March 31, 2007

Gentle Matthew Dowd turns on President Bush

In what might turn out to be an April Fool's Day joke, the New York Times offers "Ex-Aide Details a Loss of Faith in the President" about former Bush chief campaign strategist Matthew Dowd becoming disenchanted with Our Leader:

He criticized the president as failing to call the nation to a shared sense of sacrifice at a time of war, failing to reach across the political divide to build consensus and ignoring the will of the people on Iraq. He said he believed the president had not moved aggressively enough to hold anyone accountable for the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and that Mr. Bush still approached governing with a "my way or the highway" mentality reinforced by a shrinking circle of trusted aides...

"I really like him, which is probably why I'm so disappointed in things... ...I think he's become more, in my view, secluded and bubbled in... ...I'm a big believer that in part what we're called to do - to me, by God; other people call it karma - is to restore balance when things didn't turn out the way they should have... ...Just being quiet is not an option when I was so publicly advocating an election... ...[Deciding to join the Bush campaign was] almost like you fall in love... I was frustrated about Washington, the inability for people to get stuff done and bridge divides. And this guy's personality - he cared about education and taking a different stand on immigration... ...I think we should design campaigns that appeal not to 51 percent of the people... but bring the country together as a whole... ...[In the future] I wouldn't be surprised if I wasn't walking around in Africa or South America doing something that was like mission work... ...I do feel a calling of trying to re-establish a level of gentleness in the world."

Awwww. Did the reporter give him a hug? This has got to be a joke, but if it isn't and he's never able to work for the GOP again, then too bad: he should have figured out that Bush was up to no good years ago and at the least quit the campaign. Of course, as even the NYT reporter points out, his completely voluntary confession "in some ways tracks the public arc of Mr. Bush's political fortunes". Some rats are apparently given to histrionic displays as they flee sinking ships.

He also fingers the only presidential candidate who appeals to him as Barack Obama and what he calls his "message of unity". And, of course, note that he still thinks Bush's immigration schemes are acceptable.

And, after the Bush success, he went on to work for Arnold Schwarzenegger, so he's partly responsible for Arnie's rush to the center.

Of course, there's the possibility that this is just a Dowd - or even Karl Rove - scheme, with Dowd going to work for a Bush-friendly candidate who'll reach for the center, with kindness, corporatism, gentleness, corruption, hugs, and massive immigration for all.

Posted to Politics at 02:52 PM

March 30, 2007

Scratch Mitt Romney off your list (Jeb Bush possible VP)

As previously discussed, the Mitt Romney campaign includes a few people linked to Jeb Bush. Now, Romney says his list of potential vice-presidential candidates includes Newt Gingrich, South Carolina governor Mark Sanford and SC Senator Jim DeMint, and... Jeb Bush.

Even as a trial balloon and as a meaningless shout-out to the person from whom he got a few staffers, that's a scary thought and one that should immediately disqualify him from any further consideration. We can't afford four or eight more years of Bush policies.

Posted to Politics at 12:37 PM

March 29, 2007

Dr. Richard Land wants to hear from you about immigration matters

Dr. Richard Land is the president of the Southern Baptist Convention, and earlier today he appeared with Senator Teddy Kennedy and others at a Washington DC press conference to support immigration "reform" (aka a massive amnesty):

"...We also have a Biblical mandate to act compassionately for those that are in needm, Matthew 25... To love our neighbors as ourselves. Matthew 22. And to do onto others as we would have them do onto us, Matthew chapter 7, verse 12..."

Unlike other "leaders" you have a chance to speak to him one-on-one and tell him how he's wrong: he conducts a radio show each Saturday. I urge everyone to call in and ask him tough questions about what he supports, and let him know about all the aspects of this issue that both he and some of his listeners are no doubt unaware. There's a good chance that a large part of his flock will hear it and he might have to choose between supporting amnesty and being taken seriously by his congregation.

The show is called Richard Land Live! and it's on Saturday from 12pm to 3pm. The call-in number is 888-Faith 56 (888-324-8456). You can listen to the streaming version via links at his site: richardlandlive.com He's got call screeners, so make sure you can weave your question into one of the show's topics or otherwise get past the screener and get on the air.

Then, upload a tape recording of the *broadcast* (not the telephone call) to Youtube, and let's let everyone else know why he's wrong.

UPDATE: The press conference was organized by "Faith in Public Life", and they inform us that in addition to Land those present included "Rev. Sam Rodriguez, Executive Director of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference... Senators Kennedy, Menendez, Graham and Salazar, and Representatives Gutierrez and Flake." There are videos of the confab here: blog.faithinpubliclife.org/2007/03/faith_and_congressional_leader.html

That page has a comments form, and I suggest leaving comments on that and other entries designed to show how they're wrong.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 07:32 PM

White House TWP illegal alien amnesty PowerPoint presentation

U.S. News has uploaded a PowerPoint presentation the White House has regarding their new illegal alien amnesty scheme in this PDF file. Even by the abysmally low standard of other Bush administration plans, this is idiotic. Most of the provisions in there would not appeal to even the most cravenly corrupt Democrat, so this isn't a good bargaining ploy. And, it allows the far-left illegal immigration supporters (see the Kevin Appleby quote below) and racial power groups to portray the Bush administration as a bunch of meanies, which doesn't seem to square with their supposed play for the "Hispanic vote". The only ones who would support this plan would be corrupt growers and food processors and a fairly small number of completely corrupt GOP Senators.

Not only does it make no sense, it's dangerous. One of the provisions involves a national ID card for we citizens:

Initial implementation of secure identification tools for all Americans and aliens seeking employment... Legal U.S. residents seeking work will use a high-security proof of identity and citizenship... To avoid fraud, racial profiling, and failure of EEVS system, it will also be necessary for Americans seeking work in the future to use secure IDs

It also has a vague indentured servitude flavor to it:

Seasonal workers would contract with their employers, guaranteeing that the laborer will be available for the duration of the season

- A seasonal worker may leave a contracted job, but if so he will have to leave the country and go through a one-year cooling off period out of the U.S.

And, it contains provisions oddly similar to remarks Mitt Romney has made, such as the "probationary registration of aliens" and "universe of illegals seeking adjustment will be known".

And, I was right in my assumption that its "triggers" for the amnesty would be based on spending and planning and such rather than a reduction in the number of illegal aliens; see the end of this post.

There are two visas involved: the "Y Visa" for a new "guest" worker scheme, and the "Z Visa" for current illegal aliens, giving them legal working permission.

* The Y Visa is further broken down into a "main program" ("In U.S. 2 years, then 6 months at home, 2 renewals") and a "seasonal program" ("9 months in U.S./3 months at home, indefinitely renewable").

* The Z Visa (which I'll call the "legal permanent underclass" visa) is indefinitely renewable, and requires a fine of $2000 at every three-year renewal mark, together with a payment of $1500 for a total of $3500 every three years.

From the U.S. News report:

[U.S. News reporter Angie C. Marek] says the new plan has made a lot of the White House's former allies in the immigrant-advocacy community mighty unhappy. Temporary guest workers in this plan would have a tough time getting any sort of citizenship. Under the visa program outlined by the White House, workers can stay in the United States for two years, at which point they'll have to return home for six months, a process that can be repeated two times.

The fee to gain citizenship for immigrants currently in the country illegally would also jump from a proposed $2,000 to about $10,000.

Tom Snyder, national political director of the union UNITE Here, compared the measure with a "21st-century version of the Bracero program" in a conference call with reporters today. And Laura Reiff, cochair of the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, a business group that worked with the White House last year on the guest-worker proposals, called the measure "entirely unworkable."

And, from this:

"For us it's a no go," said Angela Kelley, deputy director of the advocacy group National Immigration Forum...

"President Bush said family values don't stop at the Rio Grande. Evidently they do," said Kevin Appleby, director of Migration and Refugee Policy for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops...

Family unification, said [Teddy Kennedy], "has been an essential aspect of immigration policy since the history of this country" and letting immigrants work their way toward legalization is a framework for previous immigration bills that has received substantial support.

"You don't compromise on the morality of these issues," Kennedy said. "We're not going to."

I guess the people the White House was trying to impress don't want to reciprocate the Bush administration's affection.

UPDATE: More unhappy campers don't reciprocate their affection (seiu.org/media/pressreleases.cfm?pr_id=1384):

"SEIU is alarmed by the White House's proposed immigration reform plan which fails to address any of the key elements needed to pass practical, humane solutions to the current broken system. Taking a major step away from our nation's values and our history as a nation of immigrants, the White House plan would make inequality – rather than opportunity – the centerpiece of our immigration system and deny basic rights to our hardest workers."

Posted to Immigration2007a at 05:24 PM

PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians oppose driver's licenses, Arnold's healthcare for illegal aliens

The Public Policy Institute of California has released a statewide survey (link), and some of their findings are questionable due to a lack of specificity in the questions. And, some of the finding have been spun:

While political reform dominates conversation in the state capitol, Californians say immigration (19%) is the most important issue facing the state today, followed by jobs and the economy (13%), and education (12%). Despite their concerns about immigration, a majority of residents (60%) also believe immigrants are a benefit to the state because of their hard work and job skills, while one-third (33%) say they are a burden because of their use of public services.

It bears repeating that to the respondents, immigration is the #1 issue. Unfortunately, this is where their linguistic laxity starts to play a role.

Looking at the PDF (ppic.org/content/pubs/survey/S_307MBS.pdf), we see that the 19% number was apparently a free-form question allowing people to supply their own answer to the question "First, thinking about the state as a whole, what do you think is the most important issue facing people in California today?" In the top spot is "immigration, illegal immigration"; one wonders why they didn't break that out into two figures. The answer is probably because they were using codes for various answers and, as revealed elsewhere, they seem unable to grasp the differences between legal and illegal immigration.

See, for instance, another question which is referenced in the second paragraph above:

Please indicate which statement comes closest to your own view—even if neither is exactly right: [rotate] [1] Immigrants today are a benefit to California because of their hard work and job skills [or] [2] Immigrants today are a burden to California because they use public services.

Obviously, this is a fundamentally stupid question. It combines different types of immigration into one amorphous whole, and it assumes that the question is only one of financial matters rather than other issues such as the associated political corruption and such.

Then:

Should immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally be allowed to apply for work permits which would allow them to stay and work in the United States, or shouldn’t they be allowed to do that?

64% said yes, but I wonder whether this question could have been phrased better, such as by using "illegal aliens" rather than leading with "immigrants" then revealing they're here illegally.

The language in the previous question is a bit different from two others:

Do you favor or oppose providing health care coverage for illegal immigrants in California?

43% favor, 53% oppose.

Would you favor or oppose state legislation allowing illegal immigrants to get a California driver's license?

43% favor, 54% oppose.

Posted to California at 01:24 PM

March 28, 2007

White House's "tough cop" amnesty scheme (the "infinitely renewable Z visa")

Apparently the private talks the White House has been having with various Senators regarding yet another illegal alien amnesty scheme have reached the point where they're starting to leak the plan in order to get feedback. It appears to be the "tough cop" version of the Flake-Gutierrez massive giveaway; the goal is presumably to get a compromise that most Democrats and many Republicans could support. Most Americans would not support any kind of amnesty if they were aware of the massive legal and continued illegal immigration that would result.

Since they apparently want feedback, I suggest letting them know what you think. The White House comments line is 202-456-1111, and the switchboard is at 202-456-1414.

According to David Espo of the AP, the plan:

would make it harder for millions of illegal immigrants to gain citizenship than under legislation passed by the Senate last year, according to officials in both parties... These officials said the administration also suggested barring future guest workers who enter the country legally from bringing family members with them - a proposal unlikely to survive intact... The officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss about elements of a plan that was not yet public...

His sources are anonymous because they say the plan isn't yet public. One of them is probably Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, who's a named source in the LAT article (below).

As described by several officials, the proposal would allow currently illegal immigrants to stay in the United States under a new Z visa. They could apply for so-called green cards [legal permanent resident status], taking their place in line alongside men and women who are in the country legally and want citizenship, and would be required to undergo periodic background checks while waiting...

One of the hidden bonuses of last year's Senate scheme was that former illegal aliens who were applying for citizenship would actually have been put in the line ahead of those who've been waiting for a chance to come here legally. And, of course, they'd get to live here all the while unlike those legal immigrants. Since the line is in effect serial, "alongside" needs to be further specified.

The length of their wait would depend on the number of green cards available - a feature that officials in both parties said would mean millions of illegal immigrants would have to wait far longer than under the Senate bill of last year. "It takes longer and they've got to go through the same channels as everybody else," said one Republican who had been briefed on the administration's proposal...

Nicole Gaouette of the Los Angeles Times - who writes like an unaware college newspaper "reporter" giddily transcribing the remarks of government officials - says:

Some illegal immigrants would be given legal status through an infinitely renewable "Z visa." [Georg Cantor, call your office] Those who want to become U.S. citizens would have to leave the country and return legally. A guest worker program would be created that does not allow participants to bring family members, remain in the U.S. or become citizens. And, to ensure that employers can check on whether job applicants are legal, databases at Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration would be linked... The Republican group is also considering several "triggers," or benchmarks, that would have to be met on improved border security, work-site enforcement and document verification before other changes could be made.

The Flake-Guitierrez amnesty scam contains a similar provision, as does the Mike Pence scam, but both of those are not tied to performance regarding reduced illegal immigration; rather, they're tied to having resources in place or as little as having plans ready. I have little doubt that the White House scheme will be similar.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:16 PM

"How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico"

From this:

Fifty-three years ago, when newly elected Dwight Eisenhower moved into the White House, America's southern frontier was as porous as a spaghetti sieve. As many as 3 million illegal migrants had walked and waded northward over a period of several years for jobs in California, Arizona, Texas, and points beyond.

President Eisenhower cut off this illegal traffic. He did it quickly and decisively with only 1,075 United States Border Patrol agents - less than one-tenth of today's force. The operation is still highly praised among veterans of the Border Patrol.

Although there is little to no record of this operation in Ike's official papers, one piece of historic evidence indicates how he felt. In 1951, Ike wrote a letter to Sen. William Fulbright (D) of Arkansas. The senator had just proposed that a special commission be created by Congress to examine unethical conduct by government officials who accepted gifts and favors in exchange for special treatment of private individuals.

General Eisenhower, who was gearing up for his run for the presidency, said "Amen" to Senator Fulbright's proposal. He then quoted a report in The New York Times, highlighting one paragraph that said: "The rise in illegal border-crossing by Mexican 'wetbacks' to a current rate of more than 1,000,000 cases a year has been accompanied by a curious relaxation in ethical standards extending all the way from the farmer-exploiters of this contraband labor to the highest levels of the Federal Government."

...Profits from illegal labor led to the kind of corruption that apparently worried Eisenhower. Joseph White, a retired 21-year veteran of the Border Patrol, says that in the early 1950s, some senior US officials overseeing immigration enforcement "had friends among the ranchers," and agents "did not dare" arrest their illegal workers...

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:24 PM

Attempt to repeal Kansas' illegal alien tuition law sidelined by Democrat

Kansas has had its own version of the anti-American concept known as the DREAM Act since 2004. Rep. Lance Kinzer, R-Olathe, tried to repeal it, but a motion from Rep. Mark Treaster, D-Pretty Prairie, forced the bill into their Judiciary Committee, which is apparently the equivalent of trashcanning it. The bill also included provisions apparently similar to California's Prop. 187 and Arizona's Prop. 200.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:20 PM

Maryland Delegates want illegal aliens to take college discounts from U.S. citizens

Maryland's House of Delegates passed a law allowing illegal aliens to take college discounts from U.S. citizens. The national form of this anti-American concept is known as the DREAM Act.

One of the leaders on the other side is House Majority Leader Kumar Barve, who is of course a Democrat. And:

The debate became emotional on both sides. Del. Melvin Stukes, D-Baltimore City, said the lawmakers voting against the tuition break had "the mind-set" of the framers of the U.S. Constitution who counted slaves as three-fifths of a person. Some of his colleagues were offended by the remark, and Stukes later apologized on the floor.

An apparent list of those who voted on this, with links to their contact information, is in comment #14 here.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:17 PM

Illinois House approves driver's licenses for illegal aliens

The Illinois House approved HR 1100 earlier today, which would give illegal aliens "driving certificates" which supposedly would (link to text):

clearly state on its face that it may not be accepted by any federal agency for any federal identification or other official purpose... [and] ...may not be used to obtain a Firearm Owner's Identification Card...

To get it they'd need to:

provide a valid passport and any additional documents, as the Secretary may set forth by administrative rule ...provide the Secretary with a valid individual tax identification number issued by the federal Internal Revenue Service or social security number issued by the federal Social Security Administration ...a photo identity document, except that a non-photo identity document is acceptable if it includes both the person's full legal name and date of birth; ...the Secretary shall not accept any foreign document, other than a valid official passport, for purposes of this subparagraph...

From the foregoing, I gather at least three things: a) Illinois is nearly as corrupt a state as Chicago always has been, b) our Federal government is even more corrupt, giving out tax ID numbers (ITINs) knowing that many of the users are illegal aliens, and c) at least Mexican partisans haven't infiltrated Illinois to the extent that they've infiltrated California.

The last is because of the "foreign document" restriction; similar proposals in other states have allowed the use of Mexico's Matricula Consular card, which is nearly a guarantee that the bearer is an illegal alien.

Somewhat surprisingly, the AP report leads with the pro-American comments and buries the pro-illegal alien whine several paragraphs into their tale:

Bill Ketron has a warning for Illinois lawmakers: Be careful about letting illegal immigrants drive... The Tennessee state senator sponsored that state's 2004 law to create special driving "certificates" for illegal immigrants -- an idea being considered in Illinois... Now the program has been suspended, and Ketron is sponsoring legislation to kill it entirely. People used forged documents to obtain the certificates, he said, and some came from other states to fraudulently get certificates then go home and exchange them for regular licenses... "It's been a disaster," the Murfreesboro Republican said. "If they're proceeding with it (in Illinois), go into it with your eyes open."

Those on the pro-illegal immigration side include Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich (has said he'd sign it), Rep. Edward Acevedo, D-Chicago (the sponsor), the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police and their deputy director Laimutis Nargelenas, and the Illinois Sheriffs Association. Secretary of State Jesse White is either on the fence or trying to play both sides of it. Rep. Ron Stephens, R-Greenville is quoted in opposition.

Posted to Immigration_dls at 09:56 PM

STRIVE Act: a section-by-section summary

A 50-page PDF with a summary of the Gutierrez-Flake STRIVE Act - including some highlighted differences with last year's Senate bill 2611 - is available in a PDF at this page:

visalaw.com/2007/03/section-by-section-summary-of-strive.html

UPDATE: There's another analysis here. For instance:

...Even when the bill requires that additional vehicle barriers be built along the border, we have to consult with Mexican officials to solicit the views of Mexican communities, lessen tensions, and foster greater understanding! (sections 103, 123)... ...Employers are specifically allowed to lay-off American workers and replace them with "new" foreign workers as long as they lay-off the Americans more than 90 days before or after they file the petitions for the foreign workers. (section 402)... The bill claims to have tough criminal penalties to crack down on gang violence. However, the bill does not take the single most effective step to combat immigrant gang violence - it does not make make members of criminal street gangs deportable (as the House-passed Sensenbrenner-King bill did last Congress). (section 234)...

Posted to Immigration2007a at 09:10 PM

Flake-Gutierrez: seven amnesties in one; precursor to North American Union

This page looks at some of the provisions of the Flake-Gutierrez STRIVE amnesty, including the news that it includes no less than seven amnesties rolled into one. It also gives illegal aliens a huge benefit of the doubt in trying to prove they're eligible for the main amnesty.

And:

The true horror of H.R. 1645 is that it is the most explicit expression yet of the globalist elite's ambition to destroy United States sovereignty in favor of a European Union-style subcontinental government, including, of course, marriage with Mexico... For starters, they're moving the border. ...H.R. 1645 begins with "Title I—Border Enforcement" and "Subtitle C—Southern Border Security". ...But upon closer examination, theyre referring to Mexico’s southern border!

Posted to Immigration2007a at 03:54 PM

Bush's original "guest" worker scheme revealed

In this video segment from 2004, Margaret Spellings [1] described how Bush's original "guest" worker scheme would be open to *everyone*, specifically mentioning nurses, teachers, and high-tech workers. In brief, president Bush wanted to open (most of) the U.S. labor market to the world, including (previously) middle-class occupations.

Oddly enough, the Democrats completely failed to highlight Bush's disastrous, anti- and un-American plans during the 2004 elections. If they had, John Kerry would be president today.

So, why didn't they discuss Bush's horrific scheme?

[1] At the time, Margaret Spellings was a domestic policy assistant; now she's Secretary of Education. You may have seen her losing on Jeopardy! in November.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:59 PM

March 27, 2007

Will Dick Durbin block immigration "reform" (aka a massive amnesty)?

Could Senator Dick Durbin - an illegal immigration supporting hack who refered to himself and illegal aliens as "we" as in "we can win" - block immigration "reform" by trying to push for business-unfriendly H-1B related worker protections? From this:

...Durbin is considering the tougher standards for companies that want to bring temporary foreign workers into the country under the H-1B visa program. According to a summary of Durbin's draft proposal, before they could use such visas, companies would have to give a written pledge, or "attestation," that they made a good-faith effort to hire American workers first and that they were not displacing any American workers by bringing in non-U.S. employees... That would mark a substantial change. Today, companies can hire workers on the H-1B program simply by paying the prevailing wage in a certain job. The U.S. Customs & Immigration Service has said that there's an assumption companies will hire Americans first if there's no financial advantage to hiring foreign workers. But there's no requirement that they try to do so (see BusinessWeek.com, 2/8/07, "Work Visas May Work Against the U.S."). A Durbin spokesman said no one in the office, including the Senator, was prepared to comment on details in the proposal because they are not yet finalized...

If he was pushing for this alone, we could give him a modest brownie point or two. But, he's pushing this as part of an amnesty scheme. So, in that case, his grand gesture is like being grateful for someone just savagely kidney-punching America in the back rather than using a knife as they planned to do.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:24 PM

What Paula Zahn forgot: the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform gets money from the Irish government

Apparently CNN's "Paula Zahn Now" features a "People You Should Know" segment, and in a recent one she featured Niall O'Dowd, chairman of the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform. The link is little more than something the O'Dowd could have written himself. It ends with this:

In addition to leading the Irish Lobby for Immigration, O'Dowd also founded Irish America Magazine and Irish Voice newspaper in New York.

Of course, what she and her producers forgot to tell you is that the ILIR is partly funded by the Irish government. Most people don't take too kindly to foreign-funded groups trying to meddle in our internal politics, but a few people don't. The latter is Paula Zahn's target audience.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:14 PM

Wed. and Thu. are "National Call-in Days for Immigration Reform"

The Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform - which includes one group linked to the Mexican government and another with an alleged link - informs us that Thursday and Friday are their "National Call-in Days for Immigration Reform" (cirnow.org/file/754.pdf). I suggest you join in and call Congress, just make it clear that you oppose CCIR and the Flake-Gutierrez amnesty scheme.

Congressmen Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ) have just introduced bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform legislation. The immigration debate is moving forward and Congress needs to hear from you!

Call this number and follow the instructions to connect to your members of Congress:

1-800-417-7666

Tell your representative that we NEED COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM NOW! Comprehensive immigration reform is the solution to fixing our broken immigration system, and now is the time to act. Families, workers, and communities across the country are counting on Congress to get it done, get it right, and do it now.

You can help make it happen with your phone call. JOIN THE EFFORT!

Posted to Immigration2007a at 09:45 PM

I know I shouldn't do this, but...

I thought long and hard about whether I want to do this or not. "Isn't it mean and low-class to do something like this?" I asked myself. "Yes, it is, but it's also just a light-hearted jab, plus, it's not like you're doing something like this, and furthermore it's not like you're making fun of her Valley Girl way of speaking and plus it's not like you're ever going to meet her or anything and even if you did it I'm pretty sure you'd never get anywhere. Plus, consider it a satire about the whole idea of being a pundit. Yeah, that's it, it's commentary on punditism. So, just put it up for a bit and then delete it. Just do it, OK?" So, I did what I said to myself, and here it is:

Posted to Bloggage at 02:06 PM

March 26, 2007

Darryl Fears wants Washington Post to junk their comments

Howard "Howie" Kurtz offers the rather pointless "Online, Churls Gone Vile", which I only clicked because Memeorandum was running a link to it next to a pic of the Babe of Brentwood, and couldn't help myself. Anywho, discussing the commenting feature that the Washington Post gives logged-in readers, Kurtz says:

But Post reporter Darryl Fears is among those in the newsroom who believe the comments should be junked if offensive postings can't be filtered out in advance. "If you're an African American and you read about someone being called a porch monkey, that overrides any positive thing that you would read in the comments," he says. "You're starting to see some of the language you see on neo-Nazi sites, and that's not good for The Washington Post or for the subjects in those stories."

I've left a few comments on the WashPost's blogs, but I only appear to have left one on the news side. And, the link to the comments isn't exactly prominent. And, since the WaPo engages in editing, we don't know what was in comments that were deleted and how many were deleted.

Despite that, I think I'm going to go ahead and distrust Fears' judgment in this matter, due to his past habit of misleading about immigration matters. In addition to his name's link above, see:

Darryl Fears: the Democratic line on immigration
Illegal immigration supporters split over May 1 boycott
More pro-illegal immigration propaganda from the Washington Post
WaPo: immigration laws aren't being enforced, therefore they won't work

Posted to Miscellania at 04:39 PM

The SoCal Third World slums the Los Angeles Times helped create

The Los Angeles Times offers "The Southland's hidden Third World slums" about trailer parks in California's Coachella Valley (home of Palm Springs, Rancho Mirage, and other cities). We're told that one of the parks was dumping raw sewage into the Salton Sea, others have flowing sewage behind the trailers, many residents go without heat and even electricity, and, in short, three pages of horrors for we First Worlders. We're told:

The tenants are almost entirely Latino farm or construction workers. Many are in the United States legally, but plenty are not.

If all the illegal aliens in the parks left tomorrow, the conditions of those who are legal residents would improve due to market forces.

The bottom line in this matter is that those responsible for these parks are those who profit from employing their residents, and the enablers of those people. The Los Angeles Times fits squarely into the last category, excusing illegal immigration every chance they get. Sure, the L.A. Times (and almost all Democratic leaders) might want to help them out a bit by building them a community center or otherwise fluffing their pillows, but the last thing they want is for all that cheap labor to leave the country. It's a sweet deal for them: they get ethnic power, combined with cheap, compliant labor, combined with the warm feeling they get from writing stories like this to show how humanitarian and caring they are. But, they aren't willing to do anything about the root cause of the problems they complain about.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 03:17 PM

Carol Rose/ACLU Massachusetts compares ICE tactics to Slobodan Milosevic, ethnic cleansing

The American Civil Liberties Union is indirectly linked to the Mexican government and is a strong supporter of illegal immigration. Carol Rose - executive director of their Massachusetts chapter - (with help from their communications director Christopher Ott) pens the screed "Inhumane raid was just one of many" which should erase any doubts anyone could have that their group is not interested in doing what's in the U.S.'s best interests. They even finish by comparing ICE's tactics to those employed by Slobodan Milosevic.

They discuss an Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") plan called Operation Endgame (aclum.org/endgame.pdf) which supposedly has as its goal deporting all illegal aliens by 2012. I didn't read the whole thing and I don't know whether "all removable aliens" as used in the PDF refers to all 12 to 20 million illegal aliens, or just subsets of that number. What's clear, however, is that the ACLU wants to use due process as a cover for supporting illegal immigration, and they're willing to wave babies to do it:

The pace of raids will need to accelerate, however, in order to meet Endgame's aggressive deportation goals over the next five years. We'll see more of the surreal New Bedford-style tactics: arrest first, ask questions later. We'll hear more stories of the human suffering that results from such tactics: of nursing babies who become dehydrated when separated from their mothers, of 7-year-olds frantically looking for their missing mothers, and of minors being flown to distant states without adequate protection.

A very careful use of language; unlike the NYT, they didn't falsely accuse ICE of taking the baby away. Then, they engage in their "yes, but":

Obviously, the United States has the right to control who enters our country, as well as the right to deport those who are not authorized to be here. But the US Constitution also says that everyone's fundamental rights must be respected while it is being determined whether or not they have a right to be here.

Allow me to suggest that they read the definition of "Expedited Removal" from the PDF they provide:

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 authorizes the DHS to quickly remove certain inadmissible aliens from the U.S. The authority covers aliens who are inadmissible because they have no entry documents or because they have used counterfeit, altered, or otherwise fraudulent or improper documents. The authority covers aliens who arrive in, attempt to enter, or have entered the U.S. without having been admitted or paroled by an immigration officer at a port-of-entry. The DHS has the authority to order the removal, and the alien is not referred to an immigration judge except under certain circumstances after an alien makes a claim to legal status in the U.S. or demonstrates a credible fear of persecution if returned to his or her home country.

That would seem to assuage their concerns over "due process", no? Obviously, their goal is to tie the deportation system into knots. Then come the scare tactics:

Even most US citizens could not prove their citizenship on demand. If ICE raided your workplace, could you? If you're like most people, you don't carry documents such as your passport or birth certificate with you at all times. And in a free society, you shouldn't have to... [...much deleted...] Even US citizens, as well as immigrants who are here legally, will live with the fear of arrest.

Another careful use of language, in that the first paragraph only refers to U.S. citizens, and not legal immigrants. The latter are required to carry proof of their legality at all times, contradicting the second paragraph's claim. Native-born and even naturalized citizens will in almost all cases have little difficulty very quickly proving that they're citizens. The specter of citizens or legal immigrants being unjustly deported is tiny indeed; perhaps the ACLU would be good enough to provide us with recent examples of such cases.

Then, we get to the ethnic cleansing:

ICE tactics call to mind sinister human rights abuses from other parts of the world. The United States went to war to stop Slobodan Milosevic's attempt to "ethnically cleanse" Kosovo in 1999. We should ask ourselves how, just eight years later, we came to be carrying out a policy that involves such similar tactics -- lightning raids, mass arrests, packed detention centers, and mass deportations.

Anyone who directly or indirectly donates to the ACLU should think deeply about whether they want to support an organization that would make such a despicable charge.

It ends on this misleading statement:

We must stop it. It's time to bring operation Endgame itself to an end. We need an immigration policy that balances the right to control our borders with the civil liberties we must preserve in order to remain free.

I highly doubt that the ACLU really cares about "remaining free". Rather, their goal is to hide behind that in order to push a far-left agenda, including massive immigration of any kind.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 02:24 PM

Bill Richardson: up with Kennedy-McCain, down with Flake-Gutierrez (MyDD sponsored by SEIU)

Jonathan Singer conducted an SEIU-sponsored interview at MyDD with OAS "Special Envoy" Bill Richardson [1], and asked him a question about the latest amnesty scheme. Richardson is opposed to Gutierrez-Flake's "touchback" provision, even though the symbolic gesture of leaving the country to re-enter illegally could be done any time within six years and their staffers admitted that it could be as little as one day:

Richardson: I'd like to see the original Kennedy-McCain initiative, which established a path to legalization without the return that involves setting standards like if you speak English, if you pass a background check, if you pay a fine for coming illegally, you pay back taxes, you embrace American values and you don't get ahead of those who get here legally I think that provision is cleaner, it's clearer, it's more compassionate. You know it's divided up by certain years. You can be eligible for green card or some sort of guest worker pass. I believe that is far preferable. But I haven't seen Gutierrez'... Does it have that provision to return?

Singer: Yeah.

Richardson: I prefer the Kennedy-McCain version.

I'd leave a comment, but they'd probably delete it as they've done in the past.

Here's our Gutierrez-Flake roundup with links to all other posts on that topic.

[1] mydd.com/story/2007/3/26/25954/5752
Note that right at the top it says "[t]his coverage is sponsored by SEIU". On a related note, another blogger (Taylor Marsh) covered another event with sponsorship from the AFSCME (taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=25183).

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:13 AM

March 25, 2007

Here's another fun video

OK, this isn't as fun as the last one, but it's still fun or at least it was to me. I'm actually doing megajumps, bunnyhops, and advanced trials work, you just can't see it because of the camera angle:

If you don't like that one, watch this one instead.

Posted to OutdoorSports at 11:45 PM

Should you drop your links to Washington Monthly and Calpundit?

A week ago I posted about Washington Monthly editing comments without noting they were edited.

But, there's a completely selfish reason why every blogger should re-examine their links to both Washington Monthly and Calpundit.com (Kevin Drum of WM's former site): many of those entries are clogged with spammmm. That's OK if you don't mind linking to pages filled with spammmy keywords and links, but as for me I suspect that search engines might put me in the same neighborhood as the comments to be found at calpundit.com/archives/002525.html (Warning: the comments and links there are NSFW, as is this screengrab.)

I'll be replacing my calpundit links with bare text like that above, and if you link to either site I'd suggest reviewing the linked-to page to see whether you're linking to something you probably don't want to.

Posted to Bloggage at 12:28 PM

Instapundit makes a shocking confession

Instapundit linked to me a few times for my coverage of the "peace" protests, but his last link was to this October 5, 2003 entry. He subsequently ignored my entreaties to meet him while passing through Knoxville. It's been all downhill from there, including me calling him sleazy, pointing out his failure to point out John McCain lying to him in a telephone interview, helping to drive his then-designated point man on immigration coverage - Marc Cooper - over the edge, making my enemies list, and so on.

Now comes this parody. Click for the legible version:

Posted to Bloggage at 11:49 AM

March 24, 2007

Presidential healthcare forum: Bill Richardson for illegal aliens; more media malfeasance

There was a big "presidential" healthcare forum in Las Vegas earlier today, but it looks like the only one who attended were from the Democratic Party. Realizing that I didn't watch it and I'm only relying on a few blogger reports, it looks like there was probably more debate involved at the Third Plenary Soviet.

The moderator was Karen Tumulty of Time, and you can read her nearly content-free round-up here [1]. About the only thing newsworthy she can point to is that someone tripped up Obama, making him look bad because, while he supports universal healthcare, he doesn't have a detailed plan on his website. Apparently the question about that was the toughest question that was asked; weep for "journalism".

From our comment-deleting friends at MyDD [2]:

The first question from Tumulty asks how long it would take to achieve universal healthcare under his plan, to which [Bill Richardson] replied that his plan could achieve it within a year. The second question centers on the Schwarzenegger healthcare plan, which covers illegal immigrants. Richardson says, "They're children... and we should cover children." He also says that we need to deal with immigration through securing the borders (not through the "stupid" wall) but also through legalization. The next question, from the audience, centers on the healthcare accessible to members of Congress and federal employees. Richardson says that this is the "cornerstone" of his plan, that these programs should be open to all Americans... ...One other questioner asked if Berger and Podesta were unhappy with the fact that none of the candidates, other than Edwards, seemed to speak to how they will pay for their plans, Berger notes that other candidates actually did speak to some if this question. On the question of healthcare for illegal immigrants, Berger noted that the position of SEIU was that people should come out of the shadows and that all Americans -- all Americans -- need to be covered.

Bolding in original, as is the inability to understand that, unless we're talking in purely geographic sense, only U.S. citizens are "Americans", and that appelation does not include illegal aliens.

Needless to say, no one bothered to ask Bill Richardson whether he was speaking for himself or for the OAS.

[1] time-blog.com/swampland/2007/03/re_las_vegas_health_care_forum.html
[2] mydd.com/story/2007/3/24/115150/071

Posted to Immigration2007a at 07:38 PM

STRIVE Act: MALDEF, Juan Hernandez, ANLA support; Chertoff kinda

Without refering to Flake-Gutierrez specifically, DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff reiterated his support for "guest" worker scheme:

"[The new laws should] bring them out, register them ... and make sure as a condition that they pay their debt to society for having broken the law... What I'm talking about is a common sense policy... We have to be tough. We have to be humane. We have to put into place a workable policy into this vexing issue."

"We" also have to do our job, and Chertoff isn't doing his. If he wants to advocate for an amnesty, he should quit his current position and go to work for the AILA or EPIC.

From this:

The Reform Institute and We Care America today called on Congress to show leadership on immigration. "Inaction on fixing the nation’s broken immigration system can no longer be tolerated. Congress must act on comprehensive immigration reform now," said Cecilia Martinez, Executive Director of The Reform Institute.

...Dr. Juan Hernandez, Senior Fellow of the Reform Institute's Comprehensive Immigration Reform Initiative, is available to comment on immigration policy. Dr. Hernandez served as Director of the Office for Mexicans Living Abroad under Vicente Fox. His recent book, The New American Pioneers, is an authoritative look at the complex issues related to Mexican immigration.

And, according to this, Eric Gutierrez of MALDEF ("Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund") says that group supports the bill. And, the American Nursery & Landscape Association (ANLA) "applauds" the bill [1], saying among other things:

"The inclusion of AgJOBS in the STRIVE Act highlights the unique needs of agriculture," said Craig Regelbrugge, ANLA’s vice president of government relations and research. "The time for Congress to engage in this issue is now. Our industry, along with the rest of labor intensive agriculture, is at a labor shortage breaking point that Congress must address this year."

[1] landscapemanagement.net/landscape/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=413918

Posted to Immigration2007a at 01:01 PM

STRIVE Act: not everyone happy with "touchback" (even for just one day)

The Gutierrez-Flake amnesty scheme contains a "touchback" provision. Current illegal aliens who pass a screening and meet other requirements would be given a legal worker permit immediately. Then:

Illegal immigrants would within the next six years have to leave the United States for either Mexico or Canada, go to a processing center and re-enter the U.S. legally. Lawmakers were vague about exactly how long they would have to stay outside the country under what is being called the touchback provision. But staff members said they could stay as little as one day.

Despite what is clearly a sham and a very bad joke on American citizens, not everyone is happy. From this:

...Alicia Acosta, an undocumented immigrant living in Montana Vista for the past 14 years, said it would be a hardship on families like hers to have to live [sic] her home.

"We would have to take the kids out of school. And if we live the kids here, how to support them here from over there (Mexico)?" she said.

Others realize how much of a giveaway this is:

"This is going to energize our community in a very positive way," said Fernando Garcia [a Mexican citizen], the executive director of the Border Network for Human Rights [a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government].

Garcia led a lobbying trip of El Paso immigrants to Washington, D.C., this month and is organizing a march in support of pro-immigrant legislation at UTEP April 10.

..."It's a light version of touchback. You don't have to go back to your country. You don't have to go back to Colombia, you can go to Mexico or Canada. It means you could go to Juarez and come back," he said.

...Rep. Flake explained that the touchback provision was important because it would create a record of legal entry for immigrants.

From this:

"We applaud the Congress for introducing a bipartisan and comprehensive immigration reform bill," said Jennifer Allen, director of the Tucson-based Border Action Network, devoted to promoting rights of immigrants of all stripes and border communities. "If something doesn't get passed this year, our communities will continue to struggle and suffer."

However, she and representatives of the like-minded Derechos Humanos oppose forcing illegal immigrants to leave the country. The groups also want to see more oversight of border security authorities to prevent abuses.

They also question how many people may be denied a ruling of "good moral character" based on vague language defining it.

From this:

"We have questions about the operational viability and the political viability of [the touchback provision]," said Frank Sharry, leader of the National Immigration Forum...

..."I think it's unrealistic, though, to expect these people to leave," said Ana Maria Patina, a lawyer and Hispanic activist in Santa Ana. Patina was skeptical that the government could create a program that would let illegal immigrants leave the country and return quickly.

And Amin David, leader of Los Amigos of Orange County, said even a short stay outside the country would worry fearful illegal immigrants.

He said the proposed $2,000 fine – $500 to apply for legal status initially and $1,500 to get on the path to citizenship – will also be difficult for many immigrants to afford...

From this:

Christy Porter, executive director of Hidden Harvest, a produce-recovery program that has helped farm workers laid off following January's freeze in the Coachella Valley, isn't sure the new immigration plan will work.

"Once they hit the promise land, nobody's going back the other way," Porter said. "I just don't see people lining up on this side of the border taking their suitcases over."

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:21 PM

Trouble in paradise: AFL-CIO, ACLU, NIF, AFSC not fully happy with Flake-Gutierrez; Teamsters, Democrat Lampson

The American Civil Liberties Union - a group indirectly linked to the Mexican government - has a nit with the Flake-Gutierrez amnesty [1]:

"Drafting comprehensive immigration reform is no easy task... [praise some provisions] ...Sadly, Title III of the bill attacks privacy by creating a national ID card. Creating a national ID card under the guise of a 'secured' Social Security card is not only financially and logistically daunting, it creates the possibility that we will become a society where 'your papers' will need to be presented at every turn. We urge Congress to strike this provision and build upon the hard work of Congressmen Gutierrez and Flake to keep constitutional problems out of this legislation."

Whether it will be struck - and if it is whether that will make the position of the bill's supporters weaker - remains to be seen.

For their part, the AFL-CIO says [2]:

AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney says the approach to immigration in the 110th Congress "stands in stark contrast to the mean-spirited path that the House of Representatives took under Republican control in the last Congress." ...Milton Rosado, president of the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement (LCLAA), an AFL-CIO constituency group, welcomed the legislation...

However, they also indicate several problems they have with "guest" worker programs; the STRIVE Act contains one such program.

And:

"We have questions about the operational viability and the political viability of [the touchback provision]," said Frank Sharry, leader of the National Immigration Forum.

And [3]:

[The STRIVE Act] fails to protect the fundamental human rights of immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers in this country, according to the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), a Quaker social justice organization... [it] offers little to address the root causes of undocumented migration and contains several troubling provisions... One such provision is "Touchback," which requires an applicant to leave the U.S. and re-enter the country to receive legal immigration status. This is not a practical starting point for the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants now living in the U.S...

And, from this:

On the House side, Several Democratic freshmen campaigned against so-called amnesty to help their party win control of Congress... Among them was Rep. Nick Lampson, D-Texas, who won the conservative Republican district once held by former Majority Leader Tom DeLay... "He would not support a bill that has a road to legal residency for illegal and undocumented workers who are already here," said Lampson spokesman Bobby Zafarnia... Democrats also are facing opposition from unions. Many AFL-CIO member unions and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters are concerned that employers will choose to hire foreigners over more expensive American workers... They want limits on work visas for foreigners, but also full labor protections that would let them join unions... "The ideal immigration reform bill would not contain a guest worker program," said Yvette Pena Lopes, a Teamsters lobbyist. If one is created, the Teamsters and other unions want it to expire in three to five years, Lopes said.

4/5/07 UPDATE: John Sweeney of the AFL-CIO says:

...under the Bush plan, the 12 million undocumented workers in this nation will continue to labor in second-class status as newly defined "temporary" workers. This plan will only perpetuate the dire situation of these workers and their families, and will lower standards for all of America's workers. Our nation should instead provide a path to citizenship for these immigrants who are already working here, paying their taxes and enriching our communities. The key to raising standards for all workers is to ensure that all workers are able to enforce their rights. As long as there are workers who are unable to exercise their basic rights to the minimum wage, to a safe workplace, or to join a union, we will continue to have a second tier of workers... The theme of the Bush plan is inequality. It guarantees inequality now, for 12 million undocumented workers, and it guarantees inequality for those immigrants who come to our shores legally in the future. A two-tier society is not the America we want and is not the America that workers deserve.

[1] aclu.org/immigrants/gen/29177prs20070323.html
[2] blog.aflcio.org/2007/03/23/legislation-strives-for-real-immigration-reform/
[3] wfn.org/2007/03/msg00338.html

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:04 PM

All you need to know about immigration reform (Flake-Gutierrez)

This article, in one paragraph, tells you all you need to know about immigration "reform" in general and the Flake-Gutierrez amnesty in particular:

And in a couple of new twists that haven't been seen before, the bill would require the United States to work with Mexico to address "border security and human trafficking" while giving U.S. citizens "first shot" or "right to refusal" to jobs normally filled by newer immigrants.

How very nice of them to think of us for a change. Under the best circumstances they'd be thinking of us all the time - that is, after all, their job - but baby steps and all.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:00 PM

H.R.1645 Summary, Co-Sponsors, Full Text (Flake, Gutierrez, HR1645, STRIVE Act)

The official summary of the Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy ("STRIVE Act", aka HR1645, aka H.R. 1645, aka HR 1645, aka the "Flake-Gutierrez Massive Illegal Alien Amnesty of 2007") is here. The full text and other details are available here. It includes both the anti-American DREAM Act and the AgJobs farmworker amnesty.

The current list of co-sponsors is like a veritable garden of idiots:

* Joe Baca (CA) (linked to Armando Navarro
* Xavier Becerra (CA)
* Dennis Cardoza (CA)
* Joseph Crowley (NY)
* Henry Cuellar (TX)
* Lincoln Diaz-Balart (FL)
* Mario Diaz-Balart (FL)
* Rahm Emanuel (IL)
* Luis Fortuno (PR)
* Gabrielle Giffords (AZ)
* Charles Gonzalez (TX)
* Raul Grijalva (AZ)
* Ruben Hinojosa (TX)
* Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX)
* Ray LaHood (IL)
* Grace Napolitano (CA)
* Solomon Ortiz (TX)
* Ed Pastor (AZ)
* George Radanovich (CA)
* Silvestre Reyes (TX)
* Ciro Rodriguez (TX)
* Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL)
* Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA)
* John Salazar (CO)
* Janice Schakowsky (IL)
* Jose Serrano (NY)
* Albio Sires (NJ)
* Hilda Solis (CA)

Out of those 28 alleged representatives, 21 of them (75%) are of Hispanic origin, with most of those being of Mexican descent.

Note that neither Loretta Sanchez (border subcommittee) nor Zoe Lofgren (immigration subcommittee) have signed on.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:44 AM

Flake-Gutierrez could nearly triple H-1B visas

From this:

[The Flake-Gutierrez amnesty] proposes to increase the annual cap on H-1B visas -- the visa most commonly used for foreign technology pros -- from the current ceiling of 65,000 to 115,000. The Strive Act also proposes increasing the limit up to 180,000 in subsequent years if the 115,000 cap is reached during a given fiscal year. In addition, the bill proposes exempting from the cap certain individuals who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math at U.S. schools... In the last several years, the H-1B cap has been hit months before the new fiscal year even began...

And:

...Earlier this month, Microsoft Corp. Chairman Bill Gates testified before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, as the sole witness at a hearing on U.S. competitiveness, and called for an increase in the H-1B cap and an expedited green card process for highly skilled workers.

Compete America, a Washington-based group that includes IT vendors, trade associations and universities and is lobbying for an H-1B cap increase, today praised the visa-related provisions in the legislation introduced by Gutierrez and Flake.

Robert Hoffman, vice president of government and public affairs at Oracle Corp. and co-chairman of Compete America, said in a statement that the H-1B cap for fiscal 2008, which doesn't start until October, is likely to be reached next month. In light of that, "and with multiyear backlogs in all employment-based visa categories growing, it is imperative that meaningful reform occur this year," Hoffman said...

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:33 AM

March 23, 2007

Night of 1,000 Conversations (including 900 Useful Idiots)

The "Rights Working Group" is trying to organize Moveon-style house parties throughout the U.S. on Thursday, April 5, 2007, supposedly to support due process in our immigration system. In fact, it appears to be a backdoor way to promote immigration "reform", aka a massive amnesty. And, some of the organizers lined up are linked to the Mexican government. Details here: rightsworkinggroup.org/?q=ConversationNight

Their "one-pager" (http://65.36.162.162/files/Night_of_1000_Convo_OnePager.pdf ; actually a two pager) includes a blurb from the Washington Post propaganda piece "Deporting a Model Noncitizen" by Marc Fisher (link). Some of the things Fisher forgot to cover are listed in a long comment from J. Scott here.

Their talking points are here: 65.36.162.162/files/NOTC_Toolkit_040507.pdf While they suggest steering the conversation away from immigration matters and back to due process if the former proves too contentious, it's clear that their main goals are supporting amnesty, anchor babies, catch and release, and all the other factors leading to massive legal and illegal immigration.

Their local affiliates are listed in the extended entry. Those with "LTM" have some sort of link to the Mexican government.

1. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (Washington, DC) - Laila Al-Qatami
2. Arab American Institute (Washington, DC) - Valerie Smith
3. Asian American Justice Center (Washington, DC) - Pang Houa Moua
4. Breakthrough: Building a Human Rights Culture (NY) - Carly Castania-Fox
5. Center for Intercultural Organizing (OR) - Kayse Jama
LTM 6. Coalicion de Derechos Humanos (AZ) - Kat Rodriguez
LTM (alleged) 7. Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (Los Angeles, CA) - Sara Sadhwani
8. Coalition of African, Arab, Asian, European and Latino Immigrants of Illinois (Chicago, IL) - Khemarey Nuth
9. Desis Rising Up and Moving (NY) - Monami Maulik
10. Florida Immigrant Advocacy Coalition (FL) - Maria Rodriguez
11. Hate Free Zone (WA) - Hari Kondabolu
12. Idaho Community Action Network (ID) - Leo Morales
LTM 13. Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (IL) - Mehrdad Azemun
14. National Korean American Service & Education Consortium (CA) - Juhyung Lee
15. National Network for Arab American Communities (MI) - Nadia El-Zein
16. National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (CA) - Arnoldo Garcia
17. New York Immigration Coalition (NY) - Avideh Moussavian
18. Pennsylvania Immigration and Citizenship Coalition (PA) - Regan Cooper
19. South Asian American Leaders of Tomorrow (MD) - Deepa Iyer
20. Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition (TN) - Stephen Fotopulos
21. United Farm Workers Foundation (CA) - Oscar Gonzalez
22. University of New Mexico, School of Law - ACLU Student Chapter - Pamela Hernandez (Albuquerque, NM)

Posted to Immigration2007a at 07:43 PM

Geraldo Rivera's reconquista rant

Geraldo Rivera is half Jewish, half Puerto Rican (Spanish). He hasn't let that stand in his way of standing in solidarity with the indigenous people to whom he has no bond otherwise, such as by supporting illegal immigration and penning a new screed at his site called "GOP Immigration Extremists". In case it disappears, you can read excerpts here.

Discussing it in depth would be worth even less than Geraldo himself, but let's look at this:

All most of the undocumented want is a fair shake and a chance to work hard and realize what we proudly call the 'American Dream'. Give them the chance to regularize and legitimatize their status and watch, as they become another beautiful component of the national mosaic. Maybe even Republicans.

A few paragraphs before that, he said this:

Isn't it reasonable to think that residents of Mexico might hold some affection and nostalgia for their lost North America Empire...? ...Where are the casinos and oil leases for the Mexicans forcibly excluded from their historic lands along with the Apache, Navajo, Sioux and Seminole? ...all agree that modern boundaries are now firmly and forever established. Every reasonable commentator understands that.

Obviously, the thoughts of a few "reasonable commentators" mean nothing when dealing with millions of people who hold "affection" for their "lost North America Empire". Geraldo thinks that we should allow Mexicans to resettle their lands, and somehow by doing that they'll automatically be converted into Americans. History - and everything he says - shows that Geraldo is a fool.

On a related note, his production company (Maravilla Productions) is one of the top lifetime contributors to... the Reverend Al Sharpton, turning over $10,000 to the clergyman.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 01:17 PM

Al Qaqaa munitions dump is back; BushBot response?

Remember the al Qaqaa dustup shortly before the 2004 election, in which a few reports said that large amounts of munitions had been looted from Iraq munitions dumps, prompting a furious response from the usual suspects who did everything within their powers to support massive Bush administration incompetence? Now, the GAO has weighed in:

The U.S. military's faulty war plans and insufficient troops in Iraq left thousands and possibly millions of tons of conventional munitions unsecured or in the hands of insurgent groups after the 2003 invasion -- allowing widespread looting of weapons and explosives used to make roadside bombs that cause the bulk of U.S. casualties, according to a government report released yesterday.

Some weapons sites remained vulnerable as recently as October 2006, according to the Government Accountability Office report, which said the unguarded sites "will likely continue to support terrorist attacks throughout the region." For example, it said hundreds of tons of explosives at the Al Qa Qaa facility in Iraq that had been documented by the International Atomic Energy Agency were lost to theft and looting after April 9, 2003...

While I appear to have mentioned this here once ("Should conservatives support Kerry?"), I posted several entries about this at the command-post.org and in comments elsewhere. Here's a roundup and another, here's someone else downplaying it and someone else, and here's a link to a (now missing) video report.

TalkingPointsMemo was also on the case: here and posts before and after that.

Oddly enough, the usual suspects appear to be silent this time around. Maybe we should be proactive and seek out their current thoughts.

Posted to Iraq at 12:23 PM

Let's discredit Bishop Gerald R. Barnes (San Bernardino)

Bishop Gerald R. Barnes leads the Diocese of San Bernardino (sbdiocese.org) and, as discussed here, he's also the "point man for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' national Justice for Immigrants campaign".

That says he's being criticized from all sides: pro-borders members complain about his support for illegal immigration, while at the same time the open borders loons from the National Alliance for Human Rights complain about his support for only a limited albeit massive amnesty for illegal aliens.

I'd suggest going to his public appearances and asking him tough questions about his stance. At the very least, print up some flyers and distribute them to his congregation. A possible tack is suggested by the following:

[Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-CA)] called the bishop's views, "well-intentioned but dangerous" because talk of legalization entices would-be immigrants to come into the United States illegally... "People talking about this, including the bishop, are responsible for people dying on the freeway, drowning in the rivers and dying in the desert," said Bilbray.

Or, consider this Barnes quote:

"I want to make it understood that the Catholic church is for the reformation of the immigration laws so that we do not have illegal immigration... We are not encouraging people in any way to break the law. We want to change the law."

The only way to sharply reduce illegal immigration is to enforce the laws. The U.S. Catholic Church and others have shown time and time again that they do not support enforcement of our immigration laws. Some on the far left even complain about small attempts to deport fugitive and criminal aliens.

The "reform" that Barnes supports will only make the situation far worse, encouraging even more illegal immigration and leading to even more of the problems he pretends to oppose.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:12 AM

Our Lady Queen of Angels Church (sanctuary movement, dupes, IAF)

From Louis Sahagun of the Los Angeles Times' "L.A. church offers migrants sanctuary" (link via this) we learn that Father Richard Estrada of the Our Lady Queen of Angels church ("La Placita";laplacita.org) in downtown Los Angeles is spending $1000 to build living quarters to house a family of illegal aliens facing deportation orders. It mentions the Interfaith Worker Justice and the New York Sanctuary Coalition as being involved in this "new sanctuary movement". It also quotes Rev. Alexia Salvatierra, "executive director of Clergy & Laity United for Economic Justice-California and a pastor in the Evangelical Lutheran Church".

Their goal is to create a media circus:

To be eligible, an undocumented immigrant must be in deportation proceedings, have a good work record and have children who are U.S. citizens by birth. They must also agree to undergo training to overcome their fear of public exposure and articulate their cases at news conferences and public gatherings... [Salvatierra says:] "We're choosing them for their personal stories... but we're training them in how to respond to questions about their plights."

Let a thousand Elvira Arellanos bloom! Maybe they'll even train them to emote from behind a scrim.

The new movement thinks that, unlike the past movement, they won't face arrests as long as those to be deported are in proceedings and are identified.

Pulling the tax exempt status from these churches is certainly one way to deal with this, but there's a far easier and far more effective way: discredit these "leaders". Some might not fear arrest, but all fear being publicly exposed for their inability to figure out everything involved in this issue.

Sahagun also quotes "Peter A. Schey, president of the board of directors of the Center for Human Rights & Constitutional Law Foundation" without mentioning his various links to the Mexican government.

Also of interest is the PDF of an immigration workshop (laplacita.org/workshop.pdf). It contains an overview of immigration which might look slightly balanced, but it doesn't really answer too many objections. And, it's from "One LA/IAF", which is a local affiliated of the Industrial Areas Foundation, founded by radical organizer - and apparent Hillary Clinton idol - Saul Alinsky.

The PDF has cheap labor pimps aspects:

Growers from the Imperial Valley in CA to Yuma County in AZ will fill barely half the 50,000 hand positions needed to gather the region's tons of produce, according to Western Growers

An unimpeachable source, to be sure. They also manage to mash religion, world socialism, and libertarianism together in just one paragraph:

We live in a global economy; the policies and politics of one country affect other countries. We are called to be in solidarity. There is an increasing interdependence between countries who allow free movement of goods, but not of people.

UPDATE: From this:

Nearly one year after a massive Los Angeles protest march electrified the immigrant rights movement, the original organizers gathered again at the downtown spot where they hatched their plans: the historic adobe church known as La Placita... There was the fiery priest, the activist mothers, the Riverside graduate student [Jesse Diaz Jr.]...

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:37 AM

Dems temporarily block Bush admin Mexican truck scheme; forgetting something?

The Bush administration wants to allow about 100 Mexican trucking companies to drive beyond the border zone. The reciprocal NAFTA provision allowing U.S. truckers to drive throughout Mexico is still being negotiated. However, the scheme hit a speed bump recently, with an amendment tacked on to the recent Iraq spending bill requiring the administration to provide more details and allow for public comment.

And, it was done by Democrats: Byron Dorgan, Dianne Feinstein, and Patty Murray; the Teamsters are opposed to this provision. Now if we could only get them interested in reducing the flow of cheap labor.

While it's certainly good what they did on this, I think a little public shame is in order as to why they've supported the importation of massive amounts of cheap labor from the same country.

"The administration is rushing to open the border to Mexican-domiciled trucks without assuring their safety and enforcement of the law of the U.S.," said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen. "They can't go rushing forward in opening the border without having explained what their pilot project is." ...[Dorgan] also criticized the Bush administration for opening the border to Mexican trucks before Mexico opened the border to U.S. trucks. "They were going to implement these plans for Mexican long-haul trucks in a way that was at odds with how the Mexicans were going to treat American truckers," Dorgan said.

Such concern!

Posted to NAU at 09:38 AM

March 22, 2007

Jeff Flake, Luis Guitierrez STRIVE amnesty: America's new favorite comedy duo?

[UPDATE: Send a free FAX about this here. Links to our full coverage about this below]

Could Reps. Jeff Flake and Luis Guitierrez be the Abbott and Costello of a new generation? The STRIVE amnesty ("Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy") they introduced today makes me think that instead of being duped by them - what they apparently think will happen - we'll all soon be laughing at them once all the details of their scheme have been released.

Consider the farcical "touchback" provision [1]:

Under the legislation, undocumented workers, who pay a fine and pass extensive and thorough background examinations, would be eligible for conditional status with work and travel authorization for 6 years. If, during those six years, the worker remains employed, continues to be an upstanding member of the community, learns English and civics, and pays any owed taxes, they could be eligible to adjust their status if they leave the country and re-enter legally.

I can't find the actual legislation, but that sounds not only like a massive amnesty, but it sounds like the "touchback" feature wouldn't have to be acted on immediately. In other words, the former illegal alien would get a status adjustment immediately, and only if they want to get on the "path to citizenship" would they need to "touchback", and they could do it at any time during the six-year period. In addition, some of the requirements (if they were to be actually enforced) sound slightly close to indentured servitude. What if they become disabled, or what if there's an economic downturn? Will they still get their chance at permanent residency?

And, of course, there's the irony of those who've shown a general lack of respect for our laws then being required to take civics courses.

Then, there's the "guest" worker scheme:

The Gutierrez-Flake bill sets up a new worker program for low-skilled workers, when a U.S. worker cannot be found to fill a needed job... employers would be required to provide foreign workers with the same wages and working conditions enjoyed by U.S. workers...

Let's say U.S. notaries make $20 an hour, and employers know that there are 400,000 potential "guest" notaries who'd be happy with $5 an hour. Flake and Gutierrez think we're dumb enough to think that employers wouldn't find a way to get those foreign notaries into the U.S. one way or another.

Flake flunky Matthew Specht is fielding calls about this scheme at 202-225-2635 or send him an email at matthew.specht *at* mail.house.gov.

[1] flake.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=61241

UPDATE: Straight outta the AILA come these two:

lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/files/STRIVE_Act_Shorter_Summary.pdf
lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/files/STRIVE_Act_Longer_Summary.pdf

Posted to Immigration2007a at 08:21 PM

STRIVEing for amnesty: the Flake/Guitierrez "Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy" Act

We're seemingly moments away from the release of the Jeff Flake/Luis Guitierrez "STRIVE Act", a massive amnesty for illegal aliens. "STRIVE" stands for the Orwellian-named "Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy". Please contact your representatives and stress your opposition to the scheme, and if you find anyone promoting it do your best to discredit them.

The far-lefties have anticipated the bill, with the Asian American Justice Center "encouraged" and, not to be outdone, the American Immigration Lawyers Association "enthusiastically welcomes" it.

Turning to the "news":

Millions of undocumented immigrants could get legal permission to stay in the U.S. by paying fines and symbolically re-entering the country, under an immigration reform bill introduced in the House Thursday.

Well, at least they're being honest about it. After "symbolically" re-entering, they'd be put on a non-symbolic "path to citizenship".

The bill also would allow up to 400,000 foreign workers to come to the U.S. legally every year.

Presumably that's refering to the "guest" worker program, which in an earlier bill was capped at 200,000. And, for those of you who think Jeff Flake isn't a liar, consider this quote from Flake:

"This bill will end illegal immigration"

It'll do that in about the same way as the 1986 amnesty did. Any "tough" provisions would eventually be ignored or watered down. The forces that would do that would include the racial power groups, industry groups, corrupt banks, foreign governments, and such that have been pushing "reform". They currently support illegal immigration, and this bill will give them even more political power from which to continue their support for illegal immigration. Flake is simply a liar.

The legislation would require Homeland Security officials to certify that border security and worksite enforcement measures are in place before allowing foreign workers to apply for new visas. It would force undocumented immigrants to leave the country and then re-enter before they could apply for conditional legal status that would eventually lead to citizenship.

Those mandates were added to the proposed legislation during careful negotiations aimed at giving cover to Republican supporters of the bill in hopes of avoiding the partisan standoff that killed similar legislation last year.

If they're looking for cover, that means they know they're doing something deeply unpopular. And, as indicated above, the certification would be watered down, and, while I don't know exactly what it entails in past proposals the certification only dealt with the money being spent, not on the overall success of various programs.

UPDATE: From this:

"What is reform? What Congressman Flake and I have presented, and we're supporting today, this is reform," Gutierrez, speaking in Spanish, told a reporter at a Capitol Hill press conference...

[In a written statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said:] "Our first responsibility to the American people is their safety... We must enact immigration reform that is humane and honors our American tradition of being a nation of immigrants and a land of opportunity for all... It provides an excellent framework for Congress and the president to begin work on the vital task of immigration reform...

And, from this:

Despite their optimism and good cheer, the group was not joined by the relevant subcommittee or committee chairs or ranking Republicans, nor any of the elected Democratic leadership of the House.

Meanwhile in Detroit, the Metropolitan Organizing Strategy Enabling Strength (MOSES) came out in support of the scheme. Those quoted were: Noel Saleh, "president of the board at the Dearborn-based Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services", Father Tom Sepulveda, "pastor of Saint Anne de Detroit Catholic Church, where the majority of worshippers are immigrants", and Dawud Walid, "head of the Michigan branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations."

UPDATE: Ralph G. Neas - president of the People For the American Way issues his support for the bill, launching a flock of canards:

"In several states where anti-immigrant measures have caused worker shortages, growers are being forced to leave their products to rot. In small towns across the country, immigrants are being accosted by ordinances that purport to root out lawlessness but in reality foment hate and distrust – and are draining the life out of some communities that had been invigorated by immigrants... In November, Americans rejected many proponents of anti-immigrant extremism. Now this Democratic-led Congress has the perfect opportunity to prove that it not only received the message, but is prepared to act in a responsible way to address a serious national problem..."

Posted to Immigration2007a at 10:42 AM

March 21, 2007

George P. Bush.. In The Navy

Setting out to find pleasure, search the world for treasure, and learn science and technology, George P. Bush - Hispanic nephew of Our Leader George W. Bush - is joining the Navy Reserve as an intelligence officer. He'll serve eight years, but he'll make it thirty more years if we're lucky. In the unlucky option, he'd get out when he's 38. To run for president you have to be 35, and this is a likely precursor to the U.S. being treated to yet another member of the Bush family degrading the nation with their "leadership".

Of course, by that time the U.S. will have an even larger Hispanic minority, and "P." can appeal to them out of racial grounds and almost certainly through socially conservative demagoguery: gay marriage, abortion, and the like. In fact, all of that might have been their plan all along. Of course, there's no guarantee that "P." would even run as a Republican; he might have a miraculous conversion if that party is no longer able to get enough votes to win national contests.

In one of his first likely public lies, "P." says:

"Honestly, I'm kind of a little disappointed that the word got out... I was hoping to keep this as confidential as possible. I'm not doing it for political purposes or anything along those lines..."

On a lighter note, a commentor says:

It might be to get away from his sister Noelle's constant begging for crack money.

Earlier:
George P. Bush was scheduled to speak at the Dallas illegal aliens march
Quote: "...we have to fight for our race, we have to find the leaders who represent us."
"Bush nephew backs off on INS"
"Mexico may sue U.S. over pepper-ball projectiles"

Posted to Politics at 11:33 PM

"Bill offers temporary legal status to undocumented immigrants..."

Drudge has a habit of linking to misleadingly or falsely titled - or just plain false - articles about immigration matters, the latest example being "Bill offers temporary legal status to undocumented immigrants" from Dave Montgomery of McClatchy Newspapers. That's the McClatchy-supplied title.

By "temporary", most people might think six months, maybe a year tops. Try again:

Bipartisan legislation to be unveiled Thursday in the House of Representatives would offer temporary legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants but would require them to leave the country before they could be eligible for permanent residency and U.S. citizenship.

...[ two paragraphs deleted ]...

...The Gutierrez-Flake proposal includes many of the ingredients of the failed Senate bill. It would create a guest-worker program that would enable foreign workers to stay in the country for up to six years to hold jobs that U.S. workers have bypassed.

If you think six years is in any way "temporary" - especially considering that many of those "guests" would have U.S. citizen children during that time, making it nearly impossible to deport them - please stand in line for the wallet inspector.

Previous examples of Drudge not finding better stories to link to:
EFE admits Goldwater "concentration camps" smear
ADL's (latest) smear job on Minuteman Project
Los Angeles Times goes to border, discovers immigration laws won't work
Chertoff promotes "Temporary Worker Program" at Senate meeting

Posted to Immigration2007a at 07:28 PM

Humane Borders did distribute border maps in Mexico

Last year, Humane Borders - a group of collaborateurs, far-lefties, and useful idiots - wanted to distribute maps in Mexico which supposedly warned "migrants" of the dangers of crossing the border. Of course, they also showed the best places to cross and how many days it took between stops and were thus about as effective in their supposed purpose as a two-foot high fence around a swimming pool.

The last I heard, the plan had been canceled, but apparently that's not entirely accurate (lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2007/03/view_from_the_b.html):

Here is the latest from the UC Davis law student delegation visting the U.S./Mexico border region in southern Arizona:

After our meeting with Border Patrol we met with Paul Fuschini of Humane Borders. With over 8,000 volunteers, Humane Borders offers humanitarian assistance to migrants by maintaining over 80 water stations throughout the Arizona/Mexico border region [funded by Tucson's Pima County]...

...In our meeting with Border Patrol, Officer King described the efforts of organizations such as Humane Borders as encouraging migrants to cross the desert and increasing "illegal immigration."

...The organization wanted to distribute these maps in southern Mexico, where, in recent years, a large number of migrants come from... Last year, the organization spoke with the Mexican Human Rights commission, a government agency, which agreed to distribute the posters. However, the following week, secretary of DHS, Michael Chertoff stated that the maps would encourage illegal immigration because they would show migrants how to cross into the US illegally. The Mexican human rights commission subsequently decided not to distribute the maps. Undaunted, Humane Borders itself sent a brigade of volunteers to distribute the maps in the states of Chiapas and Oaxaca.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 01:54 PM

Bill Gates: "freedom of migration is a good thing" (also: Reuters misleads)

Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates - sounding like a cross between Vicente Fox and Martha Stewart - said the following in Mexico:

"I'm a big believer that as much as possible, and there's obviously political limitations, freedom of migration is a good thing."

He also supported immigration "reform". Obviously, Bill Gates should concentrate on creating clunky software. While Microsoft benefits from increased levels of high-skilled immigration, what's best for MS isn't always what's best for the U.S. And, in Mexico, "freedom of migration" means the right of low-skilled workers to enter the U.S. at will, thereby affecting our own low-wage workers, increasing social problems such as crime and school costs and on and on, and giving even more political power inside the U.S. to the Mexican government. About the only immediate benefit to Microsoft out of that would be lower prices for their employees' domestic workers, coupled with higher prices for social services.

Massive illegal immigration is also a strong indicator of massive political corruption, and Gates might want to be wary of the latter. While to a certain extent he might be relying on political corruption in the U.S. or other countries, it can always turn against him. He might want to take a lesson from the other billionaires in Russia and China and take a look at Hugo Chavez' nationalization moves.

The unnamed "reporter" from Reuters also makes a highly misleading statement:

Tens of thousands of Mexicans sneak into the United States every year...

Now, go back and add a zero to that figure.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 12:57 PM

Pro-illegal immigration performance art (funding by Bank of America and Wells Fargo)

Observe, if you will, this picture:

Here's the explanation:

Families affected by a series of federal immigration raids this month spoke out in San Rafael on Tuesday at a news conference that showcased them as silhouetted subjects shrouded behind a privacy screen.

Hosted by Canal Alliance at a building adjacent to its headquarters on Larkspur Street, the bizarre question-and-answer session - featuring men, women and children assigned pseudonyms - was aimed at telling their stories while hiding their identities to protect them from possible deportation, organizers said...

Those "in the shadows" also made various claims, such as a supposed 14-year-old claiming he'd been punched in the jaw by a "law enforcement officer assisting in the raids".

I don't know whether these people were actually illegal aliens, or were just far-lefties pretending to be same. I wouldn't be surprised if one or many of them were in the latter category. After all, it could happen, and that's all that matters, right?

I note also that Canal Alliance's "Corporate Partners" (canalalliance.org/AU_P_Don_Corp.shtml) include Bank of America and Wells Fargo, two banks that seek to indirectly profit from the fruits of illegal activity.

Posted to Immigration2007a at 11:45 AM

March 20, 2007

Jeff Flake, Luis Gutierrez to introduce amnesty bill in House

Looks like there's a bit of work ahead, as Reps. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) are going to introduce an illegal alien amnesty bill in the House on Thursday. Senator Teddy Kennedy "applauds" their efforts as he continues his attempts to bring forth a horror in the Senate.

The details of the bill as provided by those Reps and apparently annotated by the OC Register are included in the extended entry, and they even include the creation of a "North American security perimeter".

The exact details of the amnesty itself don't really matter: the bill is amnesty and will be perceived as such around the world, resulting in massive amounts of both legal and illegal immigration to the U.S.

The way to solve this issue is clear:

1. Call your representatives and urge everyone else you know to do the same.

2. Work to discredit anyone who supports this or other amnesties. That includes anyone who has some sort of influence, from major bloggers to religious leaders to Congressmen. If you have the chance to destroy their career, do it.

_A new worker program. This variation on a guest worker program would allow low-skilled people to get jobs here when U.S. workers could not be found to fill a needed job. These employees would be able to change jobs and travel and eventually get on a path to citizenship. The worker visa would be valid for three years and renewable once.

This provision is likely to draw fire from those who favor a temporary worker program, under which guest workers would not be able to remain here indefinitely. A group of Republican senators have been working with the White House on their own bill that is expected to include a guest worker program, but not one that would lead to permanent residency.

_A legalization plan. Illegal immigrants who pay a fine and pass background checks would be eligible for a conditional status and could work and travel for six years. If during that time they learned English, stayed employed, had clean criminal records, paid fines and back taxes, the immigrants would be eligible for legal status.

This plan also includes a requirement that the undocumented immigrants leave the country and reenters legally. It's not clear from the summary available exactly how that would work.

Such a provision will likely engender opposition from immigration advocates who would see that as an impediment to some of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants coming forward. But it could make such a plan more palatable to those who say