Tag Archives: Immigration

Back To The Border

Have you ever thought about what effect illegal immigrants have on legal immigrants?

In the United States most people equate illegal immigrants to Hispanics even though there are people of many cultures and nationalities that cross our borders illegally. Some cross our borders to find employment while others cross to do harm to our great nation. Guns and drugs flow freely across our borders which, for the most part helps to destroy Americans and in turn leads to our rights being infringed upon. The recent ATF debacle with Mexican gunrunners already has some in Washington wanting to enact more regulations on law abiding gun owners.

On to the effects that illegal immigration has on legal immigrants.

Legal immigrants (especially Hispanics) have possible employers doubt the authenticity of their credentials and documents. It is not uncommon for legal immigrants to have their identities stolen because they have done the work of immigrating legally. Legal immigrants are often stereotyped as being illegal. They commonly have people look down on them or even say rude comments that do not apply to them because they immigrated legally. These are just a few issues that legal immigrants face on a daily basis.

I know a Hispanic lady that immigrated legally, and she has seen some of these things firsthand. While working at a McDonalds restaurant a customer yelled “La Migra” (Spanish for INS) and some of the workers ran to hide. After things settled down, another worker asked why she did not run. She simply stated that she was not afraid of the INS because she immigrated legally and held a green card.

I applaud those who have immigrated legally. They have followed the laws of this sovereign nation to be assets to our nation. For those that have crossed our borders illegally, go back to your home country and if you want to return, follow our laws and enter our country legally next time.

 

Society of St. Vincent de Paul Says Alabama’s Immigration Law Will Criminalize Charity

ST. LOUIS, Aug. 17, 2011 — The immigration law recently passed by the state of Alabama will make it illegal to practice virtually every facet of Christian charity, said the president of the National Council of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul (SVdP), a Catholic lay organization that works extensively with those in need and living in poverty.

“Giving a disabled person a ride to the doctor, finding a temporary shelter for someone, or just giving food, clothing or financial assistance to someone in need – all those things would be made a crime under this law if they were done for an undocumented alien,” said Joseph D. Flannigan, SVdP’s national president. “Our members provide a broad range of assistance and help to those in need regardless of ethnic background, religion or national origin, so the good works we accomplish would be compromised by this law.”

The law, H.B. 56, was signed by Alabama Governor Robert Bentley and is scheduled to go into effect in September.

“Reactionary and draconian measures like this law serve only to drive undocumented immigrants further into the shadows and dehumanize them,” said Flannigan. “Disenfranchising people who aren’t natives isn’t new. Even Moses in the Old Testament admonished his people: ‘You shall not oppress or afflict the alien among you, for you were once aliens residing in the land of Egypt.’”

Flannigan said his ancestors from Ireland also experienced discrimination, distrust and disdain when they first arrived on America’s shores. He referenced a quote from the Chicago Post newspaper from the 1800s: “The Irish fill our prisons, our poor houses … Scratch a convict or pauper, and the chances are that you tickle the skin of an Irish Catholic. Putting them on a boat and sending them home would end crime in this country.”

Laws such as Alabama’s, he said, have been born out of frustration with the federal government’s failure to adequately address immigration issues, and the only viable solution is a national approach that addresses every aspect of the issue.

“Otherwise,” said Flannigan, “this process will continue until we’ve got 50 states with 50 different laws, many of which will be in conflict with each other or, in the case of Alabama’s law, make it illegal to practice the basic tenets of our faith and Christian charity.”

One of the oldest and most effective charitable organizations in the world, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul is a Catholic lay organization of more than 690,000 men and women throughout the world who voluntarily join together to grow spiritually and offer person-to-person service to the needy and people living in poverty in 142 countries on five continents. With the U.S. headquarters in St. Louis, Mo., membership in the United States totals more than 172,000 in 4,600 communities. Programs include home visits, housing assistance, disaster relief, job training and placement, food pantries, dining halls, clothing, transportation and utility costs, care for the elderly and medicine. Providing more than $595 million in tangible and in-kind services, SVdP serves more than 14 million people in need each year, performs more than 648,000 visits to people in their homes, and delivers more than 7 million service hours to those in need, regardless of age, religion, creed, nationality or ethnic background.

Okay! May As Well Bring On Another Clown

“I stand before you today as a disciplined, conservative Texan, a committed Republican and a proud American, united with you in the desire to restore our nation and revive the American dream,”

Holy Cow Rick! No kiddin’? A disciplined, conservativeTexan! I think not. Be still my hyperventilating cardiac event!!!

Rick Perry???!!!…,…the same Rick Perry who endorsed and supported America’s Mayor Rudy Guiliani, a sometimes Republican, sometimes Democrat, in 2008?

On immigration, a critical isue founded upon our sovereign right as a nation to establish and protect OUR OWN BORDERS.., he’s a RINO populist  (That would define him as a politician, NOT a statesman).

He…

recently revived a bill that would crackdown on so-called “sanctuary” cities — localities where the government prohibits police officers from asking about the immigration status of legally detained residents.

Perry, it seems, knows which way the wind is blowing: His immigration stance is a 180-degree turn from his criticisms of Arizona’s draconian immigration law SB-1070 last year. At the time, he questioned the law, saying, “Some aspects of the law turn law enforcement officers into immigration officials by requiring them to determine immigration status during any lawful contact with a suspected alien, taking them away from their existing law enforcement duties, which are critical to keeping citizens safe.”

Considering that Perry also signed the Texas DREAM Act into law in 2001 — a precursor to the national bill that’s been struggling for congressional support — his movement to the right is quite the contrast. In a statement to the conservative Washington Times, Perry now says, “We need to, as a country, address border security before we tackle any immigration issues.”

Source: http://colorlines.com/archives/2011/07/rick_perry_positions_himself_for_gop_field_by_flip_flopping_on_immigration.html

*************************

On education for ILLEGAL aliens, in May of 2001, the then Governor Perry signed House Bill 1403, lovingly embraced by the left then as the Texas DREAM Act. This legislation allowed illegal aliens who graduate from a Texas public high school to attend a Texas college at the in state tuition rate.

Source: SECTION 1. Section 54.051(m); SECTION 2. Section 54.052 (amended by adding Subsection (j); SECTION 3. Subchapter B, Chapter 54 (by amending Section 54.0551); SECTION 4. Section 54.057(a); SECTION 5. Section 54.060(b),; SECTION 6. Sections 1 through 5 and Section 7 of the Texas Education Code

*************************

On an education roll he starts off his remarks, long-winded that they were, to the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project (that would be cutresy-speak for the Latino Voter Registration Education Project) as the clown confirms by his titular description of Cisneros, the ex-Clintonista Wandering Penis Poster-boy, on Friday, June 22, 2001 as follows:

Thank you Antonio. Mayor Garza, Latino Vote 2001 Chairman Henry Cisneros, fellow elected officials, friends in San Antonio. It is my great honor to be with you this evening. Before I begin, let me introduce someone very special to me. She spent 17 years as a nurse providing health care to those in need. Just a few weeks ago, the University of Texas San Antonio Health Science Center named her a Distinguished Alumni and created a nursing school endowment in her name. She’s the mother of two great children, and the first girl I ever had a date with. Please welcome my wife and a great First Lady for the State of Texas, Anita Perry.

My fellow citizens, the face of Texas is changing, and tonight, as I look out into this audience, I see many of the faces that represent that change. The Texas of tomorrow is in this room today, a Texas of boundless energy and fresh ideas, a Texas committed to safe communities and good schools, a Texas that is more and more diverse with each passing day. For Texas to prosper beyond our own time on this earth, there are things we must embrace now. We must embrace our growing diversity as a source of strength and cultural enrichment, not a source of division. We must welcome more Texans of differing backgrounds to the table of ideas, and to positions of leadership. And we must stand united behind an agenda of opportunity for every citizen regardless of their financial means, or the sound of their last name. We do have differences, but there is more that unites us as Texans than could ever divide us. Who among us does not yearn to be successful and to live the American Dream? Who among us is not worthy of a good education, and a future as bold and vivid as our capacity to dream? Who among us does not long for a Texas where our children can thrive, and accomplish things greater than ourselves? Yes, we may be Hispanic, African‑American, Native American, Asian and Anglo, but we are all Texans, and we are united in our common humanity.

Note: It went on similarly, ad nauseum, as he stroked the audience with the keywords of RINO dumming-down and borrowed demonRATIc “target group” strategy. He did fail to note the difference between illegals and legals being embraced in the name of growing diversity. A finger-in-the-wind POPULIST ALL THE WAY.

*************************

On Little Georgie-boy Bush’s SHAMNESTY…Governor Perry issued this press release (of which I’ll only bore you with an opening excerpt only, on Wednesday, January 07, 2004 :

“During my visit with President Fox last November, I reaffirmed my support for a guest worker program that balances our two countries’ economic realities along with the need for homeland security. President Bush’s proposal reflects those goals.“As a former governor of this state, President Bush understands well the huge impact that immigration has on Texas, ..

Source: http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/4310/

Note: Again no mention of any distinction between leagl and illegal is ever made as te wind blew on.

************************

In December of 2006, Governor Perry…sensing a shifting in the winds in Texas attitude building against illegals  he released a press statement noting his views on securing the border. He states that he opposes amnesty for illegal aliens as it rewards illegal behavior, but that he opposes enforcement of US laws through deportation OR EVEN punishment for those who violate the laws as that would harm the US economy. Do you see what he did? He split the issue into what could be operceived as two EXTREMES and why? So he can jump right in the midddle and bullsh*t you that his position is a true compromise, which it is not. !The CLASSIC finger-in-the-wind politician at work, the root cause for much of our problems now comes to the fore and he proposes a guest worker program to allow those here illegally to continue that work on a legal basis but without citizenship. Of coiurse, because he knows that conveying them citizenship can be done by SEPARATE LEGISLATION. It’s the old fast-shuffle to confuse you…THE VOTER.

Then in August of 2007 in blistering heat our hero ventures forth to hump for legalizing illegals, SHAMNESTY REVISITED! ON the OTHER SIDE of the Texas border. How about them apples?

MEXICO CITY — Leading a large delegation of Texas executives trying to drum up business in Mexico, Gov. Rick Perry on Tuesday criticized the U.S. Congress for failing to pass an immigration bill that would legalize millions of workers.

“I don’t think this is that difficult an issue if Congress would have the maturity to sit down and really discuss it and cut out all the mean rhetoric,” Perry said during a break in the third day of meetings with Mexican officials and business executives.

“We need those individuals to continue to grow our economy,” he said of Texas’ undocumented workers, most of whom hail from Mexico. “The vast, vast majority of those individuals want to come and work and take care of their families.”

Perry made the remarks in Mexico City, where immigration is nearly as big a hot-button issue as it is in Washington. He spoke at a press conference shortly before meeting with President Felipe Calderon who, like past Mexican presidents, has lobbied for changes in U.S. immigration law that would include a guest-worker program.

Perry’s statements seemed to put him at odds with many in the Republican Party’s base who regarded the immigration overhaul bill that collapsed in the Senate in June as nothing more than an amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Source: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5090944.html

I could go on with many other positions, but at this critical time Rick Perry is NOT the conservative we need to wrest leadership of the Republican Party from those like him who would piece-by-piece sell us all down the river. I still back Bachmann.

On The Border

The subject of immigration reform has become almost taboo these days. There are people on both sides of the subject that take immigration ideas to extreme. There are some that say we should lock down the border and lock the gates to the U.S., while others think that we should have little or no control on people entering this country.

The United States of America was the vision of immigrants that landed on her shores and decided to make it the greatest nation on earth. The forefathers of this nation came from many different countries and many different stations in life. Our nation has continued to be shaped by an even more diverse people throughout our history. You can find people that helped shape our country from every race creed and religion. The vast difference in the many cultures in our great melting pot has become a unique culture in itself. That is what makes this nation great.

Tolerance is necessary to overcome the barriers we encounter but bowing down to an incoming culture is an insult to those that laid the foundation of our nation. One of the first things that most of the immigrants of yesteryear did when arriving was to learn English, the language that this nation was founded on. Throughout the country there are neighborhoods that are mainly occupied by one group or another that have common ancestry or cultures. Communities like Little China Town, Little Italy, and Little Mexico for example.

The problem that has arisen as of late is that many of the people immigrating to the United States want our nation to change to the nation they left. Some disrespect the nation that has welcomed them to the chance at better lives. Some disrespect the symbols of this great nation and expect us to sit idly by when they deface our flag. Some come illegally and expect the American citizen to support them with all of the government programs offered.  These same actions in many countries could have you jailed or even put to death.

There are a very few things that most Americans want any immigrant to do when they arrive.

  • Enter our country legally
  • Respect our laws
  • Respect our flag
  • Learn our common language
  • Pay taxes like the rest of us
  • Do not try to make us like the country you left
  • If you expect to stay then become a legal citizen

We welcome most anyone no matter what race, religion, creed or even political views. You are welcome to practice your religion and celebrate your family traditions as long they do not violate our laws. We will treat you with respect if you treat us with respect. If you do happen to fall on hard times we don’t mind helping you out long as you don’t expect us to support you all of the time. You might encounter a few individuals that dislike you because of your differences but they do not speak for all of us.

Americans are aware that all of us except for Native American Indians are in fact immigrants or descendants of immigrants. This is the reason you will see people of African descent at a St. Patrick’s day festival or maybe a one of Hispanic descent at one of the Greek festivals. Americans love to come together and celebrate with each other; it is why this nation has succeeded so well. We are willing to embrace each other’s differences, but we also expect others to embrace or at the very least respect our great nation and her traditions.

______________________________________________________________________

For those of you that own firearms, train hard and well and teach those that do not know how.
Be good stewards of the right to bear arms, for we are the last line of defense against tyranny.

-Benjamin Wallace

 

Texas Legislature Fails To Pass Sanctuary City Ban

Texas lawmakers spent numerous hours of the 82nd Legislative session working on what has become a very hotly debated topic: Sanctuary Cities Legislation. The topic was not only on the agenda for the regular session, but was also declared an emergency item by Governor Rick Perry for the special session as well.

Gov. Perry said he put the measure on the special session agenda after it stalled in the regular Legislative session, because law enforcement officers need the ability to make discretionary decisions in regards to the immigration status of a person. Very similar to the Arizona immigration debate, those opposed to the bill argue that it will lead to racial profiling, as well as cause fear and distrust from Hispanics.

The Bill, known as Senate Bill 9, would outlaw sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants. The bill would also prevent law enforcement from asking about the immigration status of anyone who is arrested.

While Senate Bill 9 passed in the Senate, it failed to pass in the House when put to a vote on Saturday, July 2. The failure top pass Senate Bill 9 came as quite a shock, due to the fact that the House, with a Republican super-majority, was expected to pass the bill with virtual ease.

Gov. Rick Perry placed the blame for the failure of the bill to pass on Republican Sen. Robert Duncan. Though none of the Republican legislative delegates would criticize Gov. Perry for specifically blaming their colleague, there were many Democrats who had no problem criticizing him. There are some who feel Gov. Perry “threw Mr. Duncan under the buss to score political points with the conservative Republican base because he intends to run for president.”

While the Sanctuary Cities Ban bill failed to pass, another piece of immigration-related legislation will become law by the end of this year. A provision in Senate Bill 1, which was approved by both the Senate and the House, will require proof of U.S. citizenship or legal residence before they can get or renew a Texas driver’s license.

The driver’s license provision in Senate Bill 1 will impact most all Texas adults, whereas the Sanctuary Cities Ban bill would only impact those who have contact with law enforcement officers. Those who support the passing of Senate Bill 1 say that it will help combat criminal activity and terrorism by illegal immigrants. However, those who oppose Senate Bill 1 say it will force illegal immigrants to who have been in the United States for years to either drive without a license or be deported.

Senate Bill 1, with the driver’s license provision, is now simply awaiting Governor Perry‘s signature, which he is expected with no problems at all.

___________________

Sources:

Amarillo.com

Statesman.com

 

 

Not Devoted Enough Time to Africa?

Wondering how she can "spend" your Tax Dollars

Michelle Obama set out on a week-long trip to Africa to spread goodwill – on the U.S. Taxpayers dime. Of course there is criticism with “extra” trips that this administration’s family has taken. The trip is provoking disappointment from Africa advocates who argue that President Obama, whose father was Kenyan, hasn’t devoted enough time to the continent since winning the presidency.

Mwiza Munthali, public outreach director of TransAfrica Forum, argues that U.S. officials “are not seeing Africa as a big priority. There has been some uncertainty.” The president has made just one trip to sub-Saharan Africa since his Jan. 2009 inauguration and has chosen not to accompany his wife on her journey.

Not devoted enough time to Africa? The last time I looked he was still the President of the United States – not a leader in Africa. I wish that he were a leader of any other country besides the U.S. then I would not care so much about the more than 70 rounds of golf he has played as president. It would be nice if he would devote more of his time to “common sense” solutions to the problems plaguing the United States.

This isn’t the first time the First Lady has come under fire for travel plans. The First Lady raised eyebrows last August when she decided to fly off to Spain on taxpayers dimes, commanding top-dollar luxury accommodations in the middle of a recession. The New York Daily News called her “a modern-day Marie Antoinette.”

On a couple other trips she has been questioned on her international etiquette – in April 2009, she broke royal protocol and hugged Queen Elizabeth, causing a major stir in England. Then in Indonesia last November, Michelle Obama shook the hand of a conservative Muslim minister, a form of social contact between the sexes that violated his religious vows. He blamed the First Lady for the violation.

By the sound of it I really believe she “thinks” she is better than anyone else in the entire world. When the Obama’s travel internationally they are representing the United States, but with her antics I don’t want her representing me. It is sort of like the show “Beverly Hillbillies” when a bunch of poor backwoods people are transplanted to Beverly Hills, California, after striking oil on their land – it just don’t fit.

The First Lady organized another paltry trip to Mexico in April 2010 with Jill Biden. While that trip, too, was aimed primarily on establishing contact with younger civic leaders, some muckrakers called out the First Lady for taking time to travel to a country that’s long been a crucial moment in U.S. immigration policy. Conservative blogger Michelle Malkin, for instance, argued that the trip was little more than an effort to promote “illegal alien shamnesty.”

Expectations for American engagement with Africa soared when Obama took office, with advocates citing his previous travels to his father’s homeland of Kenya and attention paid to African nations while he was a senator. But while Obama has talked about his “family members who live in villages” and told an Africa-focused Web site that he is “probably as knowledgeable about African history as anybody who’s occupied my office,” he has made just one presidential visit to sub-Saharan Africa.

Maybe we can get Obama to move back “home” to South-Africa and he can “lead” in that country – as he is about done leading this country in the WRONG direction. Now that is something I would promote for him and vote for him on. Sorry Obama I am just trying to help you out – help you right out of my White House!

Sources:
Michelle Obama heads to Africa, stirs criticism
First lady’s African trip resurrects criticism of president on African issues

Georgia’s New Illegal Alien Law – Butt Out Mexico and 10 Other Countries

Since when do other countries have a say in our law making procedures or any other issue related to American citizens? They don’t. Why are Mexico and ten other countries filing court papers in support of efforts to halt Georgia’s tough new immigration enforcement law? The law authorizes law enforcement to check the immigration status of a suspect who cannot provide accepted identification and to detain and hand over to federal authorities anyone found to be in the country illegally.

I really don’t see the problem with Georgia’s or Arizona’s “Illegal Alien Laws.” If our government would attempt to do their job – individual states would not have to create these “new” laws. But since laws like this face tough challenges from the Obama administration, they may not be implemented any time soon.

Other countries have far stricter immigration laws than the U.S. does. It’s no wonder there is such an “invasion” of illegals into the U.S. Instead of being punished for breaking the law, illegal aliens are rewarded for making the choice to come to the U.S. with access to social services, education and health care. Other countries use large fines and imprisonment to hinder their illegal alien problems.

The U.S. gives illegals all that they need to come here and live and survive. This happens a lot in my home state of Kentucky. Illegal immigrants come here to work in the tobacco fields, get paid fairly well, some tax free. Most come here on work permits, but they forget to go back to there home country when the permit runs out. Then start a family while you the taxpayer foots the bill.  Adding insult to injury, farm hands are often paid in cash and much of that money is sent back home tax free. There are entire check-cashing and wire services just to service this activity.

Eleven foreign nations are suing the state of Georgia because those countries don’t like our illegal alien laws. Leftist socialist groups like the ACLU and the SEIU are helping them to do it. What will most likely happen is these 11 countries and the two leftist socialist groups will tie this up in court – costing again taxpayers even more money.

I am 100% against any immigrant entering my country illegally.

If you leave whatever country you live in and come across the border into America without first applying for the proper documentation – then it is illegal – you should be detained and removed and have a couple of years ban placed on you from entering the U.S.

S.C. Governor Nikki Haley Battles DHS over E-Verify

%CODE%
Nikki HaleyAs we see in the above video, courtesy of FoxNews.com, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley has sent DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano a letter demanding that the state’s employers have access to the federal E-Verify system so they may comply with the law that requires them to check the legal status of perspective employees before hiring them. So far, Ms. Napolitano refuses to reply to that letter and numerous phone calls to explain why DHS is refusing South Carolina employers access to the E-Verify system so they may comply with the law regrading the hiring of illegal aliens in South Carolina. What is very troubling here is the fact that the Obama administration, and Janet Napolitano to be specific, are constantly bragging about their crackdown on any employers caught hiring illegals, yet here we see them denying South Carolina employers access to E-Verify. For those of you who may not fully understand what the E-Verify system is, you may read up on it here.

It is against federal, and now South Carolina State law to hire illegal aliens in America, so why is the Obama administration blocking access to E-verify? Employers caught hiring illegals have been fined huge amounts of money by the federal government in their supposed crackdown on the hiring of illegals, yet they are now denying South Carolina the ability to verify that perspective employees are legally eligible to work in America before hiring them! Just who does Janet Napolitano think she is here in refusing to answer Gov. Haley’s letter? The taxpayers of this country paid huge amounts of money to create the E-Verify system in 1997, and now we can not use it? Where is Congress on this issue? How about S. C. Senator Jim DeMint calling for an investigation and/or the removal of Janet Napolitano from DHS, since she is blocking the the use of E-Verify, therefore in violation of federal laws that prohibit the hiring of illegals in America? How about House Speaker John Boehner growing a spine and demanding that DHS be investigated here? This is supposedly what we pay you people for up there in D.C., to protect the citizens of this country from exactly this kind of abuse of public office, yet not one of you is doing anything about it!

This kind of blatant example of government abuse against the people of America is the reason the people no longer have faith in the federal government. The President of the United States and the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security are in direct violation of federal law and the people of this country had better wake up to facts like these explained right here. Congress must call for the removal of Janet Napolitano immediately, and the people must be heard in the 2012 presidential elections in the form of removing Barack Hussein Obama from their White House!

Illegals Continue to Flood America, Small Percentage Being Deported.

In a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, The Justice Departments Chief of The Executive Office for Immigration Review, ( EOIR ) Mr. Juan Osuna outlined the problems of the failures of the United States Department of Homeland Security to prevent the recent floods of illegal immigrants bombarding America today. Since DHS head propagandist, Janet Napolitano says the borders are more secure than ever before today, maybe she should have been made to attend this hearing and explain what was discovered there.  Among the more scathing proof of DHS’ failure and total incompetence is the fact that Mr. Osuna stated that his department now has a current backlog of over 270,000 immigration cases as of end of March of this year, and the projected backlog of cases for 2011 surpassing the 400,00 mark !

 

These facts show us that the border is in fact, not even remotely secure, as there are hundreds of thousands of illegals still flooding the United States every year. When Obama talks about immigration reform, it needs to start with securing the southern borders as simple common sense dictates here. This immigration hearing is detailed here, at  The Center for Immigration Studies website . In in we see the following truths about why Illegals are overrunning America today:

Julie Myers Wood, former Assistant Secretary for ICE, testified that in fiscal year 2010 immigration judges completed an average of 1,300 proceedings per judge, many more than other administrative law judges in other fields and with far fewer law clerk resources to assist them. While Mrs. Wood appeared open to the idea of additional hires and also proposed additional means for internal efficiencies, she explained that internal efficiencies are “insufficient to fully address the existing backlog and expected influx of cases and ensure that the court system operates with some efficiency.” She explained that one goal should be “to reduce the number of cases that must come before immigration courts for full hearings.” One way to achieve this, she explained, is through an expansion of expedited removal, something discussed in an earlier blog. The goal should be to reduce not only inefficiencyin the immigration courts, but also to reduce demand. (emphasis mine)

As the former ICE official explained:

By statute, expedited removal may be utilized for individuals that have been in the country for up to two years. However, the executive branch has not utilized the full statutory authority provided for expedited removal, but instead applied certain arbitrary limitations, including the most recent requirement that the alien be apprehended no more than 100 miles from the border and has spent less than 14 days in the country. There is no reason that the government could not take steps to administratively expand the current use of expedited removal, by, for example, focusing on certain known smuggling routes beyond 100 miles or slightly extending the current time period for eligibility (30 days vs. 14 days, for example). Another alternative would be to apply extended time and range limits for the use of expedited removal for immigrants who are convicted of a crime by state or local law enforcement.

We see that the problem lies within the Justice Department itself, along with Obama’s executive branch, who are applying very radical limitations on the deportation statute. The only way to speed up deportation, according to the Obama puppets blatantly ignoring the rule of law, is for when they are caught near the border and within 14 days of entering the country illegally. That means that all the criminals and other illegal aliens that have snuck into the country to avoid legal immigration laws that have been here undetected for years, are being given hearings and appeals to the point of collapsing the deportation system. This is a page right out of Obama-Hero, Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals handbook on how to collapse our government to effect radical change: AKA Socialism and chaos.

From the same website mentioned above, we see just who actually started this blatant act of treason against American Rule of law, and decided to change how we deport illegals when they were in power:

As written into law, expedited removal applies to illegal aliens apprehended anywhere in the United States, provided the alien has not been continuously physically present in the country for longer than two years. Both the Clinton and G.W. Bush administrations decided to limit the program; Clinton allowed for expedited removal only at a few ports of entry while Bush decided not to use the removal process for Mexican or Canadian aliens. Implementing the program to the full extent of the law could greatly reduce the burden on immigration courts. (emphasis mine)

When we look at the staggering total backlog of over 400,00 illegal alien deportation cases projected for this year alone, we can see that the Obama administration is following along right in G.W.Bush’s footsteps in not deporting illegal aliens. This is truly one time where Bush needs to be blamed for his part in causing the current illegal immigration crisis in America today !  This also leads us to understand why the informed voters and political strategists of America today call G. W. Bush a progressive. Progressives make their living subverting the Rule of law in any way they can to effect radical change. They have taken the bad illegal immigration situation created by Bill Clinton and G.W. Bush, and turned it into a chaotic disaster that is crushing many State budgets and causing a huge division within certain groups of Americans today. Divide and conquer comes to mind there. This is just one blaring example of the cancerous infection hiding behind the innocent sounding words such as, Progress, Social Justice and Civil Rights. This is why we need to stamp out the progressive fake Democratic Party of America once and for all in 2012 and beyond. That includes the Progressives in the Republican party also, such as Bush, McCain, McConnell, Romney, Huckabee, and anyone else who doesn’t want to abide by our immigration laws that say that all illegals will be deported as soon as possible, PERIOD. They are criminals who broke the law when entering this country illegally. They have no rights, except to be put on a bus or plane and be shipped out of America period. No Amnesty,  No excuses, just obey the rule of law !

 

Putting a Face to the U.S. Immigration Controversy

VALLEY FORGE, Penn., May 12, 2011 — Today, there are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, a figure President Obama shared in his May 10 immigration speech in El Paso. During this speech, the President acknowledged the impact of our current system on immigrant families, particularly the children. These families, living in the shadows, are the focus of the new bilingual resource Listen to the Children: Conversations with Immigrant Families/Escuchemos a los ninos: Conversaciones con familias inmigrantes by author Elizabeth Conde-Frazier.

“I don’t believe the United States of America should be in the business of separating families,” stated the President. And he noted, “We should stop punishing innocent young people for the actions of their parents.” In Listen to the Children, Conde-Frazier invites the reader to eavesdrop on fictionalized conversations between immigrant parents, their children, and their caregivers in an effort to explain those actions. She addresses:

  • How and why adults make the decision to emigrate from their homeland
  • How the separation affects children
  • What challenges eventual reunification of the family brings

Chapters on the effect of legal status, raids, and educational challenges offer insight into the realities faced by immigrant families as they attempt to make their way forward in a new land. A practical resource for immigrant parents and caregivers, Listen to the Children will also serve as a useful tool for educators, pastors, social workers, community groups, legislators, and others.

 

Editor’s Note:

The reason the children are impacted is that the parents evaluated a risk-reward scenario. They could stay in Mexico and try to survive in a centrally-governed, progressive-dream of a government – or they could head north.

Heading north provides possible rewards of better pay and a safer society. When you enter it illegally you take the risk that you will be arrested and punished. America is a nation of laws.

If they decide to actually have children born in the United States, they are making a conscious decision.  They are taking a calculated risk. Americans should not feel guilty, we didn’t make the choice.

Kicked out of Canada, Jailed in France, Muslim cleric caught being smuggled into U.S

    Pictured is the U S/ Mexico Border station where agents made a surprising discovery when searching the trunk of a Mexican registered BMW.  Inside they found one Mr. Said Jaziri, a native of Tunisia. Mr Jaziri also happens to be a radical Muslim Cleric whom was deported  from Canada in 2007  for “forgetting” to put on his refugee application the small fact that he was  jailed in France for threatening the life of Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard for his drawings of  the profit Mohamaad. I must add here that it is pretty difficult to get yourself deported from Canada these days, no matter the facts. They have a history of leniency towards certain Muslim Clerics/ suspected terrorists, and assorted questionable characters. That leads me to believe there is more to this story than meets the eye. Two reasons  for that statement can be found in an article from the internet news site MailOnline, in an article dated 1/29/2011. *

“He was being held as a material witness in the criminal case against Mr Lawler, who has been charged with immigrant smuggling.”

“Lise Garon, a professor of communications at Laval University in Quebec City, told the Los Angeles Times: ‘His nickname in Quebec was the controversial imam.”

‘I think he was deported because people hated his ideas.’

     Mr. Kenneth Robert Lawler ( Jaziri’s driver) is the person who is actually charged with the crime of immigrant smuggling here. The radical muslim cleric, at the time of  writing this article, is only being held as a “witness.”  Will he be charged with illegal entry to the U.S. ?  Only time will tell. This situation does blow some holes in Janet Napolitano’s recent statements that our border is more secure than ever, and that radical Muslims from far away lands are not illegally crossing into the U.S.A.  via the border with Mexico.

   I must add that I was living in Montreal Canada in 2007 when Mr. Jaziri was said to have been deported because, as Lise Garon (above) stated, people hated his ideas. Montreal has a fairly large and growing population of Muslims, and the last thing Canada would do is deport him soley because people “hated his ideas.” As I stated above, this story is much, much deeper than meets the eye. I will be following it closely to see just what happens to Mr. Jaziri and how the DHS, under Ms. Napolitano deals with him. I also expect CAIR, the Counsel on American-Islamic relations, to get involved real quickly here.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1351385/Controversial-Muslim-cleric-caught-smuggled-U-S-Mexico-border.html#ixzz1CQkytwLZ 
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1351385/Controversial-Muslim-cleric-caught-smuggled-U-S-Mexico-border.html#ixzz1CQkayJcz

 

 *http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1351385/Controversial-Muslim-cleric-caught-smuggled-U-S-Mexico-border.html

ACLU Sues to Protect Gun Rights of .. Immigrants

In what can only be construed as a misguided interpretation of the 14th amendment, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed suit in North Dakota alleging that the State’s concealed handgun law is unconstitutional.

A U.K. citizen, living in the U.S. was denied a renewal for his concealed handgun permit due to a change in the State’s concealed carry laws.  Now, North Dakota requires that a person be a citizen in order to receive the permit.  According to a  FoxNews.com article, the ACLU is invoking a civil war amendment to open the door for persons of any immigration status to be able to carry a concealed weapon legally.

“That to us is a discrimination based upon alienage which would run against the 14th amendment’s prohibition against discrimination upon alienage,” Executive Director of ACLU of South Dakota Robert Doody told FoxNews.com”

The most basic problem with the suit is the position the ACLU is taking on Section 1 of the  14th amendment.  The 14th amendment to the Constitution was adopted in 1868 as part of a  trio that are called the “reconstruction amendments” or “civil war amendments”.  The three amendments were intended to reshape the country from a one of master and slave, to one of Americans.

Section 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

Section one has three clauses: The first, or citizenship clause, protects the citizenship status of an American from infringement by the States.  The second insures due process and the last is the equal protection clause.

The only portions of the 14th amendment that could even vaguely apply are the due process and equal protection clauses.  Those clauses apply to “any person” not necessarily a citizen.  But what those clauses protect is only the right to due process and equal protection under the law.

The ACLU appears to believe that the due process clause prevents the State from depriving any person of liberty.  Therefor, any person living in the United States must be afforded the same liberties or be denied them only through due process.

Since North Dakota has offered its citizens the right to carry concealed weapons, the ACLU is arguing that all persons in North Dakota must therefor also be offered that liberty.  This is a very backwards interpretation of the clause.  What the clause was intended to do was make sure that when a State decided to deny a person of a liberty, it should only be done through due process.

Due process is certainly being applied in this case.  Due process does not guarantee that every person can do what every other can do.  If that were the case, parole’s could roam free, felons could have the right to own guns or vote, pedophiles could be allowed to live wherever they pleased.  Instead, each of those groups were stripped of the right through the due process of law.  Laws and regulations were enacted and once the status of each person was known through legal process, the statutes applied.

In this case, the alien status of the gun owner is not in question.  He is an established, permanent resident alien living in the United States.  North Dakota enacted a law that prevents anyone other than citizens from carrying concealed weapons.  This individual is being treated just like every other alien in North Dakota – no concealed weapons.

The ACLU could easily start the snowball down the hill that becomes a dangerous avalanche.  If this suit succeeds in the Supreme court, felons, spousal abusers, child abusers, and many other groups that were previously denied access to guns, explosives and other dangerous materials would now have precedent to sue for those freedoms.

The initial hearing is scheduled for January 27th.

Are Wealthy Americans Leaving the Country?

I thought I would share my process for gathering viewpoint and facts.  Perhaps others would offer to put articles together in the future, but if nothing else, a look into how I brainstorm a publication:

The high-middle and high-earners in America  pay for the majority of social programs implemented by Congress.

With states facing nearly $100 billion in combined budget deficits this year, we’re seeing more governors than ever proposing the Barack Obama solution to balancing the budget: Soak the rich.

American Senators and Representatives should be thrilled, but instead disparage them for making the money that those Congressmen desperately need to tax.  What happens if they leave?

Perusing democraticUnderground.com, one would find the following comment:

“LEAVE. Take your money and go. America will survive without you… So rather than ruin our country for the other 90% whom you despise. Go away. Take all of your precious money and go elsewhere. Even if it means depression we will be better off in the long run without your manipulation..”

Liberals would love to see anyone with capitalist or free-market ideals leave, but seriously, would they really?  Sure, the populist view is to hate the wealthy – go Robin Hood and such.

Last September, Bob Bauman reported that, “Indeed, the growing trend of Americans voluntarily ending their status as U.S. citizens — the only legal way by which they can escape U.S. taxes and government controls — has reached a new peak and shows no signs of abating.”  Heck, even the radical left site, DailyKOS.com reported that the Bush family bought thousands of acres in Paraguay.  Although Obama doesn’t see what he’s causing, apparently his predecessor and his family did.

How serious are these ex-patriots:

Interestingly, although such a move offshore means departing Americans may have to pay an exit tax that the Democrat Congress and George Bush imposed in 2008, lawyers say this is a price people have become more willing to pay this year, now that recession and decreased asset values has reduced the size of this onerous and unfair tax.

So why do the non-wealthy care?  The top 1% of all earners pay 40 percent of all taxes. Examine the recent health care bill that relies heavily on the wealthy to fund the measure.  If there are not enough wealthy people, the rest of will be left to foot the bill.  A cost the rest cannot afford.

Continuing to hate top-earners for working hard and taking risks is counter-productive.  At some point, the government has to realize that not everyone can work for unions for middle-class wages unless the government is willing to tax middle-class wages at much higher rates.  It is well-known that our legislative branch would never admit such a truth.   Why should they, it would cost them their precious seats.

Wealth Bulletin quotes Jay Krause, a partner at private-client specialist law firm Withers who says he’s seen a rise in those interested in expatriation lately

We also found that over these same years the no-income tax states created 89% more jobs and had 32% faster personal income growth than their high-tax counterparts. -wsj.com

Those who disapprove of tax competition complain that lower state taxes only create a zero-sum competition where states “race to the bottom” and cut services to the poor as taxes fall to zero. They say that tax cutting inevitably means lower quality schools and police protection as lower tax rates mean starvation of public services.

The Live Free or Die State has no income or sales tax, yet it has high-quality schools and excellent public services. Students in New Hampshire public schools achieve the fourth-highest test scores in the nation — even though the state spends about $1,000 a year less per resident on state and local government than the average state and, incredibly, $5,000 less per person than New York. And on the other side of the ledger, California in 2007 had the highest-paid classroom teachers in the nation, and yet the Golden State had the second-lowest test scores.

Christian Kälin, a partner at residence and citizenship planning consultancy Henley Partners, said his firm has had a big rise in such inquiries.
He said: “Tax reasons might be the biggest reason why US citizens will want to drop their passports..” – clubconspiracy.com

Jay Krause, a partner at private-client specialist law firm Withers, said: “The number of inquiries from US citizens wanting to expatriate from their citizenship has increased rapidly in the last year.” – wealth-bulletin.com

To become a resident of Costa Rico for instance only requires proving an income of $50,000 USD per year.  Put $1,000,0000 in the bank and cut a crappy 5% annual and you’re in.   That is nothing serious for a middle-upper earner in their mid-50’s.

*notes:

  1. what would keep the wealthy here
  2. what is the worth of upper-middle income ($200,000) to the American economy
  3. Is the ObamEconomy more about bringing everyone to the same lower-middle class status?
  4. How does Obamacare and the financial reform bill increase Americans worth/income?
Recent Entries »