« August 2007 | Main | October 2007 »
Got a letter for Bob?
This [warning: NSFW] is pretty funny, and manages to be almost as creepy as the real Bob.
Posted to WackyHumor at 04:16 PM
Mel Martinez may quit as RNC chairman when candidate emerges (not soon enough)
Republican National Committee general chairman Mel Martinez may quit his post as soon as a GOP candidate emerges, sources say. And, I say, "mind the door, and farethee well"....News of his departure comes as Republican candidates are criticized for skipping forums aimed at Hispanic and black voters, and reports that he would step down before November 2008 dismayed some supporters.
''Hispanic voters will be key to winning the nomination, and Mel is one of the few GOP leaders who understands their importance..." said state Rep. David Rivera, a Miami Republican. "Mel Martinez understands we cannot continue to alienate Hispanics or we risk becoming irrelevant."
Martinez, who does not face reelection until 2010, has taken a battering in the polls for his immigration stance, and friends suggested it has been daunting ''trying to wear both hats'' as the party's chief cheerleader and senator.
Posted to Politics at 03:37 PM
Rudy Giuliani afraid of citizen journalists (Brave New Films)
Brave New Films is a sleazy [1], left-wing organization, akin to the low-rent Hollywoodish version of ThinkProgress. A few days ago, John Ehrenfeld from that site tried to attend [2] a Rudy Giuliani appearance, only to be kicked out apparently after Guiliani staffers learned who he was with. Thinking ahead, they had two people attend, and the footage from the one who wasn't ejected was used to create this popular video: youtube.com/watch?v=VQ0GupTQVpA
This illustrates again that the presidential candidates are afraid of questions from non-MSM journalists; they know that they have little to fear from MSM stalwarts like Dan Balz or Mark Halperin.
Unfortunately, so far almost all of the "citizen journalism" that I've seen has come from either people like BNF or Mike Stark on the one hand, and from Truthers on the other.
Hopefully sometime before January 2008 someone who opposes illegal immigration will go to a campaign appearance, ask a tough question designed to discredit the politician, and then upload the response to video sites.
[1] Regarding the "sleazy", see the race-baiting from the post and imagine the questions he was going to ask. See also their promotion of sleazy videos (bravenewfilms.org/profiles/kwah, youtube.com/watch?v=C6ZmZizWTy4)
[2] therealrudy.org/blog/14205-rudy-s-biggest-headache-brave-new-films
Posted to Politics at 03:20 PM
It was five years and a week ago today
The 22nd of this month marked the fifth anniversary of this site in its current form; everyone is invited to raise a styrofoam cup of Diet Shasta in commemoration of that momentous event. In early 2004 I listed some of this site's accomplishments and noteworthy achievements. I haven't really done anything since then, but I did change the format of the site since that time so at least I've got that going for me.
Posted to Bloggage at 05:38 PM
Hillary Clinton: $5000 for each baby born in U.S. ("baby bonds"; including anchor babies)
From this:Every baby born in America should receive money that can later be used to pay for college, Clinton told the crowd at the Congressional Black Caucus annual legislative conference in Washington on Friday.I'll let others discuss all the other downsides, but I'll point out the impact this would have on illegal immigration: "every baby born in America" includes the children of illegal aliens, even if those parents have only been in the U.S. for an hour. This would have the impact of further incentivizing illegal immigration.
"I like the idea of giving every baby born in America a $5,000 account that will grow over time, so when that young person turns 18, if they have finished high school they will be able to access it to go to college," Clinton said, calling it one way to give young people a chance to save money tax free...
See also Darrell Steinberg, Bob Dutton: give every child born in California $500 (anchor babies, bank boondoggle). That bill was brought about by the New America Foundation. One link between NAF and Hillary: Laurie Rubiner from the Clinton campaign used to be the head of their health care policy program. And, this is not a new idea: she proposed a relatively modest $500 bond last year, something that the NAF welcomed (link):
In a speech before the Democratic Leadership Council (7/24/2006), Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton called for $500 "Baby Bonds" to be established for every child at birth and at age 10. Funds could be used for college or vocational training, buying a first home, and retirement savings... "We commend Senator Clinton for proposing Baby Bonds for all newborns. Establishing these accounts would place millions of kids on a path to accumulate savings and wealth from the day they are born-- thus expanding economic opportunity and security across economic divides, and helping to build wealth across generations," said Ray Boshara, Director of New America's Asset Building Program, which aims to broaden savings and asset ownership in America... Invited to advise Sen. Clinton and her staff on child savings accounts, New America has briefed several Members of Congress from both parties, Presidential candidates, and leaders throughout the world... ...The Asset Building Program played a key role in the development of the ASPIRE Act, legislation that would establish progressively funded savings accounts at birth for every American child and introduced with bipartisan support in both the House and Senate in 2005. The program was also instrumental in developing the Young Savers Accounts proposal, introduced by Senator Max Baucus last March... To learn more about these bills, visit assetbuilding.org...UPDATE: Already history is starting to be reinterpreted:
Blake Zeff, a spokesman for the senator's campaign, said a baby bonds program "is not a firm policy proposal but an idea under consideration."
Posted to Politics at 11:38 AM
Michael Bloomberg, DHS against Spitzer illegal aliens driver's licenses plan
From this:[New York governor Eliot Spitzer's scheme to give driver's licenses to illegal aliens] starts in December but is already under fire from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a pro-immigration politician who said the change could lead to the state's licenses not being acceptable proof of identification for air travel.Related:
Bloomberg said Wednesday that the city's lawyer "does believe that in fact this would make New York's state driver's licenses ineligible to be used to get on an airplane. People would need other form of identification, generally a passport, and that would be a very big problem."
"I'm really skeptical that we should be issuing driver's licenses willy-nilly," he added Thursday, "because it then leads to lots of other problems in terms of voter registration and other things. But it's the governor's call."
[Spitzer replies:] "He is wrong at every level _ dead wrong, factually wrong, legally wrong, morally wrong, ethically wrong."
..."There is a known vulnerability in state-issued driver's licenses today and shame on us if we don't fix that vulnerability," [Russ Knocke, a DHS spokesman] said. "Anything that would complicate the enforcement of our immigration laws would be concerning, and anything that would frustrate efforts for more secure identification would be troubling."
New York county clerks oppose Spitzer on driver's licenses for illegal aliens
Posted to Immigration_dls at 11:15 AM
Calderon makes demands; Mexicans have "right to work" in U.S.; admits harm to Mexico of emigration
From this:Mexican President Felipe Calderon told U.S. governors Thursday that immigration is an inevitable, natural phenomenon and he urged the U.S. Congress to approve reforms that would allow more Mexicans to work legally north of the border.The last is probably a good thing from the perspective of Mexico's leaders: the "best people" might press for change.
Calderon demanded that the United States respect "the right to work wherever one can make the greatest contribution."
"Immigration is a natural phenomenon that is economically and socially inevitable"...
In a rare acknowledgment of the costs of migration for Mexico, Calderon said his country "doesn't not celebrate migration ... our best people are the ones who go."
Richardson and Perry were absent, but never fear because the U.S. was ably represented by two of our super-tough politicians - including Janet Napolitano - who vehemently spoke out against Calderon's comments, nearly causing an international incident:
Describing his many visits to Mexico since his first one 40 years ago, [California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger] lifted a line from his movie "Terminator," quipping, "I always look forward to saying, 'I'll be back."Well, maybe not. Of course, if there were fewer Mexican partisans in California and the U.S., it might make Arnie a little more comfortable about not being such a wimp.
And, from our Extreme Irony file:
[Eduardo Bours, governor of the border state of Sonora] also called for a crackdown on U.S. weapons that "cross the border all too easily." Calderon said weapons illicitly smuggled in from the U.S. had been responsible for killing dozens of Mexican policemen.That's certainly a bad thing, but illegal aliens from Mexico have been responsible for tens of thousands of violent crimes here in the U.S.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 09:13 AM
New York county clerks oppose Spitzer on driver's licenses for illegal aliens
New York governor Eliot Spitzer wants to allow illegal aliens to obtain driver's licenses. Now, some county clerks are pushing back:[Otsego County Clerk Kathy Sinnott-Gardner says:] "I don't see why we should make the requirements more lenient for illegal immigrants than they are for our own citizens."There may be a special session of their legislature in October. Those clerks opposed to rule may ask applicants to go to offices run by the state itself.
...State Assemblyman Peter Lopez, R-Schoharie, a former county clerk, said, "I'm stunned. This doesn't make any sense, and I think it puts our communities at risk."
...State Sen. James Seward, R-Milford, said he doesn't believe that Spitzer has the legal authority to circumvent the state law mandating Social Security numbers or SSA documents to obtain a driver's license.
"I can't believe that in the post-9/11 era, the governor is doing this," Seward said.
..."How can we be more secure with less security?" [Frank Merola, a Republican who is Rensselaer County clerk] said Tuesday. "What this is going to do is diminish the value of a license as an indication that someone is here legally. I don't see how that helps at all."
On the other side, those apparently supporting Spitzer's plan include: acting State Police Superintendent Preston Felton, state Insurance Superintendent Eric Dinallo, and state Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Balboni.
Posted to Immigration_dls at 02:41 PM
Contact Arnold Schwarzenegger re: Gil Cedillo's financial aid for illegal aliens bill
California state senator Gil Cedillo - sometimes called "One Bill Gil" due to his constant attempts to pass a bill giving driver's licenses to illegal aliens - actually has come up with a multitude of bills designed to give benefits to those who are here illegally. The latest now sits on Arnold Schwarzenegger's desk, awaiting his possible signature.
SB 1 (link) would allow illegal aliens to receive "non-competitive" financial aid for college. Those covered under the "Competitive Cal Grant A and B award program" are not included, but the term "non-competitive" is misleading since every dollar spent on giving such financial aid to illegal aliens could be spent on giving aid to U.S. citizens. That's certainly a difficult choice, but the only way to avoid such choices is to stop incentivizing illegal immigration in addition to encouraging illegal aliens to return to their home countries.
According to this, Arnold hasn't yet made up his mind; he veteod the last try and said the following:
"California has over 100,000 students here legally who apply annually for financial aid to attend college, and our state has limited funds available for this important purpose."
You can send Arnold a FAX here, or just call 916-445-2841.
Posted to California at 01:17 PM
Let's discredit Deacon Sam Dunning (Houston day laborer center)
Something called the "Cypress Creek Interfaith Coalition for Economic Development" wants to establish a day laborer site in northwest Houston; their members include the Cypress Creek Christian Church (associate pastor: Franklin Moore) and perhaps the Catholic Church. A public meeting was held last night, and the following clip has Deacon Sam Dunning from the Houston Archdiocese of the Catholic Church (diogh.org/socialjustice_sec_socialjustice.htm) supporting the center and taking questions from the audience. He appears to be quite a piece of work, and I encourage all those in the Houston area to publicly ask him tougher questions based on his statements and designed to discredit him:
In addition to the questions here and here, some possibilities include:
* Are you claiming that Mexicans are "oppressed and persecuted" as the Jews were in Egypt? (Are you serious?)
* "Reform" would mandate enforcement, yet you compare enforcing our current laws to slavery and segregation. Once again, are you serious?
* Can't Mexicans obtain a "good life" in Mexico? Considering that five billion or so people are worse off than Mexicans, what about their chances at a "good life"? Isn't it absurd for you to suggest that the only way for Mexicans to have a "good life" is to come to the U.S.?
* Aren't there huge differences between past immigration and the current variety? Doesn't the Mexican government have a great deal of political power inside the U.S. due to, among other things, politicians and non-profits having links to that government and serving to varying degrees as de facto agents for that government? Doesn't that qualify as, to a certain extent, the Mexican government "colonizing" parts of the U.S.?
11/03/07 UPDATE: The AP offers what's called here "More Illegal Immigrant Women Taking Domestic Jobs":
..."These people can be very, very vulnerable, particularly if they're not documented," said Sam Dunning, who oversees social justice programs for the Roman Catholic archdiocese of Galveston-Houston. "If there's any dispute over working conditions, they have very little recourse..."
It sounds like Dunning should oppose illegal immigration then. Instead, he supports it.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 12:25 PM
Local enforcement of immigration laws protested in Irving, Texas (Mexican consul, Hector Flores)
From Sep. 21's "Irving mayor defends increased deportations" (link):Deportations in this city have skyrocketed in the last several months – from 262 in all of 2006 to 1,338 through mid-September... "In this city, one has to be extra careful," [local Mexican consul Enrique Hubbard Urrea] told Al Dia . "And if possible, avoid going through there, because we suspect, and with good reason, that people are being detained simply because of their appearance." ...At least 1,600 people have been turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement since June 2006 as part of the Criminal Alien Program, which provides for round-the-clock communication with federal authorities and is designed to detain illegal immigrants who have been accused of a crime.Note that Irving doesn't participate in the 287g program; they mayor opposes the use of that program and the city council hasn't approved it. Now, as if on cue:
Angered over a record number of recent deportations in Irving, more than 1,000 protesters waved U.S. flags and chanted "We are America" as they rallied Wednesday night at City Hall.I wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that there was some sort of coordination between the Mexican consul and those who organized this protest, but I have no proof.
Demonstrators called for Irving officials to put a moratorium on turning over suspected illegal immigrants to federal officials until immigration laws are reformed nationally. They also urged people to call Mayor Herbert Gears and ask him to stop deporting people from the city's jail.
"We need to raise our voice and we need to ask for changes about the things we don't like here," said Hector Flores, a leader in Irving's Hispanic community [and a real piece of work who's past president of the League of United Latin American Citizens]...
...And community leader Carlos Quintanilla said he would organize a boycott of Irving businesses if the city persisted.
..."We're not just hurting people driving without driver's licenses," said Luis DeLaGarza, a political consultant who helped organize the rally. "We are hurting the economy in Irving. We need to have immigration reform."
Two people from the anti-illegal immigration side were arrested at the event; whether they misbehaved or something else happened isn't clear.
UPDATE: There's video here (warning: may lock up browser). The ends of two altercations are shown, with one counter-protester slapping at two protesters, and another counter-protester with his hand on the neck of another protester. What preceeded those incidents isn't shown (gosh, that's surprising), and both may have been provoked. Unfortunately, this illustrates yet again that many of those opposed to illegal immigration haven't learned how to play the game. That includes video taping everything that happens as it's happening, and may also include not fighting back and then suing. Who knows what could be "discovered".
Posted to Immigration2007b at 09:58 AM
Harvest Hillary! And, Gravel looks for a rock
Tonight's Democratic debate was just a sham, so let's make with the funny or a close approximation thereto.
First, it's Harvest Hillary. Dressed in one of her autumnal pantsuits, the candidates prepares to make what is considered in some countries an obscene gesture:
Then, Mike Gravel look for either a rock to throw, or for his single supporter:
Posted to WackyHumor at 08:56 PM
Tim Russert/MSNBC Democratic "debate" features journalistic incompetence
The Democrats are offering yet another debate this evening, broadcast on MSNBC and featuring Tim Russert as moderator. He and a "reporter" from a Northeast TV network just asked the candidates whether they supported sanctuary cities. Then, Russert and the "reporter" just listened as the candidates blathered on. All of them supported sanctuary cities, with (of course) Kucinich and Gravel being the most extreme and the latter being the most incoherent.The only thing Russert did was press them to answer the question; he didn't call them on any of the ensuing misleading statements nor did he point out the downsides of their support. He is simply a hack and isn't willing to call the candidates on their BS.
Please go to campaign appearances and ask the candidates tough questions - the type that hacks like Russert won't ask - and then upload the responses to Youtube. Everything will change if people start doing that: the candidates will realize they have to start dealing with issues, and the MSM will be damaged by being revealed for the hacks they are.
UPDATE: A purported transcript is here. This part does not comport with my recollection of events:
[Allison King of New England Cable News]: So, Senator Biden, yes or no, would you allow the cities to ignore the federal law [via sanctuary laws for illegal aliens]?My recollection is that he would allow sanctuary cities, but I'll wait for excerpts to verify that. Also, King was introduced as having "has been sift[ed] through thousands of questions from across the country". That's one heck of a sifter she's got there, since the question on sanctuary cities was the only one on immigration, and there were no doubt several more worthy questions, including the ones I submitted via their online form.
BIDEN: No.
In his "answer", Biden also said:
Pick up the New York Times today. There is a city not far across the river from my state that imposed similar sanctions... And what they found out is, as a consequence of that, their city went in the dumps -- in the dumpsters. Stores started closing, everything started to happen and they changed the policy.So, either a U.S. Senator bought the NYT's propaganda, or was trying to retail it.
Then, Chris Dodd says:
The Immigration Service came in an raided basically homes in [New Haven, Connecticut], causing a great deal of disruption, disrupting the relationship that was being developed with community leaders...One would hope that a U.S. Senator wouldn't support a potentially corrupt mayor and "community leaders" that are collaborating with a foreign government, but he's a Democrat so what do you expect. Then, after endorsing Bill Richardson's stock "reform" speech, he says:
If it means temporarily engaging in a sanctuary protection here, then so be it if that protects our country.Sanctuary policies would allow illegal aliens who are terrorists to remain here to plot and carry out attacks; see the remarks from September 11 Commission member John Lehman.
Then, after Kucinich reads what's on the Statue of Liberty and after Hillary and Obama try to evade the question but both end up answering in the affirmative after issuing standard talking points, we come to Mr. Incoherent, aka former Senator Mike Gravel:
What's going on? Again, we're in fantasy land. We're talking about a problem -- we're scapegoating the Latinos of our society because we as a society are failing in education, we're failing in health care, we're failing in our crumbling infrastructure, and we're failing by invading countries and spending our treasure.These answers are indicative of journalistic incompetence of the worst degree. All of those candidates should have been torn to shreds if Russert and King weren't simply paid hacks.
UPDATE 2: Video of most of the sanctuary cities question is here. While Biden does say "No" just like is in the transcript, Russert did ask all of the to speak up if they thought the federal government should do something against the cities with those policies. All of them stood there with their hands down until Kucinich started in with his blather. So, Biden got confused somewhere along the line.
Posted to Politics at 06:39 PM
Kathleen Henehan/Media Matters promotes economic benefits of illegal immigration
"K.H." of Media Matters for America - presumably Kathleen Henehan - discusses a recent Los Angeles Times guest editorial from Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies in a post entitled 'In LA Times op-ed, Krikorian cherry-picked "anecdotal evidence" on immigration crackdown' (mediamatters.org/items/200709260011). The post is beyond tedious, and here's the summary:
In a Los Angeles Times op-ed, Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, claimed that there is "extensive anecdotal evidence" that "more illegal aliens are going home, leading to improved conditions for American workers and communities." He cited five newspaper articles for support, but four of those articles also reported that the departure of illegal immigrants might have caused or may yet cause local businesses to experience a drop in revenue and eliminate jobs.
She goes on to sound just like the Wall Street Journal, George Bush, or paid hacks as they attempt to portray Agrigeddon should illegal aliens leave or be deported. Those on the left side of things may want to note that MMFA is on the side of corrupt businesses and others who profit from illegal activity in order to pay a lower wage or otherwise make more money.
Kathleen Henehan also approvingly quotes from a January 17 Wall Street Journal article that includes the following:
[t]he plant has struggled with high turnover among black workers, lower productivity and pay disputes between the new employees and labor contractors.
Thankfully - at least according to the subtext provided by MMFA - they're being replaced with Hmong imports from Minnesota and Wisconsin. Maybe Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson would like to weigh in on the interesting things that MMFA supports.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 05:25 PM
Governor Tim Kaine appoints extremist to Virginia Commission on Immigration?
I haven't researched this, but from this:A local delegate has asked Democratic Gov. Timothy M. Kaine to re-think his appointment of the head of the Virginia-based Muslim American Society to the Virginia Commission on Immigration.Video of an Omeish speech at the link or here.
Del. Todd Gilbert, R-Woodstock, wrote to Kaine earlier today, saying he was concerned about the appointment of Dr. Esam S. Omeish, a Northern Virginia physician and the group's president, to the panel. The commission was created earlier this year to study the impact of illegal immigration on the commonwealth.
The Muslim American Society has significant ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, a group founded in Egypt, Gilbert said.
UPDATE: Whether he jumped or was pushed, Omeish is now off the Commission. Tim Kaine has released the following statement:
"I have accepted Dr. Esam Omeish's resignation as one of the 10 gubernatorial appointees to the 20-member Virginia Commission on Immigration. Dr. Omeish is a respected physician and community leader, yet I have been made aware of certain statements he has made which concern me...
Posted to Immigration2007b at 03:49 PM
Ken Belson/Jill Capuzzo/NYT: corruption, illegal activity are great!
Ken Belson and Jill Capuzzo of the New York Times offer a slab of pro-corruption, pro-illegal immigration propaganda in "Towns Rethink Laws Against Illegal Immigrants".
Apparently, Riverside, New Jersey has suffered economically after enacting an anti-illegal immigration ordinance (which they recently rescinded), and the NYT offers the most dire portrait they can:
With the departure of so many people, the local economy suffered. Hair salons, restaurants and corner shops that catered to the immigrants saw business plummet; several closed. Once-boarded-up storefronts downtown were boarded up again.
What about those businesses that weren't seeking to profit from an influx of "immigrants"? How are they doing? That's not answered.
And, there certainly is a lot of money to be made off illegal activity, but whether it's good to encourage that is another thing. There are also the other costs that Riverside doesn't have to pay after "so many" people left, such as increased educational and health costs. And, there are the non-financial costs, such as illegal immigration being an indicator of government corruption. Oddly, the NYT's crack reporters didn't factor any of those costs into the equation.
As for the ACLU, PFAW and others seeking to in effect enrich themselves by bankrupting small towns, this is all they have to say:
Meanwhile, the town was hit with two lawsuits challenging the law. Legal bills began to pile up, straining the town's already tight budget.
Wouldn't real reporters look into the ACLU's activities in this matter in a bit more depth, rather than creating a slanted report designed to apologize for illegal activity?
As for the "victims", they only quote four, all of whom would profit with increased illegal immigration:
Angelina Guedes, a Brazilian-born beautician, opened A Touch From Brazil... Luis Ordonez's River Dance Music Store, which sells Western Union wire transfers, cellphones and perfume... Bruce Behmke opened the R & B Laundromat in 2003 after he saw immigrants hauling trash bags full of clothing to a laundry a mile away... Regina Collinsgru, who runs The Positive Press, a local newspaper, and whose husband was among a wave of Portuguese immigrants who came here in the 1960s.
In her previous report (first link above), Capuzzo spun such wire transfers like so:
[another shop has] a bustling Western Union office, where many of the immigrants can stay in contact with relatives back home...
"Staying in contact" by sending money to their home countries, encouraging corruption in the U.S. as U.S. companies profit from illegal immigration, and incentivizing foreign countries to keep sending us people legally or illegally, that is.
The bottom line is that what Ken Belson and Jill Capuzzo write cannot be trusted; they're simply propagandists for the illegal immigration-supporting New York Times.
Those buying the propaganda include the following:
"Classically Liberal":
freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/09/town-that-threw-out-immigrants-reverses.html
"Thoreau":
highclearing.com/index.php/archives/2007/09/26/7217
David Weigel of Reason Magazine:
reason.com/blog/show/122687.html
UPDATE: From our "self-starters"/reverse assimilation file comes this additional paragraph from the article:
On the town's leafy side streets, some residents admired the pluck of newcomers who often worked six days a week, and a few even took up Capoeira, the Brazilian martial art.
How wonderfully multicultural of them. And in New Jersey too! Compare this snippet from the NYT editorial promoting Mexicanos Sin Fronteras:
You didn't think they [MSF] were just going to roll over, did you? They're immigrants: smart, industrious self-starters, like your grandparents.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 10:51 AM
George Soros linked to illegal immigration marches? (Actually, try the Mexican government)
Investor's Business Daily offers "The Soros Threat To Democracy". The part about immigration isn't entirely accurate, and they may have fallen for puffery by George Soros' Open Society Institute:
Didn't the mainstream media report that 2006's vast immigration rallies across the country began as a spontaneous uprising of 2 million angry Mexican-flag waving illegal immigrants demanding U.S. citizenship in Los Angeles, egged on only by a local Spanish-language radio announcer? ...Turns out that wasn't what happened, either. Soros' OSI had money-muscle there, too, through its $17 million Justice Fund. The fund lists 19 projects in 2006. One was vaguely described involvement in the immigration rallies. Another project funded illegal immigrant activist groups for subsequent court cases... So what looked like a wildfire grassroots movement really was a manipulation from OSI's glassy Manhattan offices. The public had no way of knowing until the release of OSI's 2006 annual report.
First, if I recall correctly, the first large march was that on March 10 in Chicago. That was followed by a Los Angeles event on March 25, organized by the March 25 Coalition.
Second, while I'd be ecstatic to find out that Soros was involved in those marches, at this point the more worrisome issue is that many of the organizers of the Chicago marches have links to the Mexican government and Mexican political parties. The issue the MSM refuses to look into is whether those organizers are in fact Mexican proxies, much the same as the U.S. has used proxies to organize demonstrations and spread propaganda in other countries.
As for Soros, the 2006 annual report is here:
soros.org/resources/articles_publications/publications/annual_20070731
Unrelated to the marches, they disclose that they fund the far-left NLG:
Several OSI grantees, including the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, the Immigrant Defense Project of the New York State Defenders Association, and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, mounted a coordinated litigation effort that culminated in a major U.S. Supreme Court victory in the case of Lopez v. Gonzales.
As for the marches, they offer no specifics on their involvement. However, they do lie by omitting the magic word ("illegal") and by pretending that illegal aliens were marching for their rights. In fact, they were marching for additional rights:
Hundreds of thousands of people from immigrant communities demonstrated in cities across the nation for recognition of their rights as people living and working in the United States. Alliances of immigrants' rights groups, faithbased organizations, civil rights groups, and others helped mobilize the massive rallies that increased immigrants' visibility and highlighted their economic and political power. They also had a positive influence on the debate over illegal immigration in Congress, changing its focus from almost exclusively enforcement to also including opportunities for immigrants to legalize their status and reunify family members.
If someone can find a list of actual organizations that Soros has funded in the immigration field that would be very helpful.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 10:33 AM
Obama immigration interview: he'd make situation far worse (Kevin Johnson/UC Davis)
Professors Kevin Johnson (lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration), Jennifer Chacon, and Bill Hing of UC Davis have scored a true coup for the blogosphere: an interview about immigration with Barack Obama! Of course, it probably helped that all three of them "have served as members of an Immigration Policy Group for the Obama campaign". Another help was that the questions are complete puffballs and they didn't have any followup questions despite the answers being mostly stock replies and full of holes. I suspect that the "interview" (http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2007/09/exclusive-barac.html) was conducted via email and with a staffer, perhaps with the staffer simply copying and pasting from past Obama statements.
The interview does, however, reveal that Obama would make things even worse than previously suspected.
I will not stop pushing Congress to pass comprehensive reform this year... [opposes point-based immigration] We also need to bring the 12 million undocumented immigrants out of the shadows. We need to be realistic about the fact that they are here, we can't deport them, and they have become an integral part of our society. [standard amnesty provision blather, says he'll work for amnesty in first year of his term]
There are mostly likely more than 12 million here, and while we can't deport all of them tomorrow we can cause a large percentage to go home simply by enforcing our laws. He should have been called at least on that.
[reiterates opposition to point-based system, drops name of Senator Menendez]... The point system instead of family visas betrays American family values, the same values that the family-based preferences in our immigration law are designed to enforce. It gave no preference to an immigrant with a brother or sister or even a parent who is a United States citizen unless the immigrant met some minimum and arbitrary threshold on education and skills.
Maybe it's in our best interests as a country to bring in those who do in fact have something above a grammar school education and who have some skills so they can contribute to the U.S. I guess that decreases the likelihood that they'd vote Democratic, so what's in the best interests of the U.S. flies right out the window.
[Johnson et al falsely imply that increased enforcement leads to border deaths; in his response, Obama dances around his forced support for the fence and slightly contradicts them on their implication but is afraid to take them on on that issue.] ...Additional fencing on the border is not a comprehensive solution, but it sometimes helps deter people from taking the risk of entering illegally.
His response to the question of what to do about Elvira Arellano is such a classic of political doublespeak that I'll include it in full:
I've met with Elvira Arellano and her son, and I understand the challenges that they and millions of other undocumented immigrants face. Although I do not condone Ms. Arellano's defiance of the law, her plight is representative of a broken immigration system. [copy and paste begins] We need comprehensive immigration reform that creates a system that is fair, consistent, compassionate, and emphasizes both maintaining the rule of law and the security of our borders while working to keep families together. I will not stop pushing Congress to pass comprehensive reform this year. Part of this issue involves family reunification, an issue which I have fought for in the Senate, most recently working with Senator Menendez and others during the most recent debate to ensure that families were not left out of immigration reform. If President Bush cannot lead on this issue, I will, by reviving our national discussion on comprehensive reform in my first year in the White House and working diligently toward a solution rooted in pragmatism, the rule of law, and our history as a nation of immigrants.
Note that everything after the first two sentences is basically a copy and paste from what "Obama" (or his staffer) "said" earlier in the "interview".
More copying-and-pasting ensues in the response to the question about Hazleton, PA; that brackets this:
[...supports "comprehensive reform"...] The anti-immigrant law passed by Mayor Barletta was unconstitutional and unworkable – and it underscores the need for comprehensive immigration reform so local communities do not continue to take matters into their own hands... [...supports "comprehensive reform"...]
His response to the final question, one about assimilation, is vague although it contains an anti-Obama nugget at the end. He says he wants to pass the anti-American DREAM Act and then throws in his other plans just for a bonus: establishing universal healthcare, ending the Iraq war, etc., etc. Then, he drops the name of Luis Gutierrez, with whom he wrote the Citizenship Promotion Act. See the link for the issues with that. Then, he goes off on an education tear, with a Latino emphasis.
Then, a bit of a bombshell:
I am a supporter of transitional bilingual education to help our English language learners thrive.
From that I assume he supports allowing the Mexican government to spread their propaganda to U.S. public school children.
That shouldn't come as a surprise, considering that he marched in the May 1, 2006 illegal immigration march in Chicago, the one that was organized by several people linked to the Mexican government and Mexican political parties.
The bottom line is this: he would be a complete disaster as president. What we can do about this is go to his campaign appearances and ask him real questions (the kind that Kevin Johnson et al won't), and then upload his responses. That will help further reduce his popularity, it will put pressure on his competitors to reform their stances on immigration, and it will also help put pressure on the MSM and on academic hacks to ask real questions.
UPDATE: Sometimes even I reach MSM levels. I misread his statement above regarding bilingual education as "transnational" rather than the "transitional" that he actually said. Supporting the second is certainly problematic, but not anywhere near as problematic as supporting what I originally thought.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:08 AM
DailyKos poll: only 35% want Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president (Democratic Party rejoice!)
A few days ago, Huffington Post contributor Sally Kohn disclosed that she has a "crush" on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:
dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/9/23/83652/6735
However, the Kossacks have since redeemed themselves with this poll:
dailykos.com/story/2007/9/23/224950/843
After 1080 votes, only 35% would prefer that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was president of the U.S.
There's hope for the Democratic Party!
Posted to Miscellania at 09:11 AM
John Edwards: path to citizenship for *everyone* living in the U.S.
From this (scroll) we get this self-evidently lunatic quote from John Edwards (9/17 Service Employees International Union political action conference):
"We're going to ensure that every single person living in the United States of America has a completely achievable path to American citizenship so that they don't live in the shadows."
It'd be nice if we still had reporters rather than simply transcriptionists. They could have first asked Edwards what he means by "living in the U.S.A." What timeframe does that imply? Could someone live here for a day and then get on the "path"? Or, would it have to be a few weeks or a few months?
Then, they could have told the hairhead about the tremendous pressure that would put on our borders by the millions and millions and millions more who would try to come here and live for however little time it takes to get on the "path".
Any reporter who talks to Edwards should ask him about that, and any reporter who talks to him about immigration matters but who fails to ask him about that is simply a hack. I suspect we'll see many examples in the coming weeks.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 08:53 PM
DOJ sues Illinois over statewide sanctuary policy (Blagojevich)
From a U.S. Department of Justice press release [1]:The Department of Justice today filed a lawsuit in federal district court seeking to invalidate an Illinois state law that attempts to prevent employers from using DHS's E-Verify system, which allows them to check in real-time whether new hires are authorized to work in the United States. The lawsuit seeks a declaration that a law passed earlier this year by the Illinois legislature and signed by the Governor [Rod Blagojevich] that prohibits employers from enrolling in the Department's E-Verify system is invalid.Rep. Peter Roskam says:
"E-verify or the Basic Pilot Program, authorized by Congress, is the on-line system that allows employers to verify whether new hires are allowed to work in the United States," said Carl Nichols, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's Civil Division. "Today's lawsuit seeks to invalidate an Illinois state law that frustrates our ability to assist employers in making sure their workforce is legal, and in doing so conflicts with federal law."
"Governor Blagojevich and the Illinois Legislature are acting against the best interest of Illinois workers, Illinois families, and against the safety of our nation... It is unbelievable that a legislative body would prohibit honest employers the right to voluntarily verify the citizenship status of their workers. It is against the law to hire an illegal alien and the federal E-Verify system is currently the best means available for employers to ensure compliance... Governor Blagojevich is attempting to preempt federal law by creating a virtual sanctuary within the State of Illinois for illegal aliens."A few more links on this here; links to the complaint and the legislation here. The last includes an interview with Michael Chertoff about this.
Previously:
Rod Blagojevich, Luis Gutierrez, and the alleged FALN terrorist
Illinois House approves driver's licenses for illegal aliens
Will Rod Blagojevich pro-illegal immigration scheme violate law?
FBI probes Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich; hiring kickback?
Blagojevich-linked group agitating illegal aliens, calls for general strike
Blagojevich stand behind NOI member on Illinois hate crimes commission
Blagojevich gives illegal aliens better deal than veterans
Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich gets a $720,000 heated driveway
[1] usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2007/September/07_civ_757.html
Posted to Immigration2007b at 03:38 PM
It's time to call out the enablers!
I want to assure everyone that this video is neither a troll nor a satire, and it's not sad at all that those leaving comments* can't figure that out:
* UPDATE: To make this perfectly clear, the reference is to the comments at Youtube, not those here. I would also like to clarify that the "ENABLER!" graphic - which I just copied and pasted into random places immediately before pressing 'Save' - may be a bit confusing. The appearance in the video of The Pope and The Natster are meant to be guiding lights on JFo's path to recovery and I am not in any way accusing them of being enablers.
Posted to WackyHumor at 09:33 AM
New York Times editorial: pass anti-American DREAM Act
From the 9/20 New York Times editorial called "Pass the Dream Act" (link):
...The idea is modest and smart, but modest and smart usually don’t get very far these days. The anti-immigrant forces that buried the Senate’s comprehensive reforms under a wave of faxes and phone calls are at it again over the revival of this small part of that much bigger bill. They are convinced that giving a break to blameless young men and women - maybe about a million - who want to earn a college degree or serve in the military weakens the country instead of strengthening it. Their hostility to nurturing a new cohort of American citizens, their reflexive "no" even to this limited attempt at immigration decency, lays bare the bankruptcy of their self-defeating passions... Passage would also give encouragement to the budding activists on college campuses around the country who have rallied behind the Dream Act for themselves and their schoolmates...
1. This appeared on the same day that Dick Durbin made his changes which may have somewhat reduced the hugely negative impacts of the bill. Before those changes, the DREAM Act still allowed illegal aliens to take college discounts from U.S. citizens. And, it was a massive amnesty with no upper age limit and could have amnestied far more than the million that the NYT claims (maybe that's why they say "maybe").
2. Needless to say, the NYT is trying to smear those opposed to massive illegal activity as not only being "anti-immigrant", but being ruled by their "passions" rather than reason.
3. All of the "activism" I've seen relating to the DREAM Act is either dishonest (the endless string of PIIPPs) or based entirely on emotion, illogical thought, and ethnic solidarity. None of that should be encouraged.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 09:12 AM
Eliot Spitzer jeopardizes New Yorkers safety for votes (drivers licenses for illegal aliens)
New York governor Eliot Spitzer will allow illegal aliens to get New York driver's licenses beginning in 2008. You may recall New York City as home to a terror attack that took place on 9/11/01 and whose perpetrators were able to obtain 35 or so driver's licenses from various states. That includes those like California that - as New York will - make special allowances for illegal aliens.From this:
That change clashes with the 2005 REAL ID law passed by Congress that states require, among other things, a Social Security number in order to get a license. States have until December 2009 to be in compliance.Related:
States that fail to meet the standards will lose their certification by the Department of Homeland Security, meaning that driver's licenses in those states will no longer be valid for air travel, entry to federal facilities and for tax purposes.
Travelers will now have to carry a second form of ID, like a passport, which was met with criticism yesterday.
"To outright dismiss the security needs of our state and nation and provide illegal aliens documentation is dangerous and inconceivable," said Sen. Dale Volker (R-Depew).
"Gov. Spitzer should not view New York state driver's licenses like baseball cards - handing them out just to score political points."
Does Eliot Spitzer support U.S. laws?
Posted to Immigration_dls at 12:13 PM
Diversity Visa: almost 10,000 admitted from terrorist nations
The Diversity Visa Lottery is a Teddy Kennedy-hatched plan that was designed to increase the numbers of immigrants admitted from Ireland and other European countries. Each year around 55,000 applications are chosen at random from around the world with minimal qualificatons.Now, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) says that nearly 10,000 people have been admitted from terror-sponsoring countries:
The report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office said the State Department's inspector general warned in 2003 that the Diversity Visa Program posed a significant risk to national security and recommended it be closed to people from countries on the U.S. list of state terrorism sponsors.They haven't found any evidence that terrorists have used the program but, obviously, that doesn't mean that they couldn't have snuck under the radar.
But four years later, the program remains open to people from those nations and little is known about what becomes of them once they enter the United States, the GAO said.
From 2000 to 2006, the program allowed 3,703 people from Sudan, 3,164 from Iran, 2,763 from Cuba and 162 from Syria to enter the United States and apply for permanent legal resident status, the report said. That totals 9,792 new immigrants...
From July 2002:
...this program run by the State Department increases immigration from the seven countries that the State Department has declared "state sponsors of international terrorism:" Iran (768 visas this year), Iraq (71), Syria (62), Libya (61), Cuba (529), North Korea (four) and Sudan (1,297).
It also awards permanent residency to the natives of two countries that are the prime sources of al Qaida -- the network of suspected terrorists: Saudi Arabia (38) and Egypt (1,551). Other participating countries with active Islamist terrorist elements include Algeria (834), Lebanon (62) and Yemen (45)...
Posted to Immigration_terror at 11:09 AM
Lotsa dogfood: Tennie Pierce LAFD settlement made ($1.43 million)
Apparently the City of Los Angeles may announce later today a settlement with former L.A. Fire Department fireman Tennie Pierce, who sued the department over supposed racially-motivated hazing that involved other firefighters putting dog food into his spaghetti.
Story here, phone numbers to call if you're in the area here.
UPDATE: He and the city have settled for $1.43 million. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa calls it the "best possible" outcome.
UPDATE 2: From the Veritable Home of Liberalism Itself:
Pierce had sued, claiming racial harassment among other things, after a colleague slipped dog food into his spaghetti following a volleyball game in which Pierce repeatedly joked "Feed the big dog!" in reference to himself. An L.A. Weekly investigation found no evidence of a racial component, racial comments or other racial undercurrents surrounding the prank.
Not only that, but he'd previously taken part in other pranks, like the one pictured here.
And, he only ate two bites of dogfood, putting his take at $715,000 per bite. I'll eat a whole can for 1/100 the price!
Posted to Los_Angeles at 03:39 PM
Hillary Clinton: I'm not a lesbian *
Responding to the question "How do you respond to the occasional rumor that you're a lesbian?", Hillary Clinton says: "It's not true".
* Now, certainly, some reactionaries and other members of The Conspiracy might say something about the meaning of the word "is" in this case. But, it does apply, since "are" is a declension of "is", and the word "is" in this case is not entirely clear. Could it be referring to that instant moment at which the question was asked? Certainly, it wasn't referring to all time in the past, present (whatever moment the present might be; it constantly changes), or the future. When saying "it's not true", could Hillary be referring to the rumor itself, saying that she's never heard that rumor? Or, could she have been referring to the frequency of the rumor, saying that she thought it was heard more or less times than "occasional" would suggest? Could she have some lesbian "experiences" but not be a full-on lesbian? Could she have thought that she was responding to the question whether she was really from the Island of Lesbos?
Take the poll in the extended entry!
Posted to WackyHumor at 12:54 PM
Esmeralda Bermudez spins Mexican textbooks in Oregon public schools
Esmeralda Bermudez of the Oregonian offers "Mexican lesson plans crossing the border". The Mexican government - with the assistance of useful idiots and others - has managed to get their curriculum [1] used in three Oregon high schools. This is only the latest similar incident [2].Although she was defended by her paper for another article [3], the current article is completely missing any hint that this would be in any way a bad thing. One would think that, faced with a subject like this, Bermudez might consider phoning a few people who oppose illegal immigration and/or Mexico's agenda to find out what they think. Apparently she's not that kind of reporter. This case also illustrates that there are powerful forces - including those in government and the media - who oppose assimilation and who, for ethnic reasons or others, wittingly assist Mexico with its goals.
The Associated Press appears to have rewritten her report to fashion something misleadingly titled "Oregon Schools Adopt Mexican Curriculum, Stirring Debate" (link). As with the apparently original article, there is no debate, only promotion.
For the "debate" see the entry from KGW here. Most of those leaving comments are opposed; if Bermudez were in any way a real reporter rather than just a hack, couldn't she have found some opposition?
From the original article:
Conversations are under way between the Oregon Department of Education and Mexico's secretary of public education to align the curriculums of Oregon and Mexico so many courses in Mexico will be valid here and vice versa. The innovative move puts Oregon on par with other educators nationwide who have launched similar ventures in Yakima; San Diego, Calif.; and Austin, Texas.Spoken like a true useful idiot. Write him and let him know what you think: patrick.burk@state.or.us
..."[Bilingual aides and such are] not enough," said Patrick Burk, chief policy officer with the superintendent's office of the Oregon Department of Education, adding that the goal is to "minimize disruption" for immigrant Latinos.
"The availability of resources is astounding," said Burk, who flew to Mexico with a team of Oregon curriculum officials in August to discuss making equivalency standards official. "We're able to serve the students so much better if we're working together."
...In Washington, nearly 30 schools have already implemented Mexico's curriculum into the classrooms. Yakima School District was among the first, drawing educators from across the state who traveled to the schools to learn about the new method.Others quoted:
"We're seeing them score higher," on standardized tests, said Jorge Herrera, the coordinator who manages the programs for the state. "And more are staying in school." Annually, staffing the programs in Yakima schools costs an estimated $60,000, he said...
* Patricia Ramos, "the director of national affairs for Mexico's Institute for Adult Education and National Advisory of Education for Life and Work"
* Dale Bernardini, "a teacher who handles programming of Oregon and Mexico's partnership for Reynolds School District"
* Tim King, "director of Clackamas Middle College and Clackamas Web Academy"
* Francisco Rico, teacher at Reynolds High School
If you're in those school districts, discuss this issue with those people directly, pointing out the downsides of what they're involved in. If they don't relent, work to publicly discredit them or recall them from office. The same goes for those at the state level: attend their public meetings and ask them detailed questions about this issue designed to drive them from office.
[1] The program is named "community plazas" and includes history and other books and a website.
[2] Heather MacDonald discussed this issue here. Other localities using these or similar books from a foreign government include Minnesota and Los Angeles. Compare the current coverage to that offered by another ethnically-compromised "reporter", Rachel Uranga. Earlier this year Louis E. V. Nevaer promoted the textbooks.
[3] On August 24, 2007, Therese Bottomly, the Oregonian's "managing editor/readership and standards" offered "Immigration article provokes backlash" about one of the reporter's prior efforts. Not only can't she find anything wrong with Bermudez' coverage, and not only does she attempt to portray opponents to illegal activity as angry racists ("Suffice it to say, most of it was tinged with anger and some of it with outright racism"), but she offers a quote:
Peter Bhatia, executive editor of The Oregonian, says, "We certainly appreciate the passion around this issue and while our coverage has not been perfect it has been truthful and fair. We cannot and will not edit the newspaper to suit any agenda, pro or anti. Nor will we back off in covering this important issue. We are very fortunate to have a capable, talented and tough reporter on the story, Esme Bermudez. She will continue to serve our readers well in dissecting the complexities of the immigration debate."Just as long as you only want to hear Mexico's side of things, that is.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:49 AM
ACLU loses church/state separation case (Jesus painting in courthouse)
TheirA disputed portrait of Jesus Christ will remain at the Slidell city courthouse in Louisiana after a federal judge refused to grant a demand by the American Civil Liberties Union to have the painting removed...
In response [to the ACLU], the city of Slidell mounted additional portraits of 15 of history's preeminent lawgivers alongside the Jesus painting [which had been there for a decade]. The framed portraits added on Aug. 31 included those of Confucius, Hammurabi, Moses, Charlemagne, and Sir William Blackstone. Alongside the 16 framed portraits are a reproduction of the U.S. Constitution and a mounted explanation of the various figures in the paintings...
Posted to MultiCultiCult at 08:39 PM
Columbia University welcomes Ahmadinejad; Columbia Political Union rejects Minuteman speaker
Via this we learn that at the same time as Columbia University and their president Lee Bollinger wants Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to engage in a speech at Columbia (link), the student-led Columbia Political Union is denying a similar right to Minuteman Project co-founder Jim Gilchrist.
The CPU's executive board (cupolitics.org/leadership/eboard.html) voted on Monday night to deny a return engagement to Gilchrist. As you may recall, he was forced off the stage by violent far-left groups last year.
From their statement (blog.cupolitics.org/node/291):
After several productive conversations with other student leaders and our advisors, and after lengthy discussions among our Executive Board members, it has become clear that this event cannot take the form we had originally hoped it would and could not effectively accomplish the goals we had hoped it might.
Gilchrist says that a majority of their members as well as deans wanted him to speak. However, Professor David Eisenbach may have been one of those who helped pull the plug.
UPDATE: Not so fast: Eisenbach is looking like one of the good guys, telling AP about the decision to uninvite Gilchrist:
"The health of a free society and a university depends on the free expression of ideas. Only through a free expression of ideas can we reach the truth."
And:
"Of course I imagine there will be a protest, a large and potentially disruptive one—though I don't know about that—and certainly I will be helping to organize it," Judd, reached by phone Monday afternoon, said of the invitation... "I would really like to know what the hell he [Eisenbach] thinks he's doing," [International Socialist Organization President David Judd, SEAS '08] added... Lauren Steinberg, CC '09 and CUCR's director of operations, said she hadn't heard of the invitation before today [9/17]... "Personally, I really hope he's not coming," Steinberg said. "I mean, it was a fun time last year, but I don't need it to happen again."
Their plan was initially to invite Karina Garcia to debate Gilchrist, but apparently she refused.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 06:51 PM
Dick Durbin modifies DREAM Act; calls still needed
From this:Sen. Richard J. Durbin, trying to win support to pass his proposal to give legal status to illegal aliens who go to college or join the military [the DREAM Act], said yesterday he has dropped from his plan a mandate for in-state tuition rates and is promising to impose an age limit to cut the number of people who would be eligible...Sen. John Cornyn - who voted for it in conference - says it won't survive cloture. However, calls are still needed to help avoid "changes of heart." There's a list of those who need phone calls here.
...He has agreed to impose an age ceiling of 30 to limit the pool of eligibility, answering critics who said it was too open, and he is considering changes to confidentiality rules governing applications...
..."I would be opposed to it and will work against it," said Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, Mississippi Republican.
Even Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who was one of the most vocal Republican champions of the president's immigration bill, was noncommittal yesterday...
Posted to Immigration2007b at 12:17 PM
Mitt Romney releases immigration policy document (er, kinda)
Mitt Romney has released a momentous 70-page tome called "Strategy for a Stronger America" (link). It consists of ten sections about his various proposals. In rather large print, with lots of pictures. No footnotes for him!
The immigration section includes the following quote:
"We must reform the current immigration laws so we can secure our borders, implement a mandatory biometrically-enabled and tamperproof documentation and employment-verification system, and increase legal immigration into America."
That pretty clearly sounds like a national ID card for everyone, and even the PDF isn't internally consistent:
Issue a biometrically-enabled and tamperproof card to non-citizens and create a national database for non-citizens so employers can easily verify their legal status in this country.
It's a relief it would (at least according to the second statement) be just for non-citizens. However, as with Rudy Giuliani he's database-mad and as with Rudy's plan even if it only started with non-citizens it would eventually become a national ID for everyone, including citizens.
And, we get three one-paragraph-only sections that, while they probably have their own issues, aren't as problematic:
Secure The Border.
Punish Sanctuary Cities.
Encourage Legal Immigration.
The "Improve Interior Enforcement" section raises a bit of a red flag, perhaps with reason:
Provide resources to enforce immigration laws throughout the nation, and crackdown on employers who continue to hire illegals with stiffer fines and penalties.
Somehow the "continue" part has me a bit worried: after what? After Romney is elected? Or, after a "guest" worker program or after an amnesty?
Wait, what was I thinking? He's against amnesty!
Reject Amnesty. Do not give amnesty or any special pathway to those who have come to this country illegally.
The problems with that statement are discussed at the link, as is a question you can ask Romney to find out exactly where he stands. We know the MSM isn't going to ask, so it's up to us to do it.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 03:22 PM
CCC offers DREAM Act PIIPP in press release form
Via this we get this press release from Xiomara Corpeno and Cheryl Aguilar of the Center for Community Change:As the United States Senate is expected to take up consideration of the DREAM Act as an amendment on the Senate floor, several immigrant youth will join national organizations and coalitions in Washington, DC tomorrow, Wednesday, September 19, 2007 to urge their Members of Congress to support the DREAM Act under the chorus, "Our Dreams Can't Wait."They brought along two students; compare their descriptions in the release from the first paragraphs offered by "reporters" in "news" stories. The release is basically just a PIIPP in raw, unprocessed form:
Rodrigo came to the United States, at the tender age of six, after his father was killed in front of him. After graduating high school as valedictorian with a 4.0 GPA, Rodrigo entered the University of California, Berkley where he majors in Rhetoric and Ethnic Studies. Rodrigo aspires to attend medical school.I don't know about those professions; wouldn't it help pull the heartstrings better if they wanted to join the FBI or the CIA?
At 14 years old, Lizbeth left her native Oaxaca, Mexico where the family's financial situation was crumbling to embark a new life in the United States. After plenty of sacrifices, Lizbeth is one year away from graduating on the Dean's honor list in Chicana Studies at the University of Southern California. She wants to become an immigration or civil rights lawyer.
You can see Corpeno - at that time with CHIRLA, a group that's allegedly collaborated with the Mexican government - on this video where she basically states that Mexicans and others have a right to migrate to the U.S. at will.
UPDATE: The title originally said this was from CHIRLA, but that's just the organization Corpeno was previously with and with which CCC is linked.
Posted to Immigration_piipps at 01:43 PM
Douglas McGray's uniquely anti-American DREAM
Douglas McGray (douglasmcgray.com, dmcgray *at* comcast.net) of the New America Foundation offers "A uniquely American DREAM" (link), a guest editorial supporting the anti-American DREAM Act. In addition to being a massive and nearly unlimited amnesty, that bill - currently attached to a defense bill - would allow illegal aliens to take college discounts from U.S. citizens. Please contact your Senators and let them know you oppose it or just go here to send a free FAX.
The editorial is highly similar to the "news" reports in this genre; if you aren't familiar with them read a few of those then compare them to McGray's spiel. This is truly propaganda by the numbers:
...[Congress] might start by considering young people like Lucia... By seventh grade, she made it from remedial English classes to the gifted-and-talented program. She joined the California Cadet Corps, a kind of junior ROTC. She was voted queen of her high school prom and named valedictorian of her graduating class. She had a plan. She wanted to enlist in the Marines, go to college and apply to work for the CIA -- she liked spy movies... ...[Her parents] told her they had come to the United States illegally all those years ago. That meant she was an illegal immigrant too... ...She graduated two years ago. But she couldn't apply for a paying, professional job and start returning America's investment in her...
Supporters of illegal immigration are really cranking up the pressure: just yesterday another propaganda piece featured an illegal alien who wanted to be an FBI agent. Could this be a sign of some form of coordination between those who produce or who push these articles?
Note also that this is a bit of a retread for McGray. In April he offered an "This American Life" (NPR/Chicago Public Radio) segment "Just One Thing Missing" (newamerica.net/publications/articles/2007/this_american_life_5124). You know what's coming!
Martha doesn't like to talk about her future anymore. She'd wanted to go to med school, become an OB-gyn...
Etc., etc. No word on whether she also wants to join the NSA.
Posted to Immigration_piipps at 10:33 AM
Stephen Wall/San Bernardino Sun promotes DREAM Act
Stephen Wall of the San Bernardino Sun offers what's called around here a "PIIPP": a "Pro-Illegal Immigration Puff Piece". This one - like most of the others - is designed to promote the anti-American DREAM Act, a bill that would let illegal aliens take college discounts from U.S. citizens. The bill is currently attached to a defense bill and everyone is urged to call their Senators and stress your opposition.As for Wall's propaganda, if you aren't familiar with these type of articles, look at the two examples presented side-by-side here. Then compare them with his and consider - despite the quotes in the article from critics - whether he's a reporter or just a hack:
Maria Duarte is clinging to her dream of becoming a social worker.
But she will need the support of Congress to achieve her goal.
Duarte, a 20-year-old Cal State San Bernardino student, is one of the thousands of illegal immigrants who could become legal residents and eventually citizens under a bill pending in Congress...
...Even if she graduates from college, Duarte's degree will be worthless unless she can become a legal resident. Besides social work, she is thinking about entering the field of criminal justice and becoming an FBI agent...
Posted to Immigration2007b at 12:32 AM
Corporatist Nuns for Illegal Activity! (escorts for illegal alien farmworkers)
From our "I'm beyond being shocked at the level that some religious 'leaders' will go to support illegal activity" comes this:Similar fears have prompted the staff of Catholic Charities in the Diocese of Rochester, N.Y., to consider organizing escort services for the immigrants who work in the region's farms and dairies.I don't really want to see a nun doing the perp walk, so hopefully their parishioners can help prevent that from happening. The best way to do that is to let your local religious "leaders" know that if they support illegal immigration you will publicly challenge their position and show the other parishioners how wrong they are.
Mercy Sister Janet Korn, social justice awareness coordinator for Catholic Charities, said some area farmers now escort their workers when they go into town for shopping or other business. The workers – and their employers – fear that they'll be targeted for questioning and potential arrest by virtue of their appearance.
...The Catholic Charities staff has discussed formalizing a program to offer such escorts, modeled after services provided to natives of El Salvador who returned to the still-volatile country to reclaim their homes and property when the civil war ended in the early 1990s.
Sister Korn said there are fears that escorts might be charged with crimes for transporting illegal immigrants, so discussions are proceeding cautiously...
Posted to Immigration2007b at 09:47 PM
Didn't Naomi Wolf like my Huffington Post comment? (Florida taser incident)
Naomi Wolf - who you may remember from the Al "Alpha Male" Gore episode - offers "A Shocking Moment for Society: Tasering at University of Florida" [1]. I left a comment which appears to have been disapproved, thus once again proving false the HuffPost claim that they don't disapprove comments simply because they disagree with the poster [2].Shortly after posting it, someone using the nyu.edu network followed the link in the comment; this was the referer:
http://editorial.huffingtonpost.com/modsuite/?tool=approve&filter_entry_id=&pending=1Since my comment hasn't appeared, I can only assume that it was disapproved. (Of course, perhaps there could be a two-level approval process or something, but I doubt it). While I haven't been able to determine a link between Naomi Wolf and New York University, perhaps she's been given access through their network or something. Or perhaps it's one of Arianna Huffington's web minions, but one wonders whether a
Herewith the comment:
I haven't watched any of the videos, but it certainly seems like there's much more to this than Wolf lets on:[1] There are only so many videos I can watch so I haven't delved into this issue, although (just as a general rule) I tend to oppose tasering people who try to ask questions.
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/09/17/student-tasered-at-john-kerry-forum/
I note also that I was the only person that I know of who spoke out when the S.F. Supes falsely accused someone of committing a crime:
http://24ahead.com/blog/archives/003184.html
Perhaps if Wolf and other "liberals" would pay attention to things like that their words wouldn't ring so hollow.
[2] This has happened many times: my comments on Marty Kaplan's entries have never been approved, and while Earl Ofari Hutchinson might have approved one, most have not made it through the filter. Likewise with Hilda Solis. Oddly, two very negative comments I left on entries from Anthony Romero of the ACLU were approved.
[3] Per the second comment, NYU is actually not public. I note also that one of Arianna's upper-level minions, Jay Rosen, works there (journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink), so perhaps it's one of his students learning to be a good "journalist" or something.
Posted to Bloggage at 03:54 PM
Ten Senators against DREAM Act; please call the rest
So far, NumbersUSA has found 10 Senators who say they'll oppose the DREAM Act, a massive amnesty that will also make it possible for illegal aliens to take college discounts from U.S. citizens:
Alabama: Sessions
Arizona: Kyl
Georgia: Chambliss; Isakson
Kansas: Roberts
Kentucky: Bunning
Louisiana: Vitter
North Carolina: Burr
Oklahoma: Inhofe
Tennesee: Corker
The phone numbers for the other senators are listed here; please give them a call and ask everyone you know to do the same.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:07 PM
Flashback: Hillary Clinton healthcare plan's national ID card + massive government database
Let's set the wayback machine to HillaryCare, circa 1994:Under President Clinton's health-care plan, every person in America will be registered by the federal government and issued a red, white and blue "Health Security Card." This includes independent contractors, the self-employed, the homeless, and illegal immigrants who have regular jobs. Babies will be registered at birth.I'm sure we can count on Ezra Klein and all the other promoters to disclose whether Hillary Clinton's new healthcare plan contains some of these same downsides.
As 'The Clinton Blueprint: The President's Health Security Plan' (Times Books, 1993) points out, once you are enrolled, you will be assigned a "unique individual identifier." "The unique identifier may be the Social Security number or a newly created number assigned to the health care system." All of your medical information will be collected and stored in a "unified health information system," where it can be accessed via your health-security ID number. And "an electronic network of regional centers containing enrollment, financial, and utilization data is created. The network receives standardized enrollment, encounter, and related data from plans for aggregations in analysis and feedback to plans, alliances, states and the Federal Government."
In other words, everyone in America will be assigned a national ID number, and your medical records will be stored in a government computer, where they can be seen by thousands of bureaucrats. This information could be used to deny you governmental loans or jobs. Or it could be used to force you to get mandatory treatment for alcohol or drug abuse. Or it could put you in a mental hospital or enable the state to take away your children...
Posted to Privacy at 11:24 AM
Devona Walker/NewsOK sells dire consequences of no-match; illegal aliens leaving Oklahoma?
Devona Walker of NewsOK offers the stock "Immigration crackdown called devastating to economy" about illegal aliens apparently leaving Oklahoma because of a new law (two other examples here). She brings on two people to paint a dire picture of economic disaster. Oddly enough, both are Hispanic and profit from the presence of large numbers of Hispanics, legal or illegal. Odd! She also brings on Tamar Jacoby.Then, she offers what appears to be an intentional attempt to deceive:
Even those here lawfully feel they are being targeted.Terrill says it only deals with illegal immigration, but the first and fourth paragraphs above will give the reader the false impression that he's targeting legal immigrants as well.
"It makes them feel like, 'I'm not wanted here,'" [a Hispanic restaurant owner] added.
Randy Terrill, R-Moore, co-sponsored Oklahoma's own immigration enforcement legislation - largely considered one of the toughest in the nation - set to go into effect Nov. 1.
For him, that's the point.
"We are talking about people who have entered this country illegally, and are now making demands for rights, specifically the right to pursue employment, for which they are not eligible," Terrill said.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 11:00 AM
What would you like Sally Field to dress as?
You can only choose one, so make it count.
Posted to WackyHumor at 10:17 PM
Hillary Clinton healthcare plan begins with possible Big Lie
See if you can spot the possible whopper contained in Hillary Clinton's new healthcare plan (new report here, described at her site here):
Hillary Clinton unveiled the third part of her plan to ensure that all Americans have affordable, quality health insurance... ...her American Health Choices Plan will secure, simplify and ensure choice in health coverage for all Americans. This Plan covers every American - finally addressing the needs of the 47 million uninsured...
I'm going to guess that her plan would also cover illegal aliens, and if that's true then she's lying. Illegal aliens and legal immigrants are not "Americans"; they're foreign citizens: Mexicans, Brazilians, and so forth.
If it does in fact include illegal aliens, here's an accurate version of the above:
Hillary Clinton unveiled the third part of her plan to ensure that all "Americans" with that word defined to include all American citizens together with everyone that Mexico and other countries can send us have affordable, quality health insurance... ...her Residing-in-America Health Choices Plan will secure, simplify and ensure choice in health coverage for all Americans and everyone else who can make it over the border. This Plan covers every American and many more besides, just as long as they can make it through the desert or overstay their visa - finally addressing the needs of the 47 million uninsured including those illegal aliens that the Democratic Party has helped come here...
UPDATE: Via this we learn the somewhat surprising news that someone from the MSM asked Hillary's people about this issue. If it was CNN that asked they probably would have mentioned that, so it was probably another source:
Senior policy adviser Laurie Rubiner [says:] "That's one we're going to have to think through a little bit... We have not dealt with every single detail with this plan"... ...When asked if it would be safe to assume that the Democratic frontrunner, at this point, has no position on coverage for illegal immigrants advisers answered "yes" and said the plan does not "at this point" deal with that issue.
I could make a joke about Hillary waiting until her co-chair Fabian Nunez hears back from the Mexican government, but instead I'd like to point out how pathetic it is that a presidential candidate has unveiled a major plan and doesn't have or won't disclose how it intends to deal with a possible major downside to the plan.
UPDATE 2: From this:
The new Clinton plan doesn't include the words "citizen" nor "immigrant," but does refer to "Americans" 30 times. A Clinton spokesman said the plan doesn't cover illegal immigrants; he didn't respond to a follow-up inquiry asking about other noncitizens such as residents with green cards.
I don't entirely trust in the solidity of those statements because they're appearing in an obscure part of the WSJ and the spokesman isn't named. There's always the chance she could back off from those statements.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 03:31 PM
Wall Street Journal still pushing Hispanic vote chimera
The Wall Street Journal offers what is probably a daily attempt to support importing cheap labor in "Hispanics and the GOP" (possible author: Stephen Moore). It's difficult to point out all that's wrong with it or how similar it is to past efforts, but let's consider this bit:
While GOP candidates debated the urgency of erecting a fence from California to Texas along the Mexican border, Democrats debated in Spanish on Univision.
Actually, (to the chagrin of Bill Richardson), they "debated" in English. It was translated into Spanish. And, Richardson practically had a sign around his neck saying, "vote for me, I'm Raza". And, both Hillary and Obama were asked to defend their voting for the fence. And, leftie Elena Maria Salinas asked questions that indicated her support for illegal immigration, which the Dems answered as one would expect. Would the WSJ have the GOP reduce itself to that level?
To reverse current trends, the GOP need not resort to ethnic pandering, which is the left's metier.
I fail to see how they could avoid stooping to ethnic pandering, if they're going to support massive immigration from one region and especially from one country. And, that also means giving in to the racial power demands of "community leaders" who've made it clear that they put their race ahead of their country. So, how would the WSJ do it?
But Republicans would help their cause tremendously if the party at the very least adopted a welcoming stance toward Latino newcomers... Tone matters in politics, and getting people to vote for you is easier when you're not likening them to Islamic terrorists, or implying that Latino men are hard-wired for gang-banging.
Nice strawman. I'm not aware of GOP leaders that do that. Chuck Schumer did produce a video showing illegal aliens climbing over a fence and discussing the threat of terrorists infiltrating the U.S., which he quickly pulled because a couple racial demagogues complained. Should the GOP engage in such gutless behavior? Should the GOP turn a blind eye to terrorist infiltration because racial demagogues want them to turn a blind eye to massive illegal immigration by others of the same race?
There's much more, including this:
Republican pols may decide to follow Mr. Tancredo, Lou Dobbs, Fox News populists and obsessive bloggers down this path, but it's likely to lead to political defeat.
Oh well. Even if I were a member of a party I'd put what's in the best interests of the U.S. first, and I invite the WSJ to consider doing the same.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 10:24 PM
Truther (lamely) confronts Rudy Giuliani, why can't we?
There have been several videos featuring "Truthers" more or less lamely "confronting" presidential candidates about 9/11. While one featuring John Kerry featured an actual dialog (and more or less a brush off), most of them involve the Truthers yelling questions at the candidate which are then ignored. And, most people are generally going to automatically throw most of their questions into the tinfoil hat category.
It would be great if people other than Truthers could be encouraged to go to appearances and ask real questions about immigration and do it in a way designed to discredit the candidates.
For an example of how not to do things, see Rudy Giuliani's appearance at "Steak Stuffers" in Tulsa (written up here):
One would think that asking Rudy about whatever statements he made about the safety of the air on the WTC pile would be a slam dunk, since 60 Minutes featured a segment about that last week. However, Joe Picorale from Tulsa Truth didn't exactly helping himself by:
1. Not trying to get a question in during a question period. Obviously, this is difficult since the candidates are a bit aloof, but surely they could choose occasions when the candidates are willing to answer questions rather than simply shouting their questions at the candidates' back or as he gets into an SUV.
2. Not highlighting the reporters spoken to (including one from the AP). If someone has actual facts, and that reporter doesn't mention them, then one can ask the reporter why and discuss their failure to discuss those facts.
3. Not having a handout listing Giuliani's statements. I have no idea what he said about the safety of the air around the pile, but that would seem to be a necessary first step.
4. Verging a bit into conspiracy theories, such as Rudy's supposed foreknowledge of one of the buildings' collapse. As with #3, that quote and a cite could be included in the handout.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 06:04 PM
Singin' with ANSWER (DC Iraq protest video)
Here's a video from the DC Iraq protest: link. It appears to have featured even more of a (if I may use the phrase) wacko contingent than the protest that I attended, and those were in Los Angeles. Includes a dirty hippie on a pogo stick, another one with an accordion, an older dirty hippie making unintelligible sounds, a group called HIPS (link) leading a chant, and... folk songs!
Another one is here. There are pictures here.
Posted to ThePeaceMovement at 05:59 PM
Amnesty comes back on Monday, and what you can do about it
From this:President Bush's comprehensive immigration reform, defeated in June, will make a second appearance this week when the Senate takes up various pro-amnesty amendments submitted to the Department of Defense funding bill, H.R. 1585, which is scheduled for debate.Previous coverage of this latest push here. Grassfire is apparently starting some sort of campaign this week.
While not "comprehensive" reform, the latest initiative attempts to pass key provisions of the earlier immigration measure piece by piece by attaching amendments to unrelated bills, a process critics characterize as "stealth."
Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin, D-Ill., has re-introduced another version of his "Dream Act," this time as an amendment (SA 2237) to the DOD funding bill...
NumbersUSA has more details, and you can send a free FAX.
As usual, I'll point out that the way to actually have long-lasting change is to discredit pro-amnesty politicians. Dick Durbin would be a wonderful choice if he has any public appearances, but the presidential candidates are great choices as well.
All you need to do is go to their public appearances, ask them tough questions about their stances, and then upload their responses to Youtube. The idea is to ask them questions that make them look as bad as possible. If that's done enough times, it will have a very salubrious impact on not just the immigration issue but on many other issues as well.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 04:26 PM
Rudy Giuliani's "foreigners-only" (national) ID card
I've previously discussed how Rudy Giuliani's scheme to "stop illegal immigration" (one of his Twelve Commitments) by requiring a "foreigners-only" ID card would either fail or would eventually become a national biometric ID.
Here's another way that his card would morph from being just for foreigners to being for citizens as well. Consider the following quote (link):
"You then have a tamper-proof ID card for all the people that are in the United States [1]. They have to get a tamper-proof ID card when they come in, or if they hear they have to get one."
Many of those who "come in" are going to eventually become citizens. What happens then? Do they get to magically throw away their biometric IDs? After having a track record of using a biometric ID as a non-citizen, it's going to be extremely difficult to wipe the record, and there will be a great deal of pressure to require that former non-citizen continue using their card.
[1] I'll assume he just misspoke and he doesn't mean "all the people that are in the United States", since he's made it clear that it would just be for foreigners in past statements. (Although, that could have been a slip).
Posted to Immigration2007b at 04:15 PM
Randal Archibold discovers consequence of NYT policies: border deaths
Randal Archibold of the New York Times offers the two-screener "At the U.S. Border, the Desert Takes a Rising Toll", mostly about one Mexican who tried and failed to be smuggled across the desert, dying along the way. While the emotionalism isn't as incredibly high as it could be, it certainly appears to be an attempt to make the reader want to do something to end these border deaths.
And, in fact, there are only two things that would greatly reduce the number:
1. Open the border completely and pass out citizenships or at least work permits at the border, or
2. Stringently enforce our immigration laws so even people in deepest Mexico realize that trying to cross won't work: they won't be able to find work and they won't have access to non-emergency public services.
The U.S. is never going to do the first, leaving the second as the only realistic option to reduce the number of incidents.
Oddly enough, the New York Times is somewhere between the two. In fact, by excusing illegal immigration every chance they get, they help the U.S. become a sort of attractive nuisance [1]. Every time someone tries to build a fence around a neighbor's swimming pool, the NYT advocates cutting holes in the fence.
In brief, the NYT is partly responsible for the border deaths they decry.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 10:40 AM
Robert Nix and Luis Mendoza would make fine Democrats (Lou Barletta invite)
Perhaps some people should consider their political options:Leaders from two statewide groups of Latino Republicans are criticizing the Lancaster County Republican Committee for inviting Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta to speak today at a donor luncheon.Nix, who's of Mexican descent, was mentioned here about similar comments he made at a meeting of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission.
Robert S. Nix, chairman of the Pennsylvania Hispanic Republicans, and Luis Mendoza, chairman of the Republican National Hispanic Assembly's Pennsylvania chapter, slammed the local GOP, accusing it of acting against Latino interests...
Both have their own reasons for opposing Barletta, but I wonder whether they'd have those same reasons if most of the illegal aliens in the area were Chinese. I tend to doubt it, and I strongly suspect that their primary interest is in obtaining race-based power or something similar.
Perhaps the Democratic Party might be a better vehicle for both of them to achieve whatever their goals are.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 03:52 PM
UFCW, Mexico-linked Peter Schey sue DHS over immigration raids (4th Amendment, yeah sure)
From a UFCW press release (link):The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW), today, sought court intervention to protect the 4th Amendment rights of all Americans and enjoin the government from illegally arresting and detaining workers including U.S. citizens and legal residents while at their workplace.The suit concerns raids conducted at Swift Foods; note that Schey repurposed one of his sites into the Swift Raid Collaborative.
The lawsuit - filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas - names the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency as defendants. The suit calls for an injunction against the excessive, illegal and unnecessary worksite raids conducted by ICE agents...
...Peter Schey, President of the Los Angeles-based Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law and the lead counsel in the UFCW litigation said, "The Department of Homeland Security routinely violates the Constitution and federal law when it conducts work place raids to detect undocumented workers by engaging in mass detentions of all workers without any basis for believing that they have violated any laws. Such mass detentions have long been considered unlawful by the U.S. courts. While the Department of Homeland Security has a legitimate function to perform enforcing the nation’s immigration laws, it cannot do so by running roughshod over the well-established constitutional rights of U.S. citizens and lawful resident workers. If DHS Secretary Chertoff is unwilling or unable to stop the unconstitutional conduct of his agents, then we are sure the federal courts will step in to do so."
Perhaps one way to deal with this issue is for UFCW members to publicly ask their leaders whether they have any qualms about working with someone who has at least three links to the Mexican government and whose motives may involve something other than defending the Constitution.
Posted to Immigration2007b at 01:06 PM