California’s unemployment rate fell last month to its lowest level since December 2008 and 41,200 jobs were added, the state Employment Development Department reported Friday.
The state’s jobless rate for February was 9.6 percent, down from 9.8 percent the previous month and 10.8 percent a year earlier. California has added a total of 725,100 jobs since the recovery began in February 2010.
“After a long recession and housing crisis in which the state lagged the nation in job growth, California is once again one of the nation’s job growth leaders,” said Stephen Levy, director and senior economist of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy in Palo Alto. “Are things better than a year ago? The answer is yes. We are on the right track, finally. We are growing faster than the nation but we still have a ways to go. ”
February’s growth was strong enough to push the number of unemployed residents below 1.8 million for the first time since January 2009 and the economy is gaining momentum across the state, Levy said.
“Southern California is now a full participant in the recovery,” he said.
Los Angeles County added 39,000 jobs in February – a sharp contrast from the 81,000 that were lost in January – and the county’s unemployment rate dipped to 10.3 percent. That was down from 10.4 percent in January and 11.4 percent a year ago. Continue reading this article
Job-thieving foreigners have long been attracted to American jobs, but the recent border surge has been fueled by reports on hispanic media of the approaching amnesty the open-borders gang hopes to rubber-stamp into law.
At least that’s what invasive foreigners say in post-apprehension interviews, namely they heard from presumably Spanish-speaking media that they should run for the border to get their Obamamnesty before it’s too late to line up the necessary fraudulent papers.
Interestingly, many of the newbie invaders are from the poor countries south of wealthy Mexico.
It’s good that the DHS managers miraculously found sufficient funds to restore the Border Patrol to full strength from bogus cutbacks, because in Texas at least, the BP is being overwhelmed by the amnesty flood.
Contrary to the Obama administration’s claim the border has never been more secure, high-ranking Border Patrol officials in Texas are considering the need for a “tent city” because of a surge of illegal immigrants in the Rio Grande Valley.
The wave of illegal immigrants, many from Central America, appears to be an unintended consequence of the debate raging in Washington over an immigration bill. In interviews after being apprehended, immigrants say federal budget constraints and expected amnesty or legalization for those already living here make it a no-lose proposition.
“We’ve seen a 500 percent surge in the amount of activity from August to December of last year,” Janice Kephart, of the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, told Fox News.
Whereas people caught crossing illegally near the Mexican border once opted simply to be turned back, they now increasingly are invoking their right to a hearing, federal sources told Fox News. The reason is twofold: Budget cuts mean they are unlikely to be held pending their appearance, and they also think establishing a paper trail of their presence in the U.S. will help when the debate in Washington ends.
Border Patrol sources told Fox News the newest illegal immigrants have nothing to fear from being caught.
“With the knowledge of immigration reform, you will — and are — seeing a huge flow of illegals hitting the Southern border looking to stay caught,” a Border Patrol source told Fox News.
Another said, “Central Americans and South Americans are flooding the system asking for hearings knowing immigration reform/amnesty is coming.” Continue reading this article
Now the Associated Press has a report detailing the effects of having vicious Mexican gangsters in every corner of the country. The head of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Chicago office Jack Riley believes that the Mexicans are an underlying cause of the city’s high murder rate. He also remarked about the cartels, “It’s probably the most serious threat the United States has faced from organized crime.” The Texas Department of Public Safety reported 22 killings and five kidnappings in the state committed by cartel gangsters from 2010 through mid- 2011.
Rush Limbaugh opined on Monday regarding the Texas murders of two prosecutors that the killers might be cartel members: “So here are your options. Texas DAs are being murdered. It’s either white supremacists or Mexican drug cartels.”
Plus, the worsening problem of Mexican crime in America doesn’t say much for Obama’s border security. Doesn’t the Constitution guarantee the states protection from foreign invasion?
CHICAGO — Mexican drug cartels whose operatives once rarely ventured beyond the U.S. border are dispatching some of their most trusted agents to live and work deep inside the United States — an emboldened presence that experts believe is meant to tighten their grip on the world’s most lucrative narcotics market and maximize profits.
If left unchecked, authorities say, the cartels’ move into the American interior could render the syndicates harder than ever to dislodge and pave the way for them to expand into other criminal enterprises such as prostitution, kidnapping-and-extortion rackets and money laundering.
Cartel activity in the U.S. is certainly not new. Starting in the 1990s, the ruthless syndicates became the nation’s No. 1 supplier of illegal drugs, using unaffiliated middlemen to smuggle cocaine, marijuana and heroin beyond the border or even to grow pot here.
But a wide-ranging Associated Press review of federal court cases and government drug-enforcement data, plus interviews with many top law enforcement officials, indicate the groups have begun deploying agents from their inner circles to the U.S. Cartel operatives are suspected of running drug-distribution networks in at least nine non-border states, often in middle-class suburbs in the Midwest, South and Northeast.
“It’s probably the most serious threat the United States has faced from organized crime,” said Jack Riley, head of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Chicago office. Continue reading this article
Unsurprisingly, the Washington chatter about amnesty has enticed more job-thieving foreigners to flood across America’s southern perimeter. The illegal aliens obviously have little faith in the Obama administration’s commitment to checking the length of residence and other background examinations to weed out fraudsters.
Oh wait. “No human is illegal” — that’s the Democrat belief.
Future Democrats heed Obama’s invitation to enter the United Stated unlawfully.
As the immigration reform Gang of Eight inside the Beltway prepares to announce a deal later this week, claiming border security will come before a path to citizenship for millions of illegals, Border Patrol agents have seen illegal border crossings double and warn the cutting of agent work hours will only result in less border security, not more.
“We’ve seen the number of illegal aliens double, maybe even triple since amnesty talk started happening,” an agent told Townhall, who asked to remain unnamed due to fears of retaliation within Customs and Border Protection [CBP], something he said is common. “A lot of these people, although not the majority, are criminals or aggravated felons. This is a direct danger to our communities.”
Data obtained by Townhall and reported within CBP from February 5 through March 1, 2013 shows 504 illegal aliens were spotted exploiting the Tucson/Nogales area, 189 were caught on CBP intelligence cameras. Of those 504, only 174 were apprehended and 32 of the 189 on camera were carrying large drug load packs for Mexican cartels. Some were armed with AK-47 style weapons. Continue reading this article
The latest affront to American values is the Yemeni family who burned their teenager’s arms with a hot knife for communicating with a male not chosen by the parents. And she didn’t want to marry her cousin, as the parents had decreed. The mother, Sahar Thabit (pictured), did the actual burning.
“Spare the branding iron, spoil the child!” — that’s the Muslim motto, at least in the Thabit family.
Why does Washington continue to admit these horrible people as immigrants, when their misogynist culture is objectionable to our values? Muslim immigration is wrong in all possible ways.
A Middle Eastern South Florida resident was arrested Friday for allegedly burning her teenage daughter with a heated knife.
Authorities said 35-year-old Sahar Thabit, who was born in Yemen, was punishing her 17-year-old daughter for befriending and talking to a boy online in defiance of her family, who want her to marry her cousin. She has been charged with three counts of child abuse causing grave bodily harm.
“This was pretty bad, because there were burn marks on both arms,” said Somy Ali, president of No More Tears, a non-profit organization that assists victims of domestic violence. Ali said the victim had three identical burn marks on each forearm.
Hollywood Police said Thabit burned her daughter in early January. Officials at South Broward High School became aware of the victim’s burns when the teenager’s classmate told the assistant principal her parents were furious when they found out about their daughter’s online friendship. Continue reading this article
In a recent celebration of diversity, the San Jose Mercury-News praised the family values of Mexicans who watch television together, not like tiresome Americans who are too disconnected to view with others.
Below, the Pacheco family of Fremont gathers en masse to watch a telenovela soap opera on the Spanish-language network Univision.
Plus the newspaper seems curiously cheerful that hispanics will outnumber whites in California by 2014. You would think an English-language publication would understand that a growing population who prefer their news and entertainment in Spanish is not a plus for its business model.
But the Mercury-News thinks that increasing numbers of Spanish speakers are a fine addition to California’s diversity. The paper even positively observes that the Pacheco family spends hours daily glued to Spanish-language television because they want to follow the news of Mexico and apparently have much less interest in the affairs of the nation they chose to inhabit.
It is curious that the Mercury-News would celebrate this particular aspect of diversity.
Almost every weekday after work and school, the entire Pacheco family — grandparents, young adults, children — crowd into their Fremont living room for their evening ritual: watching Univision.
The Spanish-language network hums for hours through the Pachecos’ apartment, bridging three generations who watch and comment on its steady stream of news, soap operas and daily soccer highlights from Barcelona to Guadalajara.
“Hispanics watch television together,” said Raul Rodriguez, general manager of KDTV-14, the Bay Area affiliate of the national Univision network. “You haven’t been able to see that since the ’50s or ’60s on English-language television.”
The station’s cross-generational appeal — to say nothing of the fact that Latinos soon will surpass whites as California’s largest population group — helped make KDTV’s 6 p.m. broadcast to the Bay Area’s highest-rated early-evening news show last year for adults between 25 and 54, beating English-language competitors such as KTVU, KGO, KNTV and KPIX. Continue reading this article
Another dangerous policy change is the renewal of rubber-stamp visas for Saudi nationals to enter the United States. Keep in mind that 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudis.
Before the terrorist attacks, Saudis had access to a program called Visa Express, that only required a visit to a travel agent in the Kingdom. That policy was discontinued a few months after the 2001 terror attacks.
But now an updated version is back, only with a reassuring new name — the Global Entry trusted traveler program. Judicial Watch notes “just three years ago the U.S. government actually placed Saudi Arabia on a list of 14 countries whose travelers would face enhanced security.” How quickly things can change in Washington when powerful people exert their influence.
Robert Spencer and Michael Coren discussed the policy change last week on SunTV:
The latest news is that some House Republicans are asking questions about the bonehead program that endangers America’s national security.
House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Michael McCaul and the panel’s subcommittee chairmen are calling on Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to explain why DHS has extended a trusted traveler program to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
In a letter to Napolitano released Thursday, the seven GOP lawmakers voiced their concerns about “potential risks” associated with opening the Global Entry trusted traveler program — which “allows expedited clearance for pre-approved, low-risk travelers upon arrival in the United States” — to Saudi Arabia
“Of the 19 individuals who hijacked American planes on September 11, 2001 — 15 were from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” the committee members wrote in the letter dated March 27 but released the following day. “More recently, following the plot to blow up an international flight over Detroit on Christmas Day 2009, the Department saw fit to increase the scrutiny of passengers from countries like Saudi Arabia. This must be a factor in determining who to admit into the Global Entry Program.”
Napolitano and Saudi Arabian Interior Minister Prince Mohammed bin Nayef announced the agreement to expand the trusted traveler program to Saudi Arabia and begin plans for a similar program for American travelers to Saudi Arabia in January. Continue reading this article
The issue of dual citizenship is an interesting one, because it is so little discussed in the public sphere. Even so, a majority of US voters don’t think it is acceptable.
My take is that Americans understand the basic unfairness of dual citizenship and the corollary of immigrants having a spare country in case things go bad here. Plus, the policy promotes dual allegiance, and the principle of polygamy applied to nationality.
Border security and a path to citizenship are the most talked about issues when it comes to immigration reform, but another part of the debate involves multiple citizenships. Thirty-four percent (34%) of Likely U.S. Voters say that if someone wants to become an American citizen, he or she should be allowed to remain a citizen of another country at the same time.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 54% of voters don’t think potential U.S. citizens should be allowed to maintain dual citizenship. Another 12% are undecided.
Below, day of shame: President Reagan signs immigration amnesty bill in November 1986.
In February, Senator Grassley took to the Senate floor to deliver a speech on the history of the 1986 IRCA to explain the expectations and the failures. Now we are facing a replay, only multiplied by many times over in terms of the number of foreign lawbreakers being rewarded.
However, a vital difference today is that amnesty hucksters don’t even pretend that the promised enforcement will be followed. DHS Secretary Napolitano recently remarked that “triggers” were not a workable approach, thereby undermining the Gang of Eight’s framework. Senate Democrats this week voted to give Obamacare to illegal aliens. Democrats are pushing the amnesty hard because they can, calculating the Republicans are running scared about the overrated problem of the hispanic vote.
As if the ultimate hispander (amnesty) will help the GOP.
The Iowa Republicans cleaned the speech up a little and posted the text:
As we look forward to a debate this year about immigration reform, I want to share my thoughts and my past experiences on this issue. I particularly want to share my personal experience from the 1980s amnesty law and how we can learn from that debate.
But, before I dive into this history, I want to commend the many senators that are working together to forge a consensus and produce a product on this terribly difficult issue. I commend them for sitting down and agreeing to a set of principles. As Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, I expect to play a role in brokering an even broader consensus with additional members.
I’ve read the bipartisan framework for immigration reform that this group has written. And, the one thing that struck me is the sentence in the preamble. It states, “We will ensure that this is a successful permanent reform to our immigration system that will not need to be revisited.” In other words, the group understands that we need a long-term solution to this problem. We need a serious fix so that future generations don’t have to deal with 11 or 15 or 30 million people who are here illegally. That sentence is the most important part of that document, and we must not lose sight of that goal.
But, we need to learn from our previous mistakes so that we truly don’t have to revisit the problem. So, let’s discuss the 1986 amnesty under President Reagan.
In 1980, President Reagan campaigned on a promise that he would work to reform our immigration laws and legalize foreign workers in the U.S. The President’s policies were further shaped by the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy that was created in 1978 under President Carter. President Reagan signed a bill into law on November 6, 1986. This law is known as the Immigration Reform and Control Act, or IRCA.
The process to finalize a bill was long and arduous. It took years. In 1981, when I was a freshman Senator, I joined the Judiciary Committee, and I was a member of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Policy. Back then, subcommittees did real work. We sat down and wrote the legislation. We had 100 hours of hearings and 300 witnesses before we marked up a bill in May 1982. Continue reading this article
How much does the Obama administration despise public safety? Let’s count the ways. First, there is the wholesale attack on the gun ownership of law-abiding citizens, who use firearms to protect themselves and their families.
The latest attack on public safety is the cutback on Border Patrol coverage of the southern perimeter. What great news for Mexican drug cartels and Islamic terrorists! The cutback is also a fine opportunity for millions of foreigners who might hope to be included in Obama’s rubber-stamp amnesty for future Democrats.
It’s not like we have anything like a fortified border, so lots of boots on the ground are required. But the Obama gang plans to cut the hours of the Border Patrol in order to make the sequester cause pain, as they promised.
While Homeland Security officials stick to their claim that the border is as “secure as it’s ever been,” this week the Border Patrol effectively cut some 4,000 agents from its force due to budget cuts — 20 percent of its total manpower.
The cuts, meant to close a $250 million shortfall due to “sequestration,” forced Border Patrol brass to make some tough choices. One option included putting agents on furlough two days a month — but agency administrators instead opted to eliminate overtime, according to Shawn Moran, vice president of the National Border Patrol Council.
“The border is not secure. It’s safer than it has been in decades but it is by no means secure and it won’t be if you cut 20 percent of your workforce,” Moran said Wednesday.
“This is no longer about border security,” Moran added. “This has become a corporate mentality. They say it’s about the mission but if it was we’d be out there securing the border. They’re worried about securing bottom line.”
A Homeland Security Department spokesman took exception to Moran’s remarks, calling them out of line and untrue. The department maintained the cuts were necessary to comply with automatic spending cuts — “the sequester.” Continue reading this article
Ever get the feeling that the open-borders gang has unlimited funds to destroy America? In fact, they essentially do, according to research from the Sunlight Foundation, which found $1.5 billion has been spent since 2007 in anti-sovereignty lobbying behavior. That means $300 million annually devoted to replace traditional Americans with big-government-loving Marxicans from the third world. The Soros bunch alone has spent more than $70 million since 2005 to increase diverse immigration to America and thereby change the national culture forever.
Apparently, independent-minded citizens (like those in the Tea Party) are seen as too troublesome for an all-powerful welfare state. Replacement is job #1 for many powerful interests, from ethnics to universities. Traditional Americans increasingly are seen as only good for sending their tax money to support the big-government project.
The Daily Caller’s Neil Munro does a good job of analyzing the report and including relevant background information:
A loose alliance of business and political groups has spent almost $1.5 billion since late 2007 to rewrite the nation’s immigration law according to a new report.
The flood of money hired 3,136 lobbyists at 678 lobbying groups to pass one or more of 987 small or large bills, said the March 25 report from the Sunlight Foundation.
“[I]n the five years (2008-2012) since the reform last died on the Senate floor, we count 6,712 quarterly lobbying reports filed by 678 lobbying organizations in 170 sectors mentioning 987 unique bills, associated with more than $1.5 billion in lobbying spending,” the Sunlight Foundation’s Lee Drutman and Alexander Furnas write.
The report corroborates lobbyists’ recent comments to The Daily Caller that business and progressive groups are spending very heavily to pass a joint “comprehensive immigration bill” this year, which could include enhanced guest worker program and some form of amnesty.
One lobbyist said he had been given a surprise offer to promote the new bills, while another said that meetings of experienced immigration lobbyists are crowded with new advocates who know little about immigration law.
“They’re hiring nearly everybody,” the second lobbyist told TheDC.
The Sunlight Foundation’s report, however, does not focus on the 2013 fight, and instead concentrates on the scale and pattern of immigration lobbying. It does not compare funding spent by pro-immigration groups to the much smaller spending by the handful of groups fighting to curb immigration and the influx of guest workers.
Those groups include Federation for American Immigration Reform and NumbersUSA, which want to scale back the annual inflow of roughly one million new immigrants.
“The true stakeholders of what happens with America’s immigration policies — the American public — are left out and left behind as powerful and well-financed industry lobbyists run roughshod over their interests,” Bob Dane, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform told The Daily Caller.
“Special interests lobby with their checkbooks … citizens lobby with their votes and terminate the careers of those who neglect their interests,” he added.
The report says that the NumbersUSA group has an annual budget of $6 million, and has hired lobbyists at three lobbying firms.
Federation for American Immigration Reform and NumbersUSA rallied public opposition to defeat 2006 and 2007 immigration bills that were championed by the progressive activists and corporate lobbyists.
Those 2006 and 2007 bills would have granted a conditional amnesty to roughly 11 million illegal immigrants, and also increased the use of guest-workers in restaurants, construction, software, farming and retail.
OpenSecrets says that NumbersUSA spent $600,000 in lobbying in 2012. That’s less than 10 percent of the $8 million spent by one company, Microsoft Corp., which is trying to up its employment of professional guest-workers under the H-1B program.
The number of lobbying firms working on immigration increased to 355 in 2012, up from 317 in 2011, according to OpenSecrets.org.
In fact, the Sunlight Foundation itself is one of the many groups that are partly funded by the Soros Foundation, which is using its money to help pass the immigration bills. Sunlight received $300,000 from Soros in 2010 and 2011.
The Soros group has spent more that $70 million since 2005 to boost groups seeking to increase immigration, according to a February report by WNYC.org. Continue reading this article
There is one discouraging aspect, however. In an hour of discussion about the sharia threat, not one of the expert speakers pointed out that Islam has invaded America largely through diverse immigration; further, that admitting likely enemies should stop.
So back in those days, we had a great — I thought, the greatest trial judge in the United States at the time, later the Attorney General of the United States, Michael Mukasey, who, after hearing arguments about it, would not allow that defense to be presented to the jury, on the common-sense principle that we are in the United States, and we follow American law in the United States. And it didn’t matter what Sharia said, or really — not just to single out Sharia — what any other religious code would say in terms of where religious law would collide with the civil law. Because there’s a lot of Supreme Court law that says that, you know, basically if you allow chaos like that, you have every person being a law unto himself. And that’s not an acceptable way to have a civil society. So that defense got bounced out pretty easily.
The reason I think that’s interesting is — flash forward almost 20 years, in my own home state of New Jersey. And we had a woman, a Muslim woman, who was married to a Muslim man who she was trying to divorce, who was serially raping and beating her. And she went into New Jersey state court to try to get a protective order. And the court refused to give her the protective order under circumstances where there was no doubt that the attacks and the sexual abuse was actually going on. But the court reasoned that he was simply following his religious principles, under which his own understanding of them was that she had no right to say no.
So think about that. We go from 20 years ago — where a Sharia defense basically gets laughed out of court on a very straightforward, confident idea of American law that we follow our own law in the United States, we don’t — Sharia’s not the law of the land — to a situation we have now where — not just in New Jersey; that case happened to be reversed on appeal — but in almost every state in the Union, we’ve had Sharia principles creeping into our law. 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.