associated press: Page 1
Alicia Caldwell of the Associated Press writes "US sharply cutting deportations" :
President Barack Obama is on pace this year to deport the fewest number of immigrants since at least 2007, even as he has postponed until after Election Day his promised unilateral action that could shield millions more from deportation.
Border Patrol dep. chief: 140,000 unaccompanied children (UACs) might cross border in 2015, around ten times 2012 - 06/06/14
Politicians and others in the U.S. have sent the message that the we aren't serious about immigration enforcement and that we're going to implement comprehensive immigration reform. That message hasn't gone unheeded in Latin America, and thousands of unaccompanied children have responded by trying to cross the border illegally.
Increased immigration of Hispanics is a vital, urgent concern to Hispanic leaders: it means more money and power for them. Those leaders - together with those who want more immigration for other reasons - try to convince political candidates (such as Mitt Romney) that if only they'd go weak on immigration Hispanics would flock to support them, en masse.
An Associated Press / Univision poll of Hispanics conducted earlier this year  shows lukewarm support for assimilation, that Hispanics are mostly associating with other Hispanics, that many Hispanics consider "Hispanic" to be a race, and low support for the GOP. Demographic information is at .
Per this biased Associated Press article, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona helped deport more than 26,000 illegal aliens under the 287g program. That's of course without that state's new immigration law, which is set to take effect tomorrow. Maricopa was responsible for about one-quarter of all those deported under 287g (115,841 total); 64 local agencies are part of the 287g program.
The Los Angeles County's Sheriff's Office, a distant second to Maricopa, helped find 13,784 immigrants who were later deported or left the country. The Sheriff's Office's agreement with the federal government allows it to check its jails for deportable immigrants, but not to enforce immigration laws during street patrols. A renewal of the agreement is under negotiation.
An estimated 10.8 million people, about 26 percent of the state's population, are living illegally in California, compared with 460,000, about 12 percent, in Arizona.
"These statistics bear out that you have rogue sheriffs in certain counties that are bent on targeting immigrants," Lin said.
Obviously, the AP's statistics are wrong, rendering Lin's concerns even more questionable than they would be with the correct statistics. And, what she refers to as "rogue" is simply effective immigration enforcement rather than what the ACLU would prefer: little or no enforcement at all.
Juliana Barbassa of AP promotes UFW's anti-American "joke" (yes, Americans do field work) - 06/25/10
Juliana Barbassa of the Associated Press offers "Immigrant farm workers' challenge: Take our jobs" (link) about a new satirical campaign from the United Farmworkers of America. The UFW's campaign is anti-American; if you aren't familiar with this story see the last link. This post only deals with Barbassa's treatment.
According to the Labor Department, three out of four farm workers were born abroad, and more than half are illegal immigrants.
Apparently Jullianna Barbassa can't do math: that means that one out of four farm workers were born in the U.S., and somewhere between one quarter and one half of them are citizens or legal workers. So, plenty of Americans do in fact do farm work despite the fact that the UFW - and their promoters like Barbassa - would have you think otherwise. Why didn't she point out to them how the very statistics they provide undercut their already-weak argument?
Then, she gets cute:
The latest establishment attempt to support illegal immigration and undercut those who want stronger border enforcement comes from Martha Mendoza of the Associated Press. The original AP title is "AP Impact: US-Mexico border isn't so dangerous"  and it's based on statistics contained in a new FBI report  and on data they received via a FOIA request from Customs and Border Protection (CBP):
It's one of the safest parts of America, and it's getting safer.
It's the U.S.-Mexico border, and even as politicians say more federal troops are needed to fight rising violence, government data obtained by The Associated Press show it actually isn't so dangerous after all.
The top four big cities in America with the lowest rates of violent crime are all in border states: San Diego, Phoenix, El Paso and Austin, according to a new FBI report. And an in-house Customs and Border Protection report shows that Border Patrol agents face far less danger than street cops in most U.S. cities.
1. Its about 236 miles from Austin to the nearest major Mexican city (Nuevo Laredo). San Antonio is closer to the border, and it's a larger city. Considering that their crime rates are about the same  it's unclear why she used Austin. However, both cities aren't really in the border area, unless you have a Washington DC mindset. Phoenix is also not on the border. Unfortunately, the FBI statistics only show larger cities, and the only larger cities that are right on the border are El Paso and San Diego. It's misleading to pretend that statistics for a college, high-tech, and administration center like Austin that's hours from the border is representative of border crime.
2. The violent crime rate for Phoenix is 0.5% per capita, but that for Tucson is 0.65% per capita. The latter city is closer to the border but still not on the border.
3. Those who enter illegally over the border won't necessarily stay there: most will move to other cities and will have an impact on those cities' crime rates. Mendoza's article doesn't mention that.
4. Violent crime only tells part of the story. See all of the entries on the immigration terrorism page. And, just as pernicious is the possibility that local officials have been corrupted into allowing drug or human smuggling.
5. Crimes against illegal aliens stand a lesser chance of being reported than crimes against others; such crimes won't appear in the statistics.
6. The article contains "I have to say, a lot of this is way overblown," said Gary Brasher of Tuboc, Arizona, who is president of the Coalition for a Safe and Secure Border. From their site , make of it what you will:
[A permanent checkpoint on the I-19 corridor between Nogales and Tucson] is essentially a monument to over 3 decades of this obviously flawed strategy that will be circumvented by smugglers. This will inevitably result in illegal and violent activities moving into our neighborhoods along the I-19 corridor... It is also important to note that it is not the intent of the CSSB or this blog to criticize the service of the men and women serving in the Border Patrol. In fact, many residents in this area have been victims of crime perpetrated by smugglers and the Border Patrol has often been the first responders.
7. The article contains:
"Politicians are hyping up this incredible fear across the country about the border, but these numbers show these are lies being perpetrated on the American public," said immigrant advocate Isabel Garcia at Tucson-based Derechos Humanos. "The warnings about violence are just an excuse to crack down on migrants who want to work and be with their families."
Read about her at the links.
The online tool E-Verify, now used voluntarily by employers, wrongly clears illegal workers about 54 percent of the time, according to Westat, a research company that evaluated the system for the Homeland Security Department. E-Verify missed so many illegal workers mainly because it can't detect identity fraud, Westat said.
...E-Verify correctly identified legal workers 93 percent of the time, Westat said. However, previous studies have not quantified how many immigrants were fooling the E-Verify system. Much of the criticism of E-Verify has focused on whether U.S. citizens and legal immigrants with permission to work were falsely flagged as illegal workers.
Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who is writing the Democrats' immigration bill and has fought expanding E-Verify because of its flaws, said Wednesday that the fact that E-Verify was inaccurate so often shows that it is not an adequate tool.
1. No doubt additional checks could be built into the system to increase its accuracy.
2. The MPI is only "non-partisan" in the New York Times sense.
3. The reasons why Schumer opposes expanding the system probably go a bit beyond just concerns about its flaws; he's never shown much interest in immigration enforcement.
...Six months after 50,000 immigrants and their supporters marched in downtown Atlanta to protest legislation that cracks down on illegal immigrants, the same organizers rallied with a much smaller but similarly vocal crowd...."We want to open the door," said one of the pro immigration rally organizers, Teodoro Maus, 'former Mexican consul in Atlanta. "How they do it is a matter of negotiation."
Maus had harsh words for the small group of protesters with their bullhorns telling them to get out of the U.S.' "I think they are xenophobic," he said. "They are racists and they are hiding their racism in 'legal or not legal.'"
Also quotes a protester as denying that he's a racist and saying in effect that some of his best friends are Mexicans. Obviously, some people need to learn how to respond to MSM setups designed to make them look bad:
One of the protesters, hot sauce company owner Jerry Gualtieri, insisted he is not a racist. "I have very good Mexican friends," Gualtieri, wearing a belt buckle emblazoned with a Confederate flag, said. Just as he spoke, a fellow protester walked by with a sign that read, "Mexico is not our friend."
Obviously, there's a difference between "Mexico" and "Mexicans" (and, "Mexican-Americans".)
Asked about the sign, Gualtieri said there's nothing contradictory about his position."It's because 85 percent of the illegals happen to be Mexican," he said. "We're a nation of laws."
A better response would have been pointing out Mexico's aggressive attempts to send us people and their aggressive attempts to influence U.S. policy. Maybe Weber could have learned something.Note that in past articles the AP has failed to note Maus' previous affiliation, but that's changed for at least this and one other recent article.
"I think the public rightfully is still making it an issue... I don't have a problem with that. I don't know if I would have to bother to make it an issue, because I think that members of the electorate still want answers... I think it's a fair question just like I think past associations and past voting records. All of that is fair game... ...the McCain-Palin campaign didn't do a good enough job in that area. We didn't call out Obama and some of his associates on their records and what their beliefs were, and perhaps what their future plans were, and I don't think that was fair to voters to not have done our job as candidates and a campaign to bring to light a lot of things that now we're seeing manifest in the administration."
UPDATE: She's commented on this on her Facebook page, see .
Meanwhile, her supporters will most likely do things that are ineffective and things that won't strike back at her detractors.
If you're a Palin supporter, here's what you have to do: point out that many of those detractors have lied about the basic, easy-to-understand facts of this matter. You have to work to discredit those detractors. Simply saying they're wrong won't cut it: you have to take steps to discredit them and point out to their audience that they aren't credible. That is the only way to blunt attacks from those detractors: point out to their audience that they can't be trusted. And, you have to do that while only discussing facts, not wild theories.
Note that you don't have to believe that Obama was born outside the U.S. All you have to be able to do is understand what a fact is and how it differs from belief. Believing that Obama was born in Hawaii is perfectly valid, but claiming that he's definitively proved it is not because, while he's provided evidence, he has not provided definitive proof. That doesn't mean he was born outside the U.S. or isn't eligible to be president. I'm not trying to prove he was born outside the U.S. or isn't eligible. My angle on this story involves those who can't get their facts straight. My goal is to discredit those sources in order to improve their coverage of this and a myriad of other issues.
There's a list of those who've lied about the facts in the Obama citizenship issue. What I need Palin supporters to do is to find those listed discussing this issue and then in comments on their posts point out to their readers how they lied about the basic facts of this matter. Please do not engage in wild theories, only facts. Point out to their readers that they lied or misled about the basic facts of this matter and point out to their readers that they aren't credible.
UPDATE 2: Once again, this isn't about "kicking Obama out of office", at least from my perspective. This is about using this issue to discredit MSM and sub-MSM sources who've lied about the basic facts of this issue. Whatever someone's position on this issue, the MSM and others are going to use it against Palin time and time again. And, when they do that, they're going to link to "debunkers" like FactCheck. If people would concentrate on helping me discredit FactCheck using the fact that they've lied about this and other issues, that would blunt their attacks. It would also, for instance, reduce FactCheck's ability to mislead about illegal aliens and healthcare. And, it would send a message to the Beltway establishment that they can't just make things up, which they have done about aspects of this issue. They're going to attack Palin and others over this issue, and her supporters and others aren't fighting back in the right way but are more or less just helping the attackers. I made that point over four months ago, but few others have caught on.
UPDATE 3: Beth Fouhy and Justin Juozapavicius of the Associated Press offer "Sarah Palin's fans push for 2012 presidential run" (link). It shows a) how the MSM will use this issue to try to discredit Palin, and b) how her supporters who aren't trying to discredit the MSM are in effect helping the MSM with their goal. These are the 9th through 11th paragraphs:
"B.O. scares me," said Miki Booth, 59, of the president, adding that Palin "is as American as it gets."... Palin played into that fear on a radio show Thursday, telling host Rusty Humphries that voters "rightfully" have questions about the legitimacy of Obama's birth certificate. The so-called birther conspiracy around Obama's U.S. citizenship has been widely discredited, and state health officials in Hawaii have repeatedly confirmed that the president was born there in 1961... Palin later backed off the comment on her Facebook page, saying she had never questioned Obama's citizenship but believes that voters and reporters had a right to ask candidates whatever questions they wish.
Most of those who are undecided on Palin or who could be persuaded will read those paragraphs and probably side with the MSM in thinking she might be a bit "off". And, her supporters can't do anything about it unless they actually take the steps to discredit the MSM. For an example of that, Beth Fouhy and Justin Juozapavicius are lying: there's only been one statement from Hawaiian officials in which they stated he was born there, the one from 7/272009. The first statement, from 10/31/08, only said they had a valid certificate on file and, since Hawaii issues valid certificates for those born outside their state the 2008 statement was ambiguous. Fouhy and Juozapavicius said there were multiple confirmations, when in fact there was only one. If Palin supporters don't like AP articles such as the above, they need to start pointing out lies like that. The AP and the rest of the MSM are extremely vulnerable when it comes to their credibility, but if few are willing to point out their lies they'll just keep on lying.
 On Facebook, Palin has posted the following:
Voters have every right to ask candidates for information if they so choose. I’ve pointed out that it was seemingly fair game during the 2008 election for many on the left to badger my doctor and lawyer for proof that Trig is in fact my child. Conspiracy-minded reporters and voters had a right to ask... which they have repeatedly. But at no point – not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews – have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States.
That's not going to have much of an impact: the HuffPost, HotAir, the MSM, and all the rest are still going to call her a "Birther", whether her supporters like it or not. The only way to blunt their attacks is using the method discussed above.
NAS-revised Census Bureau stats: almost 1 in 6 U.S. residents in poverty (+Hope Yen lies) - 10/20/09
The Census Bureau has released new poverty statistics that may show even more U.S. residents are below the poverty line than previously thought. The new statistics - which are more "experimental" figures and not the official figures - show that almost 1 in 6 U.S. residents are below the poverty line.
The Boy Scouts are making their debut "en espanol," with an advertising campaign launched Thursday and a soon-to-come Spanish-language Scout Handbook intended to draw Latinos to the ranks of the nearly century-old organization.
The Spanish-language campaign, called "Valores para toda la vida," translated as "Values for life," includes television, radio and online spots that speak to the nation's largest minority in their language.
The outreach is intended to keep the Scouting movement relevant and growing as the country's cultural landscape shifts... ...The country also looks different than it did 30 years ago...
Of course, what Barbassa says contradicts the frequently made claims about Hispanic assimilation; if that weren't an issue no one (outside people like Nativo Lopez) would call Spanish "their language". See the immigration tradition fallacy summary for more on that. And, while there are assuredly millions of Hispanics in the U.S. who aren't fluent in English, the great majority of those are illegal aliens, the citizen children of illegal aliens, elderly family members of legal immigrants, and so on. On the other hand, the great majority of citizen children of legal immigrants will be English speakers. Which calls into question who exactly the Boy Scouts see as their target market. And, rather than encouraging cultural separatism, the Boy Scouts should be encouraging assimilation by having just one Guide.
One of the reasons why the public appears so wary about Obama’s health-care plans is due to all the misinformation out there. Majorities in [a new NBC News poll] believe the plans would give health insurance coverage to illegal immigrants (55%), would lead to a government takeover of the health system (54%), and would use taxpayer dollars to pay for women to have abortions (50%) -- all claims that nonpartisan fact-checkers say are untrue about the legislation that has emerged so far from Congress. Additionally, 45% think the reform proposals would allow the government to make decisions about when to stop providing medical care for the elderly, which also isn’t true.
1. According to FAIR, illegal aliens would be able to obtain coverage, at least given the state of one of the bills (link). More importantly, Obama himself says that his goal is to get around giving healthcare to illegal aliens by simply legalizing them first. And, he wants illegal alien children to be covered under his plan.
3. The other two points are basically a matter of opinion and forecasting. Since a national healthcare scheme wouldn't have unlimited resources, some form of rationing would have to come into play, and that would involve the government deciding that some groups of people get more resources than others.
UPDATE: Calvin Woodward of the Associated Press offers what's called by the Washington Post "FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root" (link). It came out about 12 hours after the First Read article, it addresses the same poll in the same way, and it's also misleading. Woodward states that "[t]he proposals being negotiated do not provide coverage for illegal immigrants." See the first above. On abortion, Woodward basically admits that critics could be right: "[y]et abortion guidelines are not yet clear for the government-supervised insurance exchange. There is strong sentiment in Congress on both sides of the issue."
The Democrats’ bill in the House, H.R. 3200, contains gaping loopholes that will allow illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded benefits. And these loopholes are no accident.
The legislation contains no verification mechanism to ensure that illegal immigrants do not apply for benefits. Republicans offered an amendment to close this loophole — it would have required verification using the existing methods that are already in place to verify eligibility for other federal benefits programs. But, when they were asked to put the language of the bill where their words were, in a party-line vote, House Democrats rejected the amendment to require verification and close this loophole.
The bill also leaves open the possibility that if one citizen family member is eligible for benefits, then the entire family — including illegal immigrants — is also eligible for the benefits.
As previously discussed, Youtube is soliciting questions to be asked of Barack Obama at his healthcare townhall on July 1, 2009. Since I'm not a healthcare expert and since, unlike many others, I know my limitations, I decided to go meta instead. I was able to successfully add the following video to the list of replies here. (Note: I took a screengrab in case it goes missing like others did for the CNN/Youtube debate).
Here's the script:
My Question for President Obama's July 1 Healthcare Town Hall Meeting
Here's my question: Is this contest a sham?
Everyone else asking a question might have valid concerns...
but, they aren't experts on healthcare policy.
If we want a real debate, wouldn't it involve your experts being asked very tough questions by a wide spectrum of opposition experts?
Isn't Youtube setting you up with easy questions that you can use to promote your policies...
rather than trying to make you defend your policies to those who are very familiar with these issues?
And, with all the Hollywood production values you've come to expect, here's the video:
[The] meeting included questions from a single-payer advocate, a liberal activist from Health Care for Americans now, and a member of the SEIU, who asked what she could do to help Obama pass health care reform.
According to the first link, Obama even worked in an "I feel your pain" moment:
The president asks her to come over to him – he says he will work with her to try and find help, but right now, he doesn’t want her to be alone. Now he explains why she is an example of why the system is broken... “Debbie, you are exhibit A,” the president says to the woman, before repeating the commitment to get health care reform this year.
Seriously: this is how things are done in totalitarian countries.
[Debbie Smith from the Exhibit A quote above] is a volunteer for Organizing for America, Obama's political operation within the Democratic National Committee. She obtained her ticket through the White House...
But details on exactly how to do those things were generally lacking in his hour-long town hall forum before a friendly, hand-picked audience in a Washington suburb...
Some of Obama's questioners Wednesday were from friendly sources, including a member of the Service Employees International Union and a member of Health Care for America Now, which organized a Capitol Hill rally last week calling for an overhaul...
A national advocacy group recommended Wednesday improving the country's beleaguered immigration court system by reforming how judges are selected and promoting impartiality.
A study by Appleseed, a non-profit that works to reform the justice system, also suggested improving the accuracy of translations, reducing use of videoconferencing for hearings and ensuring court representation for immigrants.
Then, you learn more about the group from pages like this or this, including that they're linked to George Soros and the Tides Foundation. Then, you realize this is yet another head in the Soros hydra designed to block enforcement of our immigration laws.
U.S. airport officials and border agents waved people through Monday with little or no additional screening for Mexico’s deadly swine flu - a far more muted reaction than the extreme caution elsewhere around the world.
At the main pedestrian border crossing between El Paso and Mexico’s Ciudad Juarez, a handful of people wore protective masks and officials handed out a swine flu flier.
But there were no extra screenings for swine flu, and it mostly looked like a typical day at the border. Faced with a new and unforeseen threat, people entering the country who said they felt unwell were questioned about their symptoms. But there were no reports of anyone refused entry.
It might be a good time for the House Republicans to drop everything else and pass an emergency resolution demanding that Janet Napolitano starts taking the threat of a flu pandemic seriously. While the article mentions that "millions of doses of flu-fighting medicine from a federal stockpile" are being sent to border states, we also need to minimize the chances of the flu being spread far and wide in the U.S. The way to do that is to a) actually do something about illegal immigration, and b) more closely monitor who enters the country through ports of entry.