La Raza frequently uses images of appealing children to promote the lie that Americans demanding immigration enforcement are cruel to kiddies: “Deporting dad would be MEAN” is a common theme.
The image shown is a Mexican poster child for invasion, literally, that combines a smiling kid holding flowers who also has a tiny fist that promises a future of Marxican activism. Symbolic, or what?
Along with squawking against deportation, Raza types portray birth citizenship as an emotional issue, rather than one of Constitutional interpretation. This poll shows that the Mexo-strategy of trying to guilt-trip Americans using tearful kiddies is largely a failure.
Arizona legislators are already being criticized for another tough measure they are considering to combat illegal immigration – denying birth certificates to children born to illegal immigrants in the state.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Arizona finds that 64% agree that children born to illegal immigrants should not automatically become citizens of the United States. Twenty-six percent (26%) disagree and say these children should become U.S. citizens.
Nationally, 58% of voters say a child born to an illegal immigrant in this country should not automatically become a citizen of the United States. Thirty-three percent (33%) disagree and say if a women enters the United States illegally and gives birth to a child here, that child should automatically be a U.S. citizen. That’s what the current law allows, and many believe it would require a constitutional amendment to change the law.
In Arizona, there’s virtually no difference of opinion between men and women on this question. Seventy-one percent (71%) of Arizona voters who do not have children living with them oppose automatic citizenship for those born to illegal immigrants. Voters with children in the home are more narrowly divided.
Eighty-four percent (84%) of Republicans and 58% of voters not affiliated with either major party say children born to illegal immigrants in this country should not automatically become U.S. citizens. Democratic voters are almost evenly divided on the question.
Arizona has been criticized by President Obama, major Hispanic groups and the president of Mexico, among others, for its new law that requires local police to check the immigration status of anyone they stop for a traffic violation or other kind of violation if they suspect the person is an illegal immigrant.
Sixty-six percent (66%) of Arizona voters favor that law, while 24% are opposed and 10% are undecided. Since late April when Governor Jan Brewer signed the measure into law, support for it has ranged from 64% to 71%. Continue reading this article
In Milwaukee, a Hmong man, Thaying Lor (pictured), was recently sentenced for a crime that would be considered normal activity back in the homeland of Southeast Asia: child marriage by way of kidnapping. (Thx Refugee Resettlement Watch.)
A Milwaukee man convicted of sexually assaulting his wife, who was 12 when he abducted her into a Hmong cultural marriage in 1991, was sentenced Monday to at least eight years in prison.
The case of Thaying Lor, 43, drew nationwide attention among Hmong-Americans, who feared it could lead to unfair judgment of their culture and an upsurge in Hmong wives making similar claims years after their weddings.
Circuit Judge Kevin Martens, who presided at Lor’s weeklong trial in December, called it one of the most difficult he’d seen, “given the number of issues I’m asked to consider on both sides.”
Prosecutors and advocates for victims of domestic violence sought much tougher punishment, while Lor’s counsel and Hmong-American groups and individuals who sent dozens of letters recommended probation.
The case began when a bailiff overheard the victim testify in her divorce early last year about how she was kidnapped, raped and essentially sold into marriage at age 12. The victim never wanted to involve police out of respect for the Hmong culture, but the bailiff alerted law enforcement and Lor was charged 10 days later.
The woman, now 32, has a different last name than Lor and is not being identified because she is the victim of a sexual assault. She remains in the Milwaukee area, where she is raising the couple’s six children.
In a letter to Martens, she said she did not feel safe appearing in person because she and her family have been subjected to ridicule, ostracism and threats, including on Hmong radio stations.
“They have threatened to hunt me down like a squirrel in the woods,” she wrote.
She asked that he sentence Lor to prison as a message to other abused Hmong women who lack the courage to come forward.
Martens spoke for 90 minutes Monday before announcing the sentence. He stressed repeatedly that case should not be seen as only “the Hmong marriage” case, but considered for Lor’s specific behavior.
“It would be wrong for anyone to take this as an indictment of the Hmong community as a whole,” he said. […]
How can anyone not “take this as an indictment of the Hmong community as a whole,” since the woman said she was threatened by her tribe for not cowering in submission like a proper Hmong female? The case is an all-too-accurate window into one of the more rudimentary peoples Washington has dispersed willy-nilly into America through its harmful refugee policy. In fact, the New York Times has called the Hmong “the most primitive refugee group in America.”
An earlier report from the Lor trial contained some interesting detail about how the kidnap happened:
Last week, she testified that Lor had visited her family once or twice before offering to take her to the mall in May 1991, when she was in sixth grade. Instead, he took her to a relative’s home where another man was waving something overhead in a circle, a gesture she knew from Laos meant she was being taken from her family into a Hmong marriage. Inside the home, she testified, Lor raped her for three days as she cried and begged to go home. They were married in a Hmong cultural ceremony a few days later.
Below is a brief video (not connected with the previous case) of a Hmong immigrant family whose daughter was grabbed like an animal and taken away for marriage, like they weren’t in America at all.
Presumably the Washington Post’s diversity-loving editors imagined a pairing of liberal academic Robert Putnam and (nominal) Republican Jeb Bush would be a dandy show of the bipartisan propaganda for maintaining vast numbers of immigrants and illegal aliens.
According to this dynamic duo, Americans ungrateful gripers who are not sufficiently welcoming to the overpopulation tsunami of millions of job grabbers. The two recite a litany of immigration complaints from centuries past to discount the concerns of today’s citizens that there are too many immigrants, even when citizen unemployment is so high.
Plus, the Post thought it appropriate to tie its immigration guilt trip to Independence Day, as if extreme diversity were the defining characteristic of the nation instead of our western-civilization-based traditions. It’s very tiresome when immigration mongers try to hijack our holidays, particularly the patriotic ones, for their nefarious globalist purpose.
On our national birthday, and amid an angry debate about immigration, Americans should reflect on the lessons of our shared immigrant past. We must recall that the challenges facing our nation today were felt as far back as the Founders’ time. Immigrant assimilation has always been slow and contentious, with progress measured not in years but in decades. Yet there are steps communities and government should take to form a more cohesive, successful union.
Consider what one leader wrote in 1753: “Few of their children in the country learn English. The signs in our streets have inscriptions in both languages. . . . Unless the stream of their importation could be turned . . . they will soon so outnumber us that we will not preserve our language, and even our government will become precarious.” Thus Ben Franklin referred to German Americans, still the largest ethnic group in America. A century later, Midwestern cities such as Cincinnati and St. Louis were mostly German-speaking. So worried were their native-born neighbors that Iowa outlawed speaking German in public and even in private conversation. […]
One important difference, however, that separates immigration then and now: We native-born Americans are doing less than our great-grandparents did to welcome immigrants.
A century ago, religious, civic and business groups and government provided classes in English and citizenship. Historian Thomas P. Vadasz found that in Bethlehem, Pa., a thriving town of about 20,000, roughly two-thirds of whom were immigrants, the biggest employer, Bethlehem Steel, and the local YMCA offered free English instruction to thousands of immigrants in the early 20th century, even paying them to take classes. Today, immigrants face long waiting lists for English classes, even ones they pay for.
Americans would prefer to have less immigration overall, but these upper crusters who have never worried about money believe that we must make it easier for still more foreigners to take disappearing US jobs. Elites see speaking English as a vital to economic assimilation, while cultural adjustment is given short shrift in comparison to the newbies becoming good worker bees.
It is concerning to see that voter fraud and intimidation are not prosecuted by the Obama-Holder Justice Department. More details are becoming public about the case of the Black Panthers who threatened voters in Philadelphia in 2008 — most of which was caught on film.
DoJ attorney Christian Adams resigned from his position over the case, saying, “It this isn’t voter intimidation, then nothing is.”
He was interviewed on Fox News June 30 (Transcript) :
In some ways, the follow-on interview with attorney Bartle Bull was even more remarkable. He was a JFK Democrat who worked for voting rights in Mississippi in the 1960s and was an aide in Robert Kennedy’s 1968 Presidential campaign. He witnessed the incident and called the Black Panther behavior “the most blatant form of voter intimidation I’ve ever seen.”
BB: For the first time in our lifetime, the power of the administration of the United States was working against the Voting Rights Act. They were protecting the people who were abusing the law.
What I saw, for example, was this guy King Sabir Shabazz … said to me and a man I was with, “Now you will see what it means to be ruled by the black man, cracker.” …
The fundamental point to me is that Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy did not die to have uniformed thugs blocking the doors to the polling places with weapons. And for the first time in our lifetime, the national administration is protecting the abusers instead of the voters.
BB: Because they want to maximize the vote. The New York Times reported one week before the election on Oct. 27, 2008, the New York Times reported that Acorn had registered 1,300,000 of which the Times said 35 percent were fraudulent. That’s over 400,000 Acorn voters, and this was an effort to protect those illegal voters, and you do that by intimidating the poll-watchers who are challenging them. And that’s what happened. […]
It’s a stunning outrage. It’s exactly not the cause that people like Martin Luther King died for. He died to help people to vote. I was in Mississippi working elections where people risked their lives to vote. And here the administration is challenging that system. […]
It leaves us in a terrible situation where the government is deciding what laws to enforce based on its opportunities in the next election. I think this next election will be very dangerous because all those illegal Acorn voters are still on the roles all over the country and now we’re going to be intimidated from challenging their false votes. […]
I didn’t like Obama from the beginning. I thought he was a hustler and I think that he still is.
Toward the end of the interview, Bull showed his medal honoring his participation the struggle for civil rights given to him by Sen. Ted Kennedy.
It would be nice to learn more about who the 400,000 fraudulent Acorn voters are — how many are illegal aliens for example? Inquiring minds want to know.
Here’s the video:
This November’s election will be crucial to the direction of the nation; will the conduct and outcome be fair? The Panthergate episode is not reassuring, to say the least.
Remember the famous aphorism of Ayatollah Khomeini: “There is no fun in Islam”?
Apparently there are no symphonies either, judging from the latest culture fracas in diverse Britain. A number of Islo-parents are removing their offspring from music classes in spite of a national requirement that all students take part in them.
How extreme. What other culture prohibits music? It is so basic to humanity.
Muslim children are being withdrawn from music lessons because some families believe learning an instrument is anti-Islamic, it has emerged.
A number of schools are allowing Muslim parents to pull their children out of classes, even though the subject is a formal part of the national curriculum.
Dr Diana Harris, a lecturer at the Open University, said she had visited schools where half of pupils were withdrawn from music during Ramadan.
By law, children are supposed to take part in all subjects and parents can only remove children from sex and religious education.
But Dr Harris claimed Ofsted inspectors sometimes turned “a blind eye” to the issue.
In one London primary school, 20 pupils were removed from rehearsals for a Christmas musical and one five-year-old girl has been permanently withdrawn from all classes.
The details emerged in a BBC London News investigation.
Eileen Ross, head of Herbert Morrison Primary in Lambeth, where almost a third of children come from mainly Somalian Muslim families, said some parents “don’t want children to play musical instruments and they don’t have music in their homes”.
“There’s been about 18 or 22 children withdrawn from certain sessions, out of music class, but at the moment I just have one child who is withdrawn continually from the music curriculum,” she said. “It’s not part of their belief, they feel it detracts from their faith.”
There has been a debate in the Muslim community about music and singing, with some followers claiming that they are forbidden.
Dr Harris, author of the book “Music Education and Muslims”, told the BBC: “Most of them really didn’t know why they were withdrawing their children.
“The majority of them were doing it because they had just learned that it wasn’t acceptable and one of the sources giving out that feeling was the Imams particularly Imams who had come over from Pakistan, didn’t really speak English and felt threatened.
And why is it again that they come to live in the West? Certainly not to share in the best our culture has to offer.
[Presidential assistant John] Brennan told the governor the additional funding will help pay for 500 more Border Patrol agents for Arizona as well as 50 more Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, along with additional Department of Justice assets to include Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearm Gunrunner Teams, which will monitor the movement of weapons into Mexico, and special FBI squads.
Such neighborly projects do not come cheap. The Inspector General’s Interim Review of ATF’s Project Gunrunner noted, “Project Gunrunner is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) national initiative to reduce firearms trafficking to Mexico and associated violence along the Southwest border. In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) and in fiscal year (FY) 2009 appropriations, ATF received $21.9 million in funding to support and expand Project Gunrunner.”
Part of the backstory here is Mexico Presidente Calderon’s efforts to blame America for his country’s crime anarchy by attacking our Constitutional right to self-defense using firearms, alleging that guns shipped from this country are the source of the violence. He pushed this false charge at length during his rude state visit to Washington in May.
By making the argument that border chaos has a “shared” guilt, Calderon can mooch more money from weak-minded Washington politicians, like the generous trough of cash and materiel supplied by the Merida Initiative. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is an enabler in this regard; see the 2009 CNN report, U.S. shares blame for Mexico drug violence, Clinton says for a typical example.
A small handful of US guns make their way to Mexico. But as the former Border Patrol agent mentioned in the preceding video, a container ship full of guns from China is easy enough for billionaire drug cartels to order up. Restricting Americans’ gun rights will not reduce violence in Mexico one tiny bit, because the global small arms trade is huge, profitable and isn’t going away.
So the question remains: Why is Washington wasting precious resources on non-problems like guns from America headed south? The big important suits must believe that supporting Calderon is vital to prevent a full-tilt narco state and tens of millions of Mexicans making a run for the border.
But hoping that corrupt Mexico might shape up is a poor bet. Ceding territory to drug cartels (as has already happened in Arizona) is only the most recent indicator that far more border enforcement is required.
And here’s a crazy thought: why doesn’t Mexico have its own border police keep all those nasty US guns out if they are such a crisis? There are plenty of Mexican agents in that locale already, e.g. Grupo Beta and regular police. Why does America have to be responsible for problems going both ways? President Obama characterized Mexico as a “partner” more than a dozen times in his welcoming speech to Calderon last spring, but actual partnership behavior from our southern neighbor is hard to discern.
Reporters must be getting bored with avoiding Obama’s failure to act in the Gulf oil explosion, since they are turning to the ethnic angle, with plenty of boo-hooey and suffering angst. It also happens that the MSM notice the diversity slant when there’s a big crime story or other large event. Or perhaps some ethno-org sent out a press release to inform the press and public of their tribe’s misery.
One interesting fact: after 35 years when they came to this country as refugees, many of the Viet shrimpers speak “little English.” That incapacity has created problems within the current oil emergency because the Vietnamese cannot negotiate benefits without a translator.
Neither the Post nor CNN (below) mentioned much about the history of refugees from Washington’s failed Vietnam war being dumped on unwilling communities. Many thousands ended up on the Gulf Coast to compete against American fishermen in an industry that is not the most dependably profitable to begin with. It didn’t help that the Vietnamese did not respect the locals’ fishing traditions, and violence occurred. But now the press sees the Vietnamese as pitiable victims who somehow forgot to learn English.
Communication has been difficult, no doubt about it.
New Orleans, Louisiana (CNN) — The lengthy documents they initially were asked to sign used language even a native English speaker would struggle to understand.
The Vietnamese interpreters BP first brought in for safety and cleanup training stirred painful memories and suspicions because they spoke to the elders with a North Vietnamese dialect and used what some described as “Communist terminology.”
The closings of fishing areas have been announced on radio stations these fishermen don’t follow, so some have piloted their boats where they shouldn’t, which means tickets from the Coast Guard keep coming.
For the Vietnamese-Americans living in the Gulf Coast region, the oil disaster is especially complicated. It’s made murky by language barriers, cultural misunderstandings and a history of challenges that have shaped them for more than half a century.
Their ties to seafood run deep and wide. A third of all fishermen in the Gulf are Vietnamese, making them arguably the most affected minority out there. More than 24,000 people of Vietnamese origin live in Louisiana, according to the last completed census. About 6,000 live within a two-mile radius in the neighborhood of New Orleans East — distinguishing it, the area’s priest says, as the greatest concentration of Vietnamese people outside of Vietnam.
In the rectory of Mary Queen of Vietnam Church, the Rev. Vien Nguyen sits in front of an altar to his ancestors and his Catholic faith. Religious texts in English and his native tongue fill the high shelves around him, as do books bearing titles like “Freshwater Crayfish Aquaculture,” “The Evolution of Cajun & Creole Cuisine” and Franz Kafka’s “The Trial.”
Here, he introduces some of the Kafkaesque oil-disaster trials facing his own people.
He talks about their distrust of lawyers — “sharks,” he calls them — who’ve come in from out of state, circling them with promises and confusing papers. He mentions the mental health concerns — depression, lack of sleep, tensions in homes — that need to be addressed, a task made difficult by an absence of Vietnamese-speaking therapists in a community that still stigmatizes admissions of emotional trouble. He worries about the lack of job training and opportunities for a people who’ve worked in an industry that may suffer for God knows how long.
“These are proud, active people who contribute to their own livelihood, and now they have to be in lines,” asking for handouts, he says. “It is a devastating blow.”
About 80 percent of Vietnamese-Americans in the Gulf region are connected to the seafood industry through jobs that include fishing, shucking oysters, packing shrimp, and running stores and restaurants, the priest and others say.
The work they do is something many brought with them from fishing villages in their native land, a place most of them fled as “boat people” after the 1975 fall of Saigon and the end of the Vietnam War. That departure was for many the second time they’d become refugees. They’d already uprooted themselves and started over with nothing in 1954, when their country divided into North and South and they, as the Catholic minority living in Vietnam, ran from the Communist rule that took over the North.
The former Archbishop Philip Hannan of the Archdiocese of New Orleans reached out to them in refugee camps in America, inviting them to call his home theirs. So they came here in the ’70s and ’80s with the help of Catholic Charities and, over the next 30 years, reinvented their lives once more — in a climate reminiscent of the country they’d left behind.
They worked hard in a familiar industry that didn’t require them to master English, often leaving their children to be cared for by older siblings and relatives so they could put in long days. They created a self-reliant community where their own local businesses thrived. They planted acres of vegetable gardens along levees, incorporating the agricultural roots of their ancestors.
Today, people wearing the traditional conical straw hats stoop in their cultivated yards or walk along streets with names like Saigon Drive. A trailer, lined with coolers of freshly caught shrimp for sale at hiked-up prices, is parked in front of a strip mall that includes Tram Anh Video, Kim Tram Jewelry and Tien Pharmacy.
Hurricane Katrina five years ago marked the third time they lost everything and had to start over. But it was also the storm that gave them a voice.
The documentary “A Village Called Versailles” — a reference to the public housing project where they first settled — debuted on PBS last month. It chronicles how the Vietnamese-Americans living in New Orleans East galvanized after Katrina, making theirs among the first neighborhoods to rebuild.
The film trailer applauds the V-tribe’s “empowerment” in the leftist style by chanting “no justice, no peace” and maintaining their own customs rather than assimilating:
Oh the horror of poor invader Mexicans trapped in a state where the government actually enforces immigration laws!
What to do? Run away, in this case to afflict another state with their unlawful presence, job mooching and other lawbreaking (e.g. ID theft).
The Arizona Republic followed an illegal family along their road trip to … Pennsylvania. Perhaps nobody told them that state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe has followed in Arizona’s example and submitted legislation (House Bill 2479) to toughen up the Keystone State’s unwelcome mat for foreign job thieves.
The Mexicans’ journey north is filled with tearful goodbyes, automotive breakdown and recriminations against Arizona for protecting its citizens.
The family sounds terrified (GOOD!) of large-scale illegal immigration sweeps by police, which the new law does not require. (When the feds did actual sweeps in Temecula, Corona and thereabouts in southern California a few years ago, they were very popular among the citizen residents. Now mass roundups have largely disappeared due to the complaints from the open-borders gang about “profiling.”)
Often, accurate profiling of illegal aliens is not that hard, as indicated below:
A white Ford pickup with Arizona plates is driving north on U.S. 191 headed for the Utah border. Afraid of encountering police, the family inside is traveling at night. The pickup’s headlights cut through a sea of darkness.
The family is in a hurry to get out of Arizona, to get away from the state’s harsh new immigration law.
The pickup crosses into Utah at 11:59 p.m. Luis Sanchez breathes a sigh of relief as his wife, Marlen Ramirez, keeps driving. Both are undocumented immigrants from Mexico.
“Look,” he says. “We are here. We have arrived in Utah.”
They have made it safely out of Arizona, past the Maricopa County sheriff’s deputy they saw as they were leaving Surprise and past the highway patrol cars they saw along Interstate 17 between Phoenix and Flagstaff.
They still have a long way to their final destination: Pennsylvania. There will be engine troubles along the way. And more police. And frayed nerves.
But the hardest part of the nearly 2,700-mile journey will be the end. Their final destination is where starting their lives over begins.
Feeling like prisoners
Luis and Marlen, both 33, lived in Arizona for more than 15 years. They are from the same small town, Xaltianguis, in southern Mexico, but they met while living at the same West Valley apartment complex.
Luis was 17 when he crossed the border illegally near Douglas. Marlen was 16 when she jumped a fence near Nogales. Both came looking for work.
Their three children are U.S. citizens because they were born in Arizona. The oldest, Luis Jr., is a quiet 13-year-old. Vanessa, 10, wears glasses and loves to talk. The baby, Christian, is 2.
Lawyers have told Luis and Marlen that they do not qualify for legal residency.
Luis has washed dishes at a restaurant on Grand Avenue, at a retirement home in Peoria and at a restaurant in Sun City West. For the past four years, he worked as a landscaper for a company that maintains office buildings in the West Valley. He earned $9.80 an hour. Marlen is a stay-at-home mom.
Luis got his jobs using fake papers. He has managed to keep working despite the recession and Arizona’s employer-sanctions law, which have made it much harder for illegal immigrants to get jobs. […]
The Rasmussen pollsters recently tested the popularity of two top administration lieutenants, Attorney General Eric Holder and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, and both garnered significant disapproval.
“I say this again as someone who has walked that border,” she said. “I’ve ridden that border. I’ve flown it. I’ve driven it. I know that border I think as well as anyone, and I will tell you it is as secure now as it has ever been.”
As a result of such shenanigans, the public does not hold either official in high regard.
Next week is likely to be a big one for Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano if the Obama administration moves ahead with its threatened legal challenge of Arizona’s popular new immigration law.
Right now, Rasmussen Reports national telephone surveying finds that just 32% of U.S. voters have at least somewhat favorable opinions of the two top Cabinet players. In Holder’s case, this includes 12% with a Very Favorable opinion, while 11% have a Very Favorable view of Napolitano.
Forty-two percent (42%) regard the attorney general unfavorably, with 26% who have a Very Unfavorable opinion. One-in-four voters (26%) still don’t know enough about Holder to venture any kind of opinion of him.
This marks a very slight worsening of the numbers for Holder from last August just after his announcement that the Justice Department was investigating how the Bush administration treated imprisoned terrorists. At that time, 35% held a favorable view of him, and 39% did not.
In Napolitano’s case, 47% now view her unfavorably, including 28% Very Unfavorable. Twenty-one percent (21%) have no opinion of the Homeland Security secretary.
Napolitano’s unfavorables have changed little since last spring following her department’s release of a controversial report on right-wing extremist groups. But her favorables are up slightly from January shortly after a failed terrorist bombing attempt on an airliner landing in Detroit. [...]
The Department of Homeland Security on Friday denied any plans to grant blanket amnesty to the “entire illegal immigrant population,” following claims from senators and others that the Obama administration has been holding behind-the-scenes talks to craft a gameplan for mass legalization.
The concern is that DHS, in a bid to bypass Congress, would extend what is known as deferred action or parole — actions usually taken on a case-by-case basis — to millions of illegal immigrants at once.
The department statement, however, did not address the possibility of giving a selective reprieve to the segment of the population holding expired visas — as opposed to those who crossed illegally. This is something that a former Bush administration official told FoxNews.com could be an option.
Anyway, keep those calls, faxes and emails coming to White House and Congress, because Obama’s henchmen may be measuring voter passion against amnesty.
Vice President Joe Biden gave a stark assessment of the economy today, telling an audience of supporters, “there’s no possibility to restore 8 million jobs lost in the Great Recession.”
Appearing at a fundraiser with Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) in Milwaukee, the vice president remarked that by the time he and President Obama took office in 2008, the gross domestic product had shrunk and hundreds of thousands of jobs had been lost.
“We inherited a godawful mess,” he said, adding there was “no way to regenerate $3 trillion that was lost. Not misplaced, lost.”
Yet an obvious partial solution is not even discussed — that of creating a moratorium on legal immigration for the duration of the recession. Legal immigration remains on auto-pilot despite the jobs carnage.
It would also be helpful to liberate the 7-8 million jobs unlawfully occupied by illegal aliens (according to Pew Hispanic Center) to free them up for unemployed Americans. Wouldn’t a government that is responsible to its people choose citizens over foreigners?
If that isn’t bad enough, some of the richest, most powerful elites are lobbying for a massive amnesty for 20-30 million aliens. Well, why should the richie rich care about overpopulation when they can jet off in their private plane to the deluxe vacation home.
The chart below is not the most up to date, but the trend is unmistakeable.
If President Obama imagined his campaign of vitriol and lawsuits against Arizona would suppress other states from upgrading their immigration enforcement, he thought wrong. If anything, all the controversy has aroused a greater patriotic enthusiasm for protection of borders, workplaces and sovereignty.
More states are popping up all the time with plans to toughen up their own interior immigration policing — the Associated Press article below counts 18.
Lawmakers or candidates in as many as 18 states say they want to push similar measures when their legislative sessions start up again in 2011. Arizona-style legislation may have the best chance of passing in Oklahoma, which in 2007 gave police more power to check the immigration status of people they arrest.
Bills similar to the law Arizona’s legislature approved in April have already been introduced in Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Minnesota, South Carolina and Michigan, but none will advance this year.
Business, agriculture and civil rights groups oppose such legislation, saying legal residents who are Hispanic would be unjustly harassed and that immigration is a federal rather than a state responsibility. Supporters say police will not stop people solely on the basis of skin color and argue that illegal immigrants are draining state coffers by taking jobs, using public services, fueling gang violence and filling prisons. […]
In Florida, Arizona’s law is a campaign issue in the GOP gubernatorial primary, with millionaire Rick Scott trumpeting its merits and Attorney General Bill McCollum saying he backs the law but that it’s not needed in his state. Meanwhile, Minnesota gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer, the presumptive Republican nominee, called Arizona’s bill “a wonderful first step.”
Even lawmakers in states far from the U.S.-Mexico border say illegal immigration is hurting their constituents.
In Idaho, Monty Pearce cites one county that paid more than $100,000 for medical services for an indigent illegal immigrant. Supporters of a citizen initiative in Nevada say they’re motivated by the state budget crisis and record unemployment.
In South Carolina, state law enforcement officials say Mexican drug gangs are moving north from Atlanta — a problem expected to intensify given that budget cuts have left fewer resources to go toe-to-toe with armed criminal groups.
And in Nebraska, where many Hispanics have found work at meatpacking plants, some blame illegal immigrants for draining community resources. Last week, the town of Fremont approved a ban on hiring or renting property to illegal immigrants.
State Sen. Charlie Janssen of Fremont plans to introduce a bill in 2011 based at least in part on Arizona’s law. He said foes of illegal immigration must gird themselves for a fight from groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, which has vowed to sue over Fremont’s measure.
“They shout ‘racism’ and try to bring down people who are trying to enforce our laws,” said Janssen, a Republican in Nebraska’s officially nonpartisan legislature. “It’s their scare tactic.”
Citizens should be sure to support any state or local politicians who are actively working to protect sovereignty.
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.