new mexico: Page 1
Gary Johnson's immigration position disqualifies him for president or anything else (Our America Initiative, New Mexico) - 06/23/10
Former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson started the "Our America Initiative" last year, possibly as a precursor to a presidential run. He's a libertarian and that means two things: a) he might as well save his donors the money because he's never going to get mainstream support, and b) he's wrong.
How he's wrong about immigration will be discussed below. First, here are two snippets showing his thinking, such as it is:
New Mexico gave out over 1000 driver's licenses to illegal aliens, others with bogus documents; Arizona no longer trusts NM licenses - 06/14/09
In 2003, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson signed a law that allowed that state to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens, and when he was running for president he continued to support the bill. And, since that time over one thousand probable illegal aliens have gotten licenses from that state using bogus documents.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) tries tying ICE's hands on immigration raids; Mexico-linked ACLU cheers - 05/20/08
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.
FBI agents on Wednesday busted 10 people they termed "special interest illegal aliens" for allegedly trying to use fraudulent documents to get New Mexico drivers licenses.
...While the FBI isn't saying which countries the 10 came from, the news release said "certain countries are associated with special national security concerns," and that using the term "special interest alien" depends on which a given person is from.
According to the news release, investigators are still working on the investigation, and believe that dozens of "special interest illegal aliens" may have obtained New Mexico licensees using fraudulent documents.
As in "dude ranch":
Brooks Brothers suit jacket turns out not to go so well with hiking.
Leaving the Great Liberal Northeast for seemingly the first time, pundit Matt Yglesias recently traveled to Taos, New Mexico. I spent a fair amount of time typing out an unheeded comment suggesting that he travel further south and visit Las Cruces, El Paso, and Carlsbad and also that he take a hike at the White Sands National Monument. It's a good thing he didn't take my advice: he probably would have done it in a tuxedo.
In a show of solidarity with, you know, everyone else, he says "Middle America goes on vacation". And, he titles a picture of someone with a baby carrier "Ambitious" ("This woman was actually carrying her daughter on her back throughout a mile-long trail.") First, a mile is nothing, especially since it appears to have been a ranger-led nature trail for tourists and thus probably wasn't in the least bit difficult. On a serious note, one wonders how someone who's such a dude could comment on matters affecting the Southwest such as massive immigration.
The AP offers a video report here that Yahoo or they subtitle with the following:
Visit Columbus, New Mexico, where some community leaders fear that blocking immigrant smuggling could put the town out of business.
While I didn't watch the video I have a pretty good idea of what it will and won't cover. They might give an ironic tip o' the hat to Columbus being the town where Pancho Villa conducted his infamous raid. But, they probably will treat transnational corruption as a wonderful good.
Dear Archbishop Michael Sheehan of the New Mexico archdiocese:
I read that you want us to show "compassion" to "immigrants". In fact, you say: "We don't condone illegal entry, but when someone is here, we try to take care of them."
Let me try to put this in a way that you might understand. (Regular readers are invited to skip this post since you already know this, but the archbishop probably doesn't.)