without health insurance rate for various statuses in 2007:
* native born: 12.7%
* all foreign born: 33.2%
* naturalized citizens: 17.6%
* non-citizens: 43.8%
RightMarch immigration rally at DNC fizzles, and what they should have done (Kristen Wyatt/AP)
Kristen Wyatt of the Associated Press (AP) gleefully offers "Anti-immigrant rally fizzles as DNC opens" (link), about an event organized by RightMarch and conducted in a Denver park specifically to coincide with the DNC. According to her, only a few dozen people turned out to see Bob Barr and the others (Tom Tancredo, Chris Simcox from the MMCD, etc.) speak, which is even lower than I would have guessed.
However, my earlier predictions about the event appear to be coming true. This has so far gotten only minimal press coverage, and, while some protesters showed up I'm sure the vast majority of them didn't bother. In fact, the rally was counter-productive because it gave those who support illegal immigration - including the Democrats and the AP - more ammunition. Who'd want to support something if their proponents can only get a few dozen attendees?
Rather, as I discussed before, the thing that RightMarch should have done is trained all their energy on asking politicians tough questions about this issue. Holding politicians accountable for their lies on Youtube videos would be an extraordinarily effective way to reduce illegal immigration, but so far I'm about the only person who can figure that out.
Open Letter to The Nation about their Open Letter to Barack Obama (immigration)
Dear Comrade:
A few weeks back you at The Nation offered an Open Letter to Barack Obama (link) [1], listing some of the things he must stay true to in order to fulfill the progressive agenda. While much in the Letter is worthy of discussion and debate, I'd specifically like to know more about this desideratum:
An immigration system that treats humanely those attempting to enter the country and provides a path to citizenship for those already here.
Regarding the first part, I'm going to assume you mean "enter" in the broadest terms possible. Let's look at all the ways various groups can "enter" the U.S.:
1. Various people crossing the borders or flying or sailing in legally. I've heard about a few issues in this regard, such as a journalist being denied a visa or a dropoff in visitors. However, millions seem to do OK and the most I've heard about is some rude treatment, nothing that could be considered non-"humane". Do you have specific issues or proposals?
2. Legal immigrants. It's hard to be non-"humane" to those who are located in other countries, and the most I've heard about is some rude behavior. Again, any specific issues or proposals?
3. Students, visiting workers, etc. Ditto.
4. Mexicans and others crossing the borders illegally. Try as they might, the left has only been able to come up with a few isolated instances of abuse of detainees, and there's no pattern of widespread non-"humane" treatment. Unless, of course, one assumes that detaining people in the first place rather than just letting them enter the country at will is non-"humane" in your eyes. If so, please be honest enough to admit that you want open borders.
5. Longer-term illegal aliens, whether visa overstays or those who entered illegally over a border. I know how you think, and that's why I'm trying to define "enter" as broadly as possible. Try as Bob Menendez and others want, they can't show a widespread pattern of non-"humane" treatment of those caught up in immigration raids, fugitives captured by ICE, and so forth. About the only thing that might be slightly questionable is the practice of moving detainees to detention centers in other states. If you object to that, change the law. Since most of those detainees will end up being deported and since almost anyone who put themselves in that situation knew the consequences, there isn't anything fundamentally non-"humane" about that process. Unless, of course, you don't believe in enforcing our immigration laws, in which case you should be honest enough to admit that.
Regarding the rest, here's a discussion of some of the downsides of amnesty. There are more here, here, and here. If those aren't downsides to you, please present your argument for supporting them. If you don't think those are issues, please explain why. If you agree they're important downsides, explain exactly what you intend to do to mitigate your concerns.
Thank you,
The Editorial Board of 24Ahead.com
--------
[1] Famous signatories include such intellectual heavyweights as Mike Stark (shown here advocating digging up personal dirt on Ron Fournier of the AP: dailykos.com/story/2008/8/23/202557/371/831/573792), Phil Donahue, Robert Greenwald, Jane Hamsher, Tom Hayden, Katrina van den Heuvel, Gore Vidal, Howard Zinn, Bob Scheer, and many more.
ICE scraps self-deportation plan; will crackdown follow?
A few weeks ago, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) started a "Scheduled Departure" program where illegal aliens who'd received final deportation orders could turn themselves in to be deported. Only six people took advantage of the offer, and now ICE has shelved the plan (link). Despite what some have said, this appears to have been one of ICE's rare good ideas: it would have made it difficult for the far-left to complain about fugitive raids if those fugitives had had an out. Scrapping it after only a few weeks doesn't make as much sense.
The AP quotes an immigration lawyer as saying "My hope is it isn't going to empower them or fuel their enforcement even further", something that ICE seems to be promising:
[Jim Hayes, acting director of ICE's detention and removal operations] said lack of support from those activists shows they are unwilling to accept any enforcement... "They want amnesty, they want open borders, and they want a more vulnerable America," he said.
This could all be a game within a game, with ICE pretending to offer this program as a prelude to increased enforcement, or they might actually intend to increase enforcement. The bottom line, however, is that anything Bush's ICE does will be designed to promote "comprehensive immigration reform".
DailyKos discovers McCain $50 lettuce canard, that "jobs Americans won't do" is false
Remember almost two and half years ago when John McCain said how Americans wouldn't pick lettuce even if they were paid $50 an hour? Since then it's become part of his lore, at least from those who oppose illegal immigration. And, remember how endless hacks trotted out the "jobs Americans won't do" lie, which many of those same opponents said was false?Well, it took them a while, but the DailyKos kids have finally caught up to both. From a "diary" by "smintheus" called "McCain on working class wages" (dailykos.com/story/2008/8/21/162111/573/526/572063):
Since the nation is in the midst of John McCain's 'housing crisis', in which he tries to remember how many houses he owns, and we're all still trying to figure out why McCain thinks an income of $5,000,000/year is needed to be considered rich, it's worth revisiting McCain's opinion about the value of wages. In 2006 at an AFL-CIO convention, when asked about the effect of immigration in depressing wages, McCain declared that no Americans would be willing to do agricultural work for as little as $50/hour. At that rate, a worker would make as much in 6 months as the average annual household income in the US...I don't know if "smintheus" is playing a game or not, but the replies I scanned seemed to agree with him. Perhaps the DNC has taken Rahm Emanuel's advice rather that offered by Markos Moulitsas Zuniga (Subcommandante Kos) on this same topic.
...I'd love for voters to ask McCain at townhalls this summer and fall whether he still thinks nobody's willing to work for as little as $50/hour...
UPDATE: To blow some Democratic minds, guess what show this is from:
Well, Project USA has made it possible for to you apply for one of those $50 an hour McCain and company lettuce picking jobs. In response to the question, "Are you qualified?" You can check, "Yes, I am an American," "Yes, I am an illegal alien," or, "Yes, I'm a qualified engineer interested in automating lettuce picking, and thanks to the H1-B cheap human import program you support, I'm unemployed, too."
You can also fill out your application online at projectusa.org. Project USA will deliver those personally to Senator McCain, I'm told.
RI Bishop Thomas Tobin: give ICE agents conscientious objector option
From this:The bishop in the nation's most heavily Roman Catholic state [Bishop Thomas J. Tobin, head of the Diocese of Providence] called on U.S. immigration authorities to stop arresting illegal immigrants in mass sweeps in Rhode Island and allow federal agents not to participate if they feel the raids violate Christian teachings.The solution to problems like this is clear: publicly discredit those who support illegal immigration. If you don't want to discredit a Bishop, try a lay official or similar. See this post for some ideas.
..."If their discernment leads them to the conclusion that they cannot participate in such raids in good conscience, we urge them not to do so. If ICE agents refuse to participate in immigration raids in conformity with their faith and conscience, we urge the Federal Government to fully respect the well-founded principles of conscientious objection," the letter [to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Boston that was published on the diocese's Web site] said.
Agriprocessors supervisor pleads guilty
In May, the Agriprocessors plant in Postville, Iowa was raided by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. Now, from this:A former supervisor at Agriprocessors, the Postville meatpacking plant that was the location of the nation’s largest single-site immigration raid, accepted a deal and pleaded guilty in federal court Wednesday afternoon.Two other supervisors haven't been charged yet, and they want their trials moved (link). They also want a different judge, saying:
Juan Carlos Guerrero-Espinoza, 35, has been convicted of one count of conspiracy to hire illegal aliens and one count of aiding and abetting the hiring of illegal aliens. A date for sentencing has not yet been set.
Court documents filed Aug. 19 indicate that Guerrero-Espinoza “conspired with others, and aided and abetted his employer, in hiring more than 10 individuals” whom he knew to be undocumented and unable to legally work in the U.S. Guerrero-Espinoza was convicted, in part, due to a conversation he had with employees under his supervision on May 7. At that time Guerrero-Espinoza allegedly told workers he knew to be illegal immigrants that they were going to be terminated and then immediately rehired by Agriprocessors.
"this Court's involvement in preparing for the proceedings, coupled with the swift and carefully choreographed nature of the guilty plea hearings, created the appearance that the Court was acting closely in concert with the government."The ACLU previously tried to make a big deal out of those proceedings having a script. Whether these three or others will be used to somehow implicate higher-ups isn't known.
Previously:
Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) calls DHS agents "Gestapo agents" (Gebe Martinez/Politico)
Luis Gutierrez demagogues Agriprocessors raid, accuses DOJ of lying (Joe Baca, Albio Sires, Jens Manuel Krogstad)
1000 protest in Postville in support of immigration-related abuses; a Rubashkin blames enemies
New York Times supports illegal activity, identity theft
Federal, state investigations of Agriprocessors (maybe the left will stop playing games)
Betsy Rubiner/Time offers pro-illegal immigration propaganda (Agriprocessors, Iowa)
SPLC misleads about American Legion immigration report
The American Legion has released a booklet called "A Strategy to Address Illegal Immigration in the United States" [1]. I haven't read it, but Sonia Scherr of the Southern Poverty Law Center apparently has and offers "American Legion Immigration Report Replete With Falsehoods" [2]. Based only on what she says, it appears the the AL made a few mistakes and left themselves open to groups like the SPLC - which is indirectly linked to the Mexican government - raising issues. They should have foreseen that would happen and subjected it to stringent review; that might be happening now [1].That said, Scherr's "debunking" a) rests parts of its claims simply on how data is interpreted, and b) contains errors of its own. Consider this:
The Legion's Claim: Thousands of immigrants from countries with terrorist connections have been caught trying to enter the United States illegally. This claim is immediately followed by several paragraphs about illegal crossing of the Mexican border, suggesting that those "from countries with known terrorist connections" are entering the U.S. via Mexico.Scherr's "truth" doesn't rebut anything in the AL's claim, and AL's claim is indisputable: it's backed by dozens of news reports as well as government reports. See this category and this. And, the Nixon Center report apparently only dealt with a subset of known terrorists; it's a pay-only report so it's not clear whether it included those with terrorist links or those suspected of being terrorists (link). And, people with terrorist links have indeed crossed over the border or been involved in smuggling operations. And, of course, terrorists aren't exactly known for announcing their presence ahead of time. Overall, it's difficult to believe that there haven't been some terrorists crossing over either porous border, and it's also extremely foolish to base belief in the opposite on one study or to assume that terrorists don't want to cross over the porous borders. It's also indicative of the level the SPLC is willing to sink to in order to support massive illegal activity.
The Truth: A 2006 report by the Nixon Center, which appeared in the peer-reviewed Terrorism and Political Violence journal, found that the suggestion that terrorists were entering the U.S. through Mexico, while frightening, was entirely untrue: "Despite media alarms about terrorists concealed in the illegal traffic crossing the Mexican border, not a single subject entered from Mexico."
Regarding their "truth" about immigrants bringing exotic diseases into the U.S., see "The ADL's definition of "hate" and "anti-immigrant" can't be trusted. (ALIPAC, others)".
[1] The booklet was apparently available here, but that says it's being updated. Also, the AL needs to pay more attention to search engines; my first search for their booklet showed Alternet and related sites on the first page and nothing from their organization.
[2] alternet.org/immigration/95695 Note that I've been banned from Alternet or I'd leave a link to this post there.
Barack Obama's Reconquista 101: "they didn't cross the border, the border crossed them", Indians aren't immigrants
Speaking at a high school in New Mexico, Barack Obama was asked about immigration and, according to this liveblog of the event, said:"We are a nation of immigrants," Obama answers.Certainly, he's somewhat factually correct: there are old Spanish origin families who are recipients of land grants from hundreds of years ago; they were there before New Mexico was part of the U.S.
"The only people can say that they aren't immigrants are the people sitting right here," the Presidential candidate says and points to the tribal leaders.
"There are some families who have been here for 4 or 500 years. They didn't cross the border, the border crossed them."
However, he's coming at this from their side, which is in conflict with our - the U.S.'s - side. In fact, his quotes are straight out of Reconquista 101, and trying to find loopholes in and complaining about the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo is a favorite pasttime of hundreds of minor extremists, with the TGH forming a major part of their lore. Sentiments like his are rarely expressed by those considered mainstream; the closest I'm aware of are Dolores Huerta and a LULAC official, and both of them aren't that mainstream at all.
As for the bit about Indians not being immigrants, one wonders at which point BHO would draw the line. Most of their ancestors came over thousands of years ago, but Mayflower descendents have ancestors who were here before 150 years before this was the U.S. and some European origin peoples' ancestors were here before then. Why is BHO differentiating between those who arrived from Europe and those who arrived from Asia? Why give so much weight to thousands versus hundreds of years? Assuming for the moment he wasn't just offering a dangerous pander, why not differentiate between those whose ancestors came here ten thousand years ago and those whose ancestors came here twenty thousand? Taken one step further, would Obama be like those who think that anyone with enough native blood - presumably more than one drop - can move anywhere within the Americas at will?
And, of course, the only people who are actually immigrants are those who are legal immigrants under our set of laws; those who were born here are not immigrants even if their ancestors were.
An open question is, other than pandering, what exactly BHO would have us do about all this? Should Mayflower descendents be considered among those who've had our borders cross over them? Is it good public policy to encourage U.S. citizens to think that our borders crossed over them? Would he give those who've been crossed over by our borders something? Would he support allowing anyone with the right amount of native blood to come here at will?
The rest of that section of his comments is his standard blather about this issue; the problems with that can be found here, here, and through a search. Discussing all the other reasons BHO's statements above are wrong is left as an exercise.
Note: I've confirmed BHO's statements with the author of the linked post.
Los Angeles may "require" home improvement stores to have day laborer centers
Anna Gorman of the Los Angeles Times offers "L.A. adopts day laborer rules for home improvement stores" (link):The Los Angeles City Council unanimously approved an ordinance Wednesday requiring certain home improvement stores to develop plans for dealing with day laborers who congregate nearby in search of jobs.Eric Garcetti - as well as day laborers who were in the Council that day - are happy.
The ordinance mandates that proposed big-box stores obtain conditional-use permits, which could then require them to build day-labor centers with shelter, drinking water, bathrooms and trash cans.
Councilman Bernard C. Parks, who first proposed the ordinance four years ago, said that this was just the first phase and that he planned to address existing home improvement stores next. He said the businesses needed to be held accountable for their role in attracting dayworkers.
Home Depot says they aren't happy, but that's probably only because the city (probably) won't be picking up the tab for building the day laborer centers. The City of Los Angeles is/was directly enabling illegal immigration by leasing a section of a Home Depot's parking lot to run a center. And, Home Depot was paying a lobbyist $10,000 a month to lobby the L.A. City Council on the wider issue.
See also an attempt to claim that opposition to a Home Depot store was racism - run by someone who previously had worked for one of their PR companies. Surely it was just a coincidence.
"Governor" Gavin Newsom defends San Francisco's sanctuary policy
"Governor" Gavin Newsom takes to the pages of the San Francisco Chronicle (link) to defend that city's sanctuary policy. It starts out with:
In 1985, San Francisco became one of the first cities in America to address a dangerous local consequence of America's failed immigration policy.
No less an authority than the Frisco "Immigrant Rights Commission" calls into question Newsom's timing (sfgov.org/site/immigrant_page.asp?id=4973):
In 1989, the Board of Supervisors adopted Ordinance No. 375-89, declaring San Francisco to be a City and County of Refuge
Both dates are around the 1986 amnesty; Newsom tries to use the fact that we haven't passed a new amnesty as justification for continuing the policy (from this: Newsom also said the ordinance's establishment was "directly connected with the failure of the federal government" to address immigration reform "in a thoughtful and comprehensive manner.") He hasn't explained why there appears to be a conflict; shouldn't the 1986 amnesty have made the 1989 policy unnecessary? If not, how would a new amnesty solve matters?
Hopefully San Francisco residents will come up with the moxie to start going to Newsom's public appearances (or calling into radio shows where he appears) and work to publicly embarrass him and drive him from office.
Judy Bachrach/Vanity Fair smears Lou Dobbs
Freelance writer and Vanity Fair contributor Judy Bachrach offers a smear of Lou Dobbs in "Lou Doubts" (poder360.com/article_detail.php?id_article=549). It's yet another example of the illegal activity-supporting establishment trying to reduce his influence in order to profit from illegal activity in one way or another.
It's not clear whether the article already appeared in VF, whether it will appear in VF, whether "Power 360" hired her to write it, or whether "Power 360" is the only group that wanted to buy it from her. It basically consists of the same warmed-over issues that were already discussed by David Leonhardt of the New York Times and in "Fear and Loathing in Prime Time" from Paul Waldman of Media Matters, combined with unattributed smear quotes from others.
1. She says that "CNN... occasionally signals that it considers Lou Dobbs Tonight the trailer park section of its nightly real estate package." That might be correct, but she fails to take into account that CNN's opinion has little validity.
2. She quotes Barack Obama lying about hate crimes doubling, simply to include his comments about Dobbs and Limbaugh. She doesn't do any real reporting in this case and point out that Obama lied. And, later in the article she quotes some hate crime statistics, so obviously she knows where to find them. Even the Washington Post's "Fact Checker" has called BHO on his lie (link), but apparently she's unable to do that.
3. She consistently gives far-left, illegal immigration-supporting groups anodyne descriptions. The National Immigration Forum is just "a center-left group"; the National Council of La Raza is just "the Hispanic advocacy group"; the Southern Poverty Law Center - a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government - is just "a civil rights organization"; and, Media Matters Action Network is just "a liberal media watchdog".
4. She consistently misspells "Frank Sherry".
5. She says "Broken Borders" was the title of Lou's initial salvo against illegal - Mexican - immigration. A search for site:cnn.com "Broken Borders" "special interest aliens" brings up 949 hits, implying that that segment doesn't just concentrate on Mexicans crossing illegally; a search for site:cnn.com "Broken Borders" "canadian border" brings up 86 hits, implying that that segment deals with the northern border as well.
6. She says [Chris Simcox of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps] organizes civilian patrols along the Arizona border— for excellent reason, apparently: he once complained he’d seen the Chinese army maneuvering on the Mexican border. The SPLC quotes him as saying (splcenter.org/intel/news/item.jsp?pid=168&site_area=1) "The Mexican army is driving American vehicles -- but carrying Chinese weapons. I have personally seen what I can only believe to be Chinese troops." I don't hold Simcox in the highest possible regard, but a real reporter would try to consider whether there could be a grain of truth in what he's saying, and might look into things like the questionable blurb from a Mexican newspaper printed here. We know that the Mexican Army has renegades or that criminals pretend to be them; it's highly likely that Chinese arms and American military vehicles are smuggled into Mexico; and, it's certainly possible that there could be Chinese people in uniform in Mexico, whether affiliated with similar fake Mexican groups or criminal Chinese groups. There have been rumors of something similar (link), but no corroboration I can find. And, of course, a Chinese company linked to the Chinese military controls the Panama Canal (link). A real reporter - and one not simply intent on writing a smear piece - would look into such allegations.
7. She says There have been dark references to "Aztlan," a supposed plan to recapture the U.S. Southwest on behalf of Mexico, and its imaginary sibling, the North American Union, a plot to merge the U.S., Mexico and Canada. President George W. Bush once described the mere thought of such a union as "quite comical," but Lou thinks otherwise. Last year he informed viewers, "that there really is such a thing and it's all part of a plan." It's extremely odd that about the only time leftists are willing to take Bush's word for anything is when he denies things like the NAU. In fact, many NAU apologists who wouldn't normally take anything the Bush administration says at face value are more than willing to regard them as the last word on this issue. She fails to point out that those who are on record as supporting something like the NAU are almost an entirely different set from those who are on record as supporting some form of self-determination or irredentism. A simple search would show examples of various thought leaders supporting both plans. For more on the NAU, see this category.
8. She refers to the mythical NAFTA Superhighway; even the MMFA report she references admits that it exists in a form.
9. She claims that Dobbs initially knuckled-under to pressure from the SPLC. Then, after allowing Mark Potok to mislead about their goals, she says that according to him Dobbs did an about face and his "polemics on illegal immigration actually appeared to harden". That section is entirely based on Potok's representations.
10. She takes Joe Baca's word for what went on when Dobbs met with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus; she says the air was thick with implications that he was a know-nothing racist with limited gastronomical experience. "I was asked if I'd ever eaten a taco before, for God's sake," Lou said. "Pretty amazing stuff." She follows that with Amazing indeed, as it turned out. U.S. Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA), the caucus leader, wrote columnist Ruben Navarrette of the San Diego Union Tribune that to the best of his recollection taco-talk "did not reflect the true nature of the discussion at our meeting." In other words, she considers a vile racial demagogue like Baca a credible source, and not Dobbs. By the way: Baca is linked to someone who wrote a book about Aztlan.
Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) calls DHS agents "Gestapo agents" (Gebe Martinez/Politico)
Alleged U.S. Representative Luis Gutierrez - Democrat from Illinois - is quoted in the article "Push needed for immigration reform" (link) by ethnocentric hack reporter Gebe Martinez as saying:
"You know who is in charge now? The Gestapo agents at [the Department of] Homeland Security. They are in charge... I think it is election season, and they have decided it did not work for us one way [with comprehensive reform], so let's try to exploit it politically another way” through harsh enforcement."
ICE is not happy:
A senior ICE official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Julie L. Myers, the assistant secretary of Homeland Security for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, was "absolutely appalled and deeply angered" by the statement. The official said Myers would send a letter to senior members of Congress asking that disciplinary action be taken against Gutierrez' for his remarks... ..."It's not OK," [Jamie Zuieback, director of congressional affairs for ICE] said. "Aside from being demeaning to the law enforcement officers that uphold the very laws passed by Mr. Gutierrez's Congress, it's potentially dangerous. No member of Congress should be encouraging the public to defy or demean federal law enforcement officers. Words matter."
Gutierrez didn't respond to their request for comment. The last link notes that California Democratic Rep. Sam Farr said this to Myers in February:
"What happens is the public image of you becomes one of not this compassionate law enforcement agency but essentially a Gestapo-type agency that is knocking on doors."
Others who've said similar things include Peter Schey, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Stillmore GA mayor Marilyn Slater, NJ nursery owner Chris Ruske, immigration attorney Casey Wolff, Joe Mota of the United Farm Workers. Those who've come close include Nancy Pelosi, the New York Times editorial board, and NY grower Maureen Torrey.
As for the rest of the Politico "news report", I don't know why the Politico gives Gebe Martinez the time of day considering her extremely biased reporting, for instance:
In May, hundreds of federal agents stormed into the Agriprocessors Inc. plant, rounded up workers like cattle and chuted them through a pre-scripted legal process that cut off their legal rights to defend themselves against unusually harsh felony "aggravated identity theft" charges.
Luis Gutierrez, Joe Baca don't want federal enforcement in "their" communities
Putative U.S. Reps. Luis Gutierrez and Joe Baca offer an editorial called "Mr. President, stop your raids on our communities" (link). Discussing everything wrong with it would take too long, but:
1. What exactly does "our communities" mean? I'm pretty sure they aren't referring to the localities they represent, but have something more ethnic nationalistic in mind. And, what right do they have to order the federal government to stop enforcing our laws? Taken the next step, are they claiming there's a Latino Nation inside our nation, and they're it's representatives?
2. As with others, they pretend they'll support enforcement after an amnesty is granted ("We can all agree that we need Immigration reform that is tough on enforcement.") Yet, everything they complain about would apply after "reform" as it does now. Does anyone believe these two racial demagogues would do a 180 and support post-"reform" enforcement?
3. They compare the conditions in the Third World ("abject poverty, meager wages, poor working conditions, paltry access to legal counsel and a jarring lack of fairness in the courts") to that which illegal aliens undergo. Not only is that extreme hyperbole, illegal aliens put themselves in their positions and almost all can escape their current conditions simply by abiding by our laws.
4. If their only concern was alleged abuses, they'd probably get more support if it wasn't clear that their goal is to prevent enforcement in order to increase their political power.
5. Is it in the best interests of the U.S. to give Gutierrez and Baca more power than they have now? (The answer is a very loud 'no').
Casa de Maryland gets $1.5 million from Citgo (Venezuela government)
Casa de Maryland - a far-left, illegal immigration-supporting group that runs day laborer centers in the Baltimore area and even advertises in competition with U.S. citizens on Craigslist - has received a $1.5 million donation from Citgo Petroleum, which basically translates into being a donation from the government of Venezuela. In November of last year, Casa's Gustavo Torres attended a "revolution in the U.S." conference in that country. And, Citgo has used ethnic solidarity to sell gasoline in the U.S.Casa is "protected" by the local Democratic machine, and they're set to receive a $1.9 million donation next year from Montgomery County. And:
In 2007, the Venezuelan government expressed interest in helping fund some county programs. But Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett declined to get involved, Mr. Lacefield said.The last is linked with the Kennedy family; see "Dial Joe-4-Chavez/Massachusetts Democrats love Venezuela's strongman" (link).
"I think he felt that we really didn't need assistance from the Venezuelan government to run Montgomery County," he said. "Our attitude was thanks, but no thanks."
Communities served by Casa have already benefited from Citgo programs. Since 2006, Casa has partnered with Citgo in a program that provides heating oil at a discounted rate to families in the area. Citgo began the national program in 2005 with the Venezuelan government and Boston-based Citizens Energy Corp.
UPDATE: While the report from the WaPo's Alejandro Lazo on this only makes it to page D8, at least it does say this:
The donation will be spread over three years to help fund the group's $4.4 million vocational training and economic development program. It will offer day laborers and other low-income workers skills courses in the construction trades, counseling to small business owners and access to social services. One of the programs encourages the formation of worker-owned cooperatives. Chavez has encouraged such cooperatives as part of his so-called Bolivarian Revolution.A former State Department official then puts some pro-Chavez spin on it.
...CASA accepted the money despite the strain [of Chavez' anti-Bush tirades, etc.], said Kim Propeack, advocacy director for the group, because few corporations have stepped up to make similar donations.
"Citgo is a large corporation, and it is all too rare in this world that large corporations have a responsibility to the community from which they garner their profits," Propeack said.
Others focused on Chávez's political goals. "He is committed to creating this constituency in the United States and also to embarrassing the United States," said Michael E. Shifter, vice president for policy at Inter-American Dialogue, a policy forum on Latin America-U.S. relations. "That here is this Third World country that is really taking care of social problems in the United States that the United States is not able to deal with -- I think that is politically what Chávez tries to do."
Bush admin agrees to two more years of Mexican trucks
From this:The Bush administration on Monday extended a test program allowing long-haul trucks from Mexico full access to U.S. highways for up to two years, despite pending legislation in Congress to shut it down.Previously:
"We intend this extension to reassure trucking companies that they will have sufficient time to realize a return on their investment, and we anticipate additional participation with this extra time," said John Hill, the Transportation Department's top trucking safety regulator...
Mary Peters, Carlos Gutierrez, Mexican official team up to promote Mexican trucks in U.S.
Sen. Byron Dorgan moves to block Mexican trucks (NAFTA)
"Mexican trucks approved for long-haul trips in U.S."
Mexican trucks to be allowed to carry cargo on U.S. highways (NAFTA)
UPDATE: There's more here, and here Democrats Rep. James Oberstar and Senator Byron Dorgan say they'll block the program as soon as they can.
Business-linked GOP groups oppose Russell Pearce; ad calls him "embarrassment" (Tim Hill, Kevin Gibbons)
Back in 2006, the GOP more or less dropped support from Republican congressional candidate Randy Graf of Arizona due to his opposition to illegal immigration; they threw their support behind a "business-friendly" challenger instead. Now, something similar is playing out in the same state involving the reelection campaign of state Senator Russell Pearce.Two groups (The People of AZ and Protect Arizona's Future) are running an ad campaign featuring this video that calls Pearce an "embarrassment" for things he's apparently said about John McCain, Jeff Flake, and Jon Kyl.
...Tim Hill, president of the Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona and chairman of both independent committees, said the groups believe Pearce is "mean-spirited" when it comes to party members with whom he disagrees, especially on the highly divisive issue of illegal immigration... Hill added that the group would like to see someone elected who looks at issues of public safety "beyond the narrow confines of immigration."... "He needs to talk not about tax cuts but about truly balancing our state budget without hurting communities," Hill said... Hill strongly endorsed [Kevin Gibbons], a Republican immigration lawyer, calling him "well-rounded and level-headed."The party affiliation of Hill and the PFFA is unclear, but the first and third bolded phrases above are definitely part of the Democratic Party's lexicon. In 2006 the PFFA backed Randy Graf's opponent (giffordsforcongress.com/2006/04/12/arizona-fire-police-and-highway-patrol-back-giffords). And, according to this, a group called "Protect Arizona's Future" got $15,000 from "Progressive Majority" in 2006; whether both are the same group is unknown.
...Gibbons, who's related to Flake, has the backing of the business industry and key political players including Farrell Quinlan, former vice president of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Quinlan is the spokesman for another independent committee, Judgment Matters, which also is campaigning against Pearce.Pearce has a site against Gibbons here. As pointed out here, only about 15% of Gibbons' contributions are from those in the district, with a large percentage coming from growers and over 30% coming from Yuma.
Another independent committee, Mesa Deserves Better, while ambiguous about its plans, is led by those opposed to the employer sanctions law, which was sponsored by Pearce. Committee chairman Nathan Sproul, a GOP heavy hitter and former executive director of the Arizona Republican Party, consulted for the anti-sanctions-law group, Wake Up Arizona!
That law is one of the toughest in the nation on employers and, along with other anti-illegal immigration measures he's pushed, is a point of pride for Pearce. He has criticized Gibbons for taking money from those who support cheap labor at the expense of jobs for Americans.
Gavin Newsom's San Francisco violated federal law? Perks for illegal aliens, and much more
Apparently the thought of "Governor Gavin Newsom" is as scary to the San Francisco Chronicle as it is to the rest of us, because they've actually done some real reporting on Frisco's sanctuary policy and their habit of supporting illegal immigration.
First up is "Illegal immigrant arrested 5 times before feds told", about a 26-year-old crack dealer's trips through the revolving door (link).
Then there's "S.F. fund aids teen felons who are illegals" (link):
As San Francisco's juvenile justice system shielded young illegal immigrant felons from possible deportation, Mayor Gavin Newsom's office gave grants totaling more than $650,000 to nonprofit agencies to provide the underage offenders with free services - everything from immigration attorneys to housing assistance to "arts and cultural affirmation activities," city records show... Joseph Russoniello, the U.S. attorney for the northern district of California and a critic of San Francisco's past policy of not turning over undocumented juvenile immigrant felons for deportation, said the mayor's office was funding programs that might be violating federal law... "What it means to me," he said, "is they took the concept of sanctuary, and they applied it in a way that it is as close to harboring as I've ever seen."
In related news, Judicial Watch has filed a California Public Records Request for details on the recent triple murder allegedly performed by an illegal alien (link).
"Chemical bomb" thrown at Jim Gilchrist at Minuteman protest against Gavin Newsom?
On Wednesday, the Minuteman Project protested San Francisco's sanctuary policy and their mayor Gavin Newsom. According to MMP leader Jim Gilchrist, one of the counterprotesters tried to throw a "chemical bomb" in a glass vial at him. It bounced off Gilchrist's assistant Tim Bueller, hit the ground, and made a loud noise as it detonated. Apparently no one was injured. The police arrested the person who threw the "bomb". There's a text blurb here, and audio where Gilchrist discusses this is here.
CIS sees reduction in number of illegal aliens; others disagree (Dave Marcus, Paul Krawzak)
The CIS has released a study called "Homeward Bound: Recent Immigration Enforcement and the Decline in the Illegal Alien Population" (link) which says that due to enforcement "the illegal immigrant population has declined by 11 percent through May 2008 after hitting a peak in August 2007... [t]he implied decline in the illegal population is 1.3 million since last summer, from 12.5 million to 11.2 million today."
Not surprisingly, others disagree. Paul Krawzak of the San Diego Union-Tribune quotes Wayne Cornelius of the University of California San Diego as saying that there may have been a decline but "the most likely cause is the poor state of the U.S. economy". Krawzak also says that CIS is "an anti-illegal group", falsely implying an animus against illegal aliens themselves (link).
Dave Marcus of Newsday gets even worse when quoting a few others who dispute the report (link). While he refers to "illegal immigration" a few times, he also uses the terms "undocumented workers" and "undocumented residents". And, he refers to "[o]rganizations that support immigrants' rights". While that may be true of some groups in some cases, for most groups and in most cases they actually support giving rights to illegal aliens to which they aren't currently entitled. The report is also labeled as "controversial" and:
While the Center for Immigration Studies defines itself as nonpartisan, some liberal groups say it is a thinly-veiled Republican group started 20 years ago as a spinoff of the conservative Federation for American Immigration Reform.
I don't know whether that's true or not, but I strongly suspect that it's more a case of correlation rather than causation: those who support our laws tend to be some Republican leaders. And, I don't think the CIS would refuse support from Democratic leaders if they also supported our laws. But, at least that description is not as bad as it could have been.
Marcus also quotes the New York Immigration Coalition, saying that they "advocate[] for undocumented workers", which at least is more accurate than they'd probably describe themselves.
Minutemen protest SF sanctuary policy; Gavin Newsom still defends that policy
Jim Gilchrist's Minuteman Project held a protest today in San Francisco against their sanctuary policy. A report is here, some pictures and links to video are here. The MMP was counterprotested by a group waving signs including many from ANSWER; two were arrested, both from the pro-illegal immigration side.
The MMP called for Newsome, "District Attorney Kamala Harris and William Siffermann, head of the city's Juvenile Probation Department" to resign. And, per this:
Newsom has put a stop to the controversial practice of protecting juvenile offenders. And no, he won't be resigning. Newsom says the Minutemen is not a group he turns to for advice.
Indeed. I'm going to imagine that most Frisco'ans - even including those who are shocked by the recent triple murder allegedly committed by an alleged illegal alien - are going to think of the Minuteman Project as being some combination of out-of-towners, yahoos, and Hayward residents. To some Frisco'ans, being protested by the MMP might even be a credibility boost for the mayor.
And, after the protest (link):
[Newsom] accused critics of misunderstanding both the law and the intent behind it... [he] said the goal of San Francisco's sanctuary ordinance, enacted in 1989, is to promote public safety... [he said] the law was intended to allow undocumented immigrants to feel they can safely report crimes in their neighborhood, or bring their sick children to the hospital, without the threat of deportation... Newsom also said the ordinance's establishment was "directly connected with the failure of the federal government" to address immigration reform "in a thoughtful and comprehensive manner."
We'd already had "reform", i.e., amnesty, just a few years before the ordinance was established, so apparently Gavin is mixed up on his dates.
..."I believe in its principles and its purpose," Newsom declared, adding that several other major U.S. cities, including Oakland, San Jose, New York City, Detroit and Chicago, also are sanctuary cities yet have not provoked the ire of groups like the Minuteman Project in the same way that San Francisco has... "The sanctuary status was never to be a shield to break laws," Newsom later responded... [...details of the supposed missed communication that resulted in the alleged murderer being set free...] ...Newsom said his staff last week began "a comprehensive analysis and review" of San Francisco's sanctuary ordinance, in order to "tighten up the language" in a way "that maintains the spirit that brought us here in the first place," he said... "Which I will not back off on," Newsom added.
The way to deal with people like Newsom isn't through relatively ineffective things such as protests. The way to resolve this issue is to have an impact on his career by discrediting him on video. Newsome wants to run for governor of California, and publicly showing that he's a liar or is unable to think things through will even cause many in San Francisco to turn against him.
The problem then becomes thinking up a difficult question to ask him, since he's slick enough to come up with a weasely reply to most questions. But, I'll bet if someone wanted to they could come up with questions that would make him look very bad. The only remaining problem becomes finding someone willing to perform the simple task of reading one of those questions. Too many people are unwilling to do something that would be very effective.
U.S. Catholic Church's 2008 National Migration Conference: Roger Mahony, others support illegal immigration
The U.S. Catholic Church is currently conducting their 2008 National Migration Conference in Washington DC, and today they visited various offices on Capitol Hill to push their agenda. The conference program is in this PDF file. Workshops included "How to respond to federal raids." Cardinal Roger Mahony was there and as could be expected spoke out in favor of illegal immigration, engaging in logical fallacies and promoting horrible public policy:
"[enforcement of our laws has led to] the separation of families, the harassment and profiling of U.S. citizens and legal residents, the expanded use of detention against those who are not a flight risk or a danger and, tragically, deaths in the United States desert." ...The recent national policy described as "deportation by attrition" has a goal of creating "such a dangerous and unwelcoming atmosphere that immigrants and their families leave the United States because they have no other choice," said Cardinal Mahony... It has led to fear among immigrant communities and a hostile atmosphere, "fanning the flames of intolerance, xenophobia and, at times, bigotry," he continued... "Such a national policy is doomed to fail because it underestimates the human spirit, the spirit of hope that we celebrate in this gathering," the cardinal said... The very act of migration is a hopeful one, he said, because it is based in the belief that a better life is possible for the migrant and his family... "While we are bound to respect our laws and not violate them, we also are bound to correct unjust laws," Cardinal Mahony said. "The terms 'rule of law' and 'national security' should no longer be used to justify the harsh and inhumane treatment of immigrants, refugees or asylum seekers. While we acknowledge the right and the need for our government to enforce the law, we must remind our fellow Americans that man-made law does not permit the violation of God's law."
So wrong. So very, very wrong. Why he's wrong has been covered here and here. Regarding the "better life" part, Mahoney is supporting draining other countries of their human capital instead of working to make sure they can be successful in their own countries. And, I'm pretty sure that enforcing our immigration laws in a humane fashion doesn't violate "God's law". Mahoney is corrupt and an embarrassment to the church.
Others there included "New York Cardinal Edward M. Egan; Guatemalan Bishop Alvaro Ramazzini Imeri of San Marcos; Bishop John C. Wester of Salt Lake City, chairman of the bishops' migration committee; Bishops Jaime Soto of Sacramento, Calif., Thomas G. Wenski of Orlando, Fla., Frank J. DeWane of Venice, Fla., and Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn, N.Y.; and Auxiliary Bishop Rutilio J. del Riego of San Bernardino, Calif" and Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, retired DC Cardinal.
Chicago City Council to try blocking immigration enforcement (Danny Solis, Roberto Maldonado, Emma Lozano)
From this:Activists and several Chicago aldermen are investigating dozens of claims that city and county authorities violated immigrant rights, including federal immigration laws affecting jail inmates.Solis is the brother of Patty Solis Doyle, who previously worked for Hillary Clinton and who now works for Barack Obama.
...''We understand the value that immigrants hold in our society, whether documented or undocumented,'' said Chicago Alderman Danny Solis, who is leading the hearings.
[...alleged abuses at jail, jail says they've instituted reforms...] ...Other allegations made by Chicago aldermen and the group, called the Intergovernmental Commission on Latino Immigrant Rights, involve the Chicago Police Department.The CPD denies both charges. And, Emma Lozano from Centro Sin Fronteras - more well known for her involvement in the Elvira Arellano matter - is involved, trying to get "immigrants" to testify at the hearings. The article also quotes Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda of UCLA.
Cook County Commissioner Roberto Maldonado alleges that some officers have pulled over individuals who appear Latino and questioned them their immigration status, which is prohibited by a 2006 Chicago ordinance.
Immigrant rights activists also claim Chicago police officers have reported the immigration status of individuals to ICE.
ICE to start voluntary self-deportation program?
[See *both* updates; it makes sense now.]
According to a press release supposedly from Frank Sharry of America's Voice [1]:
In an interview on the Univision television program "Al Punto" last Sunday, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Assistant Secretary Julie Myers announced the latest Bush Administration plan to tackle the problem of undocumented immigration: voluntary self-deportation. Myers announced that ICE would soon launch a program encouraging undocumented workers to "turn themselves in" in an "organized" way. According to Myers, this program would give workers a chance to make the necessary arrangements before leaving their families behind in the U.S.
A "report to deport" program was part of the Cornyn-Kyl amnesty scheme; under that, illegal aliens would report to DHS, be deported, and then be able to come back legally at some point. However, unless Myers said something other than what's provided above (a possibility), there's little incentive for someone to turn themselves in. There's very little chance that a non-criminal illegal alien will be picked up in a raid. What game the DHS is playing is left to the reader's imagination.
Voluntary self-deportation would work over time, but for that to happen there are going to have to be a lot more raids and at least some reduction in the numbers of services that illegal aliens can take advantage of. Some high-profile prosecutions of company executives or even crooked politicians would be nice as well, but reducing the jobs and services available would do the trick without a formal process having to be in place.
[1] The press release is here: dos-centavos.blogspot.com/2008/07/americas-voice-responds-to-self-deport.html
While there's no link provided and there's no such press release at AV's site, I also don't think most people would bother faking a press release. I'm not going to bother discussing the rest of the PR, but that part of it has little validity.
UPDATE: The program has been confirmed, and is called "Operation Scheduled Departure" (link). Those on both sides of this issue both make the point that without an incentive this isn't going to work too well. And:
Under the new program, those still walking free will have the chance to walk into ICE offices, be processed and get a few weeks to arrange their affairs, pack their belongings and ship out of the country without being detained... Myers said the program would allow immigrants to avoid the increasing risks of being picked up in a raid at home or at work, but would offer no additional incentives to turn themselves in - no chance at qualifying for an amnesty, for example...
UPDATE 2: This makes a lot more sense now (link):
The self-deportation program is only for people who have received deportation orders and who have not committed crimes, said Lori Haley, ICE spokeswoman... "We've gotten a lot of criticism when we make fugitive operations arrests and go to people's homes or businesses," Haley said. "People say that it's very difficult for their family members to deal with. This is a way people can have control over their own removal."
I'm going to assume that ICE came up with this program to deflect criticisms from far-left/racial power groups after those fugitives are arrested at their homes (example), and that ICE will point out that those fugitives could have turned themselves in. So, it appears to actually be a good idea.
Ramos/Compean convictions upheld; to Supreme Court?
From this:The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals today affirmed the major counts against former Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, reversing only a minor obstruction of justice count.
Ramos and Compean are serving 11- and 12-year prison sentences, respectively, after a jury convicted them of violating federal gun laws and covering up the shooting of a drug smuggler as he fled back to Mexico after driving across the border with 743 pounds of marijuana in February 2005. U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton's office gave the smuggler, Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, immunity to serve as the government's star witness and testify against the border agents...
The court affirmed all convictions except for tampering with an official proceeding, which it vacated and remanded for resentencing.
The bulk of their sentences, however, stem from a mandatory 10-year minimum sentence imposed by Congress for anyone convicted of discharging a weapon in the commission of a crime. Only a reversal of that count could remove 10 years from their sentences...
[Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas], deeply disappointed and clearly upset by the appellate court decision, told WND he would encourage Ramos and Compean to have their lawyers make a further appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court...
Moira Herbst/Business Week: local enforcement of immigration laws is "ugly"
Moira Herbst of Business Week - a magazine that's promoted profiting from illegal activity - offers "The Immigration Fight Gets Ugly" and, yes, it's terrible. She only offers one example of that "ugly", and it's not a good example since it's just an allegation:
Atlantic Scaffolding, which employs nearly 400 at a Pascagoula (Miss.)-based Chevron (CVX) refinery, has let go at least eight workers this month. The company says some workers were laid off for economic reasons, and others may have been terminated for just cause. But at least three of the workers have filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleging they lost their jobs because of their Latino ethnicity. The workers say although they are legally eligible to work, they were fired on July 2, following the July 1 implementation of a Mississippi state law cracking down on undocumented workers and their employers... Brandon Munn, a spokesman for Atlantic Scaffolding, denies the workers were let go in reaction to the law taking effect. Chevron declined to comment on the allegations against the contractor.
In addition to approvingly quoting Frank Sharry, she approvingly quotes "Bill Chandler, executive director of the Jackson (Miss.)-based Mississippi Immigrants' Rights Alliance (MIRA)" (yourmira.org), who - needless to say - paints a dire picture. MIRA (not to be confused with the more famous group in Massachusetts) is a coalition of labor and other groups (Laborers International Union, NAACP, Bricklayers International Union, etc.) Their homepage solicits those who have "suffered discrimination from S2988" to contact them. They link to the SPLC in their sidebar, but discovering whether they have more tangible links to that or other questionable groups isn't known. Their board president is state Representative Jim Evans, also with the AFL-CIO and the SCLC.
The article also serves as yet another example of corrupt business interests joining with corrupt far-lefties in opposition to what the majority of Americans favor.
San Bernardino school board promotes college discounts for illegal aliens
From this:The San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools office has put out a new brochure informing illegal-immigrant students of their right to pursue higher education in California [under 2002's Assembly Bill 540 that gives illegal aliens the in-state rate at public universities and colleges].AB540 was from the late Marco Antonio Firebaugh. In 2004, before getting elected to the school board, Navarro proposed giving illegal aliens local voting rights.
..."The reality is undocumented students feel there is no life after high school," said Gil Navarro, a San Bernardino County school board member. "They can't get a job (legally). They don't have a Social Security number. With this law being in existence, it will give them a new opportunity they weren't aware of before."
Navarro pushed the county superintendent's office to create the brochure, available in English and Spanish, through the Parent Information Resource Center. The pamphlet is similar to one put out by the Colton Joint Unified School District.
..."Education is an opportunity that should be available to students," said Christine McGrew, spokeswoman for the county superintendent's office. "This is a law that has made that available. We have a role to at least provide that information."
...Elsa Valdez, a San Bernardino City Unified School District board member, said the law is another way to increase the number of college-bound students.
And, on a related note, from peekURL.com/zy8i4b8:
[Now ex-Speaker Fabian Nunez] and the USC Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis have collaborated to create The College & Financial Aid Guide for:AB540 Undocumented Immigrant Students.
Luis Gutierrez demagogues Agriprocessors raid, accuses DOJ of lying (Joe Baca, Albio Sires, Jens Manuel Krogstad)
Jens Manuel Krogstad of the Waterloo/Cedar Falls Courier offers the inaccurate "Hispanic congressmen gather information in Postville" (link), informing us that Reps. Luis Gutierrez, Joe Baca, and Albio Sires visited that city for a meeting at St. Bridget’s Catholic Church to discuss the Agriprocessors raid.We're told that Baca "wiped tears from his eyes" as he heard tales from relatives of those involved in the raid.
Then, we get to the inaccurate part:
In an unprecedented move by the Department of Justice and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, more than 300 of the 390 people arrested in the raid were convicted of aggravated criminal identity theft under a plea deal.Actually, many were just charged with "aggravated criminal identity theft", but they were given the choice of going to court on it or pleading to lesser offenses, and all or almost all took the latter route. The pleas involved "false identification to obtain employment", "false use of social security number", etc. and are listed on these pages:
During congressional testimony on Thursday, the plea deal was criticized as so coercive that it violated the due process rights of the immigrant workers.
An aggravated identity theft charge usually requires a person to knowingly steal someone else's identity, or intent to use a person's identity for personal gain, such as to run up credit.
Gutierrez argued the immigrants, many of them illiterate, could not have been guilty of the crime.
usdoj.gov/usao/ian/press/June_08/6_10_08_Postville.html
usdoj.gov/usao/ian/press/May_08/5_20_08_Agriprocessors.html
usdoj.gov/usao/ian/press/May_08/5_22_08_Agriprocessors.html
Needless to say, the actual facts mean little to a vile supporter of illegal activity like Gutierrez:
"Illegal immigration is not an aggravted felony," Gutierrez said. "What they did here in Postville is unprecedented."
The Illinois Congressmen took particular exception to the Justice Department not allowing the arrested workers immediate access to immigration attorneys. After the raid, criminal lawyers were allowed to visit with their clients, but a handful of immigration attorneys were turned away.
"The Department of Justice came to us to tell us personally this process was done in compliance with the law," Gutierrez said. "I don't believe them. They're lying to us, they’re lying to you, and we need to find the truth."
1000 protest in Postville in support of immigration-related abuses; a Rubashkin blames enemies
From this:About a thousand protesters descended on a small town in northeastern Iowa [Postville] on Sunday, decrying the raid of a meatpacking plant [Agriprocessors] that arrested nearly 400 residents and calling for a change in federal immigration policies...The alleged abuses at the plant would not have occured without illegal immigration, something that many of those on the left rush to support. But, wait, there's more:
Sunday's protesters — many arriving by bus from the Twin Cities and Chicago — circled the streets of Postville on a route about a mile long. Some clutched banners and signs such as one that read, "United for immigrant and worker rights."
Getzel Rubashkin, an Agriprocessors employee and a member of the family that owns it, approached reporters outside of the plant as the rally moved on. He said it was unfair to blame his family and Agriprocessors for the raid and suggested that unspecified competitors and enemies of the plant were behind the enforcement action.UPDATE: There's video of some of his statements to reporters here.
UPDATE 2: There's a video on the march here; I didn't watch it but I'd imagine it's from the "liberal" perspective. There are pictures here and here.
UPDATE 3: Julia Preston of the New York Times offers "Iowa Rally Protests Raid and Conditions at Plant". She doesn't point out that those protesting in favor of illegal immigration are in effect helping those who'd abuse their workers. She says that FAIR "opposes illegal immigrants and proposals to give them legal status", implying that they have personal animus against illegal aliens. After a long discussion of the kosher certification-related issues, she brings on Getzel Rubashkin. Saying he's only speaking for himself, he says among other things:
"The high number of illegal people who were working here is more a testimony to the quality of their deceit, of their papers... Obviously some of the people here were presenting false documents... Immigration authorities somehow picked it up and they did what they are supposed to do, they came and picked them up. God bless them for it."
Pew Hispanic: interest in immigration lags behind education, cost of living, jobs, healthcare, and crime
The Pew Hispanic Center has released their "2008 National Survey of Latinos: Hispanic Voter Attitudes". It finds that a great majority of those surveyed support Barack Obama over John McCain (66% vs. 23%). And, interest in immigration is lower than that in education, the cost of living, jobs, healthcare, and crime. The figures:
Extremely Important/Very Important/Total
Education: 47/46/93
The cost of living: 44/47/92
Jobs: 41/50/91
Healthcare: 42/48/90
Crime: 38/44/82
Immigration: 30/45/75
Iraq: 40/35/75
Note also that the question didn't ask for their specific stance on those issues, just asked whether they were important or not. So, some (probably small) percentage of the Important percentages for immigration might actually be from those who support our laws and some percentage might even be from those who want immigration restrictions. (According to Pew's 2007 survey, 56% of native-born Hispanics think there should be a check for immigration status before granting a driver's license; they don't appear to have asked about that this time.)
When it comes to the question of who would do the better job on immigration, BHO leads McCain by 59% vs. 19%.
John McCain probably doesn't want to see the results of which candidate is better for immigrants: BHO leads 50% to 12%. The outliers from that 12% are those making more than $75,000 per year (40% for BHO vs 27% for McCain) and Republicans (28% for BHO, 35% for McCain), with smaller increases for weekly churchgoers and college graduates.
The question of which party is better for Hispanics is even more bleak for the GOP. They get just 6%, versus 50% saying the Democrats would be better. The highest that goes is 12% for those making over $75,000 a year.
It's not possible to draw a clear conclusion from the non-specific data they've provided. Better questions might ask about specific immigration proposals, from something approaching open borders to restrictions. And, those questions might also ask about their knowledge of the candidates' plans. Do they understand that McCain's stance on immigration is nearly the same as Obama's, or have they bought the lies from MediaMatters et al?
However, it's clear that all McCain's pandering either hasn't worked or has been counteracted by lies from the Democrats trying to pretend that he wouldn't grant amnesty. He's probably going to assume it's the latter and double-down on his pandering. A wiser stance - the only one that's good public policy - would be to drop amnesty and support our laws. Lacking an external event - such as citizens doing their jobs and calling him on the flaws in his policies at his public events - don't expect him to choose the wiser plan.
CDC: increased TB due to immigration; others: tropical diseases due to immigrants, others
From the AP as printed in the Washington Post (link):
Tuberculosis cases continue to fall in the United States, but some immigrants have disturbingly high rates of the disease, according to a study released Tuesday that called for more aggressive action... TB rates were highest among residents from lower Africa and parts of Southeast Asia. Most drug-resistant TB cases also were from foreign-born residents, the study noted...
The study is from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and will be published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), so it's pretty solid.
And, on June 25 the Los Angeles Times discussed another study from Dr. Peter Hotez, "chairman of George Washington University's department of microbiology, immunology and tropical disease" and "published in the Public Library of Science journal PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases":
Despite plummeting mortality rates for most infectious diseases over the last century, a group of largely overlooked bacterial, viral and parasitic infections is still plaguing the nation's poor... ...Many of the diseases are typically associated with tropical developing countries [and] have become significant public health problems in the United States. In the Los Angeles area, a pork tapeworm infection called cysticercosis which spreads in crowded, unsanitary conditions, accounts for 10% of seizures resulting in emergency room visits... The diseases are largely concentrated in poverty-stricken regions, including Appalachia, inner cities, the Mississippi Delta and the border with Mexico...
It's important to note that the second study seems to indicate that some of the conditions may not be related to immigration, however it would be incredibly surprising if the pork bit isn't directly related to immigration.
Note also that supporters of illegal activity like the ADL seem to think it's "hate" to point out that some immigrants are indeed bringing some diseases into the U.S., so feel free to turn those responsible for the reports above and for reporting on them into your local hate speech monitoring center.
43 illegal aliens arrested... in Hawaii
Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested 43 illegal aliens from Mexico at an apartment complex in Waipahu, Oahu, Hawaii last weekend (link). They're apparently agricultural workers, and it should be interesting to find out how they got there. Another interesting thing to consider is the contortions the Mexican government would have to go through to claim Hawaii as part of the Mexican Nation.
Obama camp implies healthcare plan doesn't include illegal aliens; another lie?
Dick Morris recently suggested that John McCain highlight his contention that Barack Obama's healthcare proposal covers illegal aliens. Lester Feder at the Huffington Post asked the BHO campaign about this:
David Cutler, senior health care adviser to the Obama campaign, says Morris's argument flies in the face of the plain language of the Obama plan. He notes that it reads, "My plan begins by covering every American." Cutler added in an email, "That should have been enough for" Morris.
It's not enough because many Democrats have used "Americans" to mean various things, from U.S. citizens to U.S. citizens plus immigrants to U.S. citizens plus immigrants and illegal aliens to everyone in North and South America. In the mind of many Democratic Party leaders, the word "American" is a bit fluid.
Further, the numbers don't add up: The 45 to 47 million people that BHO touts as covered by his plan include millions of people who aren't U.S. citizens.
For instance, BHO's page (barackobama.com/issues/healthcare) includes this quote from his May 29, 2007 Iowa City, IA speech:
If you are one of the 45 million Americans who don't have health insurance, you will have it after this plan becomes law.
In the text of the page, it says this:
47 million Americans — including nearly 9 million children — lack health insurance with no signs of this trend slowing down.
Now, let's turn to the Census Bureau chart in this PDF file (link). On Page 21, the number of those without health insurance in 2006 is indeed 47 million (rounded). However, only 35.7 million of those are native born or naturalized.
10.2 million of the 47 million are listed as "not a citizen". The Census Bureau doesn't say what status those 10.2 million have, but some will be visitors, some will be those working towards citizenship, and some will be illegal aliens. Most likely a good percentage or a majority will in fact be illegal aliens.
Now, of course, there is a sneaky way that Obama might not be lying but simply being very misleading, as has been seen before. He could be thinking forward to his other plan, the one to give a massive amnesty to illegal aliens. If that's enacted, all those millions of illegal aliens would be magically transformed overnight into legal residents on the "path to citizenship" and they'd eventually become U.S. citizens, i.e., "Americans". Under that BHO plan, almost all of those 47 million would be U.S. citizens eventually, so, a few years after his plan was enacted, BHO will not have lied.
There are a lot of possibilities here:
1. The BHO campaign is lying/being very misleading about who would be covered by their healthcare plan.
2. The BHO campaign has a flexible definition of "Americans".
3. The BHO campaign has a circuitous, trans-Clintonian "out" involving the massive amnesty they'd grant.
4. Other explanations even beyond anything Bill Clinton could ever come up with.
I'll try contacting Cutler to see which it is.
7/23 UPDATE: No reply has so far been received from Cutler. And, Morris does the math for the BHO campaign again:
The senator is either misrepresenting when he says he'll cover 47 million or when he denies that he'll cover illegal immigrants. We choose, given his liberal pedigree, to believe that his denial is inaccurate and his original statement, repeated again and again, is controlling.
7/23 UPDATE 2: I sent the email again, this time to Cutler's faculty assistant. She replied that she'd pass the message along but she couldn't guarantee when/if he'd reply.
7/27 UPDATE: Still no word from Cutler. In comments, a presumed BHO fan tries to claim that the 10.2 million is just legal immigrants. First, it doesn't matter: legal immigrants are neither citizens nor (in our dictionary) Americans. Second, the linked PDF from the Census Bureau says absolutely nothing regarding the immigration status of those 10.2 million. At the beginning it does says this:
The data in this report are from the Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC) to the 2007 Current Population Survey (CPS). The population represented (the population universe) is the civilian noninstitutionalized population living in the United States.
And, this CB page describes the CPS, saying:
Because all residents of the United States living in households are represented in the sample of households interviewed by the CPS, undocumented immigrants or illegal aliens are probably included in CPS data. Because the CPS makes no attempt to ascertain the legal status of any person interviwed, these individuals cannot be identified from CPS data.
Sasha Baron Cohen (Borat) in "Accidentes" (immigration-related movie)
Word out of Hollywood is that Sacha Baron Cohen ("Borat") will be producing and probably starring in a movie called "Accidentes":
The protag will be a lawyer of Latin descent who transforms from contingency attorney [personal injury] to hero of the working class when he helps an immigrant win a judgment against his wealthy employer after a landscaping mishap. He also becomes the enemy of L.A.'s power elite.
While I'm sure the movie won't come out for immigration enforcement, just how bad it will be remains to be seen.
John Trasvina of MALDEF lists his demands
Discussing the National Latino Congreso, Teresa Watanabe of the Los Angeles Times says:
John Trasvina, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund [MALDEF], said he wanted to see the next president end immigration raids, put a moratorium on the use of local police in immigration enforcement, and appoint a Homeland Security chief who would suspend immigration raids during the 2010 Census to ensure a more accurate count, among other things.
I'm going to guess that his first demand was actually more like stopping immigration raids until "reform" is enacted, although he might have said exactly what she's written above.
"Slaying suspect once found sanctuary in [San Francisco]"
From this:
The man charged with killing a father and two sons on a San Francisco street last month was one of the youths who benefited from the city's long-standing practice of shielding illegal immigrant juveniles who committed felonies from possible deportation, The Chronicle has learned...
Related:
Feds probing San Francisco's sanctuary city policy; city-paid flights for drug dealers
San Francisco's IDs for illegal aliens plan may spread to East Bay
San Francisco: ID cards for illegal aliens (Tom Ammiano, Gavin Newsom, banks)
Newsweek at least tries to ask about Juan Hernandez (John McCain)
Trying to get answers out of the John McCain campaign about their Hispanic outreach director Juan Hernandez - a former cabinet-level official with the Mexican government - is even harder than hunting snipes. Many have tried, all have failed. The latest are Jessica Ramirez and Holly Bailey from Newsweek (link). They tried to interview him at the NALEO convention where he'd been scheduled, but someone else replaced him at the last moment. Their calls regarding him have gone unanswered. While their article contains several of the expected problems, at least they tried. Let's just hope they haven't given up completely.
But, if anyone wants to do a public service in the meantime, go to a McCain event and ask him about this on videotape, and then upload his response to video sharing sites.
Julia Preston/NYT uses unique case to advocate against 287g program
Julia Preston of the New York Times offers "Immigrant, Pregnant, Is Jailed Under Pact" (link), an attempt by the NYT to advocate against the 287g program under which localities contact ICE regarding jail inmates. A pregnant illegal alien was stopped without a driver's license, taken to jail, and gave birth after being shackled to a bed. The article, as most ones from NYT do, contains the seed of its own destruction:
"Whether this lady was documented or undocumented should not affect how she was treated in her late pregnant condition and as she was going through labor and bonding with her new baby," [her lawyer Elliott Ozment] said.
Indeed. The issue here is how that jail treats pregnant inmates. Julia Preston, the New York Times and others want to jump from there into blocking the 287g program. The more the New York Times advocates for illegal activity, the more I have to wonder whether they've got a sideline or something.
Anarchists coordinating "action" for illegal aliens on July 21
Presented for your amusement. From "Call For Anarchist Solidarity Actions With Immigrants July 21st" (la.indymedia.org/news/2008/07/218957.php):Take Nationally-Coordinated Action To Show Solidarity And Fight ICE on July 21st!Needless to say, I don't take this seriously, and for all I know it might have been planted by ICE or some other federal agency. A quick search for the vandalized van didn't result in anything. And, I think any anarchists who try to breach an ICE facility are going to get a lot more than they bargained for.
We have begun the attack by spraypainting an ICE van with many anti-Migra(ICE) slogans. May our spark spread into a wildfire...
...Let us continue, and expand our solidarity with hyper-expolited and terrorized immigrant communities by taking action on July 21st.
Some Ideas For Possible Actions:
-Banner Hangs of Solidarity
-Protests at ICE Facilities (Detention Center List: http://www.bordc.org/threats/detention.php)
-Protests at Federal Buildings
-Protests at Employers Known To Under-Pay or Exploit Illegal Workers
-Street Theater to Show What Happens When A Family is Torn Apart by an ICE Raid
-ICE Copwatch (Use a phonebook to find ICE locally)
-Murals Dedicated to Illegal Immigrants
-Stencils saying "No ICE Zone" or "Anti-ICE Safe Space" in your neighborhood and in front of your house. (In Spanish: "Zona No ICE" or "Espacio Seguro: No Migra Aqui")
-Vandalism of ICE and DHS Property
-Breaching a Detention Center to Free Imprisoned Immigrants (In Australia and Europe this has been done!)
-Get creative and participate!
American allegedly assaulted at National Latino Congreso
A small number of people from the group No More Invasion protested in front of the National Latino Congreso/National Latino Congress yesterday, and one of their elderly female members was allegedly assaulted during the protest. There are pictures here. The LAPD arrested someone for the assault, and based on the picture and the text he appears to be from a group of anarchists/far-lefties who apparently work as independent bike messengers. No video is provided.
As I suspected, neither Barack Obama nor John McCain showed for the event, despite claims from unnamed organizers who said they'd be there.
Unfortunately, protests like this are part of a long line of largely ineffective events stretching back years. The MSM refuses to portray those being protested in a negative light, meaning that they're basically just preaching to the choir. And, as with past events, they apparently failed to bring back video. Those who go to such events should always have at least two people videotaping what's going on.
Unfortunately, groups like this don't seem to understand what massive odds they're up against and are unable to figure out how to strike where their opponents are weakest and in an effective way. Asking a locally or nationally known politician a question that reveals their lies or inability to promote good public policy would have a far greater impact than street-level protests like this. If, for instance, they went to L.A. mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's public events and tried to ask him questions (not just rants) that showed he wasn't qualified for higher office, that would send a loud and clear message to the others. Or, if they were able to produce a video showing how the MSM lied about something, or tried to ask MSM reporters similar questions, that would help send a message to the rest of the MSM.
Teddy Kennedy to get award from Mexican government
Decades of hard work have finally paid off for Massachusetts Senator Teddy Kennedy, as the government of Mexico announces that they'll be giving him their "Aguila Azteca" award for his work on immigration "reform" and, per the AP, denounc[ing] injustices against migrants. He'll be presented with a sash in Washington DC at some unknown future date.
Related:
Rick Noriega proud of taking college educations from U.S. citizens and receiving award from Mexican government because of it
Arlington's Walter Tejada gets Mexican government award at NALEO convention
Jared Polis, Colorado Springs awarded by Mexican government (Ohtli award)
Douglas Mayor Ray Borane sells illegal immigration to L.A. Times
"Greater Mexico"? You're living in it. (IME report)
Mexican partisan Louis E.V. Nevaer of New America Media offers "Mexican Middle Class Fuels Ascendance of 'Greater Mexico'" (peekURL.com/zdrldr1) about a report from the Mexican government's Institute of Mexicans Abroad (IME) finding that such an entity is growing as Mexico's European upper classes establish companies and lives on both sides of the border:
...[Someone says the border doesn't matter since they can jump between countries at will] That reality – and attitude – has caught Mexican officials by surprise. IME Director Carlos Gonzalez y Gutierrez calls these white middle class Mexicans in the United States "Mexico’s transforming agents," adding that, "although they send many things that benefit us, they also send other things that harm us. But we are tied to each other."...
Mexico-linked ACLU, MALDEF, Steptoe & Johnson sue Sheriff Joe Arpaio for "profiling"
As part of an agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio takes part in enforcing immigration laws; ICE has given his efforts a clean bill of health. Now, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and their Arizona chapter, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), and the law firm Steptoe & Johnson LLP have sued Arpaio, his Sheriffs Office (MCSO), and the county itself claiming racial profiling. Also involved is the local group Somos America.
The details on the case are here: aclu.org/immigrants/gen/36011prs20080716.html. That also promotes Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon's complaints about Arpaio; Gordon's opponents may have enough signatures to force a vote on his recall.
Meanwhile, the ACLU of AZ and MALDEF are part of a group headed by Peter Schey, someone with a series of links to the Mexican government. Their San Diego branch is directly collaborating with that government. Perhaps they should just cut out the middleman and sue him directly.
The lawyers involved:
ACLU of Arizona: Legal Director Dan Pochoda
ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project: Robin Goldfaden and Monica Ramirez
MALDEF: Kristina Campbell and Nancy Ramirez
Steptoe & Johnson: David J. Bodney, Peter Kozinets, Karen Hartman-Tellez and Isaac Hernandez
UPDATE: Per this, the sweeps might have decreased the MCSO's ability to respond to calls, but there might be other factors involved.
Nevada McDonald's franchisee fined $1 million over illegal aliens (flashback to supporters)
The Nevada-based McDonald's franchisee Mack Associates Inc. has been fined $1 million after pleading guilty to employing illegal aliens. Two executives of the company - but not apparently Luther Mack himself - have pleaded guilty and may face fines and jail time.
The backstory on this is here, with a panoply of Reno-area Hispanic groups opposing the original September 2007 raid and in effect supporting identity theft purely out of race-based reasons. IIRC, several news reports from that time portrayed Mack as a victim if not a hero; if anyone would care to research that leave a link in comments.
Bob Barr still trying to fool people on immigration
Bob Barr has released a slightly more detailed immigration plan: bobbarr2008.com/issues/border-security-immigration, which I'll henceforth refer to as the Farcical Boob Bait For Bubba Plan That Has No Chance Of Ever Happening ("FBBFBPTHNCOEH").
Under the FBBFBPTHNCOEH, Barr would push through at least two Constitutional amendments: one to block illegal aliens from receiving K-12 education, and the other to end birthright citizenship. More generally, he wants to end non-emergency benefits to illegal aliens. He wants to end foreign language ballots and make English "the national language for government and official public business". He also wants to "secure the borders to the extent possible".
The biggest problems with the FBBFBPTHNCOEH is that few of his proposals have any chance of coming to pass. Moreoever, in those eight paragraphs he doesn't even hint what he intends to do about current illegal aliens. Based on his previous talking point - the same employed by Barack Obama, George W. Bush, John McCain and others - we have to choose between mass deportations and a massive amnesty. In other words, until he says otherwise, Bob Barr supports a massive amnesty for current illegal aliens. By giving that amnesty, Barr would give even more power inside the U.S. to those groups - including the far-left, business groups, and the Mexican government - who would vigorously (to say the least) oppose his other proposals.
Barr is just a dishonest hack, and his supporters would be wise to understand that now rather than before investing any time or money on his campaign.
UPDATE: On a WashTimes live chat, Barr sounded once again exactly like John McCain. Asked how his position differs from McCain, he says:
Immigration is certainly an important topic during this campaign season. To be certain, I do not support amnesty. Our immediate duty is to secure the borders quickly and efficiently. To enter our nation, you must identify yourself, prove you're not a criminal, prove you're not infectious and when you are in our country legally, you cannot receive any of the benefits from our system unless you're paying into them. Let me emphasize that we must end government benefits to those who enter our country illegally. Obviously, there is much more to address on this topic.
John McCain doesn't support amnesty either. No one does (unless they slip up). What they support is "earned legalization". Or, they "require undocumented workers to come out of the shadows". Or, some other euphemism for amnesty. A better question is going to need to be asked to show that, as he's said before, Barr wants to legalize current illegal aliens. And, when he refers to "those who enter our country illegally", he's referring to those who would enter *after* his amnesty.
Obama favored over McCain at NCLR meet, PWW reports (Fairness Doctrine)
Comrade Rosalio Munoz from People's Weekly World reports from the National Council of La Raza convention where John McCain and Barack Obama spoke:"Incredibly, McCain did not even address the issues of the war in Iraq or his policy on health care. On immigration it was more of the same: secure the borders and no stop to the raids," said Angela Sambrano, an NCLR board member and director of the National Alliance of Latin-American and Caribbean Communities.Whoa, score one for McCain! This one time he was able to differentiate between U.S. citizens and the rest of the world.
...Irene Godinez, 26, of Raleigh, N.C., who leads statewide public policy advocacy for the organization El Pueblo, said she thought "McCain was diplomatic and stressed his priorities like border security, cushioning it by saying the immigrants were 'God's children.'"
But a significant language difference gained Godinez's attention. "I noticed McCain spoke of serving American children while Obama stressed everyone," she said. "This is important for me because our Legislature just passed a law excluding undocumented students from community colleges."
Health care advocate Teresa Quezada, vice president of Mujeres Latinas of Modesto, Calif., took a more critical tone... "McCain said he opposed immigrant bashing, but he stressed 'criminals and drugs' coming across the borders time after time. That's really bashing to me."Obviously, having large numbers of people who think that it's "bashing" to worry about those who don't "just want to work" coming across our borders is not in the U.S.'s best interests.
The article then quotes someone named "Joshua Messiah", before confirming once again that the NCLR wants to push the Fairness Doctrine or similar in order to silence their critics:
Former [NCLR president Raul Yzaguirre] echoed the sentiment. "The issue of the media has to be a big issue for us like education, health care and housing," he said. "We have to confront Lou Dobbs, Rush Limbaugh, O'Reilly and right-wing radio."Even Frank Sharry admits that the print media is in their corner, aside from Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck most of those on television are some degree of massive/illegal immigration supporters, and the two highest-rated talk radio hosts (Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity) aren't exactly strong amnesty opponents. Apparently that's not enough for the NCLR.
He added that electing a Congress to return the public airwaves to serve all the people and not just the huge monopolies is a critical fight. "We have to find the ways to tell our story."
Carla Marinucci/SF Chronicle misleads about the phrase "la raza"
Carla Marinucci of the San Francisco Chronicle offers '"La Raza" defined', a supposed attempt to define the term "la raza". She misleadingly states (sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=28138):
Literally, yes''la raza'' is ''the race.'' But what it means: ''my people, my community,'' as in ''my peeps,'' or the Italian ''paisanos.'' As a Spanish-speaker myself, I can attest: this is one of those phrases (think outside the box) where the literal translation isn't accurate... ''La Raza" as it is used by organizations, disc jockeys, musicians, and in common conversation doesn't translate into -- as many of the critics in my mailbox suggest -- an Arayan Nation-style racial supremacy reference.
Whatever its origins (which may include supremacism along the way), the word "raza" signifies that someone is a member of a certain group and that group is almost always differentiated from others by racial means. What Marinucci fails to address is Obama's attempt to declare himself "raza", when no one who's generally considered to be "raza" would agree. The word doesn't just mean "people in general", or "my peeps", or "my friends". It means people who share some characteristics, and those characteristics are at heart defined by race.
For instance, few of those who are considered "raza" would consider an Argentinian of German descent to likewise be "raza". A similar example comes from the the meanings of the German word "Volk"; while it may mean "people in general", it also means the set of Germans and those of German descent.
To pretend that "raza" is something other than racially exclusionary is completely false, and Marinucci is just a hack who's lying in order to support the National Council of La Raza.
John McCain pledges to stop immigration raids? (NCLR convention)
[UPDATE: Thank you, MyDD! After listening to the tape, it turns out that the "We will" in McCain's answer was little more than throat-clearing; the audience is still applauding the question as he says that, then he pauses and says the rest. He is, however, implying that raids will no longer be necessary after reform.]After speaking at the National Council of La Raza convention, John McCain held a Q&A session. A live-blog of his comments is here: mydd.com/story/2008/7/14/17446/4277, but hopefully an accurate transcript will be provided. But, for now:
Q: "I am ashamed of these raids that are separating children from parents. As president will you stop these inhumane raids?"So, after McCain passes immigration "reform", there will be no more immigration raids? That doesn't square with one of the selling points hacks like McCain have used, that "reform" would include stepped-up enforcement against future illegal immigration. And, since those future illegal aliens would bring children with them or have children once they were here, family separations would continue as they do now.
A: "We will. With all due respect, you're talking about a symptom of the problem rather than the problem itself."
On the one hand, he could just be telling them what they want to hear. On the other hand - the even worse hand - he might actually believe what he's saying.
He also apparently said he supports the DREAM Act, an anti-American bill that lets foreign citizens who are here illegally take college educations from U.S. citizens. While he's supported that in the past, he dropped his support a few months back. While many of those who claim that McCain has flip-flopped on immigration are lying, that is indeed a flip-flop.
John McCain at National Council of La Raza convention (charter schools, immigration "reform")
[UPDATE: Did McCain pledge to stop immigration raids?]
Yesterday, Barack Obama spoke at the National Council of La Raza convention. Today, it's John McCain's turn to pander to that far-left, extremist-funding, racist-awarding group, and his prepared remarks are here.
"La Raza runs one of the largest housing counseling programs in the country that has helped tens of thousands of Latinos become homeowners with secure mortgages."
Yes, indeed. And, they've made it quite clear that that or a similar program is racially-specific.
He then says that he's an "unapologetic supporter of NAFTA, the Central American Free Trade Agreement, and the Colombian Free Trade Agreement" and once again promotes a "hemispheric free trade agreement".
Then this bit of "conservative" thinking:
I'm a strong believer in charter schools. La Raza has helped establish 100 charter schools and the results they are producing are very encouraging.
One of the charter schools funded by La Raza is has a "reconquista" nature, the Academia Semillas del Pueblo. See this for more on some others. Does McCain know the nature of those schools? Does he care?
He then reiterates that he supports amnesty:
I don't want to fail again to achieve comprehensive immigration reform. We must prove we have the resources to secure our borders and use them, while respecting the dignity and rights of citizens and legal residents of the United States. When we have achieved border security goal, we must enact and implement the other parts of practical, fair and necessary immigration policy. We have economic and humanitarian responsibilities as well, and they require no less dedication from us in meeting them.
Then, McCain reads an excerpt from the Arizona Republic's article "205 Migrants Die Hard, Lonely Deaths", the same excerpt he read into the Congressional Record on July 12, 2005 in support of McCain-Kennedy (PDF link):
Several years ago, the leading newspaper in my state published an article putting faces on the tragic human costs of illegal immigration, and I would like to briefly quote from it: 'Maria Hernandez Perez was No. 93. She was almost 2. She had thick brown hair and eyes the color of chocolate... [two other cases deleted]... We can't let immigrants break our laws with impunity. We can't leave our borders undefended. But these people are God's children, who wanted simply to be Americans, and we cannot forget the humanity God commands of us as we seek a remedy to this problem.
Needless to say, he's being extremely sleazy. If our laws were enforced - something that both McCain and the NCLR have opposed - many of those deaths would not have occurred. It's those who support illegal immigration - including McCain and the NCLR - who are partially responsible for those deaths, not those who want our laws to be enforced.
Then, as if the above wasn't enough, he confirmed his support for amnesty yet one more time:
"I spoke recently at both the NALEO and LULAC conferences, as did Senator Obama. I did not use those occasions to criticize Senator Obama. I would prefer not to do so today. But he suggested in his speeches there and here, that I turned my back on comprehensive reform out of political necessity. I feel I must, as they say, correct the record. At a moment of great difficulty in my campaign, when my critics said it would be political suicide for me to do so, I helped author with Senator Kennedy comprehensive immigration reform, and fought for its passage. I cast a lot of hard votes, as did the other Republicans and Democrats who joined our bipartisan effort. So did Senator Kennedy. I took my lumps for it without complaint. My campaign was written off as a lost cause. I did so not just because I believed it was the right thing to do for Hispanic Americans. It was the right thing to do for all Americans. Senator Obama declined to cast some of those tough votes. He voted for and even sponsored amendments that were intended to kill the legislation, amendments that Senator Kennedy and I voted against. I never ask for any special privileges from anyone just for having done the right thing. Doing my duty to my country is its own reward. But I do ask for your trust that when I say, I remain committed to fair, practical and comprehensive immigration reform, I mean it. I think I have earned that trust.
Then, even more Hispandering:
"Let me close by expressing my respect and gratitude for the contributions of Hispanic-Americans to the culture, economy and security of the country I have served all my adult life. I represent Arizona where Spanish was spoken before English was, and where the character and prosperity of our state owes a great deal to the many Arizonans of Hispanic descent who live there. And I know this country, which I love more than almost anything, would be the poorer were we deprived of the patriotism, industry and decency of those millions of Americans whose families came here from other countries in our hemisphere. Latinos are among the hardest working most productive people in our country. The strength of your religious faith and the strength and closeness of your families are a great force for social stability and individual happiness. In my recent visit to Mexico, I visited the Shrine of the Virgin of Guadalupe, and was greatly moved by the experience, and came to appreciate all the more your deep devotion to the God who created us and loves us all equally. I will honor your contributions to America for as long as I live. We would not be the special country we are without you.
Then, he smears those who support our laws:
I know many of you are Democrats, and many of you would usually vote for the presidential candidate of that party. I know I must work hard to win your votes, but you have always given me a respectful hearing, and I appreciate it. I know many of you were disappointed and hurt by those who used the debate on immigration last year, not to respectfully debate the issue, as most did, but to denigrate the contributions of Hispanics to our great country. I denounced those insults then, and I denounce them today.
John Harris/The Politico offers sham immigration "debate" ("Dear 44: Ideas for the next president")
The Politico is running a series called "Dear 44: Ideas for the next president" (politico.com/dear44) featuring two people on "different" sides debating various issues and offering advice for the next president. The Politico's John Harris offers an introduction to the series at politico.com/news/stories/0608/11113.html and has background on the two "sides" in the running debate.
The topic this week is immigration.
On one "side" is Randel Johnson of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
On the other "side" is Daniel Restrepo of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
On the American side, well, there's no one around to present the views of the great majority of Americans and to present a case that's in the U.S.'s best interests, because The Politico is running a sham debate with both "sides" supporting the same basic thing: "comprehensive immigration reform", aka amnesty. [1]
This is a stock trick employed by those who want to profit from illegal and/or massive immigration: conduct sham "debates" with just one side. For past examples, see the Politico presidential debate as well as the PBS Newshour's treatment of this issue.
[1] From the USCofC (politico.com/news/stories/0708/11690.html):
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports a comprehensive immigration reform plan with the following components: increased border security; an improved verification system that is fast, accurate, and reliable for determining whether an employee is truly authorized to work in the United States; a new temporary worker program that allows employers to recruit workers from abroad when they cannot find U.S. workers; and, under certain strict qualification criteria, a reasonable pathway to legal status for undocumented workers presently in the United States.
From CAP (politico.com/news/stories/0708/11683.html):
Any such proposal must require illegal immigrants to become legal. It is unacceptable to have 12 million or more people living in the shadows of society. And it is impractical to try to drive them out of the country through deportation. The president must work with Congress to establish mechanisms that require the undocumented to pay back taxes, learn English, pass criminal background checks and get to the back of the line for citizenship as keys to legal status.
Aside from minor details, those two positions are identical.
Barack Obama praises **Enrique Morones**
Even I am shocked by the how far Barack Obama is willing to take Hispandering and support for illegal activity. Before reading the script for his speech to the National Council of La Raza convention (the one where he accused his own government of terrorizing people), he praised open borders loon Enrique Morones (link):Obama, at the podium, had just thanked two top NCLR officials before his speech when he thanked Morones of Border Angels, a group that stocks desert water stations and lobbies intensely for immigrant rights, often with a theatrical flair and a blunt style that has drawn the ire of anti-illegal immigration activists.In 2003-2005, Morones was a member of the Institute for Mexicans Abroad, an advisory council to the Mexican government. They joined him on one of his marches. Other very questionable people were involved in that march, including the Mexican government-linked Peter Schey, Isabel Garcia, and a Mexican government official. The march was held on the day that the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed. And, in February 2007 he read an email threatening diners with tainted food at a restaurant where a Minuteman meeting was to be held; he recommended that "our community" not eat there that week. Also, of course, he's affiliated with the San Diego branch of the Democratic Party.
Morones said that prior to the speech he, several elected officials and others had attended a meeting with Obama and his campaign staff, and that he'd handed the candidate a t-shirt from his "Marcha Migrante III," the third in a series of cross-country trips he and other activists have made to lobby elected officials for immigrant-friendly law changes.
New York Times supports illegal activity, identity theft
The New York Times editorial board continues to hit new lows, this time offering "The Shame of Postville, Iowa" (link) about the May immigration raid at Agriprocessors meat packing plant in that town.
Under the old way of doing things, the workers, nearly all Guatemalans, would have been simply and swiftly deported. But in a twist of Dickensian cruelty, more than 260 were charged as serious criminals for using false Social Security numbers or residency papers, and most were sentenced to five months in prison... No one is denying that the workers were on the wrong side of the law. But there is a profound difference between stealing people's identities to rob them of money and property, and using false papers to merely get a job. It is a distinction that the Bush administration, goaded by immigration extremists, has willfully ignored. Deporting unauthorized workers is one thing; sending desperate breadwinners to prison, and their families deeper into poverty, is another.
One wonders exactly what sort of sentence an American citizen would get for the same crime, and the NYT would probably support that citizen being prosecuted instead of making lame excuses. And, one wonders whether the NYT has any sympathy for those U.S. citizens and legal immigrants whose lives were affected by their identities being stolen. While the law occasionally makes distinctions, the New York Times thinks those who engage in identity theft should just be let free, just as long as they're foreign citizens.
The NYT also links to a PDF essay by Erik Camayd-Freixas, a professor of Spanish at Florida International University who's also a federal interpreter and worked in that capacity in Postville. I only scanned the first part, and nothing I saw in that part was anything but an extremely biased screed that, among other things, referred to the ad hoc detention center as a "concentration camp".
And, his and the NYT's prescription is horribly wrong: the U.S. can't serve as a safety valve for every failed country in the world. Those countries' people have to take charge of their own fates. The standard leftwing response is to lay all the blame on the U.S. and justify illegal immigration that way. In other words, the left's policy prescription is to make things worse for all concerned and not really solve the problem.
Parents: watch for Southern Poverty Law Center's Cesar Chavez "documentary"
The Southern Poverty Law Center - a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government - is producing a "documentary" on Cesar Chavez which they'll be distributing free to schools across the U.S. starting in September (splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=318, via this). Since the SPLC is a strong supporter of illegal immigration, the fact that Chavez opposed illegal immigration is probably going to be left on the cutting room floor. Please watch out for their video and, if your local school district will be taking them up on their offer, review the video for balance and fill in any facts they "forgot" to mention. The fact that UFW co-founder Dolores Huerta is involved at least as an interviewee is not in the least a good sign.
Violent hate: protesters beat effigy of Sheriff Joe Arpaio (Isabel Garcia/Derechos Humanos)
On Thursday a protest against Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio was held in front of a Tucson Barnes and Noble where he was holding a book signing. Arpaio is working with Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) to enforce immigration laws in his area, and, needless to say, those who support illegal immigration don't like that one bit.In front of the store, protesters savagely beat an effigy of Arpaio, severing it's head (video link). Then, Isabel Garcia of Derechos Humanos carried the severed head around (video link). Then, the protesters carried the body around (video link). See the writeup from Jon Justice of the radio station 104.1 FM The Truth here.
As of 2006, Derechos Humanos was collaborating with the Mexican government, and to make it even worse Garcia is on the payroll of Pima County (home of Tucson) as their Public Defender.
Needless to say, the Arizona Republic downplays the violent protest ("Arpaio's appearance at Tucson bookstore draws protesters" by Blake Morlock, link), saying only that the protesters "also pummeled a pinata meant to resemble Arpaio". Morlock also quotes far-leftie Reverend John Fife, an associate of Reverend Robin Hoover of No More Deaths, another person who is/was collaborting with the Mexican government.
And, also needless to say, the Arizona Daily Star offers a protester-friendly, race- and age-baiting report ("Fans and non-fans flock to Sheriff Joe event here" by Dan Sorenson, link). Per Sorenson, smashing the "pinata" was "mostly for their own amusement". Yes, they certainly look amused in the first video above.
Deanna Morgan of Fox 11 News doesn't mention the protest at all, but does note that they ran out of copies of Arpaio's book (link).
UPDATE: There's some more here, including letter they sent to Garcia's boss, Pima County Administrator Chuck Huckleberry.
9/17/08 UPDATE: It was all just a dream. From this:
After initiating a review, Huckleberry issued a report last week, in which he concluded Garcia was acting as a private citizen on her own time, had nothing to do with the Arpaio piñata being brought to the event, did not encourage student protesters to strike the piñata, did not advocate any actual physical threats against Arpaio and, therefore, did not violate any county policies.
Although Huckleberry’s review focused on this single incident, Pima County citizens have complained for over a decade that Garcia’s conduct is unbefitting a public employee. In his report, Huckleberry stated, "In my conversation with Isabel Garcia ... she is truly remorseful regarding this matter. I had previously instructed her to not respond to media inquiries relating to this incident. She has complied. I asked her to fully document her recollection of the incident. She has complied. I asked for her apology regarding the difficulty incurred by Pima County regarding this incident. She has complied ... My expectations regarding this matter as it may relate to future activity have been clearly conveyed to Ms. Garcia."
Federal, state investigations of Agriprocessors (maybe the left will stop playing games)
Neither Alternet nor New America Media are reputable sources, but, for what it's worth, Wendy Feliz Sefsaf of NAM offers "Meat-Packing Giant Raided by ICE Faces Criminal Investigation" (alternet.org/immigration/91182). Discussing the Agriprocessors raid from May, she says:No fewer than seven federal and state agencies are coordinating on investigations of Agriprocessors.One of the dodges some on the left use to support illegal immigration is to demand that those who employ illegal aliens should be arrested. They want the illegal aliens themselves to stay in the U.S. for various reasons. What they fail to understand (or state) is that by blocking enforcement against illegal aliens that keeps a pool of illegal labor in the U.S., and they'll just go to work for someone else. But, hopefully if Agriprocessors' management is actually prosecuted they'll stop trying that dodge at least temporarily.
The Iowa Division of Labor Services, the U.S. Department of Labor, the U.S. Department of Justice, the Equal Employment and Opportunities Commission (EEOC), the Iowa Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Iowa Attorney General's Office are all either conducting or cooperating on investigations into the plant.
Doris Meissner, a former Commissioner of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute said, "From everything we hear about this, it sounds like the federal government is marshalling all of the authorities that it has in order to bring the broadest set of charges -- and that's what it should be doing. It's a positive sign that they seem to be working with the state attorney general...
...According to lawyers in the case and agency representatives, there are likely to be civil charges related to immigration, wage enforcement, safety and other labor issues which usually result in fines, however, criminal charges related to immigration, child labor and sexual harassment and assault are far more serious and potentially wide reaching. Anyone with "knowledge or intent" of child laborers for instance is subject to criminal prosecution -- in theory this could include management, human resources representatives and owners alike...
Frank Sharry launches Immigration08.com
Frank Sharry of America's Voice has launched the site Immigration08.com, featuring "expert analysis" from Pete Brodnitz of Benenson Strategy Group, Celinda Lake of Lake Research Partners, and Simon Rosenberg from the New Democratic Network. At post time it mostly consists of links to news articles and the candidates' (Obama and McCain) positions on their websites.
Now, as it happens, one of my neglected web properties is Immigration2008.com, so I guess I'll have to keep that more up-to-date in order to keep up with my new web neighbor.
Barack Obama proud of attending immigration march (LULAC, Mexican government)
Barack Obama's prepared remarks for his speech at the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) convention include him taking pride in having marched in support of illegal immigration at the Chicago event on May 1, 2006. Unfortunately, no one has yet asked him why he'd be proud of marching at an event whose main organizers have links to the Mexican government. One of the main organizers is even an official with Mexico's PRD political party. Who'd be proud of being at the least a useful idiot for possible Mexican government proxies? Barack Obama, that's who:
I marched with you in the streets of Chicago to meet our immigration challenge. I fought with you in the Senate for comprehensive immigration reform. And I will make it a top priority in my first year as President – not only because we have an obligation to secure our borders and get control of who comes in and out of our country. And not only because we have to crack down on employers who are abusing undocumented immigrants instead of hiring citizens. But because we have to finally bring undocumented immigrants out of the shadows. Yes, they broke the law. And they should have to pay a fine, and learn English, and go to the back of the line. That's how we'll put them on a pathway to citizenship. That's how we'll finally fix our broken immigration system and avoid creating a servant class in our midst. It's time to reconcile our values and principles as a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws. That's what this election is all about.
Everything above is something he's said before, and the fix he offers will make things far worse and lead to the rebuilding of the "servant class" over time as those who currently support illegal immigration continue to support it, this time with even more power than they have now.
Related:
Barack Obama statement supports illegal immigration marches
Barack Obama proud of marching for illegal immigration at Mexican government-linked events (Ted Kennedy)
Rick Noriega proud of taking college educations from U.S. citizens and receiving award from Mexican government because of it
Rick Noriega is running against incumbent John Cornyn for Senator from Texas. While Cornyn is pretty horrid, Noriega is even worse. From his about page (ricknoriega.org/about):The most significant accomplishment of Rick's second session in 2001 was passage of House Bill 1403.This was an historic bill, making Texas the first state in the country to provide in-state tuition rates and financial assistance for certain immigrant children; today, thousands of them are attending college.As described here many times, bills like 1403 have the impact of taking college educations from U.S. citizens in order to give them to foreign citizens who are here illegally. Noriega is on their side, not ours. And, the Ohtli award is presented to U.S. officials who help that country push their agenda inside our country.
...For his courage in authoring HB 1403 and his leadership in shepherding the bill through the legislative process, Rick received numerous awards including one from the Texas Association of Bilingual Educators, Texas LULAC. He was also selected by the Texas Association of Chicanos in Higher Education (TACHE) and Hispanic Journal as "2001 Legislator of the Year." The government of Mexico honored Rick with the Ohtli Award in 2002, presented to U.S. citizens of Mexican descent who have distinguished themselves in public service.
Arlington's Walter Tejada gets Mexican government award at NALEO convention
Walter Tejada is chairman of the Arlington County, Virginia Board [1]. He's also a former leader of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). And, back on June 26 at the convention of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) he was presented with the Ohtli Award, given by the country of Mexico to elected officials in the U.S. who, not to put too fine a point on it, advance that country's agenda [2]. More on the award here; more on Tejada here, here, and here.
Note that both Barack Obama and John McCain spoke at the same convention, and readers are urged to ask both of them whether they have any qualms about appearing at events where awards like that are given out.
[1] arlingtonva.us/Departments/CountyBoard/CountyBoardMain.aspx
[2] naleo.org/DC/program_thurs.html
John McCain launches new English-language radio ad
From the press release (link):ARLINGTON, Va., July 3 /Standard Newswire/ -- U.S. Senator John McCain's presidential campaign today released a new English-language radio ad, called "Our Values." The ad features Frank Schmidt, John McCain's roommate at the U.S. Naval Academy, speaking about the values John McCain shares with the Anglo/a community and the leadership he has demonstrated on behalf of Anglos and all Americans. The radio ad will air in Nevada and New Mexico.
LISTEN TO THE AD HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VV8D3ITyd2w
English Script For "Our Values" (Radio:60)
FRANK SCHMIDT: My name is Frank Schmidt, a proud Anglo who wants the best for America and for our community.
My roommate at the U.S. Naval Academy is running for President of the United States and he wants what is best for the Anglo community too.
His name is John McCain and he has stood for our community even in the most difficult of times.
This is because he shares our same conservative values and faith in God. He knows that family is the focal part of our lives and that we value hard work.
Being from Arizona, John knows this. He has earned the trust of Anglos and has a history of supporting us.
This election, it seems to me that the other candidate has just discovered the importance of the Anglo vote. So when it comes to our values and understanding Anglos this election, I know for John it's not political; it comes from the heart.
That's why I am voting for John McCain.
JOHN MCCAIN: I'm John McCain and I approve this message.
ANNCR: Paid for by John McCain 2008.
For the last time: John McCain still supports amnesty ("It'll be my top priority yesterday, today and tomorrow")
As discussed here for some months, various Democratic Party proxies have tried to claim that John McCain has "flip-flopped" on "comprehensive immigration reform", aka amnesty. They base that on his supposed insistence on "border security first", as discussed here.
McCain is simply trying to fool people. Those who try to claim he's "flip-flopped" are either confused or, more likely, are similarly trying to fool people.
McCain still supports amnesty, just as he has for several years.
The only issue for him is how to get it. Don't just take my word for it, here's a quote from McCain from the recent meeting of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (link):
[He told them that] fixing U.S. immigration policy would be a priority — even as he acknowledged it's not popular with some members of his own party. "It'll be my top priority yesterday, today and tomorrow," McCain said.
Feds probing San Francisco's sanctuary city policy; city-paid flights for drug dealers
Presented without comment (link):San Francisco juvenile probation officials - citing the city's immigrant sanctuary status - are protecting Honduran youths caught dealing crack cocaine from possible federal deportation and have given some offenders a city-paid flight home with carte blanche to return.
The city's practices recently prompted a federal criminal investigation into whether San Francisco has been systematically circumventing U.S. immigration law, according to officials with knowledge of the matter...
Joseph Russoniello, the U.S. attorney in charge of the San Francisco area, said he was "flabbergasted that the taxpayers' money was being spent for the purpose of ferrying detainees home. You have to have a perfect storm of dumb moves to have it happen."
Could Martin Wisckol be any more of a talentless hack?
Yes, I'm sure there are some ways that Martin Wisckol of the Orange County Register/OC Register could be even more of a talentless hack, but after reading this phone interview with John McCain I'm having a bit of difficulty imagining exactly how he could do it.
It features the stock trick of asking a politician the price of something. One might think that tricks like that are played out, but apparently the news hasn't reach Wiskol, who tries to trip up McCain on the price of gas. That's noted by ThinkProgress here: thinkprogress.org/2008/06/28/mccain-gas-prices-unaware/
On the immigration front, his questions were just as shopworn, first asking McCain how he's going to thread the needle between the GOP base (which largely supports our laws) and Hispanics (some of whom don't think our laws apply to those of their race/ethnicity). He then pretends that McCain isn't "supporting an amnesty of some sort". In case that was a trick designed to get him to say that he supports amnesty, even McCain is smarter than that. However, it was almost certainly not a trick and Martin Wiscol was simply confused over what he's read on other sites. His final question on the topic is - wait for it in all its Sovietski-style glory - this:
"It sounds as though you believe that there is a good, practical compromise strategy that can be reached."
What did he expect the answer to be, "no"?
Please send an email to mwisckol *at* ocregister.com and let him know that there are plenty of real questions that McCain should be asked about this topic, and that if he doesn't want to be considered simply a talentless hack he should consider trying to ask them.
UPDATE: I didn't bother parsing the gas prices-related portions of the "interview", but this site did:
McCain isn't saying he doesn't know the price of gas. He is saying that he doesn't remember the last time he pumped his own gas, and how much it cost then.
UPDATE 2: ThinkProgress continues to be a bad joke, this time by providing an update at the link given above:
Patterico claims that McCain's cluelessness was in reference to the last time he pumped gas, not the price of gas itself. If true, that means McCain did not answer the reporter's question about how much is the price of gas during the interview.
Obviously it's true, and obviously TP doesn't want to admit they were once again caught trying to mislead their readers. I wish I'd paid more attention to that part of the interview to begin with, but that part doesn't matter all that much. What we need to have happen is someone who's familiar with an issue and who isn't a corrupt hack press McCain on an issue, whether involving energy or involving immigration.
Mexico planting 400,000 trees on border to protest fence (no, really)
Look for U.S. useful idiots to rush to get involved with Mexico's plan to plant 400,000 trees on the other side of the Texas border in order to protest the border fence. It sounds like a joke but it isn't, but one wonders how their "green wall" will stay green in a relatively parched environment. Perhaps they don't mean trees so much as shrubbery.
Eagle Pass mayor Chad Foster was at the symbolic start of the effort in Piedras Negras, Mexico.
Sierra Club supports lowering population growth globally, massive immigration in U.S.
Via this comes the Sierra Club article "Life in Abundance/Ethiopia, the cradle of humanity, faces up to family planning" (sierraclub.org/sierra/200807/ethiopia.asp) which promotes Ethiopians having fewer children and contains this sidebar:
In the past decade, U.S. funding for international family-planning programs like those in Ethiopia has declined by almost 40 percent. During those years, 275 million more women in the developing world came of childbearing age... The Sierra Club's Global Population and the Environment program is working to get the United States to invest $1 billion in 2009 in international family planning.
And, right at the top of sierraclub.org/international is this:
What does population have to do with global warming? Plenty! Population growth, global warming and consumption patterns are inextricably linked in their collective global environmental impact. Did you know that during the 20th century, human population multiplied from 1.6 billion to 6.1 billion people, and that heat trapping carbon-dioxide (CO2) emissions grew twelve fold?
Oddly enough, the Sierra Club's goals are a bit different when it comes to domestic U.S. policy. Here in our country, they support massive immigration of any kind through various means, such as being involved in a smear campaign against those running for their board who wanted the Club to oppose massive immigration. And, through suing the U.S. over the border fence.
Now, the last thing I think is that it has anything to do with the funder who gave their Foundation $100 million and who told SC Executive Director Carl Pope that:
"if they ever came out anti-immigration, they would never get a dollar from me."
I'm absolutely positive that the SC's confused policies have absolutely nothing to do with the $100 million they got from the gentleman who said that.
Rep. David Price: deport criminals, but leave the illegal workers alone (cut enforcement funds to support illegal immigration)
Rep. David Price - Democrat from Chapel Hill, North Carolina - chairs the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee and he's using his position to encourage the DHS to prioritize deporting illegal aliens who are in prisons and jails in the U.S., rather than simply releasing them into the community. Sounds good so far, except for his corresponding plan of basically neglecting worksite enforcement:
[His committee] voted to cut and remove funding [from the Homeland Security funding bill] for proven enforcement measures such as the 287(g) program, which enables local police and sheriffs to enforce immigration laws, and workplace enforcement activities. The measure will, among other things, require ICE to spend $800 million to identify and deport illegal aliens who have committed serious crimes. Since the bill provides ICE only $60 million over its $4.8 billion budget request, the money aimed at identifying and deporting serious criminals will have to be shifted from other priorities.
Price is simply trying to make sure that cheap labor employers - perhaps even those who've donated to his coffers - are able to continue to have access to a low-cost labor pool. From a speech he gave at the Center for American Progress Action Fund where he promoted "comprehensive immigration reform" [price.house.gov/apps/list/press/nc04_price/062308.shtml]:
I want to be clear on that point. The illegal presence of foreign nationals in the United States is a problem, and calls into question our commitment to the integrity of our immigration laws. But we need to put that problem into perspective on two counts: First, the integrity of our immigration laws is compromised primarily by the fact that those laws are grossly unrealistic in relation to our labor market demands. And second, there can be no credible argument that deporting illegal workers should take precedence over efforts to combat smuggling, prevent terrorism, and deport criminal aliens... while we have been using scarce resources to detain and deport laborers at meatpacking plants, we have allowed tens of thousands of dangerous criminal aliens to be released back into our communities after serving their sentences, with no awareness on our part of their immigration status... Our illegal immigration is more about demand than about supply, so as long as our immigration policies are not responsive to the realities of our labor market, illegal immigration will drain our resources and distract attention from the apprehension of criminal and terrorist aliens crossing our borders and living among us... The current Administration made some effort last year to promote comprehensive immigration reform, but it now seems to have turned 180 degrees toward an enforcement-only approach. This might be interpreted as an attempt to appeal to the most hard-line anti-immigrant segment of the population, but some have painted it as an effort to drive home the need for immigration reform by inflicting pain on businesses and communities who depend on these workers. If it really is some sort of perverse “tough medicine” policy, I find it doubly hard to understand, given the negative impacts on hardworking immigrants and their children, and because it has tradeoffs with other activities that could be helping to make our country safer...
Price is hiding behind rightful concern about criminals being released in order to support illegal immigration by supposed non-criminals. It's possible to balance spending on deporting criminals with workplace enforcement, and with more workplace enforcement there would be fewer potential illegal alien criminals.
As for our "labor market demands", if there were no crooked politicians and our laws were enforced, our industries would adapt either by automating, producing alternatives, moving low-wage work offshore, or simply going out of business. There's a reason why we don't have a buggywhip industry nowadays.
State Farm not a good neighbor to Republicans (Hispanic voting drive with NCLR, NALEO)
The questionable organizations National Council of La Raza (among other things, funds extremists and gave an award to a vile racist) and National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (has a relatively minor link to the Mexican government) are behind a citizenship and voting drive for Hispanics called "Ya Es Hora" ("It's About Time", naleo.org/veyvota.html). And, State Farm Insurance has announced that they'll be the lead sponsor.It's great that State Farm is encouraging people to get out and vote. However, it's unfortunate that they're making it ethnicity-specific rather than working to get everyone regardless of race or ethnicity to vote. And, considering that a good majority of those who will be driven out to vote will be voting Democratic, those Republicans who hold StateFarm policies should consider contacting the company to complain or should consider switching to a different company. And, that goes for everyone, considering the groups involved in the effort:
In addition to the cash infusion [$1 million], 4,000 State Farm agents who serve the Hispanic community across the country will provide U.S. citizenship applications and voter-registration materials to clients. More than eight million green-card holders, or legal permanent residents, currently are eligible to become U.S. citizens, and the majority are immigrants from Latin America.Some might suggest that State Farm just give the money they'll spend on this to the Democratic Party to cut out the middleman.
Other companies involved include the Miami Herald, El Nuevo Herald, and Univision; the latter network's vile, illegal immigration-supporting anchor Maria Elena Salinas was on hand for an event last year [1]. A current or previous sponsor was ConAgra Foods [2]. Others involved include ImpreMedia, the Service Employees International Union SEIU and the We Are America Alliance [3]. Members of the WAAA are linked to the Mexican government. Others involved include Entravision Communications and Mi Familia Vota Educational Fund [4].
This NCLR press release makes it clear they only care about one thing: race-based power [3]:
Strategically, the campaign seeks to expand the Latino electorate in key battleground states, solidify the strength of the Latino vote in traditional Latino states, and help lay the foundation for a Latino electorate in nontraditional states where the Latino population has significantly increased in recent years. The strategy will establish Latinos as an important national electorate.And, they even reference the 2006 illegal immigration marches, where foreign citizens marched through our streets demanding that we change our laws to suit them [5]:
"The dramatic success of this year's naturalization efforts demonstrates our community's desire to help shape the future of our country at the ballot box," said Janet Murguia, NCLR President and CEO. "This unprecedented effort will give Latinos the key to victory in 2008," added Murguia. "The campaign will also build the capacities of local communities to engage in the electoral process for years to come," concluded Murguia.
The campaign was launched as the Latino community's action-oriented response to the mobilizations of 2006 and represents the largest and most comprehensive effort to incorporate Latinos as full participants in the American political process.[1] nclr.org/content/news/detail/47243/
[2] hispanicprwire.com/news.php?l=in&id=9072&cha=8
[3] hispanictips.com/2007/07/10/
multimedia-grassroots-campaign-launched-help-achieve-historic-
latino-turnout-2008-nclr/
[4] nclr.org/section/yaeshora/veyvota
[5] nclr.org/section/yaeshora/ciudadania
Chicago Aldmn Cardenas, Flores introduce anti-"hate speech" resolution; Mexico-linked ICIRR cheers
The Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights is linked to the Mexican government, and they have some involvement in a resolution introduced today by two Chicago aldermen (George Cardenas and Manny Flores) condemning "hate speech" (i.e, the facts) supposedly directed at "immigrants" (i.e., illegal aliens) [1]. The resolution also comes out in favor of legalizations of illegal aliens. And, Lou Dobbs and others are apparently the intended targets, with Cardenas saying:
"...the overall climate surrounding the immigration issue has turned more and more ugly, fed in particular by cable news. It's time that our city took a stand against the hateful rhetoric."
The ICIRR press release references the recent Media Matters report "Fear and Loathing in Prime Time: Immigration Myths and Cable News", with their Fred Tsao saying:
"The Media Matters report documents in great detail how Dobbs, O'Reilly, Beck, and others have used distortions and misrepresentations to portray immigrants in a negative light and push an anti-immigrant agenda... We applaud Aldermen Cardenas and Flores for standing with immigrants and against hate."
Those involved are simply trying to silence debate in order to make their grab for race-based power easier. And, this illustrates again the folly of those non-far-lefties who give in to the far-left's definition of hate.
[1] icirr.org/node/2886
Rep. Chris Cannon loses in Utah! (Jason Chaffetz)
Illegal immigration-supporting hack and Republican Congressman from Utah Chris Cannon will lose the primary election to Jason Chaffetz. With over 80% of the votes counted at post time, Chaffetz leads 60% to about 40%, so it's safe to call.
There are about forty posts at this site mentioning Cannon; use the search function to see them all. His higlight reel includes one of his aides soliciting campaign contributions from illegal aliens as he sat next to him, his links to David Safavian and Grover Norquist, the money he got from the cheap labor lobby, and more. See also this, this, and this. And, in 2002 - when accepting an award from the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) - he said this:
"We love immigrants in Utah. And we don't make the distinction very often between legal and illegal. In fact, I think Utah was the first state in the country to legislate the ability to get a driver's license based on the matricula consular [the Mexican government's illegal-alien ID card] and of that I'm proud."
As for Chafetz, he says among other things:
I will not support or vote for amnesty in any way, shape or form. If you are here illegally, there is no pathway to citizenship except to apply from your country of origin.
Whether there are loopholes in that statement or not remains to be seen, but just about anyone would be better than Cannon.
In the past when Cannon has been challenged on his immigration stance and won, various sources have pointed to that as an example of public support for "comprehensive immigration reform" and/or an indication that those who support our laws have trouble at the ballot boxes. What those same sources will say in this case remains to be seen. Perhaps they won't say anything at all, or perhaps they'll try to pretend it was due to something other than immigration.
Melinda Zosh lets Jason Riley/WSJ engage in logical fallacy, Michael Barone spout nonsense
Melinda Zosh is an "intern at the American Journalism Center, a training program run by Accuracy in Media and Accuracy in Academia", and she offers "Today's Illegals 'Not Different, Just Newer'" about a talk that Jason Riley of the Wall Street Journal (author of "The Case for Open Borders") gave at the CATO Institute (link).
While she offers a fine and no doubt accurate transcription, like most MSM reporters she doesn't go beyond that and question anything she's told. She simply serves as Riley's stooge and fails to call him on his use of a logical fallacy:
...Riley said that Americans limit their perspectives and fear that new immigrants won't assimilate. But the Irish did and "if America can assimilate the Irish, we can [assimilate] anybody."
Riley said lots of things, all of which Zosh dutifully wrote down without questioning them. She failed to point out to him anything approaching what's discussed at the previous link: the current conditions are quite different from those a century ago. The conditions are so different that Riley is engaging in a logical fallacy. Zoll forgot to point out to him that today's immigrants are largely coming from a contiguous country or region. She forgot to point out to him that Mexico used to own part of our territory and that 58% of Mexicans think the U.S. southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico. There's so much she forgot to point out to him that her future in the MSM looks quite bright.
She also provides the following Michael Barone quote that makes me question his sanity:
"Our elites have been putting barriers in the way of immigration... Ultimately, the good sense of the people overwhelms the nonsense of the elites."
Any reporter worth her salt would have pointed out that it's the elites that have constantly pushed massive immigration, and that everyone else opposes them on that. Needless to say, Zosh did not do that.
John McCain, Barack Obama to appear at National Latino Congress?
According to a Mexican newspaper [1], both John McCain and Barack Obama may be appearing at this year's National Latino Congress/National Latino Congreso (latinocongreso.org), something I have a bit of trouble believing. See the translation here.
The main reason I have trouble believing that they'll be appearing there is that many of those showing up are extremists, and few of those groups are (unlike the NCLR where Obama and McCain will speak) considered mainstream.
For instance, last year's event featured Nativo Lopez and Gil Cedillo, groups like the League of United Latin American Citizens and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and it included approved resolutions supporting the Cuban Five, the Fairness Doctrine, and much more. The only presidential candidate who showed was Dennis Kucinich (responsible for two of the resolutions), and aside from one report the MSM largely ignored the event.
The report says that the organizers have confirmed their participation, but they don't name which organizers confirmed that. Much is made here of the fact that the NLC has been endorsed by the Communist Party; the key isn't that they've endorsed them, but that the endorsement has been accepted.
But, if they do show up, it will show even more people that neither of them are qualified to be president, at least of this country.
[1] informador.com.mx/mexico/2008/20223/6/
asistiran-mccain-y-obama-a-congreso-nacional-latino-en-los-angeles.htm
New Jersey landlord sued over allegedly renting to illegal aliens (Connolly Properties, civil RICO)
The Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) - part of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) - is suing New Jersey's Connolly Properties under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), claiming that that company and others have a habit of renting to illegal aliens and are thus guilty of harboring illegal aliens as well as violating the Fair Housing Act. Connoly is based in New Jersey and has properties there and in Allentown, Pennsylvania. Press release here, biased AP report from Samantha Henry here.
Related:
"Mohawk Industries accused of witness tampering"
Swift and Company sued under RICO Act
Idaho county sues illegal alien employers under RICO
Are you a lawyer who likes money?
Caltrans suspends Adopt-A-Highway to "review" guidelines (SD Minutemen, ACLU, Lori Saldana)
From this we learn that the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") is reviewing the guidelines used in their Adopt-A-Highway program, whereby groups can volunteer to clean up stretches of highways. In exchange, they get some publicity with their names on signs along the stretches. Those currently in the program aren't affected, only current and future applicants.
Through a wild coincidence, the San Diego Minutemen is engaged in a federal court battle with Caltrans due to the latter's interesting handling of their application for a stretch of the San Diego Freeway. They were denied their first choices and instead offered a less-traveled route. A Caltrans spokesman says there's it's all just a coinkydink. And, as another twist, the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego and Imperial Counties (ACLU) is taking the Minutemen's side, with their David Blair-Loy saying:
"It's hard to believe its merely a coincidence... It certainly seems to be in violation of the spirit, if not the letter, of the First Amendment to close down a forum for speech... I welcome the review to the extent that it may lead to the correction of unconstitutional language in the guidelines...
Also:
California Assemblywoman Lori Saldana, D-San Diego, said last month that she wanted Caltrans to refine its application procedures to require a membership roster, a board of directors and bylaws.
Based on hearing about them, I'm not a big fan of the SD Minutemen, and while taking on Sacramento is a big point in their favor there are much better things they could be doing with their time and probably money. Namely, working to discredit those politicians who support illegal immigration by asking them tough questions.
6/28/08 UPDATE: A federal judge has told Caltrans to let the Minutemen clean up one of the original sections of the 5 freeway that they requested.
Villaraigosa, Dellums, Nickels don't want ICE immigration raids of "responsible employers"
If you want examples of political corruption, illegal immigration is where you should look. The latest example is a resolution proposed by three west coast mayors at this year's Conference of Mayors meeting: they don't want ICE to conduct immigration raids of "responsible employers". Instead, they want them to only raid those companies that are abusing employees and the like. The mayors are: Antonio Villaraigosa (Los Angeles), Ron Dellums (Oakland), and Greg Nickels (Seattle).
In effect, those mayors only want one set of laws to be enforced: wage and safety laws, just not immigration laws. The reason is so that illegal aliens will continue to live in their cities and provide them with a political power base, and one presumptive reason is also because some of those "responsible employers" are politically connected in one way or other.
If they really wanted to reduce abuses, there's an easy way to do it: stop supporting illegal immigration. If there were very few illegal aliens in their cities, most of what they pretend to want would be solved: employers are much less likely to abuse legal workers, and those with valid Social Security numbers are much less likely to use someone else's number.
The resolution specifically mentions "well-established businesses that contribute significantly to the local economy". In olden times those would have been referred to as "protected". Nowadays, it's acceptable to profit from illegal activity - including the "dramatic increase in identity theft of the Social Security numbers of U.S. citizens" they mention - just as long as they treat their workers OK and contribute to the tax base (and perhaps to those mayors' campaign coffers). They don't want "responsible employers" to be raided until either "reform" or an "accurate verification system" is available.
The resolution is located along with dozens more in this PDF. For your entertainment purposes, the full resolution is in the extended entry; discussing all the other ways it's wrong would take too much time. Note that the cost is marked as "Unknown", as is another resolution also demanding "comprehensive immigration reform", as is another resolution from Villaraigosa and other mayors demanding more resources for food stamps, the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) programs.
Related:
Fabian Nunez, Mexico-linked Peter Schey, American Apparel join to support illegal immigration
AVWatch: Antonio Villaraigosa complains to Michael Chertoff about ICE raids
AVWatch: Antonio Villaraigosa, Fabian Nunez at MacArthur Park candlelight vigil?
Resolution No. 52
U.S.IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS WORKSITE ENFORCEMENT
1. WHEREAS, the United States is a nation of immigrants, the
overwhelming majority of whom are making an important and
positive contribution to both our economy and our culture;
and
2. WHEREAS, immigration reform is one of the most pressing
issues facing The U.S. Conference of Mayors; and
3. WHEREAS, the federal government has not been able to pass
comprehensive immigration reform legislation; and
4. WHEREAS, as a consequence of such inaction has been a
dramatic increase in identity theft of the Social Security
numbers of U.S. citizens; and,
5. WHEREAS, due to a lack of a workable immigration policy,
our country is inhabited by more than 12 million
undocumented individuals; and
6. WHEREAS, many of these undocumented individuals are working
in well-established businesses that contribute
significantly to the local economy; and
7. WHEREAS, responsible employers often have to rely on
documentation that appears facially valid in order to
determine an individual’s status to accept employment; and
8. WHEREAS, the current federal E-Verify system has not been
reliable in ascertaining a prospective employee’s right to work; and,
9. WHEREAS, some employers will prey upon undocumented
workers, with substandard wages, long hours and unsafe
working conditions, knowing these workers will not complain
to authorities; and
10. WHEREAS, the U.S. Immigration & Custom Enforcement (ICE)
has increased worksite enforcement activities;
11. WHEREAS, ICE worksite enforcement activities are often the
result of “anonymous” tips from the competitors of
legitimate employers, thereby using ICE raids to disrupt
production; and,
12. WHEREAS, ICE enforcement activities targeting companies
that have had no record or suspicion of engagement in
exploitative practices will negatively impact local
economies and may drive employers to locate manufacturing
facilities overseas; and
13. WHEREAS, ICE has limited resources and time to conduct
worksite enforcement activities;
14. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that The U.S. Conference of
Mayors calls upon U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement to
develop a national policy for its workforce enforcement
activities that focuses on employers with a demonstrated
history or reasonable suspicion of engaging in exploitative
practices, such as violation of wage, hour or occupational
safety laws and regulations; and
15. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ICE not prioritize responsible
employers for worksite enforcement activities before
accurate verification systems are available or
comprehensive immigration reform regularizes the status of
workers on whom they rely; and
16. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ICE should strive to keep in
close communication with the nation’s mayors when
conducting worksite enforcement activities in their cities.
Crooked town: New Haven to give low-price gas to ID card holders (many illegal aliens)
New Haven, Connecticut offers a city-only identification card (the "Elm City ID card") for those who - ahem - have ID problems. While any resident can get one of the cards, they're only of real use to illegal aliens. The plan was pushed through by a city employee who used to head an organization that was working with the Mexican government to pass out that country's Matricula Consular card.
Now, New Haven is considering a special incentive to encourage people to get the Elm City card: a three-hour special of gas at $1.99 at a station in their town (link). No doubt some legal residents and citizens will take advantage of the discount, but to illegal aliens in other cities who might be considering a move this will send a loud and clear message that New Haven welcomes everyone, "regardless of their immigration status" as they say. In our terms, New Haven is a crooked town, run by a corrupt mayor (John DeStefano) who has no qualms about not just supporting but encouraging illegal activity in order to obtain political power. There was an allegation that DeStefano might have a financial interest, but that hasn't been confirmed.
The solution for those in the area is to have an impact on DeStefano's political career: go to his public appearances, ask him tough questions (not rants), get it on video, and then upload his response to video sharing sites. He previously ran for governor, but if enough people embarrass him on tape future runs won't be possible.
Portland: U.S. citizen arrested protesting city-sponsored illegal alien hiring center
Apparently a U.S. citizen was arrested for disorderly conduct while protesting a city-sponsored illegal alien hiring center in Portland, Oregon. The circumstances aren't clear, but apparently he was sitting either on the curb or in the driveway with a sign saying, "No". It's unknown whether the arrest was justified or not. Some details here; and from this:
A police car did lazy laps near the center Monday morning, in case protesters showed up and trouble started. Just one -- a man with a sign that read "No" -- plopped down in the center driveway.
And:
Mayor Tom Potter first talked of a day labor center during his 2004 campaign. At his urging, the City Council is spending $200,000 on the center over the next two years. The Portland Development Commission is renting out the parking lot at the corner of MLK and Northeast Everett Street to VOZ for $1 a year. City Council members expect the center to support itself after the first two years.
Obviously, the center - which might be breaking federal law - is supported by the local power structure including the Mayor, the City Council, and the Oregonian newspaper. So, protests like that will usually end in failure.
The better way to protest things like this is to go to public appearances by city leaders and ask them questions (not rants) designed to make them look bad. Then, publicize that via Youtube and similar sites. Let me also suggest that those in the area learn how to better document cases like this so it's clear what actually happened.
Illegal immigration-supporting Andrea Bazan is new Chairwoman of National Council of La Raza
Andrea Bazan has been named the new Chairwoman of the Board of Directors of the National Council of La Raza, a racial power group that - among other things - funds extremists, wants to give a special break to illegal aliens accused of identity theft, and gave an award to a vile racist. She's replacing Monica Lozano, publisher of the La Opinion newspaper; whether Lozano will continue on the board isn't known.Per hispanicbusiness.com/news/2008/6/18/hispanic_leader_takes_dc_post_bazn.htm:
Bazan, 40, has become a prominent advocate since moving to North Carolina nearly 20 years ago. In 1995, still in her late 20s, she helped found El Pueblo, North Carolina's largest Hispanic advocacy group. She later became its first executive director and led a controversial push to allow illegal immigrants to attend North Carolina universities at in-state tuition rates.
She has served on a number of influential boards, including the UNC Tomorrow Commission and the Governor's Council on Hispanic/Latino Affairs.
Though she left El Pueblo in 2005 to head the philanthropic group, Triangle Community Foundation, she has remained a strong voice for Hispanics, including those in the country illegally.
Senator Bob Menendez uses alleged ICE abuses to hamper immigration enforcement (SPLC, NYT)
Senator Robert Menendez is a racial demagogue who supports massive Hispanic immigration (of any kind) in order to obtain political power. His latest trick to oppose immigration enforcement was a speech he gave on the Senate floor last week [1] in which he made several inflammatory statements about the government he supposedly works for and highlighted rare examples of abuses - some merely alleged - by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). He also promised legislation concerning this issue. You can view the speech here and here.From the inflammatory side of things, he refers to agents who "stormed" a house; he claims that there are "US citizens who are targeted because of their race, targeted because of their color"; he claims that "their accent, their name, the color of their skin, the place where they lived would have put them at risk" and that "fundamental Constitutional rights still might not apply to them, in today's America"; and that the "authorities harass U.S. citizens of Hispanic descent in other ways". And, much more. It won't be surprising that the New York Times editorial board calls it a "brave" speech (link). From Menendez' summary of the speech:
This afternoon, U.S. Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) took to the floor of the Senate to deliver a major speech on immigration raids and detentions. He cited the numerous incidences of American citizens and legal permanent residents of Hispanic or other minority descent getting swept up in raids and the fear this has engendered in minority communities. Senator Menendez, who is the Senate sponsor of legislation to ensure basic medical care for detainees, also announced that he will be introducing legislation to prevent the unlawful detention of American citizens and permanent residents.Consider this anecdote from his speech:
"The legitimate desire to get control over our borders has too often turned into a witch-hunt against Hispanic Americans and other people of color," said Senator Menendez. American citizens "are targeted because of their race, targeted because of their color--denied every fundamental right guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Common sense repeatedly loses out to hysteria, and agents of intolerance repeatedly jump over the legal protections to which every single American is entitled."
Another U.S. citizen named Gladis was at her home one day when eighteen vehicles drove into her front yard, and twenty agents jumped out.What Menendez forgot to state is that that incident occurred during the raid in Stillmore, Georgia. In addition to raiding the chicken processing plant in that town, ICE also arrested illegal aliens in residential areas, and they claim that they visited specific locations in those residential areas based on information they obtained during the main raid. She and others are part of a lawsuit [2] brought by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government. See this for a description of the raid, with an ICE statement at the end. See the attempted class action complaint at [3]. Some abuses may have occurred, or the plaintiffs could be telling tall tales; in any case the situation is mitigated by the facts that Menendez didn't reveal. And, it's worth noting that after the raid the plant was forced to raise wages in order to hire legal workers; whose side is Menendez on?
Agents banged on the door and threatened to throw gas inside the house if they didn't let them in. While the children in the house ran and hid in the bedroom, the agents broke down the door.
One of the agents grabbed Gladis and attempted to handcuff her.
Gladis said she could prove her citizenship, and gave them her social security card. After interrogating Gladis and her family for twenty more minutes, the agents left as fast as they came - they had no warrant, no probable cause, no reason for their actions besides suspicion about someone's name, their accent, and the color of their skin.
Like others, Menendez also brings up the case of Pedro Guzman, a mentally impaired U.S. citizen who was deported to Mexico and only made it back three months later. He also discusses the recent Washington Post series, which is disputed by ICE.
And, he brings up the case of Maria Argueta, who's also currently suing ICE. She makes some generally unbelievable claims (link):
Once inside, the agents asked Argueta about her immigration status, and when Argueta presented her Temporary Protection Status documents, they tossed them aside without looking at them, the suit alleges.Once again, while I'm sure that ICE abuses do occur, I tend to doubt her version of events.
According to the lawsuit, Argueta was taken to a detention center in Elizabeth, where agents mocked her with a popular Latino song "Maria Has Gone," and was later transferred to a Newark facility, where she was held for nearly 36 hours. Argueta was held without food or water for the first 24 hours after her arrest, the lawsuit claims.
[1] menendez.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=299036
[2] splcenter.org/legal/news/article.jsp?site_area=1&aid=221
[3] splcenter.org/pdf/dynamic/legal/manchaICE.pdf
Hispanic Caucus has excellent advice for Obama: Hillary as Veep, immigration reform in 1st hundred days
In the past, I've considered the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to be simply a group of mostly vile racial demagogues whose only interest is in support of others of their race even if that's done at the expense of everyone else.But, I was wrong! In actual fact, they're keen observers of the political scene who are now offering extremely valuable advice that Barack Obama is urged to follow (link):
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) must commit to helping illegal immigrants achieve citizenship or else risk losing the vital Latino vote in the general election, Hispanic Democratic lawmakers are warning.If anyone has a blog at Obama's site, please use it to help Obama see the light on this issue. Just don't let it be known that I suggested it, the BHO campaign might think I was trying to hurt their chances or something.
If he does not promise so-called comprehensive immigration reform, the lawmakers say, the only other way to win over Hispanic supporters of his erstwhile rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), may be to pick her as his running mate...
...[CHC Chairman Rep. Joe Baca (D-Calif.)]... said that the CHC will be looking — but not necessarily asking — for Obama to make as strong of a pledge as Clinton did to putting comprehensive immigration reform on his "first 100 days" agenda...
Obama’s campaign coordinator for Spanish-language media, Vince Casillas, said that while Obama has promised to take up immigration reform in his first year in office, he has not yet laid out his detailed plan for comprehensive reform...
Also mentioned: Cuauhtemoc “Temo” Figueroa (National Latino Vote Director for Obama), who'll be meeting with the CHC.
In addition to Baca, those quoted include Reps. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) and Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.)
Note also this "interesting" comment:
"But Latinos are brand-loyal, and after the Clinton brand, the McCain brand is the second-strongest among Latinos because of his military service and his immigration record," [Cecilia Munoz, the senior vice president of research, advocacy and legislation with the National Council of La Raza] said.
Another shocking Barack Obama blogger spotted: me
Anyone can get a blog at Barack Obama's site, and you the reader might even want to get one (or more). Just don't do anything over the top and spoil it for the rest of us.
And, since I've got a three-line phone and nothing better to do with my time, I just started by own blog there:
my.barackobama.com/page/community/blog/nomoreblatherdotcom
I posted the following question, let's see how long it stays there:
On March 11, 2008, Barack Obama falsely stated that Lou Dobbs supports mass deportations:
When I hear Rush Limbaugh or you know Lou Dobbs or some of these people talking about how we need to send [illegal aliens] all back. We're not going to send them all back.
Dobbs doesn't support mass deportations, and he discussed Obama's false claim on his show of that day. To my knowledge, no one in the MSM besides Dobbs has called Obama on his false statement. Lying about someone's positions isn't too presidential, so hopefully someone can go to an Obama appearance, ask him to retract his false statement, and then upload his response to Youtube.
Shouldn't John Bowe ("Nobodies: Modern American Slave Labor") forcefully oppose illegal immigration?
Investigative journalist John Bowe is the author of a new book called "Nobodies: Modern American Slave Labor and the Dark Side of the New Global Economy", and he recently spoke about it at a book store in Iowa City, Iowa. An interesting Q&A with him is here. He actually makes a fair amount of sense. While I haven't read the book and it might just be a function of the questioner, he seems to stumble a bit on how to solve the issues he complains about:
We need to address labor rights and laws. We need to go into the workplaces of the lowest-end workplaces and figure out a way to make labor practices fair. What this really means is that we need to make it easier for workers to organize and form unions. At the same time, we need to nail employers who are breaking American laws. So it's having a labor policy and enforcing it... The same holds true for immigration.
Perhaps he realizes the latter is controversial and in order to avoid offending his audience he said the latter sotto voce. But, perhaps he should speak up because reducing illegal/massive immigration and only allowing current, limited "guest" worker programs would work towards eliminating abuses.
ICE complains about Washington Post immigrant detention health story (Dana Priest, Amy Goldstein)
Immigration and Customs Enforcement has written a letter to the Washington Post (link) complaining about a WaPo/CBS 60 Minutes story that claimed that ICE isn't providing proper healthcare to immigrant detainees. The authors of the story are Dana Priest and Amy Goldstein. The WaPo's ombudsman, Deborah Howell, responds here. Needless to say, they disagree.
IowaPolitics.com stages pro-illegal immigration forum (LULAC, Beth Wessel-Kroeschell)
IowaPolitics.com staged an immigration forum earlier today, and these were the five panelists (link):
1. Brent Wilkes of the League of United Latin American Citizens
2. Iowa State Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell, D-Ames
3. James Benzoni, Des Moines immigration lawyer and Drake University professor
4. David Roederer, executive director of the Iowa Chamber Alliance
5. Alicia Claypool of the Iowa Immigration Education Coalition
Without much more information, it shouldn't come as much of a surprise that "the majority of the panel agreed the raids on the plants should cease". In other words, the forum was a complete, Soviet-style setup.
Needless to say, Wilkes stuck up for illegal activity:
"But hardworking immigrants that are picking your food or working in your meatpacking plants are not terrorists and you shouldn't lump them all together with people that are bent on some ideological campaign against the United States. We’ve not distinguished the real threats from those folks that are actually helping us. We can’t become a country that punishes hardworking people just because they want the American dream – that's not what we are."
Wessel-Kroeschell combined that with support for "reform", aka a massive amnesty:
"The federal government has ignored it – they’ve done nothing... The states can't fix it. It is within the power of the federal government through the supremacy clause of the Constitution to provide us with guidelines to immigration. There are, however, some things we can do. For example, states have authority over issuing driver's licenses. We can also make sure everyone that is in this state is productive. We can provide an education to individuals. When it comes to talking about deportation . . . we need to find a feasible way to providing a path toward citizenship, but we need to do that at the federal level."
Per this, she also said:
"By raiding our employers that we feel might be hiring many undocumented workers, we’re causing such a trauma to so many communities, and we’re making no impact whatsoever to the real problem."
The real problem is corrupt politicians like Wessel-Kroeschell; please go to her future appearances and ask her questions designed to discredit her.
And, among many other interesting things, Benzoni said:
The federal government is carrying out politically-motivated terrorism against innocent people... That's crime, that is not law enforcement."
Roederer stuck up for businesses.
Claypoll - also chairman of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission - said (among other interesting things) "[j]ust thinking about the images on the news of black helicopters flying over Postville reminds me of these militaristic movies you see previews for".
Next time, Iowa Politics should consider inviting someone who supports our laws, and those who rely on their coverage should double-check it for ideological balance. Also, feel free to send your thoughts to their News Editor Mike Schramm: schramm *at* iowapolitics.com
Jorge Bustamante of United Nations to review immigration in Prince William County, Virginia
The United Nations' special rapporteur on migrants' rights, Jorge Bustamante will be paying a visit to Prince William County, Virginia to review their strict anti-illegal immigration ordinance (link). He'll be visiting Manassas and Woodbridge and trying to speak with local officials on June 10 and 11, and his visit might have been orchestrated by the extremist group Mexicanos Sin Fronteras.Among other things, Bustamante is a Mexican citizen and partisan who wanted Mexican immigrants to the U.S. to become citizens of this country in order to push Mexico's agenda inside the U.S. This link has newspaper reports with him referring to "Nazi-style deportations" ("deportaciones estilo nazi", 5/25/2008, oem.com.mx/oem/notas/n710628.htm). Five days earlier (oem.com.mx/elsoldelbajio/notas/n704682.htm) he compared immigration raids to those carried out by the Nazis, although he said there were differences.
If you're in the area and want to do something, go to public events and ask those who support his visit to denounce his past statements and actions, then upload their responses to video sharing sites. Don't bother with rants, emotional or otherwise, and don't bother asking Bustamante something unless it's good. Concentrate on local officials or those who work for local groups. Kent Willis of the Virginia American Civil Liberties Union is quoted in the article, but his position on the visit isn't clear (although it can be assumed).
UPDATE: Here's video of a Lou Dobbs report on the visit: link.
UPDATE 2: Uh oh! From this:
A United Nations human rights official has postponed a planned visit to inspect the treatment of immigrant workers in Prince William County, according to the activist group Mexicans Without Borders. The group had welcomed the outside scrutiny, saying the county's illegal-immigration policies have "created a climate where suspicion and terror thrive."
Jorge A. Bustamante, a U.N. special rapporteur for human rights of migrants, called off a visit planned for yesterday and today. In a letter to Mexicans Without Borders, Bustamante cited "something unexpected of extreme gravity" that was "totally outside of my control" as a reason and did not indicate when he would reschedule the trip.
MALDEF's "Truth in Immigration" misleads about 14th Amendment quote (Lamar Smith)
The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) has at least an indirect link to the Mexican government, and they run a website called "Truth in Immigration" (TII) which, as we'll see, is a misnomer. Their "Fear-mongering in Congress" (truthinimmigration.org/CompleteStory.aspx?sid=55) discusses an attempt by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) to abolish some aspects of birthright citizenship involving the way that the 14th Amendment has been interpreted for around a century.
First, TII says that he "advocates for the elimination of birthright citizenship", which is probably not true: presumably he only wants to prevent the children of illegal aliens or foreign visitors from being automatically declared citizens. Unfortunately, a May 25, 2008 guest editorial from him (link) could be read as him wanting to eliminate birthright citizenship entirely. However, 1997's H.R.7 was discussed at a hearing (link) where Smith supported it:
Mr. Bilbray's bill would extend birthright citizenship only to a child born in wedlock to parents either of whom is a citizen, national or permanent resident and to a child born out of wedlock if the child's mother is a citizen, national, or permanent resident.
And, 2007's H.R.1940 was co-sponsored by Smith and 99 others and had similiar provisions (link).
So, while Smith isn't helping his cause by failing to specify what he wants, MALDEF didn't give him the benefit of the doubt and isn't being intellectually honest .
And, it gets worse, as we examine this quote from their page:
Representative Smith asserts that our Founding Fathers "never sought to guarantee citizenship to children of illegal immigrants."5 To support his assertion, Representative Smith quotes Senator Jacob Howard (R-MI), who proposed the language on citizenship, when in 1866 he stated that the citizenship "will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners."6 Had Representative Smith finished the quote, it would have read "foreigners... who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of person."7 In relying on this legislative history, the Supreme Court found that "the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment extends to anyone, citizen or stranger, who is subject to the laws of a State, and reaches to every corner of a State's territory."8
Intrigued by their use of ellipses after "foreigners" (bolding added above), I went looking for the full quote (middle column, halfway down) [1]. They left off just one word:
"will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors, or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of person."
Yes, that's right: the only word they omitted was "aliens".
[1] Congressional Globe, Senate, 39th Congress, 1st Session, Page 2890
Scott Aust/Rapid City Journal helps Obama hide behind kid to support illegal immigration
Scott Aust of the Rapid City Journal offers "Mom proud of teen's moment with Obama" (link) about seventh-grader Steven Cady who asked Barack Obama about immigration in Rapid City, South Dakota yesterday. That article has the heartwarming backstory, with everyone thinking everything was just great. However, to get the actual question we turn to another story also by Aust ("Obama stresses differences between himself and policies of Bush-McCain", link):"Doesn't everyone outside of America deserve to come to America and have the freedom that they deserve?" Cady asked to a round of applause and cheers.Now, if someone asked me that I'd point out that there are billions and billions of people who'd like to come here and for various reasons we can't invite them all. So, we have to have limits. And, I'd point out that allowing people an "out" of coming here could (and does) cause them not to fix the problems at home, and it's best that we avoided that. And, I'd point out that, for instance, allowing massive immigration from one country gives the sending country political power inside the U.S., and that's something we have to avoid.
Needless to say, Obama took a different tack by simply playing back what he's said many times before. After some small talk about Cady's interests:
Obama remarked again about how smart Cady was, and a woman in the crowd, Linda Mallory, stood up and yelled, "I'm his teacher." The crowd roared.It isn't that very difficult to find several examples of Obama saying those same things. For just one example, here's an Obama editorial from April:
In response to Cady's immigration question, Obama said as a nation of immigrants, America should encourage immigration, but it should be done legally. He advocated for secure borders, better surveillance and sanctions for companies that knowingly recruit and hire undocumented workers.
For the 12 million undocumented workers here already, Obama said his administration would require them to register, pay back taxes and learn English so they can assimilate.
"When we've done those thing,s we give them a pathway to earn citizenship and become part of broader American community," he said.
Second, we must require the 12 million undocumented immigrants who are already here, including more than 300,000 in North Carolina, to step out of the shadows and onto a path that includes the ability to earn citizenship by demonstrating a sound character, a commitment to America, and a strong work ethic... While it's unrealistic to deport them, illegal entry cannot go unpunished. That's why we must require them to pay a fine, learn English, and get to the back of the line for citizenship behind those who came here legally... We are a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants, and we must reconcile those traditions...I don't expect a seventh-grader to know how to look up Obama's immigration positions and his past statements on the internet, although I'm sure many can. But, if Aust were a real reporter he would have spent less time on letting Obama hide behind yet another kid and more time on pointing out how Obama used the kid as just an entree to a recitation of his talking points. And, if Aust were a real reporter and not just a hack, it would have been him who had asked a question, and it would have pointed out a few of the endless things wrong with Obama's positions on this issue.
UPDATE: Rapid City is in South Dakota, not Iowa as previously stated. However, they still get the internet in both states, so finding out that Obama simply launched into his stock speech and pointing that out shouldn't have been difficult.
Illegal alien farmworker dies from heat; cheap labor liberals, conservatives partly responsible (UFW, Susan Ferriss/SacBee)
Susan Ferriss of the Sacramento Bee offers "Teen farmworker's death, probed as heat-related, stirs outcry" (link) about an illegal alien who died after working in a vineyard near Stockton:
California occupational safety authorities are investigating the girl's death in Lodi as a heat-related fatality. The United Farm Workers Union is calling her treatment an "egregious" violation of safety regulations put into effect three years ago after three farmworkers and a construction worker died of the heat.
Arnold Schwarzenegger was apparently a supporter of legislation related to working in the heat, and he attended the funeral and said in a statement that the incident "should have been prevented" and then said "we have to make sure this doesn't happen again".
Unfortunately, both the UFW's and Arnold's support for illegal immigration played a role; if they opposed illegal activity she wouldn't have been in the situation in the first place or she would have been here legally and thus would be much less susceptible to alleged abuses. Despite that, none of the usual suspects will take this opportunity to support only legal labor. Note also that some business groups have even highlighted non-American labor being able to work in the heat.
For more, in the comments on the SacBee article, mmike2885 says:
Glad the Governator showed up at her funeral. Great Press and Photo Ops for him. Kinda reminds me of how Dr. Phil shows up at hospitals and jails to capitalize on peoples misery.
And, from this:
The creation of a serf class in this country is an abomination and a return to the age of the Robber Barons. Democrats and Republicans are equally guilty of this for different and equally short sighted reasons. I oppose it. Maria is one of the reasons I oppose it. You enablers killed this girl, face it, this is what you advocate tolerance of. I keep trying to tell you that there are real serious problems with your tolerance of illegal labor and you keep pooh-poohing. I keep trying to tell you that you harm everyone involved in labor for the benefit of plutocracy and you call me names. That's fine, you go there and tell Maria's family all the benefits of a disenfranchised serf class.
Dave McKenna/Washington City Paper: the most ludicrous immigration article ever? (Cheap Seats)
Dave McKenna writes the Cheap Seats column for the Washington City Paper, and he offers what just might be the most ludicrous immigration article ever here: washingtoncitypaper.com/display.php?id=35635
It's like the "crops rotting in the fields" articles which feature growers whining about not having as many illegal aliens as they did before. But, it's about apparently legal workers in a different job. As a bit of a mind-twister, try and guess which job it is (answer below).
Now, since there are probably dozens of articles vying for that title, and since McKenna is a nobody, and since he calls Lou Dobbs "the thinking man's white supremacist", I'm not going to give him the award. I'll just suggest that if you live in the DC area and you support our laws, you avoid patronizing local merchants whose advertisements appear in that paper and you inform them of what you're doing.
And, for those who want to know just how ludicrous Dave McKenna is, here's a snippet from his article:
As the swimming season opened over Memorial Day weekend, area pool managers were facing the most severe lifeguard-supply shortage in memory—perhaps the worst ever, says Amy Kroloff of Century Pools.
Yes, that's right, the vitally important lifeguard shortage.
"Mexico's Ghost Towns" (from leftwing In These Times)
The leftwing In These Times offers "Mexico's Ghost Towns", a discussion of how massive immigration to the U.S. has hollowed out the interior of Mexico and turned some small towns into virtual ghost towns:Cerrito del Agua, population 3,000, has no paved roads — either leading to it or within it. No restaurants, no movie theaters, no shopping malls. In fact, the small town located in the central Mexican state of Zacatecas has no middle schools, high schools or colleges; no cell phone service, no hospital. Its surrounding fields are dry and untended. The streets are empty.Note also that the author (John Gibler) is a "Global Exchange Media fellow". I believe that refers to Susan Medea Benjamin's Global Exchange.
The explosion of emigration to the United States over the past 15 years has emptied much of central Mexico, even reaching into southernmost states like Chiapas and Yucatan. But it has simply devastated Zacatecas, a dry, rolling agricultural region located about 400 miles northwest of Mexico City...
A challenge for Drew Carey/Reason Magazine (and other open borders hacks)
Washed-up TV comic Drew Carey is now working on a joint venture with the pseudo-libertarians at Reason Magazine [1]. In various video segments he presents the "libertarian" view of things, and the latest is called "The Cost of Securing Our Southern Border" (reason.tv/video/show/434.html). Like everyone else, I didn't bother to watch it, but I feel safe in asserting that there are many things he forgot to mention. This snippet is provided:
"One way out of this mess would be to simply allow peaceful workers to enter our country through legal ports of entry... If we did that we could stimulate our economy, bring a huge underground labor market out into the open and we could put unscrupulous smugglers out of business. More importantly, we'd free up border patrol resources that could be used to fight criminals and terrorism."
The last part is just the busboys canard, and there are other things wrong with his statement.
But, to make it easier, let's just concentrate on one unanswered question he might consider trying to answer:
While individual workers might be "peaceful", as a group they form a political power bloc for foreign governments. In other words, for very little gain (cheap labor is cheap for a reason), we'd be giving a foreign government even more political power inside the U.S. than they have now.
Does Carey deny that the Mexican government and others have been able to obtain political power inside the U.S.? If not, does he think giving a foreign government such power is acceptable? And, if the answer to that is also no, what exactly does he intend to do to prevent them from obtaining even more power under his scheme? Will Carey have any sort of answer, or, if he ever discussed that issue would he just answer with one of his cheap jokes?
Suggested Starting Points:
* Mexico's Undiplomatic Diplomats (by Heather MacDonald, link)
* Calderon encouraged Mexicans inside the U.S. to push his country's agenda to Congress
* Mexico is linked to the ACLU
* Those linked to the Mexican government were involved in organizing 2006's immigration marches
* Mexico is linked to one of the lawyers against the fence.
[1] Reason is a pseudo-libertarian magazine because their support for massive and/or illegal immigration has the ultimate impact of leading to more power for the far-left, leading to a greater welfare state, leading to more privacy restrictions, leading to more corporate subsidies, and so forth. When you actually look at the ultimate impact of what they support, they might as well name Nancy Pelosi as their editor.
Betsy Rubiner/Time offers pro-illegal immigration propaganda (Agriprocessors, Iowa)
Betsy Rubiner of Time Magazine [1] offers a slab of pro-illegal immigration propaganda called "After Immigrant Raid, Iowans Ask Why" (link). The raid in question occured at the Agriprocessors plant in Postville earlier this month, and her article could have been written by that company or anyone else who supports profiting from illegal immigration. The only mention of those who support our laws is in a highly negative light. The reader who thinks she's in any way a credible source of information should research the raid using the last link, then compare it to her article.
It starts with this:
In this small northeastern Iowan town surrounded by newly planted cornfields, a middle-aged white woman walks into the local Guatemalan restaurant with her arm around a Hispanic child who is sobbing because she can't find her mother. After conferring with a restaurant worker, the woman takes the child nearby to St. Bridget's, a small 1970's-era brick Catholic church on a quiet tree-lined street that has become command central for what people in this community of 2,273 describe as a "disaster relief response."
Then, it continues on like that, continuing to try to pull the readers' heartstrings in order to convince them to support illegal activity. Those who support our laws are smeared:
Anti-immigrant sentiment and ethnic tensions are not unknown in this unusually diverse Iowa small town, whose residents include descendants of German and Norwegian Lutherans and Irish Catholics as well as more recent arrivals — Latin Americans, Ukrainians and Hasidic Jews drawn here by the plant. A few angry people have called the church, complaining about its care of "criminals." But volunteers like Ardie Kuhse, 60, shrug this off. "Yes, they were illegal. But they were working. Is that a crime? They're a part of our community," says Kuhse, near tears as she recalls trying to calm children after the raid.
Obviously, it is a crime, but don't expect a hack like Rubiner to point that out to her. The last paragraph gives us their demands:
Braced for months of waiting and uncertainty, many Postville residents are certain about one thing: "We have to have comprehensive immigration reform so these people who desire to work can. We have to have a way to welcome them," says Sister McCauley. "When people are so hurt, we have to take a look at the law."
"Reform" is, of course, a code phrase for amnesty.
[1] From a bio for her book "Fun with the Family in Iowa: Hundreds of Ideas for Day Trips with the Kids":
Betsy Rubiner has written for "Parenting, The New York Times, The Boston Globe, Better Homes & Gardens," "Time," and other publications. As a newspaper reporter, she launched children's beats, most recently in the" Des Moines Register. "She is a mother of two and has lived in Des Moines since 1990.
Geraldo Rivera warns of immigration raids' devastating effects on nation's "orchids"
Geraldo Rivera continues the struggle to help "his" people, littering the pages of the HuffPost with "Secretary Chertoff, Call Off These Raids" (link). In addition to what was already covered here, let's look at this:
In view of the pending Puerto Rico Democratic primary and the island commonwealth's rare opportunity to explain itself and amplify the growing importance in the larger nation's future of the Latino vote; it is time to say to all three candidates that our votes will go to the presidential aspirant who has the courage to defy the mob and call for an immediate cessation of ICE's draconian workplace campaign.
Needless to say, not all Puerto Ricans would agree with Geraldo and, for instance, most Chicanos don't exactly have much in common with Puerto Ricans. So, until such time as he becomes some sort of pan-ethnic Hispanic leader I don't think Geraldo has much standing to refer to "our votes" in the context of the largely mythical "Latino vote". Maybe I'm wrong; perhaps he could give the fine folks at aztlan.net a call and see if they'd accept his help.
Then, let's look at this:
And what exactly did our heroes under the direction of Secretary Michael Chertoff accomplish? They shut down or severely crippled production at the food plants and fields and orchids, so the nation's food supply has been aversely affected. (The New Bedford plant was sewing knapsacks for our GI's). DHS/ICE has expended millions in executing these operations. They have denied the Social Security trust fund of the millions of dollars these workers were paying into accounts that they have no dream of ever redeeming, because they did not really exist. They have separated working parents from their children, many of whom are citizens. And they have denied the workers' commerce to their communities, many of which have been resurrected by the immigrant's presence in recent years.
1. Not just one but two no doubt spittle-induced typos: he meant "orchards", not "orchids". He also meant "adversely", not "aversely".
2. He's sneering at ICE agents not because they weren't doing their job according to our rules, but simply in order to support illegal activity.
3. He's supporting using illegal serf labor rather than, for instance, mechanizing or raising wages to employ legal workers.
4. He provides no evidence of our food supply being affected, almost certainly because - aside from whines from interested parties - there is none.
5. He forgot to mention that most people agree that the Michael Bianco factory in New Bedford was a sweatshop.
6. Having foreign citizens - especially illegal aliens - playing a role in production of military equipment is generally a bad idea; Geraldo wouldn't care.
7. He wants the Social Security system to profit from illegal activity, which would lead to political corruption. Further, some plans would result in those illegal aliens being able to obtain benefits, and those who enter the country to work illegally must surely realize after a bit that they're paying into a fund that they might not get to access in the future. Geraldo might consider concepts such as unjust enrichment.
8. The only way to deal with mixed status families is to discourage illegal immigration, yet Rivera supports it. And, he's not holding the parents responsible for their actions.
9. There are ways to "resurrect" communities other than through illegal activity, and if it can't be done through legal means then perhaps the town should just be disbanded. And, Rivera is supporting things such as landlords renting to illegal aliens knowing there's a very good chance they're here illegally, and so forth.
P.S. There are a few geraldo.* TLDs available if anyone wants to put up a parody or something.
Barack Obama lies, falsely accuses Dobbs, Limbaugh of inciting hate crimes
At a Florida fundraiser yesterday, Barack Obama said this:"A certain segment has basically been feeding a kind of xenophobia. There's a reason why hate crimes against Hispanic people doubled last year... If you have people like Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh ginning things up, it's not surprising that would happen."Those statements are beyond reprehensible, and come close to accusing Dobbs and Limbaugh of breaking the law. And, the reason he did it is because he's completely corrupt, hoping to obtain political power by supporting illegal immigration. Rather than supporting our laws as a U.S. Senator should, he smears those who oppose law-breaking.
Moreover, Obama lied yet again. See how the SPLC's "The Year in Hate" misled about FBI hate crime statistics. See also the FactCheck discussion of one of the February debates:
However, Obama was being overly dramatic when he said, "we have seen hate crimes skyrocket in the wake of the immigration debate."UPDATE: Here's a segment from the Lou Dobbs show on Obama's lie. Note the figures from the FBI that show that Obama lied, and note also that the Obama campaign couldn't tell them where Obama got his statistics:
That's saying a bit much. When we asked his campaign for documentation, they pointed us to the most recent FBI statistics, which actually show that the number of incidents classified officially as "hate crimes" went up 7.8 percent in 2006. (Figures for 2007, which would show what occurred during and after the highly charged debate on the House and Senate immigration bills last year, won't be available until much later in 2008.)
We think a 7.8 percent increase hardly qualifies as a "skyrocket." Looking only at the incidents in which Hispanics were targeted, "hate crimes" rose a bit more, 10.3 percent, but that's hardly a rocket-propelled rise either. Furthermore, the number of anti-Hispanic incidents fluctuates widely from year to year. During the last 11 years, the number of incidents nationwide has bounced around between a low of 426 in 2003 and a high of 597 in 2001, according to the FBI Uniform Crime Reports. It was 576 in 2006.
John McCain back to supporting "comprehensive immigration reform", "guest" workers, H-1B visas
Some people have tried to say that John McCain turned his back on "comprehensive immigration reform", i.e., a massive amnesty for illegal aliens. In a Silicon Valley speech today, McCain clarified the matter (link):After several of the business leaders complained about the difficulty in obtaining temporary H1B visas for scientists and engineers, something the Senate immigration bill was supposed to address, Mr. McCain expressed regret the measure did not pass, calling it a personal "failure," as well as one by the federal government.It gets even worse, as - with Arnold Schwarzenegger by his side, cheering him on - McCain said:
...Mr. McCain asked others on the panels for suggestions about how to “better mobilize American public opinion” behind the notion of comprehensive immigration reform.
"Senator Kennedy and I tried very hard to get immigration reform, a comprehensive plan, through the Congress of the United States... It is a federal responsibility and because of our failure as a federal obligation, we’re seeing all these various conflicts and problems throughout our nation as different towns, cities, counties, whatever they are, implement different policies and different programs which makes things even worse and even more confusing... ...I believe we have to secure our borders, and I think most Americans agree with that, because it’s a matter of national security. But we must enact comprehensive immigration reform. We must make it a top agenda item if we don’t do it before, and we probably won’t, a little straight talk, as of January 2009... ...[illegal aliens] are also God’s children, and we have to do it in a human and compassionate fashion...The last is simply false compassion, and what McCain supports will lead to even more people wanting to come here and will give even more political power to corrupt business groups and far-left groups that currently oppose immigration enforcement.
IT WAS ALL JUST A DREAM UPDATE: From this:
Team McCain tells me the senator's comments were poorly worded. There's been no discussion within the campaign of altering their stance on illegal immigration, and as far as everyone on the campaign is concerned, the policy is still, 'secure the border first.'
I said, "so, this change away from border-security-first wouldn't happen, unless John McCain and his top advisers had gotten together, studied it in great detail, weighed all the advantages and disadvantages, and came to the carefully-considered conclusion that they're really not interested in winning the election?" The strategist laughed and agreed.
Mexico-linked ACLU: immigration raids are "terrorizing communities" (Joanne Lin)
Joanne Lin, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union - an organization collaborating with the Mexican government to possibly sue the U.S. government - on Monday appeared at a meeting of the Appleseed Foundation and said, in reference to local police playing a role in immigration enforcement under the 287g program:"Local law enforcement has been given the green light to engage in racial profiling... Massive immigration sweeps are terrorizing communities across the country, including those who are U.S. citizens, permanent residents and other lawful workers... It's always been the ACLU's position that immigration is exclusively a federal law... Our view is that it's not the appropriate constitutional use of state and local power."Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institute is quoted as disagreeing with the latter claim. And, while it's not the best question I'd ask the ACLU, at least CNS asked something:
At Monday's briefing, Lin spoke about the federal lawsuit filed against the Department of Homeland Security and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department by the ACLU and the family on behalf of Pedro Guzman, the Associated Press reported. Guzman is a mentally disabled man who was arrested for trespassing, had no identification and was deported to Mexico.Discrediting the ACLU would go a long way towards doing something about this issue, and since they frequently make public appearances with Q&A sessions it's not that difficult. See the last link for some questions you can ask them on videotape.
Guzman, who is a U.S. citizen, was found by relatives near a border crossing almost three months later. When asked by Cybercast News Service if Guzman was an isolated case or if the ACLU had statistics showing how many U.S. citizens are mistakenly deported, Lin said she did not have any numbers but suspected there were other such cases.
Related:
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) tries tying ICE's hands on immigration raids; Mexico-linked ACLU cheers
Three questions for the American Civil Liberties Union (Kevin Keenan)
On April 24, 2008 I sent an email to the American Civil Liberties Union's San Diego chapter, directed to their president Kevin Keenan. I listed a few questions I had for them concerning the fact that they're collaborating with the Mexican government to in effect block immigration enforcement. Needless to say, I haven't heard back.
However, if you'd like to do a good turn, please go to any event where someone from the ACLU is speaking - preferably about immigration but not necessarily so - and ask them one of these questions on videotape. Then, upload their response to video sharing sites. The goal is to discredit them and reduce their ability to block enforcement of our laws.
1. Isn't the only logical way to prevent border deaths to either declare completely open borders, or to strictly enforce our laws? With the former, no one would try to cross the desert, and with the latter only a very few would try it because they would know that they couldn't find jobs and access anything beyond emergency services. However, if illegal immigration is considered somewhat acceptable, doesn't that lead to people trying to cross the desert, with some dying along the way? And, haven't almost all the ACLU's efforts in this area in effect encouraged or enabled illegal immigration? How many cases has the ACLU supported that served to discourage illegal immigration? Is there even one such case?
2. Will the ACLU be registering as a Registered Foreign Agent under FARA (usdoj.gov/criminal/fara)? If not, could you provide details on why you think you aren't required to register?
3. The press release said you weren't getting any funds from Mexico. Why was that included? Does the ACLU somehow think that if they aren't getting a share of Mexico's profits that somehow makes this partnership OK?
Media Matters for America on immigration "myths" ("Fear and Loathing in Prime Time")
Media Matters for America offers a "report" called "Fear and Loathing in Prime Time/Immigration Myths and Cable News" (mediamattersaction.org/reports/fearandloathing/online_version). It attempts to address some of the "myths" supposedly promulgated by Lou Dobbs, Bill O'Reilly, and Glenn Beck. Not only that, but members of Congress are involved in helping them push their support for illegal activity:
On Wednesday, May 21, Media Matters Action Network, along with several members of Congress and prominent immigration groups, held a press conference to discuss "Fear and Loathing in Prime Time: Immigration Myths and Cable News." Participants included: Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ); Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA), chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus; Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL); Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA); Janet Murguía of the National Council of La Raza; and Frank Sharry of America's Voice.
The first issue with their report is that it switches between discussing illegal immigration and all forms or the legal variety of immigration, a common trick.
The second is that their discussion of the NAFTA Superhighway - something they label simply an "urban myth" - includes them admitting that such a highway exists already as a set of current routes. Like others they take low-level Bush administration employees at their word rather than questioning whether they're telling the truth or not. They also take the word of NASCO that there are no plans to extend the TTC past Texas, something that's clearly false. Apparently the only thing that would confirm the NSH in MMFA's mind is if there were secret construction plans to build a TTC-style highway across the U.S. Their discussion of this issue puts MMFA on the side of the Bush administration and others who seek to confuse the public about this issue. They also might want to check with Barack Obama.
More later, but please leave other issues with the report in comments.
UPDATE: From this:
Three Democratic lawmakers who spoke at a briefing Wednesday about alleged anti-immigrant media coverage were not aware of a recent State Department travel alert warning Americans about military-like "combat" along the southern U.S. border in Mexico and that Americans are being kidnapped and murdered there.
Solis said:
"I've read different reports of the violence in Mexico, and I am a strong advocate for cracking down on the violence, and I'm very concerned about the murder of women... But I'm more concerned about people having their civil rights violated here."
And:
Gutierrez blamed drug use in the United States for some of the violence... "We are the consumers," he said. "We are the cause."
Mary Sanchez/KC Star tries downplaying attrition; questionable race comments?
Mary Sanchez of the Kansas City Star offers a rather interesting column called "Are immigration raids really doing what backers claim?" She attempts to claim that the recent ICE raids haven't had much of an impact vis-a-vis reducing the level of illegal immigration. But, she seems to go a bit further. Unfortunately, I'm out of my depth concerning that questionable part, and it's too bad that "liberals" like those from ThinkProgress would give her a pass because I get the feeling that if, say, Pat Buchanan wrote something like this they'd be all over it quicker than you could feign outrage:People in Greeley say many of the illegal immigrants have simply returned or been replaced by newer, also illegal workers. Others report that the raid created an anti-Latino mood, causing some legally resident Latinos to leave town, lest they be targeted, too.If she weren't a "liberal" and a supporter of illegal activity, I'm sure they'd be all over it.
And there is a new influx to Greeley: hundreds of Somali refugees, who are legally allowed to live and work in the United States. The same situation is playing out in Grand Island, Neb., also the scene of a 2006 Swift raid. Hundreds of Somalis, many from Minnesota, are arriving to take the jobs once held by the Latino immigrants. But officials there also do not believe the illegal or legal Latino population has changed much.
Some argue that undocumented Latinos are taking jobs that could be filled by native-born workers. In the case of slaughterhouses — where wages start at $12 an hour — this seems not to be true. If it were, why are they now being filled by Somalis, who have crossed the world, and then the nation, to resettle in mid-sized American cities?
Somalis and other refugees are hardly the answer to this nation’s low-wage labor needs, however one may feel about their appearance in Greeley and Grand Island. Those needs can only be solved by Congress — which, by failing to alter immigration laws so that Latino immigrant workers could arrive and be hired legally, laid the path for these federal raids.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) tries tying ICE's hands on immigration raids; Mexico-linked ACLU cheers
Rep. Lynn Woolsey, Democrat from Petaluma, California and chairwoman of the Workforce Protection Subcommittee of the House Education and Labor Committee (some background here), held a hearing this morning regarding ICE raids (link):Congress should enact legislation giving more teeth to existing federal guidelines aimed at ensuring that children's needs are considered when their parents are arrested in raids by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enfocement agents [Woolsey said]. The agency's November 2007 guidelines outlining humanitarian concerns to be addressed during raids "are not being followed in a consistent fashion," [she said].If you listen to her 30-second whine here, it's easy to tell what she's getting at: she doesn't have much interest in immigration laws being enforced.
That belief is buttressed by the fact that the American Civil Liberties Union - an organization collaborating with the Mexican government to possibly sue the U.S. government - has issued a press release commending her actions (aclu.org/immigrants/gen/35397prs20080520.html):
Since late 2006 the Department of Homeland Security Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) section has undertaken an unprecedented campaign of immigration raids in homes, and worksites. The ACLU has challenged the legality and constitutionality of many of these raids including worksite raids conducted in New Bedford, Massachusetts, and Van Nuys, California... "ICE's immigration raids have been so sweeping that they have ensnared U.S. citizens, including innocent children, in their dragnet," said Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "There are no regulations controlling ICE's reckless raids, and ICE routinely violates due process while conducting raids."Joanne Lin, ACLU Legislative Counsel, also weighs in with a quote.
Discrediting the ACLU is easier than discrediting Woolsey, but either would have a salubrious impact. See the last link for some questions you can ask them in public and preferably on video.
UPDATE: Nancy Pelosi's blog (?!) links to a PDF with Woolsey's opening whine (speaker.gov/blog/?p=1349, "...we are still hearing heartbreaking stories of the impact on children... ...They have been separated from their families in the cruelest of ways for long periods of time and many of their parents have been deported...", etc. etc.) as well as a video of the remarks of Simon Romo, Chief Counsel for New Mexico Child Protective Services (link). I left the following comment on the last:
We'll always have immigration laws and they'll always be enforced. So, if these two actually cared about children they'd discourage mixed-status families, and the only way to do that is to support our immigration laws and their enforcement.
Instead, they're opposing immigration enforcement, something that will make the situation worse and increase the number of mixed-status families.
Both are simply corrupt, just for slightly different reasons.
Non-barking dog: John McCain doesn't mention immigration at National Restaurant Association show
The dog didn't bark during the daytime, as John McCain attended a National Restaurant Association show in Chicago earlier today and didn't mention immigration. Maybe he's learned his lesson! Just kidding.
The text of his remarks is at lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2008/05/where-does-sena.html for those who care.
Texas Border Coalition sues to stop border fence; lead attorney is Mexico-linked Peter Schey
The Texas Border Coalition - a group of cities, counties, businesses, chambers of commerce, and economic development committees listed at the link - has sued the Department of Homeland Security over the border fence. The lead attorney in the case is Peter Schey, someone with a series of links to the Mexican government. The chairman of the TBC is Chad Foster, mayor of Eagle Pass. Others involved include Richard Cortez (mayor of McAllen), Pat Ahumada (mayor of Brownsville), Raul Salinas (mayor of Laredo), and Eddie Aldrete and Dennis Nixon of International Bancshares Corp./International Bank of Commerce.
Their claims are listed here and they say that the DHS didn't pay enough for lands they acquired, showed preferential treatment regarding lands owned by the Hunt family, and that Michael Chertoff failed to more or less cross his t's by establishing guidelines beforehand. And, Schey is quoted as saying the following ironic bit:
"They hoodwinked property owners [into waiving their property rights]... This whole thing has been built on a foundation of lawlessness."
Another Mexico link for Peter Schey: hired by Mexican consulate
The New York Times story "Arizona County Uses New Law to Look for Illegal Immigrants" (link) about Sheriff Joe Arpaio's attempts to enforce immigration laws in Maricopa County, Arizona contains the following:
Peter Schey, a lawyer from Los Angeles hired by the Mexican consulate here to represent some of the detainees, said, "This sheriff is not the director of homeland security, but that is how he is acting."
This is at least the fourth link that Schey has to the Mexican government; MSM hacks frequently fail to point out his series of links when offering quotes from him.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein pushing AgJobs amnesty, attached to Iraq bill
Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) obtained passage today of an amendment to the Iraq supplemental appropriations bill to provide partial amnesty for illegal immigrants working in agriculture. The amendment would provide legal status for 1.35 million agricultural workers and lessen current protections for Americans and new foreign workers taking agricultural jobs. The amendment was adopted 17-15 in the Appropriations Committee and will be part of the bill put to the full Senate for a vote. In a parallel move, apparently Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) is attempting to use a similar amendment to reopen temporary visas for unskilled workers outside the annual ceiling.
Feinstein dropped the push in November, then tried a mini version in April. Those amnesty backers who realize they won't be able to push full "comprehensive immigration reform" will continue to try piecemeal approaches like this. Please contact your senators and let them know what you think.
UPDATE: There's more here; this says that Senator David Vitter will try to get AgJobs out of the bill when it hits the floor.
Janet Napolitano blocks Sheriff Joe Arpaio's funding for immigration enforcement
From this:Much of the money for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's immigration-enforcement efforts lately has poured out of a special pool of state money.UPDATE: There are details here, and from this:
But New Times has learned that Governor Janet Napolitano's turning off the spigot.
In what appears to be a prelude to a major fight between Napolitano and Arpaio, the governor issued an executive order last week to develop a new task force--headed up by the state Department of Public Safety--to find and arrest tens of thousands of felons with outstanding warrants.
And, according to a letter from DPS Director Roger Vanderpool to Arpaio outlining the new effort, the task force will be funded with the money that Arpaio isn't getting anymore...
Arpaio said the governor, along with officials in Phoenix and Maricopa County, "conspired to take away ... money that the state Legislature and the (county) Board of Supervisors approved specifically to enforce human smuggling laws, money my office needs to fight illegal immigration."From this:
He said Napolitano's decision to create the felony warrant task force is "a cover-up for taking away grant money to fight illegal immigration," calling the move "despicable.''
Napolitano spokeswoman Jeanine L'Ecuyer denied that the Democratic governor was trying to cut into efforts to stop illegal immigration.In fact, I am shocked - shocked! - that anyone would accuse Napolitano of trying to block immigration enforcement.
"It couldn't be further from the truth," L'Ecuyer said.
Immigrant assimilation study: low scores for Mexicans; other results mixed (N.C. Aizenman/WaPo, Yglesias, Drezner, Atrios, Weigel)
N.C. Aizenman of the Washington Post offers "Study Says Foreigners In U.S. Adapt Quickly", an article about a new Manhattan Institute report called "Measuring Immigrant Assimilation", authored by economist Jacob Vigdor of Duke University. He constructed an "assimilation index" based on economic, cultural, and civic assimilation. One of the issues with the index is that it probably doesn't include a question on whether those immigrants subscribe to our laws or whether they think they don't apply to them, and it probably doesn't cover irredentism-related issues. It's also a mixed bag; while the headline of the WaPo article spins it in the way we've come to expect from the WaPo, even N.C. Aizenman offers the following as the third sentence of his article:The gap between today's foreign-born and native populations remains far wider than it was in the early 1900s and is particularly large in the case of Mexican immigrants, the report said.And, Howard Husock, vice president for Policy Research at the Manhattan Institute, says:
It turns out there is plenty of assimilation going on. Cubans and Vietnamese, for instance, are economically indistinguishable from natives. Germans are indistinguishable both culturally and economically. Some cities are doing better than others at assimilating newcomers. Houston, where Mexican and Central Americans predominate, has an assimilation index of just 19. New York, where no one group predominates, has a score of 31.On the same theme, Eunice Moscoso offers "Immigrants less integrated than before, study finds" (link).
But the most striking finding is much less positive. The current overall assimilation level for all immigrant groups combined, measured on a scale of zero to 100, is, at 28, lower now than it was during the great immigration wave of the early 20th century, when it never went below 32. What’s more, the immigrant group that is by far the largest is also the least assimilated. On the zero-to-100 scale, Mexicans — 11 million emigrated to America between 1980 and 2006 — score only 13.
Although Mexican assimilation does occur, it’s extremely slow. Mexicans who arrived in 1995 started out with Index scores around five — and increased only to around 10 by 2005. In other words, our largest immigrant group arrived with little education and even less knowledge of English, and they have stayed that way for an extended period.
Oddly enough, those hacks who support massive and/or illegal immigration only seem to have read the headline of the WaPo piece.
They include David Weigel of Reason Magazine ("The Washington Post reports on a new study revealing the quicker and quicker adaptation of immigrants to American norms."; reason.com/blog/show/126477.html). He's taken to task here.
Someone else weighing in is Duncan Black (aka Atrios) under the title "Paging Lou Dobbs" (eschatonblog.com/2008_05_11_archive.html#7247266138416718020):
Haven't looked at the study myself, so put this in the category of "confirms what I already thought," but as someone who lives in a city which still has plenty of white ethnic enclaves I've long been puzzled by the widespread belief that today's immigrants are somehow "different," aside from the skin color of some of them.That's not only sleazy race-baiting, but it contains two logical fallacies: he's drawing a false conclusion based on a small sample size (i.e., his limited experiences) and based on past behavior despite the underlying conditions having changed.
Next up is Matt Yglesias, who links approvingly to both the WaPo and Atrios in "Assimilation Then and Now" (matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/assimilation_then_and_now.php).
Last and least at least as far as traffic is concerned, Daniel Drezner takes a content-free swipe at both Lou Dobbs and Mickey Kaus (http://www.danieldrezner.com/archives/003815.html)
UPDATE: Looking at the study (manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_53.htm), here's what "cultural assimilation" means to the author the study:
* Ability to speak English
* Intermarriage (whether an individual’s spouse is native-born)
* Number of children
* Marital status
One will note a few things missing, such as whether they buy in to our laws (or think they don't apply to them) and whether they support our borders (or think they have a Blut und Boden-style right to move anywhere within the Americas).
An intellectually honest index would take those into account. The civic index has similar issues as well, one of which the author acknowledges (military service being a fast-track to citizenship).
Agriprocessors meat packing raid, Postville, Iowa (kosher, UFCW)
Somewhere from a few hundred to 700 or more persons were arrested in Postville, Iowa earlier today as part of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raid of the Agriprocessors meat packing plant in the town. That plant produces kosher meat and is owned by the Rubashkin family, Hasidic Jews from New York; this page has more details on the culture clash after the bought the plant and seem to have gained a great deal of power in the town. Details on the raid itself here. "Immigration rights activists" tried to use scare tactics in expectation of the raid here.
The United Food and Commercial Workers Union - a representative of which was recently convicted in a similar case - also didn't want the raid due to an attempt to unionize the workers. Per them, raiding the plant could interfere with "ultimately uncover[ing] unscrupulous employer acts". On the one hand ICE could actually be raiding the plant to interfere with others' investigations, but on the other if they uncover employer malfeasance and it's successfully prosecuted then the UFCW should be happy. Of course, they're being fundamentally dishonest: they want labor laws but not immigration laws to be enforced. The last link lists the contents of a rather interesting subpoena, but it's unclear exactly what was involved. There's no word on whether the plant's owners are involved or cooperated with the investigation, but if the former one would think the UFCW would want a raid. If the latter it would probably have been mentioned. There's a video report on the raid here.
UPDATE: This later report says only about 300 were arrested. And, there was a protest outside the facility where the arrestees were held. Now, turning to a summary of the search warrant, we find that, in a highly encouraging move, ICE paid someone to pose as an illegal alien and recorded his dealings with those at the plant. And, there are allegations of worker abuse, weapons being carried in the plant, and even a meth lab being operated inside the plant. Those protesting the raid would allow activities like that to continue.
UPDATE 2: A report on a 5/13 press conference held by "Matt Dummermuth, U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Iowa, and Claude Arnold, special agent with Immigration and Customs Enforcement" is here. They didn't say whether the company was being investigated for criminal activity, and:
[They] also refused to comment on if there would be more arrests in relation to the more than 300 outstanding criminal complaints... A total of 390 first-shift workers were arrested as a result of the immigration raid. The event, which boasted 697 criminal complaints and arrest warrants for plant employees, is the largest single-location immigration raid in the nation. Nearly 60 people, most of them women, were released under ICE supervision to care for children or due to medical reasons. Those released are wearing electronic monitoring devices. Of those arrested, 290 are Guatemalan, 93 are Mexican, four are Ukrainian and three are Israeli.
UPDATE 3: Some on the left continue their support for illegal activity and worker abuse, with Frank Sharry offering the press release "The Republican Approach to Immigration Policy: Treat Immigrants Like Cattle" [1]. He says:
The GOP plan of terrorizing Latino immigrants in hopes they will self-deport amounts to a non-violent strategy of ethnic cleansing. Forcing them further into the shadows does nothing to regain control of our chaotic immigration system. And making workers afraid while coddling employers who take advantage of them ends up hurting immigrant and American workers alike.
If the first sentence is true, then we can't enforce our immigration laws, even after they were changed to Sharry's liking: he's simply opposed to immigration enforcement. And, it's certainly true that the Bush administration is in the pocket of cheap labor employers, but the way to end the worker abuse Sharry decries is to reduce illegal immigration, not to encourage it as Sharry would do.
UPDATE 4: The Peck Law Firm (Amy Peck) and Dornan & Lustgarten, both of Omaha, Nebraska have sued ICE in an attempted class action. Another attorney, Sonia Parras Konrad, represents other clients. Their request that their clients not be transferred out of the state was granted (link). From this:
The lawsuit alleges that government agencies and officials violated the immigrant workers' constitutional rights. Those rights include the right to due process, which includes protections from arbitrary prolonged and indefinite detention. The suit also states that their rights to consult with counsel have been violated, among other claims... It claimed that as victims of alleged crimes, the immigrant workers would be eligible for certain visas that would let them gain legal status... It also claimed that some of the detained workers have spouses and children that are U.S. citizens, and could be eligible for immigration relief because of their family ties.
Presumably they're referring to U Visas, something that Peter Schey helped push through.
There's also a Q&A with the author of a book about Postville, Stephen Bloom, here. His book - which appeared in the 90s - detailed several abuses which were mentioned by the government in their search warrant.
Things take a turn out of Iowa in the case of politically connected Rabbi Milton Balkany, who's married to the sister of the Agriprocessors CEO. He apparently recently lost a libel case against the Village Voice: link. Here's a 2003 VV article on him: link.
UPDATE 5: The Fair Immigration Reform Movement informs us (fairimmigration.wordpress.com/2008/05/19/how-to-send-support-to-iowa) that their "partners" the Mexico-linked Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights as well as the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition and the Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition "have come together to provide support and technical assistance to Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement and other allies on the ground". If you too would like to engage in false compassion and help support illegal activity, you can send money to St. Bridget’s Hispanic Ministry Fund in care of Sister Mary McCauley.
7/4/08 UPDATE: From this:
Two supervisors at the Agriprocessors kosher meatpacking plant in Postville on Thursday became the first known members of the company's management to be arrested after a federal immigration raid of the company in May... Juan Carlos Guerrero-Espinoza, 35, and Martin De La Rosa-Loera, 43, are accused of encouraging illegal immigrants to work at the plant, in some cases even helping them obtain false documents before the raid... De La Rosa-Loera oversees the plant's poultry kill facility, and Guerrero-Espinoza is in charge of the beef kill, according to court records. Guerrero-Espinoza is a U.S. citizen, said Assistant U.S. Attorney Pete Deegan Jr. He did not reveal De La Rosa-Loera's citizenship status... ICE officials are seeking the public's help in locating Hosam Amara, 43, last known to live in Postville...
7/9/08 UPDATE: The potential class action mentioned above has been voluntarily dismissed; the plaintiffs' demands to stay in-state were met (link).
7/11/08 UPDATE: Samuel Freedman of the New York Times offers "Iowa Church Is a Beacon After Immigration Raid" (link), a sympathetic (of course) discussion of how St. Bridget's Roman Catholic Church engages in false compassion by supporting illegal activity.
And, the Rubashkin's PR firm is accused of leaving sockpuppet and masquerade comments on blogs (link).
See also Federal, state investigations of Agriprocessors (maybe the left will stop playing games)
[1] http://www.americasvoiceonline.org/index.php?
option=com_content&view=article&id=27:
advisory-republican-policies-treat-immigrants-like-cattle&catid=1:
under-main-menu&Itemid=30
United Food and Commercial Workers union rep convicted in Swift meatpacking case (UFCW, harboring illegal aliens)
From this:A former union representative who helped illegal workers get jobs at a Swift & Co. meatpacking plant in Marshalltown was found guilty of federal immigration charges today.What he said during his "orientation speeches" at the link; note that a former Swift manager was sentenced to a year's probation, probably ruling out him dropping a dime on higher ups. And, perhaps that was by design.
A jury found Braulio Pereyra-Gabino guilty of harboring illegal immigrants but acquitted him on other charges that included false use of a Social Security number and aggravated identity theft.
...Pereyra-Gabino was working as vice president of Local 1149 of the United Food and Commercial Workers union when he was arrested by federal immigration officials in July 2007.
Prosecutors contend that he told undocumented workers how to escape detection and protect their fake identities used to get jobs at the Marshalltown plant.
More in UFCW, Mexico-linked Peter Schey sue DHS over immigration raids (4th Amendment, yeah sure).
Bill Richardson: the border is more secure; partnerships with Mexico
From this:
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said Wednesday that he has seen an improvement in security along the U.S.-Mexico border... Problems remain, but increased policing by state and federal authorities has significantly helped...
Part of John McCain's (previous?) tactic to get amnesty involved the border being declared to be secure, something that would probably be done by border state governors like Richardson. And, they'd probably do it in as casual fashion as Richardson did yesterday.
He also announced various partnerships with the neighboring Mexican state of Chihuahua, some of which might be in the U.S. interest, some of which might not be.
John McCain "flip-flops", will support "comprehensive immigration reform"; DNC still concept-challenged
John McCain has "flip-flopped" on immigration. Except, it's not really a flip-flop because it's been his position all along, despite attempts by the Democratic Party and others (such as Media Matters) to pretend otherwise. On May 5, while announcing his new Spanish-language website, he said this:
"Unless we enact comprehensive immigration reform I don't think you can take it piecemeal... In other words... because as soon you and I start to talk about the highly skilled workers, our agricultural interest people are going to say, 'Look we need ag workers, too.' And then somebody’s going say, 'We need the DREAM Act,' and then somebody’s going to say, 'We’ve got to enforce our border.'"
His previous position was that the borders needed to be certified as secure first. But, even if he meant to do that, it would basically be a sham designed to making getting amnesty ("comprehensive immigration reform") easier. So, this isn't so much a flip-flop as simply a more explicit indication of what he really wants.
Needless to say, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) continues their charade and also reveals that they're still concept-challenged (link):
McCain said he would pursue comprehensive immigration reform as soon as he takes office. But in the same news conference, McCain also took the opposite position: saying that the borders have to be secured first. McCain touted a virtual fence today and said we could have secured the border if it wasn't for all the earmarks and pork spending in Washington. But as recently as March, McCain called the virtual fence a "failed effort" and a "disgrace." Asked whether state and local law enforcement agencies should be enforcing federal immigration laws, McCain said "I support the enforcement of every law that's on the books in the United States of America." But moments later McCain took the opposite position, blaming the federal government for having "failed to act" and asserting, "when I'm president, beginning in January 0f 2009 we will have a federal approach to what is a federal problem." ...Democratic National Committee spokesman Luis Miranda [says] "John McCain cannot have it both ways. He cannot pander to the right wing of his Party by promising an enforcement-only approach to immigration while telling Hispanics that he supports comprehensive reform.
Obviously, their "opposite positions" aren't opposite at all.
John McCain admits illegal immigration hurts low-wage Hispanic citizens; says Hispanics want border secured
From this:Speaking to reporters in Phoenix, McCain said Hispanic citizens want America's borders secured and illegal immigrants to be treated humanely.However, per this he acknowledged "that Latinos had been discouraged by the harsh anti-immigration tone during parts of the Republican primaries". There wasn't really a "harsh anti-immigration tone" coming from the previous GOP candidates, he's just playing the role of Howard Dean and making that up. And, it's possible to secure our borders, treat illegal aliens humanely, and avoid a harsh tone: we simply enforce the current laws. That will result in many or most illegal aliens returning home and reforming their own countries, which is the most humane solution of all. McCain is peddling false compassion, trying to pretend that allowing 14% of a country's workforce to move here is good policy.
He added that low-income Hispanic citizens are vulnerable to losing their jobs to the lower wages accepted by illegal immigrants.
Frank Sharry leaves my questions unanswered, confirms MSM bias (FireDogLake forum)
Massive immigration supporter Frank Sharry - formerly of the National Immigration Forum and now with America's Voice - stopped by FireDogLake earlier today for a chat with their readers: firedoglake.com/2008/05/04/fdl-welcomes-frank-sharry-of-americas-voice
While he answered questions from others, he failed to answer a few I posed despite the fact that few others asked him anything and he had over 20 minutes to think up a good response; more below.
He also gave what will hopefully turn out to be spectacularly bad advice:
On the one hand, I do think it will matter hugely if progressive forces -- if labor, and immigrant advocates, and Latinos, and African Americans, -- if we close ranks, and Democrats get on offense [against "nativist sentiment"], that's going to matter hugely. ...the way to deal with the right-wing echo chamber is to marginalize them through a combination of political power and winning the argument over who has the better solution... We increasingly are and will take them on. There's an anti-hate approach that's part of the strategy. But from my point of view, the real key is to have the netroots take this on as an issue. I think we pretty much have the upper hand in the mainstream print press. And I think eventually we want to make cartoon figures out of TV talkers like who are cartoon characters.
There really isn't much of an argument in favor of massive and/or illegal immigration; the only way some make that argument is through being misleading in one way or another. And, many bloggers do post in support of illegal immigration, then get comments on those threads pointing out how they're wrong. While some new voices might join in, they'll soon leave as they see their credibility fall. And, it's good to see that Sharry at least partially agrees with me on the biases of the "print press".
Here's the comment I left, in case Sharry drops by and wants to leave a comment or something. Comments can be left 24/7, no waiting. Alternatively, those who attend his public appearances should try to ask him these or the many other questions he should answer (links added):
1. Approximately how much did your former group (the NIF) obtain from companies that profit from illegal immigration? I know they got at least $40,000 from Western Union, a company that illegal aliens use to send money to their home countries. Can you give us a ballpark figure on any other money received from other companies that profit from illegal immigration?
2. Would you agree that illegal immigration is an indicator of government corruption, and that anyone who supports illegal immigration through things like discouraging enforcement of our laws is supporting government corruption?
3. The ACLU is working directly with the Mexican government, and other non-profits have direct or indirect links as well. And, Calderon recently stated that they’re going to be using U.S. non-profits to push their agenda inside the U.S. Will you denounce such meddling in our internal politics?
San Francisco Chronicle Day in Pictures doesn't understand fundamental American concepts
The San Francisco Chronicle's Day in Pictures section highlights the incorrectly spelled sign from the anti-illegal immigration protester discussed in the post about Nico Pitney of the Huffington Post, saying:
Excellent point: In Houston, a Texan protesting amnesty for illegal immigrants argues that anyone who can't master English doesn't deserve to live in America.
How horribly smug. However, the upshot is that the SF Chronicle doesn't feel much of a bond with those in other areas of the country who aren't like them and who oppose massive illegal activity. Taken literally, they would strip her of her citizenship simply for supporting a change of the law that they oppose or simply for opposing massive illegal immigration.
None of the DIP pages are bylined, so please contact their ombudsman and let him know what you think: readerrep *at* sfchronicle.com
Recall Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon: just 23,751 signatures needed
Via this comes the news that a group called "American Citizens United" is going to attempt to recall Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon over his support for illegal immigration. The chairwoman of the group, Anna Gaines, is also a member of You Don't Speak For Me, which was started by FAIR. Whether they're involved isn't known, but in any case only 23,751 valid signatures are needed, and they have four months to get them. So, hopefully they can reach that milestone even if they have to pay signature gatherers for some or all.
Mexican consulate to work with LULAC on Pilgrim's Pride raids?
This report is less than coherent, but indicates that the Mexican consulate might want to work with the League of United Latin American Citizens, a previously patriotic group that's since been radicalized:The Mexican Consulate from Dallas will be visiting Mt. Pleasant this Sunday, hoping to address issues and concerns after the recent raids at Pilgrim's Pride Corp.
...The objectives of the meeting, as listed by the Mexican consulate, are:
1. Have a formal organization created, either LULAC council or other;
...3. Document incidents of harassment, racial profiling, intimidation, etc.
4. With cooperation from media, get wider coverage of abuse and treatment to all North Texas...
Illegal immigration marches: May 1, 2008
This year's marches for "immigrant rights" - i.e., to give rights to illegal aliens to which they aren't entitled - were much less attended and made much less of an impact than those in 2006. There's a round-up of reports here and a round-up of the marches in various cities here. Barack Obama threw his support behind the marches; as discussed at that link one of the key organizers of several Chicago marches is an official with the PRD, a Mexican political party.
In Los Angeles, Teresa Watanabe, Anna Gorman and Ari B. Bloomekatz of the LAT spin, spin, and spin again (link):
Thousands of workers waved American flags, marched to mariachi music and rallied for labor and immigrant rights in downtown Los Angeles on Thursday, as May Day gatherings drew light but peaceful crowds.
Not all were workers, the rights they want are those they aren't entitled to, and many were no doubt waving flags from other countries. What matters accuracy? Per them, a whopping 8500 showed up for three marches total. Gil Cedillo was one of the few politicians to speak at the rally, and supposedly Fabian Nunez was there as well. Per this, there were somewhere between 7000 and 30,000 and the organizers were the MIWON, March 25 Coalition, and the April 7th Coalition for Full Immigrants Rights with support from Hermanidad Mexicana, Latino Movement USA, ANSWER-LA, the Filipino American For Immigration Reform (FAIR), Pilipino Workers Center, Association of Filipino Workers (AFW), Youth UNITE, KMB Pro People Youth, JFAV, Samahang Pilipino at UCLA , People’s CORE, PWC and Gabriela-Network-LA, Bus Rider's Union, and the Filipino Immigrant Network for Empowerment (FINE).
Meanwhile, in Georgia, 200 people turned out for a march organized by the Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights (link). Unlike in a previous report, Mary Lou Pickel fails to point out that a co-founder and advisor (link) to that group is Teodoro Maus, a former Mexican consul general.
In Seattle, the low turnout is blamed on: a change of organizers, fear of enforcement, high gas prices, and more. "Hundreds, perhaps thousands" were expected (link).
In Portland, around 500 showed up. Credulous Joseph Rose says:
Many were shouting "workers of the world, unite!" and following that up by yelling "we have nothing to lose but our chains!"
Those are Shriner slogans, right?
UPDATE: Per this, those attending the L.A. rally included Fabian Nunez, Assemblyman Kevin de Leon, and Cedillo, who said "No one is illegal, no one is a criminal". Somewhat unexpectedly, Mexican congressman Jose Jacques Medina of the PRD was booed, with one person in the crowd saying, "I know there are a lot of communists out here... We're against the communists. They're always putting rocks in the path of Mexican democracy."
UPDATE 2: Jonesing for a Mexican flag waving video? Here's one.
UPDATE 3: There are pictures here, via this. Note: one of the signs is misspelled, and the carwash girl is interesting.
Barack Obama statement supports illegal immigration marches
Barack Obama has released a statement supporting the May Day illegal immigration marches [1]. He misleads by failing to note that the marches are designed to benefit those who are here illegally rather than legal immigrants. He's also apparently proud of having spoken at the May 1, 2006 event in Chicago; the main organizers of that event have links to the Mexican government with one even being an official with a foreign political party. That same official is a "key organizer" of this year's Chicago march [2].
Two years ago, I came home to Chicago to witness the mobilization of hundreds of thousands of citizens and immigrants united in an effort to fix our immigration system. I spoke to the marchers that day, and Senator Kennedy spoke to those marching in Washington. They said to us, "today we march and tomorrow we vote." Two years later, our immigration problems remain unresolved, and those who want change will have to vote for change in November. So today, I encourage the thousands of people who are marching and calling for change to work hard registering voters in the months to come. Your vote is your voice.
Many of those marching were citizens or legal immigrants, but many were also illegal aliens. And, all were marching to give rights to illegal aliens that they aren't entitled to.
Four-hundred thousand marchers were in Chicago that day and hundreds of thousands of others came out and stood up around the country. They were marching to put a human face on the idea of America as a country of immigrants: the notion that people can come here and pursue a better life for themselves and, most importantly, for their children, if they work hard and apply themselves.
How they come here should matter to a U.S. Senator, but Barack Obama is obviously a different kind of Senator.
Two years later, politicians remain polarized and the challenge is unresolved. On the anniversary of those marches, I again express my commitment to comprehensive immigration reform and will do everything I can to bring order and compassion to a system that is broken today. It is in our interest and true to our tradition to come together and solve this problem. And as President, I intend to lead us in that effort.
BHO could bring "order and compassion" to the system by supporting the enforcement of our current laws; his plan would lead to more illegal immigration and more problems and is the opposite of "compassionate".
[1] lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2008/05/obama-statement.html
[2] From this: "We have to put pressure on the politicians," said Jorge Mujica, a key organizer of this year's march and the original 2006 May Day march. "If everyone starts talking about immigration again after May Day, that's a success for us." Mujica is an official with Mexico's PRD Party.
El Paso BP chief Victor Manjarrez promotes immigration "reform", busboys-style (Alicia Caldwell)
Alicia Caldwell of the Associated Press offers "El Paso border chief urges immigration reform" (link). The person in question is Victor M. Manjarrez Jr., chief of the U.S. Border Patrol's El Paso Sector. Over several paragraphs both the AP and Manjarrez simply offer a long-winded version of the busboys canard previously employed by Barack Obama, Tamar Jacoby, Michael Chertoff, Rudy Guiliani, and more:
"Most of these people are economic migrants but we have to deal with them between the ports of entry because we have not, in terms of a legislative fix, determined what we do with these people... I think it's pretty obvious that the country has a need for economic migrants. To what degree, I don't know. That's for the country to decide and for the politicians to decide... When you look at the series of events that have happened over the last five, six years ... our mission changed... Our primary mission changed from our traditional focus. Our primary mission now is terrorists and weapons of mass destruction. That's what we should be focused on. We can't focus on that as much as we would like because of all the other issues that we deal with."
He then goes on to say there might be a "terrorism nexus." Just because his remarks are highly political and he was probably ordered to give this interview by higher-ups doesn't mean there isn't such a "nexus", but it would be more credible coming from someone else.
Fabian Nunez, Mexico-linked Peter Schey, American Apparel join to support illegal immigration
Yesterday, California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez held a press conference at the headquarters of American Apparel to oppose workplace raids and thus support illegal immigration. Also on hand was AA's attorney Peter Schey, someone with at least a few links to the Mexican government. Nunez is also a co-chair of the Hillary Clinton campaign, so asking her about his activities is highly recommended. From the Tiffany Hsu report (link; like Anna Gorman she doesn't mention Schey's links):"The last thing we need is to bring the type of disruption to our economy that could ultimately lead us into a downward spiral into a recession," Nuñez (D-Los Angeles) said.Needless to say, his economics is off: fewer illegal aliens would do wonders for the California economy. And, also needless to say, he's completely corrupt.
...If American Apparel's facilities are raided because of the company's support for legalizing the workforce, Schey said repeatedly that the company would "come down like a ton of bricks" on ICE and use "the courts and other devices if possible." He did not elaborate...
...But Schey said between drops in revenue from stalled production and the dangers of suddenly losing a stable workforce, the raids could cause tens of millions of dollars of economic damage...
Although Nuñez said companies should not endorse hiring illegal immigrants, he said workers who were employed should be left alone.
And, per this:
"As Speaker of the Assembly I am announcing today that I will be introducing legislation condemning the questionable practices perpetrated by ICE," Nunez says.UPDATE: I'd like to know whether Nunez has any qualms about appearing in support of ignoring our laws with Peter Schey, someone who has a joint venture with the Mexican government (vocesunidas.org), who wrote an "opposition research" paper that they commissioned, who has at least one other link, and who generally acts in a way that supports Mexico's agenda. Due to an unknown issue with my call to (916) 319-2046, I'll be sending an email to Steve Maviglio, a Nunez aide who left a comment on this earlier entry. The only email I have is Assemblymember.Nunez *at* assembly.ca.gov.
He says he has seen proof agents have violated people's constitutional rights during enforcement operations.
However, if anyone else wants to call or email them and find out, leave a comment.
UPDATE 2: After a day, my email hasn't been replied to. So, I'm going to assume a) that it wasn't a phone problem and Steve Maviglio hung up on me, and b) Fabian Nunez doesn't see a problem with opposing our laws in conjunction with someone linked to the Mexican government.
Former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack takes illegal immigration side in Swift raid; Peter Schey link
From this:
Allegations that federal officials illegally rounded up and arrested almost 1,300 Swift factory workers during raids in Marshalltown and across the country are being highlighted today at a public hearing that includes testimony from former Gov. Tom Vilsack... [Vilsack alleged various abuses and said:] "Our nation has no real comprehensive immigration policy, so instead we use scare tactics to mark the failure of our system... We're here today because it is clear that our constitutional rights have been violated during raids conducted by our government..."
Whatever the facts of the matter, he should have tempered his remarks with a statement in support of our immigration laws and their enforcement. Not only did he not do that, but he's linked in with some interesting folks...
The Mexico-linked Peter Schey has joined with the UFCW to sue the feds over the raid based on the same charge, for which he started the "Swift Raid Collaborative". And, the UFCW has started something called the "National Commission on ICE Misconduct & Violations of the 4th Amendment" (lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2008/02/ufcw-hearing-on.html).
Vilsack serves on that UFCW commission with the following:
* Joe Hansen, President, UFCW
* Dennis Hayashi, a lawyer
* Rev. Samuel "Billy" Kyles
* Maria Elena Durazo (AFL-CIO and Barack Obama co-chair)
* Bill Hing, Professor of Law, UC Davis
* Susan Gzesh, Human Rights Program, Univ. of Chicago
* Oscar Chacon, Salvadoran American National Network
* Mary Bauer, Southern Poverty Law Center
* William Spriggs, Department of Economics, Howard University
Their February 25 meeting included appearances by:
* Peter Schey
* Arnoldo Garcia, Director, Immigrant Justice & Rights Program, National Network of Immigrant Rights
* Jeanne Butterfield of the American Immigration Lawyers Association
* Monica Guizar of the National Immigration Law Center
If Vilsack runs for some future office, bring up his new wonderful friends.
Is U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie a corruption supporter? (downplays illegal immigration then "clarifies" remarks)
From this:...U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie [District of New Jersey] surprised many at a Dover [NJ] church public forum [at the First United Methodist Church of Dover] when he said sneaking into the United States is not a criminal act.If I had been there, I would have questioned his "corruption-busting" credentials, pointing out that illegal immigration is a multi-billion dollar "industry", with very power forces such as the banking industry trying to profit from money that was earned illegally and with cheap labor employers basically paying off politicians.
"Being in this country without proper documentation is not a crime," Christie told more than 60 residents and town officials. "The whole phrase of 'illegal immigrant' connotes that the person, by just being here, is committing a crime."
Being undocumented may be a civil wrong, but it's not a criminal act, Christie said.
"Don't let people make you believe that that's a crime that the U.S. Attorney's Office should be doing something about," he added of entering the country illegally. "It is not."
After touching on the usual topics of his corruption-busting career...
While Christie told the audience it doesn't take a "genius" to see there's a "serious immigration problem" in this country, he stressed an undocumented immigrant is not a criminal unless that person re-enters the country after being deported.
He was invited to speak by the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey. Their president (Martin Perez) said this:
"The issue of undocumented people didn't start with the Mexicans, the Colombians and the Guatemalans... It started with the Mayflower -- none of those people had any documents."Now, Chris Christie's office has released a "clarification" (link), saying in part:
He did not say, nor did he mean, that entering this country through any means other than the appropriate immigration channels is a lawful act. It is not.The "clarification" needs its own clarification, because while his earlier comments noted that reentering and remaining here after having been deported is in fact a crime, the "clarification" does not.
The first link also alludes to a previous incident with Christie taking the illegal immigration side. In 2007, Morristown Mayor Donald Cresitello had called some pro-illegal immigration protesters Marxists and socialists. Christie called that "hyperbole and grandstanding and demagoguery"; the mayor says he was referring to people who had identified themselves as Communists, waving red flags and holding signs that bore socialist slogans.
Christie was appointed by Bush; whether he's just a loose borders hack, on the take for either money or votes, or just doing what his boss wants isn't clear, but it's one of those three.
UPDATE: Cresitello is now calling for Christie to resign. In the report, Rob Jennings notes only first part of the bit above about Marxists, without noting Cresitello's response.
San Francisco's IDs for illegal aliens plan may spread to East Bay
From this we learn that groups in the East Bay are trying to get their own version of
San Francisco's ID cards for illegal aliens plan, specifically basing their proposal on that plan.
The group pushing it is called the "Contra Costa County Municipal ID Task Force" and supporters quoted include Miriam Wong of the Latina Center, a Richmond-based organization that teaches leadership skills to women in the Latino community, Antonio Medrano of Concilio Latino, a West Contra Costa group that works to improve conditions for Latinos, and Maria Rivera, an immigration lawyer in San Pablo. They're being supported by Richmond Mayor Gayle McLaughlin, a Green and past associate of the Sanctuary Movement (CISPES) and by City Councilman John Marquez of that city.
Related:
Bill Clinton, Arnold Schwarzenegger promote corruption, try to fool people about "unbanked" program
Mexico-linked Peter Schey sues over immigration raid; Anna Gorman/LAT fails to note his links
Immigration lawyer Peter Schey of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law is suing the feds over a recent immigration raid in Van Nuys, California. He also has at least a few links to the Mexican government, yet Anna Gorman of the Los Angeles Times yet again fails to inform her readers of that fact in her report "L.A. civil rights attorney files claims over federal immigration raid" (link). Per her, he's just a "longtime Los Angeles civil rights attorney" who's "trying a new strategy to push federal immigration authorities to change the way they conduct workplace raids" when in fact there's probably a bit more that he wants.
He claims that constitutional rights were violated because ICE agents locked down the building and didn't allow people to leave until they showed that they were citizens or legal immigrants:
"That group detention is completely unconstitutional... They have no individual probable cause, yet they come in like the Gestapo."
The article quotes two other immigration lawyers on the case: Carl Shusterman says it's a long shot, but John Ayala of the American Immigration Lawyers Association disagrees. And:
[A citizen who was detained] said immigration authorities could have handled the arrests in a more diplomatic and less theatrical way.
Unfortunately, there's the possibility that "drama" might have been the point. Micheal Chertoff of the DHS has hinted at conducting raids in order to inflame the left, and the whole raid might have been designed to generate outrage and lawsuits from the usual suspects, such as those mentioned above. If that's the case, Chertoff's goal would be to generate a backlash in order to get what Bush wants: a massive amnesty and a "guest" worker program. Note that ICE called the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles - a group that's allegedly collaborated with the Mexican government - shortly before the raid.
Needless to say, Gorman doesn't look into that possibility.
Please write readers.rep *at* latimes.com with your thoughts.
Stephen Fuller/George Mason University: are you sure you're a professor of public policy?
[The money followed in the update.]
Stephen Fuller/Stephen S. Fuller of George Mason University - supposedly a professor of public policy - is featured on the latest video from 9500 Liberty. On the video (called "IMMIGRATION Crackdown HURTS Our Economy", link) he discusses the dire consequences of Prince William County in northern Virginia trying to do something about illegal immigration in their county. Oddly enough, for the several minutes that Fuller basically says the same thing over and over, he only discusses direct economic effects and certainly doesn't sound to me like an intellectually honest public policy expert.
He doesn't, for instance, discuss how businesses profiting from illegal activity isn't good public policy. Yet, one might expect a real professor of public policy to do that, no?
He doesn't discuss how massive illegal immigration is a symptom of massive government corruption, something one might expect a real professor of public policy to do.
He doesn't discuss the social welfare costs of massive illegal immigration. He doesn't discuss other non-financial costs, such as the cost of giving even more political power inside the U.S. to foreign governments and to homegrown racial demagogues like Walter Tejada or extremist groups like Mexicanos Sin Fronteras. Those are costs, and based on his bio (link), one might expect him to be honest and knowledgeable enough to factor them into the equation.
Not only that, but - believe it or don't - he says this:
The state makes transfer payments to the schools based on the number of school children. Start losing schoolchildren, you qualify for less money.
That's Homer Simpsonian in its stupidity, considering that those transfer payments have to come from somewhere.
He offers that argument, and he completely fails to point out any of the public policy negatives related to illegal immigration or even massive immigration. So, is he really a professor of public policy, or is he something else?
Please send him a polite email asking him what he is exactly: sfuller2 *at* gmu.edu
Note also that GMU is home to other intellectual superstars like Bryan Caplan, Donald Boudreaux, Tyler Cowen, and Alex Tabarrok of Open Letter on Immigration fame.
UPDATE: Fuller is back in yet another video, this called "Immigration Myths with Dr. Stephen S. Fuller, PhD" (link). He doesn't discuss any myths and he still doesn't discuss any negatives of what he supports.
And, 9500 Liberty doesn't disclose that in 2007 he was named Chief Economist of Cardinal Bank, which also agreed to sponsor the Metropolitan Washington Economic Index from the George Mason University Center for Regional Analysis. Fuller is the Director of that Center (policy.gmu.edu/people/Fuller.html).
Steve Grove/Youtube still promoting 9500 Liberty's pro-illegal immigration propaganda
Filmmakers Eric Byler, Annabel Park, and Jeff Man run "9500Liberty", a pro-illegal immigration online documentary project discussing issues in northern Virginia (youtube.com/user/9500Liberty). In the past they've resorted to re-re-re-repurposing supposedly controversial comments from an older white gentleman in an attempt to racially demagogue the issue, but now they're back with a new video called "IMMIGRATION Crackdown HURTS Our Economy" (link) featuring the thoughts of supposed professor of Public Policy at George Mason University, Stephen Fuller.
Like their other efforts, the video is being promoted by Youtube for an unknown reason. I'm going to assume that they haven't paid Youtube for the promotion and the latter company is doing it for free for one reason or other, possibly even related to their corporate goals of increasing skilled immigration (Laszlo Bock; link). And, I'm going to assume that their hack political editor, Steve Grove, is at least partly responsible for the promotion. I don't think that's an unfair assumption, considering Grove posts like this:
One of the most poignant examples we've seen of the immigration debate on YouTube has come from 9500Liberty, a channel started by Eric Byler to highlight the immigration battle taking place in Prince William County, Virginia. 9500 Liberty is the address of an intersection where immigration protests became heated after local policy makers debated an ordinance denying certain rights to local immigrants.
Those "immigrants" are actually illegal aliens, and the ordinance involved trying not to give them rights to which they aren't entitled. The quote above follows Grove using the intentionally misleading euphemism "undocumented workers".
Related:
We're all going to regret giving Youtube so many links (note that I put nofollow tags on the Youtube links above)
Nancy Pelosi opposes immigration enforcement, says agents are kicking in doors
Responding to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus complaining about the House leadership not supporting "comprehensive immigration reform", aka amnesty, Nancy Pelosi said the following today:
"I am frustrated, too... And as I have said since the day we took over here, we're not going to have an immigration bill unless the president takes the lead on it. There is no way to have a partisan immigration bill. And we saw what happened in the Senate on it... [the CHC's concerns are] very legitimate... In homes across America, people's homes are getting kicked in and families are being split and so I understand their frustration with this... In order, though, to have any compromise, even something that falls short of comprehensive, which is what I support, we're going to have to have presidential cooperation and more than that, leadership... The principles of the Hispanic caucus are the principles of the [House Democratic] Caucus: secure our borders, enforce our laws, keep families united. Even his holiness, the holy father when he was here, Pope Benedict, spoke about unifying families. To have some kind of insistence that people who are here be here legally."
Not to put too fine a point on it, she's basically portraying legitimate ICE enforcement as the Gestapo, something usually reserved for non-lawmakers. I'd imagine that very few attempts at arrest of criminal aliens even involve kicking in doors, and I'd imagine that in almost all cases that was justified. If she were complaining about individual cases that would be one thing, but to have a lawmaker oppose enforcement of our laws in this way should be beyond shocking.
Statements like this are part of a pattern for Pelosi; in 2003 - speaking in Mexico - she accused ICE of "terrorizing" people.
Raul Grijalva, Congressional Hispanic Caucus: lack of immigration "reform" is "spineless"
Yesterday the Congressional Hispanic Caucus complained about the failure of other Democrats to support "comprehensive immigration reform", aka a massive amnesty....Rep. Raul Grijalva of Arizona called the Democratic caucus "spineless."One factor in provoking their outbursts was the SAVE Act from fellow Dem Heath Shuler:
"Today my party wants to do what is easy, not exactly what is right," said Rep. Luis Gutierrez of Illinois. "The leaders in our party who are arguing for consideration of helping just a few immigrants are risking the future of all immigrants."
Rep. Joe Baca, D-Calif., who chairs the Hispanic Caucus, said the visa and other bills under consideration were "nothing more than a Band-Aid being used to cover up a gaping wound."
If a Democratic majority can allow such a hearing [on the SAVE Act], "then we are no better than the Republican majority we replaced," Gutierrez said.Nancy Pelosi blamed it on president Bush and the GOP, then said yet another stupid thing today.
The lawmakers refused to identify names but said the piecemeal approach wouldn't be happening without the consent of top House Democratic leaders...
Canada's moves against skilled immigration sparks outrage
From "Canada's immigration minister threatened for blocking stripper visas" (link):Canada's immigration minister is being threatened by criminal gangs opposed to her government's efforts to halt foreign strippers from working in this country, media said Thursday...
Canada has long had a shortage of homegrown strippers, and club owners, some of whom are alleged to have ties to organized crime, hotly opposed the bill.
According to Tim Lambrinos, head of the Adult Entertainment Association of Canada, there are currently 700 foreign strippers in Canada, and more are needed.
He told the Globe and Mail that the Conservative government's crackdown on his industry will force foreign dancers underground where they will be more prone to exploitation...
ACLU now working with Mexican government
The San Diego chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is now working with directly with Mexico's Human Rights Commission, a quasi-governmental group that's independent from but funded by the Mexican government. The ACLU is a very strong supporter of illegal immigration but in the past the only known link between them and the Mexican government was indirect. Any future news report on the ACLU's efforts regarding immigration should mention their new direct link, and if it doesn't please contact the news source's editor. They should also be asked about this at public meetings or whereever else they discuss these issuesThis also follows Mexican president Felipe Calderon stating that they're going to use U.S. non-profits to push their agenda inside the U.S.
The release from aclusandiego.org/news_item.php?article_id=000383 is in the extended entry; note that they incorrectly blame border deaths on attempts to enforce our laws, when the actual culprits include those like the ACLU who take every step possible to encourage and enable illegal immigration. They'll be working together to "explore legal actions" against Operation Gatekeeper. They also say that the "ACLU of San Diego is not receiving funding from any Mexican source for its work", hinting that even they know what they're doing is wrong.
Related:
Humane Borders *did* distribute border maps in Mexico
Gil Cedillo, Peter Schey, LULAC, MALDEF, more at Migrant March II
Mexican official on Democrat Enrique Morones' "Migrant March II"
The release follows.
In a historic agreement to pursue joint strategies to protect the human rights of migrants moving across the Mexico-United States border, the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties and the Comision Nacional de Derechos Humanos today signed a document declaring common goals and principles to address the serious human rights issues.
The Memorandum of Agreement between the two organizations charges the parties jointly to explore legal actions to challenge Operation Gatekeeper and other programs that have contributed to migrant deaths, and to educate a transnational audience about the issue of human rights tragedies at the border. More than $30 billion dollars have been spent on Gatekeeper since its inception, but the program has done little to prevent illegal entries—it has simply shifted them to the mountains and deserts east of San Diego, where migrants face much harsher conditions in remote, environmentally hostile areas.
The agreement was developed in reaction to the continually mounting death toll of now more than 5,000 migrants along the border, as well as the challenge of advocating on these issues effectively from just one side of the border. With respect to abuses by federal law enforcement agencies, for example, U.S. federal agencies have acted with immunity and a complete lack of transparency.
Kevin Keenan, Executive Director of the ACLU-San Diego and Dr. José Luis Soberanes, President of the Comisión, signed the agreement at the “Justice in Mexico: Evaluating National and Local Strategies” conference at the Joan Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice, University of San Diego.
“Through this collaboration we hope to build bridges of understanding and justice, and tear down walls of prejudice and hate,” said Dr. Soberanes. “It is intolerable that our two civilized nations have allowed so many deaths of migrants along the border since the adoption of Operation Gatekeeper,” said Keenan. “By working together with Mexico’s Human Rights Commission, we will hold our governments to account in ways that we could not do alone.” David Shirk, Director of the Trans-Border Institute that hosted the conference, said, “We are pleased to serve as the backdrop for the signing of this historic agreement, and hope that this partnership will lead to a reversal of the tragic trends that have plagued our two nations in recent years.”
The agreement calls for the organizations to host an invitation-only conference of experts in June to focus on bi-national advocacy strategies for attacking inhumane policies affecting migrants, especially deaths from border crossings; to meet again following the U.S. elections in November to update its plans; to cooperate on other lawsuits, advocacy efforts, and educational campaigns on a case-by-case basis; and to seek funding for these efforts in their respective countries. The ACLU of San Diego is not receiving funding from any Mexican source for its work.
Felipe Calderon to meet with IME advisory board in Dallas (+Alfredo Corchado's pro-Mexico spin)
On Tuesday, Felipe Calderon will be attending a meeting of the Institute for Mexicans Abroad/Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior advisory board to the Mexican government (www.ime.gob.mx). The board has about 125 members, some of whom are U.S. citizens, all of whom have divided loyalties, and some or most of whom have some influence on U.S. politics. One member is even an Illinois state senator, Martin Sandoval. Another is Juan Salgado of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.
Others mentioned in "Mexico's President Calderon to hear immigrant leaders' concerns at Dallas conference" by Alfredo Corchado (link) include:
* Claudia Torrescano of Dallas: naturalized U.S. citizen and Univision radio host.
* Mexico City native Mario Cesar Ramírez, who runs the La Paloma taquería chain in the Dallas area. Also a U.S. citizen.
* Rene Martínez: works for the Dallas Independent School District in an unknown capacity; see this.
* Graciela Reyes Salinas: nurse in Dallas, naturalized U.S. citizen. ...She understands why some might be suspicious of her participation in IME... IME's mission, Ms. Salinas said, is aimed at providing "know-how" that "hopefully, we can stop the flow of illegal immigration to this country."
Why exactly people might be suspicious of U.S. citizens having divided loyalties and helping push Mexico's agenda inside the U.S. is, of course, not explored. What we are offered is this:
...A crackdown against illegal immigrants is roiling Texas and much of the U.S., and its scope and fury haven't been seen in this country in at least 50 years, historians have said... With about 125 members, the advisory board's influence is growing, analysts and Mexican government officials say. And that is why Mexico's president chose to visit the group's semiannual conference, which is being held outside Mexico for only the second time... With its burgeoning immigrant population, Dallas is a logical place for Mr. Calderon's visit, Mexican officials said. The Dallas area now has more Mexican-born people than Houston, placing the region just behind Chicago and Los Angeles in terms of political and economic importance for Mexico.
The article also quotes IME director Carlos Gonzalez Gutierrez:
"The access of these Mexican migrants to the decision-making process in Mexico is rare, if not unprecedented, and it's growing... Sometimes we're not in total agreement with IME advisers, but the consultation between us is real, and this meeting in Dallas is a reflection of that. These are people who want to influence both sides of the border, so our relationship is far from being one-sided... Polls have consistently shown that it is only a small minority of Americans who believe that it is feasible to deport 12 million undocumented people... We want to stay close and work with those organizations because we share their concerns."
What exactly he means by "those organizations" isn't clear, but presumably he's referring to the far-left U.S. non-profits that Calderon previously indicated he wants to use to push Mexico's agenda inside the U.S.
Is Bryan Caplan the world's looniest libertarian? (give every Haitian a green card)
The New York Times offers "Across Globe, Empty Bellies Bring Rising Anger" (link) about high food prices having a detrimental effect on the third world, focusing on Haiti: "experts say there are few quick fixes" to the problem.
That causes "economist" Bryan Caplan of George Mason University to offer the self-evidently ludicrous "The Quick Fix: For the Love of God, Give Every Haitian a Green Card" (link). His grand plan helps show just how insane the libertarian support for open borders is:
Well, I've got a quick fix. Give every Haitian a green card. Invite the world's most precious resource - human labor - to leave a dirt-based economy and get an entry-level job in the modern economy. It's called doing well while doing good. And unlike everything else the world has ever done for Haiti, it works.
This isn't the first time Bryan Caplan has descended into self-parody, and it probably won't be the last.
There are over 8 million Haitians and having most of them come here would present a huge number of social costs, both financial and non-financial. Taking a glance at the CIA page on the country, their literacy rate is just over 50%, meaning that around half of those who came here would only be able to do manual labor, if that. And, the national languages of the country are French and Creole, not English. So, even those who can read and write would have to learn English in order to get a job other than manual labor.
And, the 2003 HIV rate was 5.6%. While not as high as Botswana at 37.3%, that's still much higher than the U.S. at 0.6%. They also have "pervasive corruption" and other issues that are ingrained in their culture. While eventually some or many would Americanize, in the intervening decades those negative cultural issues would simply be moved to the U.S. And, since there are hundreds of millions or even billions of people in the same or worse dire straits, why exactly we should favor Haiti over, say, Bangladesh, Belize, or Botswana is a mystery only Caplan can answer.
Discussing all the other issues with Caplan's beyond-childlike plan is left as an exercise for his students.
Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform to oppose Lou Barletta (Jim Wallis backgrounder)
On Monday, the illegal immigration supporting Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform (headed up by Jim Wallis) held a press conference where they stated their opposition to Hazleton, Pennsylvania mayor Lou Barletta.
It was probably what you'd suspect, and their press release had more of the same:
..."They need to stop using rhetoric that demonizes immigrants and make an effort to respect all people, including immigrants..."
Barletta responded to the paper by pointing out that they'd forgot to specify that his opposition is to illegal immigration and that he supports the legal variety.
The article also has a little dirt on Wallis; while I hate to admit it I'd previously considered him mainstream leftwing because of the way that he's been presented by the MSM, but apparently he's got an interesting past:
Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform is a spinoff of “Sojourners” magazine. It’s a coalition of about 100 religious groups – including the Mennonite Church U.S.A. and the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference – that favor a path to citizenship for people in the country illegally. ...Wallis was an anti-Vietnam War activist in the mid- to late 1960s. He’s been arrested numerous times for “civil disobedience.” “Sojourners” began as “Post-American,” an anti-capitalist magazine that criticized American foreign policy and supported socialist governments. In the early ’70s, Wallis moved the magazine from Chicago to Washington and changed its name to “Sojourners.” In 1979, Wallis told the magazine “Mission Tracks,” “more Christians will come to view the world through Marxist eyes.” That year, he also criticized the Vietnamese boat people who were trying to escape that country’s communist government, saying they’d been “inoculated” … “to support their consumer habit in other lands."...
Hundreds arrested at Pilgrim's Pride plants (immigration raids, identity theft)
Hundreds of illegal aliens and presumably others were arrested today at Pilgrim's Pride chicken processing plants in Texas, Tennessee, Arkansas, Florida, and West Virginia (link). The company participated in the E-Verify program and cooperated with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The arrests were for identity theft and document fraud in addition to being illegal aliens and/or criminal aliens.
There were also smaller, unconnected raids at Shipley Donuts in Houston (a local chain, report link) and at a chain of restaurants around Buffalo, New York.
Expect the usual suspects to start whining on cue tomorrow.
UPDATE: Erin Segroves offers "Hispanic community rocked by plant raid": "...Tension and fear burned through Chattanooga's immigrant community Wednesday..." etc. She also quotes someone as saying, "They pay for [fake documentation]... In their hearts, they really think that it's OK because they bought it." Obviously, it's bad public policy to have large numbers of people thinking that's OK, yet due to corrupt politicians supporting illegal immigration that thinking is becoming ingrained in a large segment of our population. And, another group is suing Pilgrim's Pride and seeking class action status, claiming they intentionally hired illegal aliens in order to drive down wages.
Barack Obama immigration editorial misleads
But, you already knew that. Barack Obama offers an editorial entitled "Enforce tighter border, employer verifications" (link):
While I understand the passions -- and legitimate differences -- on both sides of this difficult issue, we must restore civility and reason to the conversation.
Translation: "my opponents are gun-toting anti-immigrant racists". And, "as irrational as it seems, what I propose is the rational approach."
First, we must reinforce our borders to deter the more than 2,000 immigrants who cross them illegally each day. Most of these aspiring laborers risk death in the desert to come here illegally, and they are diverting our attention from those trying to enter to do us harm.
That's the same thing Bush and Chertoff have said at least a few times. The use of "aspiring laborers" is a minor variation of the Busboys Canard as used by Tamar Jacoby, David Brooks, the WSJ, and on down the line.
We also have to ensure that employers are hiring only legal workers. That's why I've worked with Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley and Democratic Sen. Max Baucus to make it significantly more difficult -- if not impossible -- for employers to hire workers who are here illegally, including the more than 40 percent who came legally and overstayed their visa... This will require a mandatory electronic system that enables employers to verify the legal status of their employees within days of hiring them.
If that just uses SSNs, that might be acceptable. If however it involves a biometric national ID card, that probably wouldn't be. More on that later...
Second, we must require the 12 million undocumented immigrants who are already here, including more than 300,000 in North Carolina, to step out of the shadows and onto a path that includes the ability to earn citizenship by demonstrating a sound character, a commitment to America, and a strong work ethic.
Bolding added; see Possible Democratic Party immigration "reform" charade: "offer legalization" to become "require". At least he's got his talking points in order!
While it's unrealistic to deport them, illegal entry cannot go unpunished. That's why we must require them to pay a fine, learn English, and get to the back of the line for citizenship behind those who came here legally.
Unfortunately, there's no "back of the line", since the line is constantly being replenished. Not only would granting amnesty greatly impact those now in the line or who want to get in the line in the normal fashion, it would either take five to ten years to do all the background checks or they'd be extremely sloppily done.
We are a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants, and we must reconcile those traditions. It's time to move beyond our broken politics and achieve real progress on immigration reform, not just for the sake of passing a bill, and not as a favor to immigrants, but so that we can finally address the concerns of the American people, and make real the hopes of all those who want nothing more than a chance at the American Dream.
Certainly, many want the "American Dream". Others just want to earn money. And, their leaders have shown time and again that they have other goals in mind.
CNN Democratic Candidates Compassion Forum: no immigration questions
Last night's CNN Democratic Candidates Compassion Forum at Messiah College in Pennsylvania (transcript link) contained no questions relating to immigration. That's despite it featuring questions from Jim Wallis and Samuel Rodriguez [1] of the National Hispanic Leadership Conference, and despite the high profile that religious leaders have in promoting amnesty. And, that's despite the fact that those leaders continually engage in false compassion to push their case.
The hosts were Campbell Brown and Newsweek editor Jon Meacham, and sponsors were Faith in Public Life, the ONE Campaign, and Oxfam America.
Previous coverage of the CNN "debates" starts at the last link.
[1] See the stock editorial "SAVE Act perpetuates, rather than reforms, our immigration policy" (link) "Expressions of hatred and xenophobia toward immigrants, at an all-time high, are producing widespread fear in the Latino community. Unfortunately, the echo of a hate-filled climate is now making its way through Congress..." etc. etc.
Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon files FBI complaint over Joe Arpaio raids
In his effort to support illegal immigration and perhaps just gain some fame, Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon now wants the FBI to investigate Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio over whether any civil rights laws were broken civil rights laws during his recent immigration sweeps (link).
In the letter, Gordon race baits, does something no one should do and relies on the characterization of an Arizona Republic editorial ("guilty of looking latino", link), and he also apparently included other news reports which may be biased as well. He includes one example of a suit that's already been filed, and another unverified incident involving one of his own staff members, not exactly an unbiased source.
Meanwhile:
Arpaio said it was ironic that Gordon drafted the letter on the same day that Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officials from Washington observed his deputies arresting residents and illegal immigrants in Guadalupe and approved of the sheriff's work... ICE officials have said repeatedly that Arpaio is not violating the formal agreement he has with their office allowing sheriff's deputies to enforce immigration laws.
The Arizona chapter of the Anti-Defamation League also wants an investigation, and others mentioned opposing the raids are the American Civil Liberties Union, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (both have indirect links to the Mexican government), the Arizona Ecumenical Council, and the American Jewish Committee (collaborated with the Mexican government).
Did Bob Barr swipe his immigration policy from Barack Obama (or Bush, McCain, Clinton,...)?
Libertarian Party contender for president Bob Barr was interviewed by Neal Boortz a few days ago, and the audio and a partial transcript is here. Part of the conversation involved immigration matters, and based on that I have trouble seeing any major difference between Barr's positions and those of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, George Bush, Teddy Kennedy, and on down the line. In fact, it's like his campaign was the recipient of a blank cardboard box with just the word "POLICY" stenciled on it.
On the audio, he implies that he supports a form of amnesty where illegal aliens who are caught in the interior, as long as they passed a background check, would get to remain. He doesn't specify whether that would be as a "guest" worker or whether they'd get on the "path to citizenship". Asked about this, he says:
"I think as a practical matter, that makes a lot of sense. I'm not sure how you would go about rounding up millions of people and trying to deport them. The key here is security..."
Now, compare that to BHO:
"We are not going to send [illegal aliens] home... I want us to have an honest conversation about this." ...Mr. Obama said many illegals have "settled," "bought property" and have children who are U.S. citizens. He said the country would have to devote "all our law enforcement resources to rounding up people without papers, even if they weren't causing any trouble," and once that's done, the country would have to "empty out our jails..." ..."Imagine what that would look like, basically detaining, putting in jail 12 million people. We're not going to do that..."
And, in fact, all of those listed above have made similar arguments. And, all of those arguments are wrong: they offer a false choice and fail to note other alternatives such as attrition. Under that plan we'd enforce the laws now and reduce non-emergency benefits to illegal aliens, causing many to leave voluntarily. Neither an amnesty nor mass deportations would be required.
Barr also said that neither the Dems nor the GOP are making border security a priority. To a large extent that's false, since the leaders of both parties supported "comprehensive immigration reform" and all three major candidates support some form of border enforcement, or at least pretend to.
As a political matter, Barr's position makes little sense (unless there's "something else" involved). He doesn't seem to have an ideological standpoint on this issue, and aside from using them to get the nomination there's little reason for him to reach out to the extremist libertarians on this issue. On the other hand, there's nothing to differentiate him from the three major candidates on immigration, an issue that many people care about and that the vast majority of Americans would care about if someone were able to explain everything involved in this issue.
Barr is also going to face a lot of heat from the GOP; see for instance Sean Hannity's attempts to portray him as someone who'd like to make crack and heroin legal. He's going to be ferociously attacked by he has no effective way to fight back against McCain. McCain's weakest point is immigration, yet he can't attack him on that issue since their positions are basically the same.
If Barr saw the light and decided to very aggressively go after all three major candidates on this issue he could have a very powerful impact on the presidential race. He'd have to explain everything involved, including topics that are frequently ignored such as the political power that foreign governments have been able to obtain inside the U.S. and the fact that illegal immigration is an indicator of political corruption. He'd also have to deflect attacks from those who support illegal activity, but that really isn't that difficult. And, he'd have to aggressively attack his opponents on this issue such as by sending his representatives to their campaign events to ask them embarrassing questions designed to point out the hugely obvious flaws in their policies and designed to discredit them.
However, based on what I've seen so far it looks like Barr isn't going to run an "insurgent" campaign but simply one designed with other goals in mind.
5/17/08 UPDATE: Barr appeared on the Glenn Beck show a few days ago and continued to sound as sleazy and misleading as his opponents as well as other hacks who support massive and/or illegal immigration. Asked whether he'd "ship [illegal aliens] home or not", Barr said:
When you find them, you ship them home, absolutely.
What Barr forgot to mention was that, based on what he's said earlier, that would only occur after having granted an amnesty, and he's only referring to those who came after the amnesty or those who didn't take part in the amnesty. He then said that he'd fine employers and was asked about the border fence. He said he wouldn't build it:
First of all, I think it would be terribly costly. And whatever border fence you build, people are going to find a way to get around it, go under it, go over it, somehow... I think it would look absolutely awful. And even though it`s a fence to keep people from coming in, as opposed to the Berlin wall, it gives the same impression. Not the impression I want to give the world about America.
Needless to say, it's not difficult to find other hacks saying something almost identical to that.
Candid emails from opponents Oklahoma's anti-illegal immigration law (1804, Harry Coates, Spirit Bank)
Oklahoma passed an anti-illegal immigration bill (1804) last year and various forces are apparently trying to weaken it or repeal it. Late last month the Oklahoma Bankers Association released a study claiming that the bill could cost residents of the state $1.8 billion (link). One of the opponents is state Sen. Harry Coates, whose family just happens to own a roofing company.
Now, some apparently embarrassing emails from the opponents have been obtained (link). I'm not familiar with the players and the post isn't entirely clear, but those mentioned include "Lobbyist Jamie Longacre, who represents Spirit Bank CEO Kell Kelly... Dick Rush [State Chamber of Oklahoma]."
UPDATE: Coates now says the emails were stolen. His opponent accuses him of being paranoid.
David Price, Ciro Rodriguez question Michael Chertoff on fence waiver; "contingency miles"; hilarious posturing
Earlier today, Department of Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff spoke to Congress about the waivers he's using to apparently build part of the border fence."This is a major exercise of the waiver authority which goes beyond, I think, what many of us anticipated," House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman David Price, D-N.C., said to Chertoff Thursday.They didn't, however, discuss withholding funds. And, there's apparently a little creativity involved:
Price said Congress also instructed the department to conduct consultations with local officials and residents before constructing fencing and gave the department flexibility to not build fencing. Price said that the department needs to complete only about 360 miles of fencing to meet its goal for the year, and questioned why laws were being waived to build 470 miles.
Rep. Ciro Rodriguez, D-Texas, said he was not against fencing but does not believe the department has held adequate consultations with residents in his district.
"Because you have the right that doesn't mean you ought to have taken that right," he said. "I think in all honesty in some cases you've been misinformed by your own people."
He acknowledged that 470 miles of fencing is more than the department plans to construct, saying the additional fencing represents "contingency miles" or might be used to tur