In the White House, the re-election brain trust is gearing up to promote Obama as the great friend of hispanics, even though his promise to enact a mass amnesty in the first year of his Presidency never happened. In fact, he was busy with other things that he thought more important, in particular jamming through a government healthcare system that the American people didn’t want.
President Obama’s re-election campaign has released four new Spanish-language ads, each ending with the phrase: “Esta eleccion si importa,” which in English means, “This election does matter.”
In 2008, Barack Obama captured two-thirds of the Hispanic vote, winning in crucial swing states with large Hispanic populations like Colorado, Nevada and Florida.
The president’s re-election campaign is attempting to replicate that success for 2012, targeting those same states with this week’s launch of its first set of Spanish-language television and radio ads.
In four separate ads, Latino campaign organizers recount personal stories as reasons for supporting the president, focusing on education.
In one ad, Obama volunteer Lynette Acosta explains the importance of a college degree to her and her family: “Without the help of loans, I would not have been able to study,” Acosta says in the ad. “That’s why everything the president has done to increase access to funding is so important. … My mother says, ‘The best gift you could give me is a diploma that I can hang on the living room wall.’ ” Continue reading this article
In any case, the accumulation of decades of extreme levels of immigration has been noticed by the Census. Now those young unskilled immigrants and illegal aliens from the early wave after 1965 have become old. What a surprise. And the aging immigrants need more expensive social services, particularly medical.
Below, the Census announced the official results of its 2010 enumeration.
In addition, younger immigrants bring aging parents, who can get welfare benefits in a few years with citizenship without ever paying a penny into the system. H-1b expert Prof. Norm Matloff reported in 1996 that “approximately 55% of elderly Chinese immigrants were on welfare” and it’s doubtful the number has decreased since then.
Naturally California is leading the way with immigration bad news, although no dollar estimates are provided in the following article, presumably because nobody wants to know how much all this diversity will cost the taxpayers in the near future and going forward.
The number of older Asians and Hispanics in California is rising more than three times faster than that of whites, creating a need for more health and social services for these populations, according to census data and interviews.
Overall Asians and Hispanics are the fastest growing groups in the state, but the rise in adults 55 years and older in those groups is particularly pronounced, the Associated Press found by analyzing census data released Thursday.
Experts say the increase in older Asian and Hispanic adults is partly due to the aging of immigrants who came to the U.S. for jobs or to seek refuge from war. Another reason is that some established immigrants are bringing parents from their native country. Also, some Asians and Hispanics have especially long life expectancies.
Whites remain the largest group of older people. But growth in the 55-plus population between 2000 and 2010 for Asians was 74 percent and for Hispanics 73 percent. That compares with only an 18 percent growth rate for whites and 34 percent for blacks.
Advocates and providers say these rapidly growing older populations, comprised of large numbers of immigrants, are increasing the need for culturally-specific services and putting a strain on already thin financial resources. Continue reading this article
Interestingly, a look at the poll’s wording and breakdown of results shows strong opinion among Tea Party members. While 70 percent of registered voters overall thought that photo IDs are needed in elections to prevent fraud, 91 percent of Tea Party voters believed that idea.
Most Americans think voter identification laws are needed to stop voter fraud, according to a Fox News poll released Wednesday.
Overall, 70 percent of Americans say voter ID laws are needed to stop illegal voting. That’s far more than the 26 percent who see the laws as a hindrance to legal voting.
An overwhelming 87-percent majority of Republicans say voter ID laws are necessary to ensure only eligible voters participate in elections. Some 74 percent of independents and 52 percent of Democrats agree.
Democrats (44 percent) are four times as likely as Republicans (10 percent) to consider these laws an unnecessary deterrent to law-abiding citizens casting their ballot.
The poll was conducted in connection with a new documentary to air on Fox News Channel this weekend. Hosted by Eric Shawn, it’s called “Fox News Reporting: Stealing Your Vote.”
In their increasingly heated battle, many supporters and opponents of voter ID laws are accusing the other of acting in bad faith.
The poll finds 34 percent of voters believe supporters of voter ID laws are trying to “steal” elections by keeping eligible voters away from the polls. Yet more people — 50 percent — think opponents of the laws are acting in bad faith by trying to increase participation from ineligible voters. Some 17 percent think both supporters and opponents of voter ID laws are playing dirty.
The federal “Help America Vote Act” says all states must require identification from first-time voters who registered by mail and did not provide verification of their identification with their mail-in voter registration. Thirty-two states have passed voter identification laws that are broader than the federal mandates. Of these, nine states have passed the strictest legislation, which includes a requirement for voters to show a photo ID in order to vote. Continue reading this article
The liberal press is full of helpful ideas to sink Republican Presidential hopes, like when border-buster Jeb Bush was suggested by the media as a swell choice to be the candidate. (Generous editors want only the best from taxpayers for their dirt-cheap Mexican maids and gardeners.)
The latest from the electron-stained wretches is support for Marco Rubio’s twisted scheme to pretty up the DREAM Act somehow, which if enacted would be the beginning of the long march to perdition: no borders, no sovereignty, no America.
Earlier DREAM Acts have been gushing with loopholes galore. Rather than merely establishing bright valedictorian kiddies (heh) as advanced anchor babies, the various versions of the legislation have been a history of bad faith with no checks of the weak “requirements.” The most recent DREAM included non-student gang criminals as well as drunk drivers and other diverse undesirables.
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s push for a Republican version of immigration legislation looks like the answer to the election-year prayers of the GOP — and Mitt Romney.
Rubio — telegenic son of Cuban exiles and potential vice presidential pick — is pulling together a bill that would allow young illegal immigrants to remain in the United States but denies them citizenship, an initial step in the drawn-out, divisive fight over immigration policy and the fate of the 11 million people here illegally.
The freshman senator calls his evolving legislation a conservative alternative to the DREAM Act — the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors measure. That Democratic-backed bill, which is overwhelmingly popular with Hispanics, would provide a pathway to citizenship to children in the United States illegally if they attend college or join the military. The measure came close to passage in December 2010 but has languished since then.
“We have to come up with an immigration system that honors both our legacy as a nation of laws and also our legacy as a nation of immigrants,” Rubio told The Associated Press on Tuesday.
An immigration plan from Rubio, the GOP’s best-known Hispanic, could help Republicans make some headway with the fastest growing minority group and its 21 million eligible voters, many concentrated in the contested presidential battleground states of Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and Colorado.
Democrats maintain a significant political advantage with Hispanics, numbers that were only strengthened by the harsh rhetoric from Republican presidential candidates in this year’s primary. Hispanics overwhelmingly backed Barack Obama over Republican presidential nominee John McCain, 67-31 percent, in the 2008 presidential race and they favored Democratic congressional candidates 60-38 percent in 2010, according to exit polling. A Pew Research Center survey out Tuesday showed Obama with a solid edge over Romney among Hispanic registered voters, 67-27 percent.
It’s a reality the likely Republican presidential nominee clearly recognizes.
“We have to get Hispanic voters to vote for our party,” Romney told a private fundraiser in Florida on Sunday in which he insisted the GOP needs an alternative to the DREAM Act. He warned that a significant number of Hispanics backing Obama “spells doom for us,” according to NBC News.
Rubio, who notably called on his party to tone down the anti-immigrant talk earlier this year, is working on a plan that would allow young illegal immigrants who came to the United States with their parents to apply for non-immigrant visas. They would be permitted to stay in the country to study or work, could obtain a driver’s license but would not be able to vote. They later could apply for residency, but they would not have a special path to citizenship. Continue reading this article
More recently, however, millions of Muslims have flocked to Europe and America for “a better life” (material comforts) or to advance the cause of a worldwide caliphate ruled by Islamic sharia law.
So it’s almost a relief to see an old-fashioned imam calling for the faithful to exit the West and return to dar al-Islam. Perhaps he thinks too many Muslims are adopting ideas of the despised infidels (although I haven’t noticed such shifts).
Whatever the cause, Imam Omar al-Haddouchi believes that Muslim immigration is a bad idea — we agree!
Omar al-Haddouchi, ideological leader of the Jihadist movement in Morocco, published a fatwa saying all Muslims should leave France for North Africa.
Al-Haddouchi says Muslims have no reason to stay in France, listing as reasons the burqa ban, the limits on the call to Friday prayers, and the stricter controls on Muslim radicals following the terror attack in Toulouse. He said non-Muslim countries where like a toilet, where you do your thing and then leave.
His 14-minute long video fatwa is currently circulating on Jihadi websites. Al-Haddouchi was sentenced to 30 years for his links to the attack in Casablanca, May 2003, but was pardoned last year by King Mohammed VI.
Despite his insistence that voter fraud is not a serious problem, Attorney General Eric Holder was embarrassed last week when a video surfaced of someone illegally obtaining a ballot to vote under Holder’s name in his home precinct in Washington, D.C. Most voters consider voter fraud a problem in America today and continue to overwhelmingly support laws requiring people to show photo identification before being allowed to vote.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 64% of Likely U.S. Voters rate voter fraud at least a somewhat serious problem in the United States today, and just 24% disagree. This includes 35% who consider it a Very Serious problem and seven percent (7%) who view it as Not At All Serious. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on April 12-13, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
The current occupant of the White House is so consumed with his re-election campaign that he cannot let it rest even during an overseas trip that is supposed to be about expanding trade.
President Obama must believe that the word “Arizona” is a magic talisman that will enthrall hispanic voters (legal and illegal) and make them forget his earlier unfulfilled promises of amnesty which was supposed to occur in the first year of his Presidency. He surely thinks that hopeful hispanics will be sucker enough to vote for him despite his failure to deliver the big enchilada. It doesn’t seem like much of a re-election strategy, but it’s what he has.
CARTAGENA, Colombia — President Obama, on a three-day trip to South America, attacked GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney’s stance on immigration reform today, saying his support for Arizona’s tough immigration law is “very troublesome.”
“We now have a Republican nominee who said that the Arizona laws are a model for the country … and these are laws that potentially would allow someone to be stopped and picked up and asked where their citizenship papers are based on an assumption,” Obama told Univision during an interview in Cartagena, where the president is attending the Summit of the Americas.
The three-day trip gives the president an opportunity to showcase his interest in the region and court Latino voters back home, whose support will be crucial in the upcoming election. Obama won a majority of the Latino vote in 2008 and his campaign is hoping for similar results come November.
If reelected, Obama vowed to tackle immigration reform.
“I can promise that I will try to do it in the first year of my second term. I want to try this year,” Obama told Univision.
During his 2008 campaign, then-candidate Obama promised to produce an immigration reform bill within a year of taking office. The problem now, the president told Univision, is resistance from Republicans.
“The challenge we’ve got on immigration reform is very simple. I’ve got a majority of Democrats who are prepared to vote for it, and I’ve got no Republicans who are prepared to vote for it,” he said.
“What we need is a change either of Congress or we need Republicans to change their mind, and I think this has to be an important debate during — throughout the country,” he said.
Gov. Jerry Brown didn’t mince words on his 40-minute appearance on KGO radio’s Ronn Owens show this morning, saying that Sacramento lawmakers need to “man up” and make the billions of dollars worth of budget cuts he proposed in January, and also predicting that the state’s shortfall could exceed the $9 billion his administration estimated four months ago.
[. . .]
When a caller asked about the cost of illegal immigrants to the state — and Owens followed up with remarks about the the undocumented population using school, prison and other resources — the governor didn’t skip a beat.
“Most of them are doing a hell of a lot of work, and most of the food you eat was picked by undocumented workers,” he said. “It’s one of the reasons California is still growing. We need people to buy homes. We also need immigration reform and border security, but don’t just scapegoat people … By the way if nobody came to California anymore, your property value would go down.”
Owens pushed that point, asking the governor if he really believed illegal immigrants help keep property values up.
“I’m telling you if 2 million undocumented people were rounded up tomorrow, and put on buses and sent to the foriegn countries from which they came, there would be a massive drop economic activity. They are working, buying things, paying for things,” he said.
Brown argued there ought to be a path to citizenship, noting he signed the Dream Act — allowing some undoucmented college students to apply for financial aide — and saying he is “glad” if a kids with farm worker parents go on to succeed in the business world.
Sweden’s devolution from being a fairly harmless social welfare nation into the nanny state from hell is a cautionary tale of well intentioned liberalism run amok. A major symptom is the government-knows-best attitude regarding education, and the little citizens better shape up if they want to get along. The specific problem with education started in 2010 when law was passed by the Swedish Liberal Party that banned parental freedom to choose homeschooling.
One shocker indication of creeping totalitarianism is the very strong suggestion that one-year-old children be sent to daycare rather than be raised by parents. The government believes that it can do a better job of child rearing than the mom and dad, even of little babies who belong at home.
I’m guessing the kids get a strong dose of diversity propaganda, but the article doesn’t say that exactly. However, force-feeding multiculturalism is hinted by the observation, “They want to get the kids. They want to socialize them in the way they think is appropriate.”
STOCKHOLM, Sweden — Sweden used to be synonymous with freedom and safety. The nation was a haven for political refugees from around the world.
But today, Sweden is creating new political refugees: the home-schooler.
One of the escape routes for home-schoolers from Sweden is by ship, two hours across the Baltic sea to the Åland Islands. It’s a part of Finland where the locals speak Swedish and where parents can home school in freedom.
Sweden’s home-school movement has been crushed by a state apparatus that wants children as young as one year old in daycare, and all children in a classroom with a state-approved curriculum.
“The Swedish government believes that [the] state takes better care of children than parents,” said Jonas Himmelstrand, president of ROHUS, the Swedish Homeschool Association.
“They [the government] are slowly going to more of a police state, where children are more controlled. They have to be in school,” he added.
Freedom in Finland
Himmelstrand and his wife Tamara were threatened with tens of thousands of dollars’ worth of fines for home-schooling. The family slipped quietly out of the country and is beginning a new life in Finland.
“We had many friends tell us, ‘Please get out, we’re worried about you,’” Himmselstrand recalled.
Home-schooling parents Magnus and Cina Wallen-Henriksen worked in the music industry in Stockholm before fleeing to Finland.
“We were afraid to stay. Our children were in danger and our family was in danger,” Cina said.
“The choice [to leave] was quite easy to make,” Magnus added.
Most Swedish home-schoolers don’t make the decision for religious reasons, but because they see the educational and social development home schooling provides.
“We noticed our children are enjoying how they learn at home and in other places,” Cina explained. “Our children developed fast and good, both emotionally and social and intellectual.” Continue reading this article
The recent contraception kerfuffle and the ensuing debate about “religious freedom” must have made the Catholic church in America feel like it had some moral authority to weigh in on other issues. The debate started when a Georgetown student complained that her university health plan did not include contraceptives because she attended a catholic school.
We can’t know the strategy details, but the obvious results are in the news. The Catholic hierarchy has launched a campaign stirring up the flock to disobey US laws which the church deems unjust. The top target of the list by far is immigration enforcement, which the church regards as a impedance to future pew-fillers.
It would easier to accept the idea of Catholics standing for religious freedom against an intrusive government if the church didn’t have its hand out for all the federal money it can get, in the billions of dollars. In fact, Catholic Charities acts as an agency of Washington in areas like refugee resettlement and immigration services, even as it promotes non-assimilation and lawbreaking. If the bishops want to claim noble religious independence, then they need to get off the government gravy train.
The Catholic attack on immigration enforcement is really an attempt to undermine American sovereignty and open the borders to unlimited numbers of Latin Americans, which would result in increased Catholic influence. As the late Samuel Huntington observed, “If America had been settled not by British Protestants but by French, Spanish, or Portuguese Catholics, it would not be America; it would be Quebec, Mexico, or Brazil.”
Washington D.C. – Roman Catholic bishops in the United States are urging the public not to obey laws that counter religious beliefs.
The bishops have launched a campaign in the name of religious liberty, and say that laws that the church deems at odds with its moral teachings should not be followed.
In a new 12-page document that quotes the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., the bishops said priests, lay people, public figures and others must be involved in the effort to change recent state and federal laws that church leaders believe violate religious freedom.
Church leaders have been fighting tough immigration laws in Alabama and elsewhere that many religious groups say make it impossible for them to aid undocumented immigrants. Many such laws include provisions making it a crime to harbor or transport undocumented immigrants.
Catholic leaders have also protested a decision by federal officials not to renew a church contract for work with sex trafficking victims, many of whom are from Latin America. The decision not to renew the contract was linked to church officials’ refusal to provide the women birth control or abortion services.
“We address an urgent summons to our fellow Catholics and fellow Americans to be on guard, for religious liberty is under attack, both at home and abroad,” the bishops wrote.
Churches of various denominations long have stood at the side of people they consider unfairly targeted by unjust laws — in recent years churches have, for instance, offered sanctuary to immigrants facing deportation.
In New Jersey, the Reformed Church of Highland Park is helping three Indonesian immigrants avoid deportation by allowing them to live inside the church.
Pastor Seth Kaper-Dale said has vowed to continue to welcome undocumented Indonesian immigrants into his church. The immigrants living inside the church say they came to the U.S. to escape persecution because of their Christian faith.
Several years ago, Elvira Arellano, an undocumented immigrant from Mexico, made national headlines when she took refuge in a Chicago church for a year to avoid being separated from her U.S.-born.
Arellano became an activist and a national symbol for illegal immigrant parents as she defied her deportation order and spoke out from her religious sanctuary. She was arrested and deported by immigration officials — who normally are reluctant to enter a church to enforce laws — after she spoke at a rally. Continue reading this article
There’s nothing like a successful free-speech lynching to get the leftist mob riled up. They are currently doing a celebratory pitchfork dance about Rich Lowry’s recent firing of John Derbyshire from the National Review. The magazine was upset about Derb’s column with a white version of “The Talk” to children about tough race realities that relate to safety.
Now a lefty site is calling for NR to go further, and excise any references to anti-sharia reformers Andrew McCarthy, Robert Spencer, David Horowitz and Daniel Pipes. ThinkProgress believes that those writers exhibit the dreaded “Islamophobia,” which the friends of Allah like to characterize as being an evil like racism even though Islam is an ideology, not a race.
How any political persuasion this side of Genghis Khan could approve of Islam’s totalitarianmisogynous system of society is beyond me, but the lefty bunch is all in. Birds of a feather, apparently; the marxists and Islam share a dislike of free speech.
The National Review has been cleaning house over the past week. Last week the conservative publication fired John Derbyshire for a racist rant and today the magazine terminated its relationship with Robert Weissberg for his ties to a white nationalist group.
But while the National Review has decided to very publicly purge itself of white supremacists and racists, bigotry toward Muslims appears to go unchallenged in the pages of the magazine and on its blog, National Review Online (NRO). NRO contributing editor Andrew McCarthy, who accused President Obama of standing with the Muslim Brotherhood against 9/11 families in his post “The President Stands With Sharia,” told Rep. Peter King’s (R-NY) hearing on the radicalization of American Muslims:
What “radicalizes” Muslims is Islam — the mainstream interpretation of it. The “radicals” propagating it do not need the “captive audience” provided by the prison environment. The “radicalization” is happening in plain sight.
The denigration of Islam and Muslim Americans isn’t limited to McCarthy’s screeds. A number of noted Islamophobes are regularly given free rein to guest post on NRO’s site or write in the magazine, including:
Robert Spencer, who just last month concluded that “Islamic supremacists” may have subverted the “U.S. defense against jihad terror,” because the man who heads the Central Intelligence Agency’s Counterterrorism Center — and is credited with crippling Al Qaeda and other militant networks in Pakistan — was identified as a Muslim in a Washington Post profile.
David Horowitz, who, in an interview last year, stated, “What has the Arab world contributed except terror?…The theocratic, repressive Arabic states do no significant science, no significant arts and culture.”
Daniel Pipes, who, in the pages of The National Review in 1990, wrote, “All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most.”
The National Review has been notified of the Islamophobic statements made by a number of their contributors in the past. To date, they appear to have decided to do nothing. Perhaps now is the time for The National Review to take a hard stance against all bigotry, intolerance and racism.
On ground level, it appears that many actual Mexicans have not received the memo that nobody is fleeing any more. Someone should tell them that Mexico has a booming economy, or so it is claimed. The Mexes keep coming, at least judging by the vans stuffed full of job thieves that continue to break in.
One recent example: nine illegal aliens killed in south Texas in a full-up van that flipped over.
A van overstuffed with suspected illegal immigrants rolled and crashed after fleeing a traffic stop in a South Texas border city, leaving at least nine Mexican citizens dead and injuring six others, officials said Wednesday.
Immigration authorities have eight survivors of the wreck in custody, according to Enrique Mendiola, acting assistant chief for the Border Patrol’s Rio Grande Valley sector. He said no one has been charged and an investigation is ongoing.
Border Patrol agents stopped the van in Palmview, 10 miles west of McAllen, on Tuesday night. Some of the passengers immediately sprinted away and agents pursued them on foot, catching one, Mendiola said.
But as the foot chase unfolded, the van sped off.
The agents came across the wreck three or four blocks away on U.S. 83. The scene was strewn with backpacks and water bottles and nine bodies lay scattered nearby, he said.
The van was demolished, but several managed to flee the wreck, Palmview police Cmdr. Lenny Sanchez said. The vehicle had been gutted to accommodate far more than the eight people it was designed to carry, he said.
Six people were taken to a hospital and three of them were later released to authorities, Sanchez said. All of them are in the custody of Border Patrol, he said. One of the men who fled subsequently turned himself in: Palmview police handed him over to immigration authorities, Sanchez said.
It wasn’t clear how many people from the van remained on the loose.
Mendiola said most of those involved in the crash were from Mexico. Sanchez said all those who died were Mexican citizens, but he declined to provide the nationalities of those who survived. He said authorities believed they entered the country illegally.
Many of the dead came from the southern state of Oaxaca, one of the poorest regions of Mexico, according to Ricardo Alday, spokesman for the Mexican Embassy in Washington. Consular officials were interviewing survivors and gathering information on the dead to assist their families with repatriation of the bodies.
A 23-year-old woman who lives nearby told the McAllen Monitor that she didn’t see the accident happen but that several victims seemed to be alive in the immediate aftermath.
“The bodies were everywhere,” Diana Castillo said. “It’s really sad because they came over here to live a better life and then they lost their lives.”
Anna Garza, a 56-year-old woman who also lives near the scene of the crash said “lots of helicopters came really quickly, I think to take the wounded to the hospital.”
I would love to see the costs to the American taxpayer toted up in a few months after all the hospitalized illegals have been released and their medical bills can be examined. “Lots of helicopters” — what’s the price tag for that? Plus all the police work, shipping the bodies home, the cost of sending the survivors back.
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.