As a result of California being too stupidly broke to fund the university system adequately, state residents are being severely slashed in admissions in favor of foreign students paying much higher tuition.
The Bloomberg report below curiously frames the issue as Asian American students versus foreign Asians, particularly Chinese, but the statistics cited are worth attention.
The shrinking proportion of white students at UC (falling 29 percent in 2010 at Berkeley) gets but a single sentence in this longish piece.
The important point is that qualified California residents of all races are being shunted aside so the University can charge more money from foreigners.
In addition, some, perhaps many, of the Red Chinese students are certainly spies and come to vacuum up valuable technology and science. It’s crazy for Obama (and some Republican Presidential candidates) to say that every foreign student who earns an advanced degree should get an automatic green card, thereby welcoming ruthless Chinese spies and endangering national security.
Dec. 29 (Bloomberg) — Kwanhyun Park, the 18-year-old son of Korean immigrants, spent four years at Beverly Hills High School earning the straight As and high test scores he thought would get him into the University of California, San Diego. They weren’t enough.
The sought-after school, half a mile from the Pacific Ocean, admitted 1,460 fewer California residents this year to accept higher-paying students from out-of-state, many from China.
“I was shocked,” said Park, who also was rejected from four other UC schools, including the top-ranked campuses in Berkeley and Los Angeles, even with a 4.0 grade-point average and an SAT score above the UC San Diego average. “I took it terribly. I felt like I was doing well and I failed.”
The University of California system, rocked by budget cuts, is enrolling record numbers of out-of-state and international students, who pay almost twice that of in-state residents. Among those being squeezed out: high-achieving Asian-Americans, many of them children of immigrants, who for decades flocked to the state’s elite public colleges to move up the economic ladder.
In 2009, University of California administrators told the San Diego campus to reduce its number of in-state freshmen by 500 to about 3,400 and fill the spots with out-of-state and international students, said Mae Brown, the school’s admissions director. California residents pay $13,234 in annual tuition while nonresidents pay $22,878.
As a result, almost 200 freshmen from China enrolled in 2011, up from 16 in 2009, a 12-fold increase. At the same time, the number of Asian-American Californians enrolled fell 29 percent to 1,230, from 1,723 in 2009. The 2009 figure is from the UC system’s office because San Diego didn’t have it available.
While the San Diego campus is accepting more Chinese students, the decline in Asian-American enrollment may be a result of the total drop in California resident admissions, and two years’ data doesn’t reflect a trend, said Christine Clark, a university spokeswoman.
“UC San Diego is committed to admitting and enrolling talented students from all ethnic and cultural backgrounds,” Clark said in an e-mailed statement.
Asian-American students fighting to distinguish themselves to college admissions officers now have to go up against Asians from overseas, said Casey Chang, a Chinese-American senior at Claremont High School in Claremont, California, east of Los Angeles. He said he has a 4.7 grade-point average and is applying to the San Diego campus for a joint undergraduate/medical-school program.
One in Five
“We’re all competing for the same goal, and the fact that they’re international makes them that much more interesting to the UCs,” Chang said.
One in five international students nationwide, or 57,000 undergraduates, came from China in 2010-11, a 43 percent increase over the previous year, according to the Institute of International Education in Washington. Colleges are more frequently tapping this pool as the surge in middle-class incomes in China coincides with steep budget cuts at U.S. state universities.
UC San Diego received $227 million from the state in the 2011-12 academic year, down from $301 million in 2007-08. Funding for the nine other University of California campuses dropped as well. Continue reading this article
In Mexico, the National Council to Prevent Discrimination (Conapred) is running a campaign to fight racism in the country, which is funny since Mexican illegal aliens in America have consistently employed the bogus complaint as an excuse for their lawbreaking.
An interesting point that might be overlooked is the remark of one boy who responded as he pointed to the white doll, “I am not afraid of whites. I have more trust.” His simple explanation points to the tribal nature of human beings which is based upon the safety that the group provides. We normally prefer to be around others who share our language and values because of the safety component, which is hard wired and deep.
The multiculti crowd has to propagandize loud and long in schools and the media that diversity is the highest good because diversity ideology runs counter to human nature.
Below is the video prepared by Conapred. Although it is in Spanish, anyone can see that many of the kids respond to the question of which doll is “malo” (bad) by readily pointing to the black doll.
REPORTING FROM MEXICO CITY — Is Mexico’s an inherently racist society? Does the culture overwhelmingly favor those with light skin over those with dark skin? And if so, is that a legacy of European colonialism or present-day images in television and advertising?
These are among the thorny questions emerging in online forums in Mexico since a government agency began circulating a “viral video” showing schoolchildren in a taped social experiment on race.
The kids are seated at a table before a white doll and a black doll, and are asked to pick the “good doll” or the doll that most resembled them. The children, mostly brown-skinned, almost uniformly say the white doll was better or most resembled them.
One child in the video with mixed-race features says the white doll resembled him “in the ears.”
“Which doll is the good doll?” a woman’s voice asks the child.
An administration Dec. 29 memo declares that illegal immigrants may have to be held until they’re convicted in local courts before the federal government will begin deportation proceedings.
The declaration “means lots of criminal aliens will be released if the locals don’t have the resources or inclination to prosecute, or if the [suspect] is found not guilty because of a technicality,” said Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies.
The new rule shows “the administration wants to give up one of the most important tools in preserving public safety,” said Krikorian. “We’ll have more and more instances of illegals released by police because [federal immigration officials] wouldn’t take them [and] who then go on to commit some heinous crime.”
President Barack Obama’s campaign aides frequently say they’re seeking Hispanic support to win crucial states, such as North Carolina and Arizona. On Dec. 19, for example, Obama’s campaign manager Jim Messina released a video in which he said Arizona was winnable because “hundreds of thousands” of people in the state have not registered to vote.”
The campaign is using Hispanic ethnic lobbies, such as La Raza, to help register Hispanics and to persuade them to vote in November.
But the ethnic lobbies have their own demands.
They want easier immigration for their ethnic or religious groups, including Hispanics, Asians, Arabs, Irish and Muslims. Continue reading this article
The Muslims’ complaint was about the NYPD’s surveillance of suspicious persons of the Islamic religion. Clearly they hoped to intimidate Bloomberg into letting hostile Muslims run amok and do whatever they want against the hated infidels. Bloomberg fortunately wasn’t having any, but the Muslims feel that they can demand that New York City should stop protecting the public from jihadist terrorism and that is somehow a reasonable request and not enemy activity.
For a view of what goes on in the hostile Muslim underworld, the WSJ article from 2010 (Infiltrating Jihadis’ World) is enlightening. One scene describes a dozen men in an Islamic bookstore in Brooklyn getting their groove on from watching snuff films of American soldiers being killed:
“That made these guys pumped up and happy,” the [undercover] officer said. “It’s like a party at a club. They were hitting the walls with excitement. One guy even broke a chair.”
The Muslim fifth column, from CAIR to Mayor Bloomberg’s breakfast guests, doesn’t want Americans to know about such people in our midst and the danger they bring.
NEW YORK — More than a dozen Muslim clerics and civic leaders skipped Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s annual interfaith breakfast Friday, saying they were upset that he supported police department surveillance efforts in their neighborhoods.
The 15 leaders wrote a letter to the mayor, saying they were protesting the spying program first revealed in a series of Associated Press articles. The letter made a controversy out of a normally sedate end-of-the-year meeting.
Bloomberg didn’t directly address the boycott during the event, though he did quote his father as telling him that “discrimination against anyone is discrimination against everyone.”
He also said: “We have to keep our guard up, but if we don’t work together we won’t have our own freedoms.”
The breakfast is traditionally held at the historic New York Public Library building on 42nd Street and has long served to showcase the city’s diversity during overlapping winter holidays.
Hesham El-Meligy, a founder of the Building Bridges Coalition of Staten Island, said he boycotted the breakfast in hopes of persuading the mayor to abandon his support for the surveillance program. Continue reading this article
On Thursday, Fox reported an egregious immigration case in which Cook County released Salvator Sarabia (pictured), a violent burglar and convicted child sex predator who had been previously deported. Instead of holding him in jail to be picked up by ICE for deportation, the authorities released him into the community on bail, despite the obvious flight risk and danger to public safety.
Unsurprisingly, he didn’t show up for his court date.
When child sex predators are released from police custody, obviously a more radical agenda is at work. In the video below, a hispanic-sounding county commissioner sniffs, “We works for our constituents, not the federal government.” Presumably his constituents wouldn’t like a predator loosed on the local playground. But the commissioner apparently believes even criminal aliens are a part of la raza and must therefore be protected from American law, public safety be damned.
A convicted child sex offender and illegal immigrant who was charged with breaking into an Elgin home in June where a 13-year-old girl hid in the basement has skipped bail, according to police.
Salvador Sarabia, 28, has served time for two burglaries, drug-related charges and criminal sexual abuse of a minor and has been deported twice. He had been free after posting the required $10,000 of his $100,000 bail.
Sarabia, of the 800 block of Ford Avenue, did not show up for his court date on Nov. 21, and a warrant was issued for his arrest, according to Elgin police.
Although Sarabia had an Immigration and Naturalization Services hold against him, a Cook County ordinance passed in September allowed Sarabia to leave the Cook County jail after posting bond.
The controversial ordinance halts compliance with Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer requests, which could have kept him behind bars for up to two days after posting to allow federal authorities time to pick him up for possible deportation. Continue reading this article
How low will he go? It’s still eleven months until the election but Obama is escalating his hispandering by opening up a hotline for those facing deportation or experiencing some other difficulty in America.
As states across the nation ramp up their efforts to catch illegal immigrants, the Obama administration on Thursday launched a new free hotline for people busted on violations to get help.
The hotline, run by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, is available 24/7 for detained individuals to phone if they think they “may be U.S. citizens or victims of a crime.”
The hotline will have translation services available in several different languages. ICE personnel will gather the caller’s information and send it to a field office for immediate action, according to the press release.
The purpose of the hotline and other measures, including a new detainer form, are “to ensure that individuals being held by state or local law enforcement on immigration detainers are properly notified about their potential removal from the country and are made aware of their rights.”
The new practices are “part of a broader effort to improve our immigration enforcement process and prioritize resources to focus on threats to public safety, repeat immigration law violators, recent border entrants and immigration fugitives while continuing to strengthen oversight of the nation’s immigration detention system and facilitate legal immigration,” ICE wrote in its press release.
ICE is an arm of the Department of Homeland Security.
Ann Coulter observes that America is being irrevocably changed by immigration, and it must be stopped very soon.
She thinks Obamacare is just as bad, and makes a decent case. Perhaps, but toxic levels of immigration, particularly Mexicanization (not so much diversity) poisons major aspects of American society, not just the economy.
In the upcoming presidential election, two issues are more important than any others: repealing Obamacare and halting illegal immigration. If we fail at either one, the country will be changed permanently.
Taxes can be raised and lowered. Regulations can be removed (though they rarely are). Attorneys general and Cabinet members can be fired. Laws can be repealed. Even Supreme Court justices eventually die.
But capitulate on illegal immigration, and the entire country will have the electorate of California. There will be no turning back.
Similarly, if Obamacare isn’t repealed in the next few years, it never will be.
America will begin its ineluctable descent into becoming a worthless Western European country, with rotten health care, no money for defense and ever-increasing federal taxes to support the nanny state.
So let’s consider which of the Republican candidates are most likely to succeed at these objectives.
In order to allow Democrats to indignantly denounce Republicans who said Obamacare would add to the deficit, the bill was structured so that no goodies get paid out immediately. That way, when the Congressional Budget Office was asked to determine if Obamacare was “revenue neutral” over its first 10 years, government accountants were looking at a bill that collected taxes for 10 years, but only distributed treats in the later years.
Starting at year 11, those accountants will be in for a big surprise when the government starts paying out Obamacare benefits without interruption.
Because of this accounting fraud, Obamacare can still be repealed. But as soon as all Americans have been thrown off their employer-provided insurance plans and are forced to start depending on the government for health care, Republicans will never be able to repeal it.
The vast complex of unionized government workers managing our health care from Washington will fight to keep their jobs (for more on this topic, see the Department of Education), voters will want their “free” government treats (for more on this topic, see Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security) — and even if they don’t, there won’t be a private insurance market for them to go back to (for more on this topic, see IRS rules favoring employer-provided health care).
The only way to stop Obamacare is to beat Obama in 2012, and repeal it before the health care Leviathan is born.
Otherwise, starting in 2016, Republicans will run for office promising only to improve Obamacare. Newt Gingrich will be calling plans to reform it “right-wing social engineering.”
All current Republican presidential candidates say they will overturn Obamacare. The question for Republican primary voters should be: Who is most likely to win?
2012 is not a year for a wild card. It’s not a year for any candidate who will end up being the issue, instead of making Obama the issue. It’s not a year for one wing of the Republican Party to be making a point with another wing. (And there are no Rockefeller Republicans left, anyway.) It’s not a year to be gambling that America will vote for its first woman president, or that the country is ready for a nut-bar libertarian.
Running against an incumbent president in a make-or-break election, Republicans need a candidate with a track record of winning elections with voters similar to the entire American electorate.
Michele Bachmann, Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich have never had to win votes beyond small, majority-Republican congressional districts.
Jon Huntsman, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have won statewide elections, but Huntsman and Perry ran in extremely red states that don’t resemble the American electorate. Only Romney and Santorum have won a statewide election in a blue state, making them our surest-bets in a general election.
But if Santorum wins, we lose on the second most important issue — illegal immigration — and he’ll be the last Republican ever to win a general election in America.
Just as Americans ought to be able to learn the perils of a welfare state by looking at Greece, we ought to be able to learn the perils of illegal immigration by looking at California.
Massive legal and illegal immigration has already so changed the California electorate that no Republican can be elected statewide anymore. Not so long ago, this was a state that produced great Republican governors and senators like Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, S.I. Hayakawa and Pete Wilson.
If even Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman, two bright, attractive, successful female business executives — one pro-life and one pro-choice — can’t win a statewide election in California spending millions of their own dollars in the middle of the 2010 Republican sweep, it’s buenas noches, muchachos.
And yet, almost all Republican presidential candidates support some form of amnesty for illegals in order to appeal to the business lobby.
Among the most effective measures against illegal immigration is E-Verify, the Homeland Security program that gives employers the ability to instantly confirm that their employees’ Social Security numbers are legitimate. It is more than 99 percent accurate, and no employee is denied a job without an opportunity to challenge the records.
Although wildly popular with Americans — including Hispanic Americans — the business lobby hates E-Verify. Employers like hiring non-Americans because they can pay illegal aliens less and ignore state and federal employment laws.
Any candidate who opposes E-Verify is not serious about illegal immigration. If anything, E-Verify ought to be made mandatory to get a job, to get welfare and to vote.
Kowtowing to business (while pretending to kowtow to Hispanics), Paul, Perry and Santorum oppose E-Verify. As a senator, Rick Santorum voted against even the voluntary use of E-Verify.
Jon Huntsman claims to support E-Verify, but also wants to give illegals amnesty as soon as the border is sealed — as determined by someone other than us. Also, he gave driver’s identification cards to illegal aliens in Utah. (You’d think a guy no one has ever heard of would be more careful about ID cards.)
Following his latest guru, Helen Krieble, Newt Gingrich is for amnesty, combined with second-class status for illegals. Instead of giving illegal aliens green cards, Newt proposes giving them “red cards” so they can stay, take American jobs, have children, receive welfare benefits, attend public schools — and eventually be granted amnesty. The Republican primaries will be over before most voters realize what Newt’s “red card” scheme entails.
Only Michele Bachmann and Mitt Romney aren’t trying to sneak through amnesty for illegal aliens. Both support E-Verify.
Numbers USA, one of the leading groups opposed to our current insane immigration policies, gives Republican presidential candidates the following grades on immigration: Paul, F; Gingrich, D-minus; Huntsman, D-minus; Santorum, D-minus; Perry, D; Romney, C-minus; and Bachmann, B-minus.
And that was before Romney said last week that Obama’s drunk-driving, illegal alien uncle should be deported!
That leaves us with Romney and Bachmann as the candidates with the strongest, most conservative positions on illegal immigration. As wonderful as Michele Bachmann is, 2012 isn’t the year to be trying to make a congresswoman the first woman president.
Two Little Indians sitting in the sun; one was just a congresswoman and then there was one.
A few days ago, a disturbed Muslim woman, Jameela Barnette, was shot dead when she attacked a police officer. She had gotten into trouble earlier for threatening Rep. Peter King because of the hearings he presented on the subject of radical Islam and its dangers to American national security.
Mentally deranged individuals, like Barnette, can sometimes be influenced to behave violently by the crazed exaggerations that appear daily in the mainstream media. Calmly criticizing hostile Islam for its supremacist ideology bent on destroying Western freedoms, as King has done, informs Americans about a genuine threat in our midst.
The CNN talking head in the video below was shocked at the Congressman’s criticism of the press, remarking “to lay this at the doorstep of the media. . . many would question that.”
According to the tireless purveyor of diversity propaganda, the San Francisco Chronicle, California has the dubious distinction of having the nation’s highest number of so-called hate crimes, although the reporter does not specify whether the numbers are tabulated per capita. As the most populated state, the high number of crimes committed could just reflect more people, and the Chron might have omitted that detail in order to make a pro-diversity point in a very biased news story.
At the same time, the reporter tries to convince the reader that the high score is a good thing because it shows more people report “hate” crimes.
The piece reads like a holiday dead-week filler, disjointedly designed to reassure liberal readers that all is normal between Christmas and New Years.
At least a city official admitted that evil white people are not the cause: Assistant District Attorney Victor Hwang, who prosecutes hate crimes in San Francisco, noted, “Hate crimes are committed by everybody against everybody in the city. You see Asians against gays, gays against blacks – you see every variety under the sun in San Francisco.”
The blessings of diversity! In San Francisco, you can get beaten up by a person of any race, ethnicity, nationality, immigration status or sexual preference. I feel so enriched.
California is the state with the most recorded hate crime offenses, but officials say that’s actually a good thing.
California reported 1,331 offenses in 2010, the most recent findings, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. And San Francisco, a famously tolerant city, is also no stranger to hate crimes. The city reported 88 offenses in 2010, according to the state attorney general’s website.
But that doesn’t mean more prejudice is spreading through the West Coast, authorities say.
Unlike homicides or larcenies, statistics for hate crimes don’t always tell the whole story. Higher numbers don’t always mean an upward trend – in fact, Sgt. Katherine Schwarz Choy, who heads the hate crime investigation unit for San Francisco police, said numbers of reported crimes in the city have not changed significantly over the past years.
“When I look at statistics that our state has the highest number of hate crimes by far – on one hand, that’s terrible, but at the same time, that says to me that because people are aware, they’re reporting it, they’re talking about it,” said Nancy Appel, associate director of the Anti-Defamation League in San Francisco. “When I look at a state that’s reporting just two or three a year, that just says to me that they’re not talking about the problem.”
The reality is that hate crimes are a constant in a world where the capacity for prejudice is human nature, authorities say – no matter what ethnicity, race, religion or sexual orientation you are.
“I think that most people think of hate crimes as the Ku Klux Klan riding in, but it’s really something much broader than that,” said Assistant District Attorney Victor Hwang, who prosecutes hate crimes in San Francisco. “It addresses a lot of lower levels of prejudice against ethnicity and race. Hate crimes are committed by everybody against everybody in the city. You see Asians against gays, gays against blacks – you see every variety under the sun in San Francisco.” Continue reading this article
One of the most awful Christmas crimes in recent years was the massacre of six family members shot down in the midst of opening presents by a gunman wearing a Santa Claus outfit. It has taken a couple days for the identities and possible motivation to take shape.
The shooter was an Iranian Muslim immigrant, Aziz Yazdanpanah, who was an estranged husband, a realtor living in a foreclosed house, who was apparently angry with his daughter Nona (pictured) for dating a non-Muslim and his wife for leaving the marriage.
The Associated Press coverage (Authorities identify dead in Christmas shootings) emphasized the killer’s financial and marital troubles as explaining his actions. Those difficulties surely added to Yazdanpanah’s stress, but a Muslim man who is not exercising control over the females in his family can be a very dangerous character. (One example is the “moderate” Muslim, Muzzammil Hassan of Buffalo NY, who beheaded his wife when she decided to divorce him.)
Perhaps the shooter was further irritated by his family’s drift away from Islam. He could have blown away his family on any day of the year, but chose Christmas for maximum effect and several extra victims, who were relatives of his wife. Under extreme stress, people may pull back into earlier beliefs and behavior. For Yazdanpanah, that might have meant a massive honor killing, going out as a traditional Muslim man.
That’s my supposition, of course, but immigration is a very stressful endeavor even in the best of times, and this is not one of those. Muslims in particular may not have bargained for the degree of freedom offered to women in this culture which can be challenging to Islamic family life.
Not all strands of diversity can be woven together. Muslims keep telling us westerners that with their hostile behavior, but we aren’t listening very well. Lee Kuan Yew, the architect of modern diverse Singapore, declared, “I would say today, we can integrate all religions and races except Islam.”
JihadWatch posts an important article from the Dallas Morning News (“Neighbors horrified at news of family’s slayings in Grapevine,” — available only with subscription). The emotional difficulties of the family appear toward the end:
GRAPEVINE — Aziz Yazdanpanah seemed to be losing control of his life in recent months — his wife left him, his house was in foreclosure, and his 19-year-old daughter was dating a young man he didn’t like.
Even so, the 58-year-old former real estate agent from Colleyville seemed to be holding it together. Neighbors say he would smile and wave as he drove through his middle-class neighborhood. Recently, he was seen raking leaves in his yard.
“He was very friendly, a very good neighbor,” said Carrie Stewart, who lives across the street. “He was out here often doing yard work and he even watched our house for us when we went to Colorado.”
Yazdanpanah, a volunteer high school debate coach described as a doting father, is the focus of suspicion a day after a Christmas morning massacre in which a man dressed as Santa Claus killed six relatives and then committed suicide.
Grapevine police arrived at the Lincoln Vineyard Apartment Homes a few minutes before noon and discovered bodies sprawled among opened presents and wrapping paper. The victims were ages 15 to 58….
Citing public records and interviews with friends and neighbors, media reports Monday identified Yazdanpanah and others who had died: his estranged 55-year-old wife, Fatemeh Rahmati, their 19-year-old daughter, Nona Narges Yazdanpanah, and 15-year-old son, Ali Yazdanpanah.
Friends of the family said Fatemeh Rahmati’s 58-year-old sister, Zohreh Rahmaty, and her husband, Hossein Zarei, 59, and daughter Sahra Zarei, a 22-year-old pre-med student at the University of Texas at Arlington, also were killed. Continue reading this article
In a few days it will be 2012, and that means many new laws will go into effect.
Egregious nanny state California has instituted a slew of behavior enforcement laws to stomp out things liberals don’t like. Effective cough syrup corrupting the kiddies and beer confused with caffeine are banished from the shelves of commerce. (Don’t tell Sacramento about Irish coffee, a favorite upper-downer libation in San Francisco.)
Schools are a favorite laboratory for the liberal agenda of diversity social engineering, and this year is no exception with the inclusion of “gay history” for students of all ages. The law requires “a study of the role and contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans, persons with disabilities, and members of other cultural groups.”
DENVER — Starting Jan. 1, getting shark fins, caffeinated beer, cough syrup or a tan is going to be tougher than it was in 2011.
The National Conference of State Legislatures issued Monday its annual list of laws set to take effect in 2012, and there was nothing but bad news for connoisseurs of shark-fin soup. Oregon and California passed laws prohibiting the sale, trade, or distribution of the fins, which are considered a delicacy in China.
California also became the first state in the nation to require a prescription for obtaining any drug containing dextromethorphan, an ingredient found in many popular over-the-counter cough suppressants, including Robitussin, NyQuil and Dimetapp.
The law was prompted by a spike in the use of cough syrup as a recreational drug. A Food and Drug Administration advisory panel considered making the medications prescription-only, but rejected the idea in September.
Voter identification continued to be a hot topic for legislators in 2011. Four states — Kansas, Rhode Island, Tennessee and Texas — approved laws requiring voters to present photo identification before casting ballots.
A fifth state, South Carolina, had passed its own voter-identification law, but it was overturned Dec. 23 by the Justice Department. South Carolina is required to submit revisions in voting procedures for federal clearance as a state with a history of discrimination at the ballot box, but it can appeal Justice’s ruling in federal court.
Supporters say the laws are needed to combat voter fraud, but the effort has touched off an outcry among civil rights groups, which contend that the laws are aimed at suppressing minority-voter participation. The NAACP recently launched a campaign, Stand for Freedom, to fight voter-identification measures.
Employers will be required to use E-Verify to determine the eligibility of their employees starting Jan. 1 in four states — Louisiana, Tennessee, South Carolina and Georgia. In California, however, legislators bucked the trend by prohibiting any state or local government from requiring employers to use the E-Verify program unless required by federal law or as a condition of receiving federal funds.
In education, California approved two hotly debated laws slated to take effect on New Year’s Day. The California Dream Act expands eligibility for institutional grants and fee waivers to students who are in the country illegally at the state’s university systems and community colleges.
To qualify, students must attend for at least three years and graduate from a California high school and prove that they are applying for legalized immigration status. The students must also meet certain academic standards.
California also becomes the first state to mandate the teaching of gay history. A new law requires schools to include in the public-school curriculum the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans, along with disabled persons and others. The statute, which has no age limit, also bans instructional material that discriminates against those groups. Continue reading this article
We little citizens are supposed to celebrate New Year’s Day, but in backwards Mexifornia, that’s the date when the bad new laws go into effect. So the holiday also has a strong batten-down-the-hatches aspect.
One of the worst concoctions from Sacramento this year is the law that prohibits the impounding of cars driven by unlicensed drivers. It was enacted in October to make life easier for illegal aliens.
It used to be the law that unlicensed drivers snagged in checkpoints or during traffic stops would lose their vehicles to the impound yard and have to pay a big fine to bail them out. But that was deemed too troublesome for illegal aliens, so the only punishment left to dissuade unlicensed driving was scrapped.
Pandering to illegals makes the roadways more dangerous for the public, but the Mexican tail wags the Democrat dog in the California capital.
“This could have been avoided if the driver had taken the bus,” said Officer Kristi Sandoval, who serves on the Police Protective League board. “She could have saved a life if she were willing to be inconvenienced.”
As a police officer I can tell you that when we pull over an unlicensed driver whom is in this country illegally with NO license or insurance (so if they get into a collision you are totally financially responsible for damage / injury even if it is through no fault of your own), also these drivers are also much more likely to leave the seen of an accident as well regardless if you are injured / dying. But back to my original point, I have to give the unlicensed driver twenty minutes to call a friend to come get his or her car (this is the law of our state). Now if you are an American who had a license who somehow got it revoked I (by statute of state law) immediately no questions asked have to tow your car. I have not an ounce of leeway in this matter. How is that fair and equal treatment under the law?
Escondido, Calif. (AP) — Delfino Aldama was fixing a customer’s brakes this month when his smartphone chimed with a text message that tipped him to a police checkpoint more than an hour before officers began stopping motorists. The self-employed auto mechanic frantically called friends with the location and drove an alternate route home.
The Mexico native had reason to be alarmed: He does not have a driver’s license because he is in the United States illegally, and it would cost about $1,400 to get his Nissan Frontier pickup back from the towing company. He has breathed a little easier since he began getting blast text messages two years ago from activists who scour streets to find checkpoints as they are being set up.
The cat-and-mouse game ends Jan. 1 when a new law takes effect in California to prohibit police from impounding cars at sobriety checkpoints if a motorist’s only offense is being an unlicensed driver. Thousands of cars are towed each year in the state under those circumstances, hitting pocketbooks of illegal immigrants especially hard.
When Aldama’s 1992 Honda Civic was towed from a checkpoint years ago, he quit his job frying chickens at a fast-food restaurant because he had no way to make the 40-mile round trip to work. He abandoned the car rather than pay about $1,200 in fees.
“A car is a necessity, it’s not a luxury,” said the 35-year-old Aldama, who lives in Escondido with his wife, who is a legal resident, and their 5-year-old son, a U.S. citizen.
Assemblyman Gil Cedillo, a Los Angeles Democrat who tried unsuccessfully to restore driver licenses to illegal immigrants after California revoked the privilege in 1993, said he introduced the bill to ban towing after learning the notoriously corrupt city of Bell raked in big fees from unlicensed drivers at checkpoints.
A sharp increase in federally funded sobriety checkpoints in California has fueled controversy. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration paid for 2,553 checkpoints last year, which authorities say helps explain why deaths caused by drunken drivers dropped to an all-time low in the state. Continue reading this article
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.