Narco-State Honcho Visits Washington

Is Mexico’s Presidente Felipe Calderon the rudest White House guest ever? His condemnation of Arizona’s newly heightened immigration enforcement was over the top for a foreign dignitary on a state visit. But host Obama and the liberal media already set the stage in inaccurately characterizing the law as racial profiling, so it was easy for el Presidente to be speak ungenerously about his neighbor.

Of course, in bashing Arizona, Calderon is bashing America, because the state is standing up for our national sovereignty while Washington won’t. Plus, Americans side with Arizona and don’t buy all the propaganda about profiling. (Apparently Felipe has largely written off American tourism since insulting potential customers is poor business practice. Plus the noisy gun battles between rival cartels can be offputting to sensitive travelers.)

When Presidente Calderon was interviewed on CNN (transcript), he repeated the lies about racism. He did admit that Mexican immigration laws had recently been softened to use as a club against the United States, because Mexico’s tough enforcement was “very powerful argument” in painting his country as a hypocrite in earlier amnesty battles.

Calderon also made a big deal of portraying his nation as a trustworthy neighbor, declaring in his speech to a joint session of Congress, “Mexico is determined to assume its responsibility. For us, migration is not just your problem.” … “I have come here as your neighbor, as your partner, as your ally, and as your friend.”

(Obama likes the word “partner” in describing his pal Calderon, and used it more than a dozen times in his welcoming press conference.)

But Calderon and the Mexicans don’t want illegal immigration to stop, a fact that two-thirds of Americans recognize, according to a recent Rasmussen poll. The $20 billion in annual remittances is easy money, and it helps keep millions of Mexican families fed and quiet.

If Calderon were a real “partner” in law enforcement, he would have police at the border preventing crossers from entering the US illegally. Instead, Mexico has Grupo Beta, a sort of border-roaming welfare worker cadre, to help the illegals get across.

In addition to lecturing Americans about racism, Presidente Calderon unloaded another pack of lies about guns during his Congressional speech:

Mexican President Challenges Congress On Immigration, Guns, NPR blog, May 20, 2010

Just to give you an idea, we have seized 75,000 guns and assault weapons in Mexico in the last three years. And more than 80 percent of those we have been able to trace came from the United States — from the United States.

And if you’ll look carefully, you will notice that the violence in Mexico started to grow a couple of years before I took office, in 2006. This coincides with the lifting of the assault-weapons ban in 2004. One day, criminals in Mexico, having gained an access to these weapons, decided to challenge the authorities in my country. Today, these weapons are aimed by the criminals not only at rival gangs, but also at Mexican civilians and authorities.

With all due respect, if you do not regulate the sale of these weapons in the right way, nothing guarantees that criminals here in the United States with access to the same power of weapons will not decided (sic) to challenge American authorities and civilians. It is true the U.S. government is now carrying out operations against gun traffickers. But it’s — it is also true that there are more than 7,000 gun shops along the border with Mexico, where almost anyone can purchase these powerful weapons.

True assault weapons are full auto and are not legally available in any American gun store, so the guy is lying like a rug, er engaging in political theater for the folks back home and liberal gun confiscators here.

Other weasel words were chosen carefully. He referred to the guns “we have been able to trace…” Most of the recovered firearms have no identification numbers because they come from China and similarly squirrelly arms suppliers.

The facts are unfriendly to gun grabbers…

The Myth of 90 Percent: Only a Small Fraction of Guns in Mexico Come From U.S., Fox News, April 2, 2009

There’s just one problem with the 90 percent “statistic” and it’s a big one:

It’s just not true.

In fact, it’s not even close. The fact is, only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to the U.S.

What’s true, an ATF spokeswoman told FOXNews.com, in a clarification of the statistic used by her own agency’s assistant director, “is that over 90 percent of the traced firearms originate from the U.S.”

But a large percentage of the guns recovered in Mexico do not get sent back to the U.S. for tracing, because it is obvious from their markings that they do not come from the U.S.

“Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable, and the U.S. effort to trace weapons really only extends to weapons that have been in the U.S. market,” Matt Allen, special agent of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), told FOX News.

See also a video version of this story, Fox Report: Mexican guns not from US.

Poll Suggests Americans Are Sick of Mexico's Treachery

The Rasmussen pollsters have published a new survey just in time for the big shindig at the White House welcoming Presidente Felipe Calderon and his amnesty roadshow.

The take-away message is this: more than two-thirds of those polled don’t believe Mexico is an honest player that respects America’s right to borders and sovereignty. This opinion sampling follows a series of polls from Rasmussen and other mainstream polling organizations showing universal support for Arizona’s increased immigration enforcement, even after a flood of lies that the new law would unleash random mass arrests.

One can assume from this result that Americans have had it with the bad faith of our neighbor; one indication being that only 13 percent think that Mexico wants to end illegal immigration.

And what’s going on with the President’s odd passivity about this issue? If he wants a mass amnesty to assure a future of big-government-loving hispanic Democrats, it is to his benefit to send troops to the border and shut it down tight to get the big enchilada amnesty later. But he acts like there’s nothing he can do. Arizona Senators McCain and Kyl recently sent a letter to Obama urging troops be deployed, following an April 19 press conference that also went unanswered by the White House.

Unless you include Obama’s bashing of Arizona along with Presidente Calderon with the same tired lies that effective immigration enforcement requires racial profiling: that’s his answer. Obama’s strategy is to rile up his far left base by blaming Arizona for taking responsibility for a duty of the federal government. He could fix it but he won’t. In fact, Obama wants the budget for border control cut.

67% Say Mexico Does Not Want To Stop Illegal Immigration, Rasmussen Reports, May 19, 2010

Most Americans don’t believe Mexico wants to stop the illegal flow of its citizens into this country and think America’s southern neighbor should be asked to compensate U.S. taxpayers for costs incurred by illegal immigration.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 13% of Adults think Mexico wants to stop illegal immigration. Sixty-seven percent (67%) say Mexico does not want to stop its citizens from entering the United States illegally. Another 20% are not sure.

Mexican President Felipe Calderon in his meeting today with President Obama complained that Arizona’s new immigration law encourages discrimination. But Arizona officials say the new law is needed in part because illegal immigration is causing big public safety and financial problems for the state.

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Americans think Mexico should be asked to compensate U.S. taxpayers to offset such costs. Twenty-four percent (24%) disagree and say Mexico should not be asked for compensation. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.

As the United States wrestles with a future of historic-level deficits, 67% of voters nationwide say illegal immigrants are a significant strain on the U.S. budget.

Most voters (55%) now favor passage of an immigration law like Arizona’s in their own state. When asked specifically about the chief provision of the Arizona law, support is even higher. Sixty-nine percent (69%) believe a police officer should be required to check the immigration status of anyone stopped for a traffic violation or violation of some other law if he suspects the person might be an illegal immigrant. […]

According to news reporters, the Mexican Embassy in Washington, D.C. is preparing friend-of-the court briefs to support lawsuits challenging Arizona’s new law. Only 12% of Americans believe it is appropriate for a foreign country to help challenge U.S. laws in U.S. courts. Seventy-two percent (72%) say it is not appropriate, and again 17% are undecided.

Twenty-seven percent (27%) view Mexico as an ally of the United States, while 14% describe it as an enemy. Fifty-three percent (53%) view Mexico as somewhere in between the two. These findings are consistent with a survey last August but are up from earlier last year when the Mexican government was seeking restrictions on U.S. gun sales it argued were linked to growing drug-related violence.

The majority of Republicans, Democrats and adults not affiliated with either party feel that the Mexican government does not want to stop illegal immigration and that Mexico should be asked to compensate U.S.taxpayers for costs associated with illegal immigration. But Republicans and unaffiliateds believe both things much more strongly than Democrats.

Members of the president’s party are also more inclined to view Mexico as an ally than are Republicans and unaffiliated adults.

Most voters continue to say as they have for years that gaining control of the border is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers. But most also favor a welcoming immigration policy that excludes only “national security threats, criminals and those who would come here to live off our welfare system.”

The Obama administration announced in March that it was halting funding of the fence along the U.S.-Mexico border, but 59% of Americans believe the United States should continue to build that fence.

More Law Enforcement Obstruction from San Francisco

The ultra-left city is truly an upside-down universe, when the sheriff declares he wants to “opt out” of a federal law enforcement program, specifically Secure Communities which assists local jurisdictions with finding criminal aliens in jails. Who could object to checking out prisoners for instances of additional wrongdoing? Only San Francisco, the Queen of Sanctuary Cities!

(See my article The Thin Blue Line Is Compromised at the Top about how political the top cop job is.)

SF sheriff seeks to opt out of immigration program, San Francisco Chronicle, May 18, 2010

San Francisco’s sheriff is seeking to opt out of a federal program that uses the fingerprints of arrestees to check their immigration status.

Sheriff Michael Hennessey sent a letter Tuesday to the California attorney general asking that the state Department of Justice not share the city’s fingerprint data with federal immigration authorities.

San Francisco is scheduled to begin participating in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s so-called Secure Communities program on June 1. Under the program, anyone arrested will have their fingerprints checked against a database used by ICE.

Hennessey says the program conflicts with a San Francisco policy that requires law enforcement to report only those born outside the U.S. who are booked for felonies.

Arizona: Mandatory Multilingualism Not Required for Businesses

Arizona is renewing my faith in elected representatives — that they need not be insanely cruel toward citizens. The state is legislating impressively common-sense ideas, such as enforcing immigration laws more stringently and prohibiting schools from teaching Raza racist treason.

Now it is relieving businesses from any requirement (real or imagined) that they provide translators for immigrants and illegal aliens too arrogant or lazy to learn English.

In comparison, consider California, where Sacramento has mandated that healthcare providers include translators as part of their services, at an estimated cost of $25 million annually. The blessings of diversity don’t come free, you know.

Arizona is showing up Washington big time: not every piece of legislation need be a stab in the back to honest citizens.

New AZ law: Firms have no legal duty to have translators, Arizona Star,

PHOENIX – A Glendale optometrist’s yearlong legal fight over what services he had to provide for a Spanish-speaking customer has translated into new protections for other businesses.

Gov. Jan Brewer has signed legislation affirming that nothing in state law requires businesses to provide “trained and competent” interpreters when a customer comes in speaking a language other than English.

Assistant Attorney General Michael Walker said that has probably always been the law. But that didn’t save John Schrolucke from having to spend time and money defending himself and his practice before Walker’s office finally dismissed the case.

Schrolucke told lawmakers the incident stems from a patient who spoke only Spanish. Although she did bring her 12-year-old child with her to the office, he said allowing the child to interpret for the parent would have gotten him into legal trouble.

He said he faced a potential malpractice lawsuit if the child did not properly translate some of the more technical explanations being provided, so he turned the woman away, telling her through her child to come back with someone at least 18 years old.

Schrolucke said he also gave the woman the option of going to one or two other optometrists who speak Spanish.

Instead, he said, the woman filed a discrimination complaint with the Attorney General’s Office. Continue reading this article

Anti-Safety Protestors Interrupt Police Checkpoints

In Riverside County, California, anarchists, er “activists” have been intercepting drivers headed toward police checkpoints to warn off illegal aliens who may be drunk and/or unlicensed. They stand beside the road with big signs a block or two ahead of police stops to allow miscreants the time to turn back.

Yep, the anarchists believe that the ability of hispanic lawbreakers to drive is more important than public safety. They say it’s “unfair” that police conduct checks that bust more aliens than citizens.

It would be more precise to note the situation is a target-rich environment. By definition, illegal aliens who drive without licenses in California do so unlawfully. And even NPR has admitted that hispanics drive drunk at disproportionately high rates.

The job of police is to catch bad guys and prevent crime when possible. That means that effective PDs go to locales where a lot of crime is committed. (See Heather MacDonald’s recent analysis of how extremists blame police for being too efficient, Distorting the Truth About Crime and Race.)

According to Raza anarchists, America should cut illegal aliens extra slack because they commit more crime (like their style of entrance). It’s an upside-down argument, but in today’s political climate, it sells well among the victimization peddlers.

Immigrant advocates say crackdown on unlicensed drivers unfair Press-Enterprise, May 15, 2010

The high school student was among protesters hoping to help illegal immigrants whose vehicles were about to be impounded by police because they were driving without a license. California law got tougher in 1993, requiring a social security card and other identification to get a license and barring most illegal immigrants from applying.

Now the stricter license requirements and a rising number of checkpoints across the Inland area and state are stirring controversy that has reached a fever pitch in some cities with a large Latino population.

Critics say most Inland checkpoints economically punish illegal immigrants whose cars often are impounded for 30 days — the maximum time allowed — and can ill afford the approximately $2,000 to retrieve the vehicle. Protesters point out that drunken drivers usually lose their car for only one day. They say racial profiling is at play where checkpoints are placed.

Inland authorities said softer penalties, such as citations, for unlicensed drivers don’t work because many illegal immigrants lack identification and can’t be found if they skip court. Police say impounding cars is needed to deal with drivers without licenses, who account for about 40 percent of the nation’s hit-and-run crashes based on statistics of hit-and-run drivers who were caught. And police say that traffic volume, not a neighborhood’s racial composition, determines checkpoint locations.

“Usually people only see the fact that we’re creating a monster for them and we’re taking their car and taking their livelihood,” said Perris police Sgt. Dan Lingo, who supervises the city’s checkpoints. “The other side of it is they’re breaking California law and they become a risk to the public.” […]

Activists and illegal immigrants such as Elder Cabrera, a 40-year-old Corona resident, say month-long impounds are too harsh.

With a wife and child to support, getting to and from the Corona glue plant where he works is his first priority.

When Perris police recently impounded his 1992 Nissan Maxima for 30 days, Cabrera never got it back from the tow company. Rather than wait a month and pay about $1,800 to retrieve it, Cabrera bought a 15-year-old Toyota Camry for $2,000 two days after the checkpoint.

“If you don’t have a car in this country, you’re nobody,” Cabrera said in Spanish.

At least a little attention is paid in the article to the victims of drunk drivers.

Lori Gleason, director of Mothers Against Drunk Driving in Riverside County, told the council how she lost her 20-year-old son to a four-time repeat offender with a suspended license.

“Sobriety checkpoints support enforcement of traffic laws,” said Gleason, of Palm Desert.

Moreno Valley police Lt. Virginia Busby said protesters could be shooing drunken drivers from checkpoints.

“How would they feel if they turn away a drunk driver who ends up killing a pedestrian or one of their family members?” she asked.

Someone should tell the anti-safety advocates that plenty of hispanics are killed by drunk-driving, like little Bryan Mendoza who died when his blotto drunk father crashed the family vehicle.

Raza Racists Angered at Arizona's Ethnic Studies Prohibitions

The Mexican fifth column located in Arizona is unhappy that restraints have been placed on one of its major propaganda arms, namely the Raza-friendly ethnic studies that have afflicted the Tucson schools. (Raza means “The Race.”)

The new state law has followed closely behind the immigration law that has been so slandered by the dinosaur liberal media, open-borders Mexicans are doubly angered. The limits put on social studies in schools are pretty basic: no sedition taught, no division of students by ethnic group to be taught a specific flavor of victimhood. But the law clamps down on what chicanos in Che berets want to teach: takeover of the American southwest with communist hispanic control.

Arizona bill takes aim at ethnic studies classes, Los Angeles Times, May 10, 2010

At the main entrance to a campus in Tucson, a sign greets visitors with “Welcome to Tucson High, Home of the Largest Xicano Studies Program in the Nation.”

“Xicano,” or Chicano, studies is a 14-year-old program in the Tucson Unified School District that offers classes from elementary through high school in topics such as literature, history and social justice that emphasize Latino authors and history.

In the wake of Arizona’s adoption of a law to crack down on illegal immigration, such classes are the subject of another ethnically tinged fight in the state. Another bill approved by the Legislature seeks to ban such courses, which critics say promote “ethnic chauvinism.”

Supporters of Mexican American studies say the aim is to offer subjects and perspectives ignored by academia, as well as foster pride in a marginalized community.

In teacher Curtis Acosta’s literature class at Tucson High, the walls are plastered with the faces of labor leaders Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta and Latin American revolutionary Che Guevara. Students read fiction by Luis Alberto Urrea and Junot Diaz and plays by the Los Angeles-based theater troupe Culture Clash. A poster proclaims “United Together En La Lucha”—In The Struggle.

The proposed law would ban schools from teaching classes that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, are designed for students of a particular ethnic group, promote resentment or advocate ethnic solidarity over treating pupils as individuals.

The “Xicano” syllabus doesn’t present much of America’s founders apparently.

As a result of being thwarted, the junior revolutionaries put on their Raza outfits (including berets and masks) and displayed their displeasure at Tucson High. (This bunch will take any excuse to walk out of class and cause trouble. Hispanics’ disinterest in education is deeply engrained and shows up in consistently high dropout rates.)

The State Superintendent of Schools, Tom Horne, appeared on NPR to explain his position in more detail, probably trying to head off the MSM going bonkers with lies again:

New AZ Law Targets ‘Ethnic Studies’ Programs, National Public Radio, May 13, 2010

KEYES: Superintendent Horne, is it wrong to highlight the contributions of specific ethnicities that you might not have heard about before? I mean, when I was growing up in Chicago, they didn’t focus a whole lot about the history and culture of people of color. I realize that has changed in many ways, but is that not something important that kids need to know?

Mr. HORNE: Absolutely. And the standards that my department promulgates, we require in the social studies classes that the students learn about contributions of all different cultures. We think that’s very important. But what we’re against is ghettoizing students. Raza studies for the Mexican kids. African-American studies for the African-American kids. Asian studies for the Asian kids. Indian studies for the Native-American kids – and then just teach them about the contributions of the group that they happen to have been born into.

We think kids should be taught together. They should be taught to treat each other as individuals, that what race they happened to have been born into is irrelevant. What’s relevant is what you know, what you can do, what’s your character, not what race you happened to have been born into. And we teach the contributions of different groups together in a social studies class for all kids.

The job of the public schools is to bring kids from different backgrounds together and teach them to treat each other as individuals. I’ll read to you a brief sentence from a third teacher. She’s overheard the Raza studies teacher tell students that they need to go to college so they can gain the power to take back the stolen land and give it back to Mexico. He personally told me that he teaches his students that Republicans hate Latinos, and he has the legislation to prove it. When he asked him about Mexican-American Republicans who are against illegal immigration, he said this is an example of self-racism.

Naturally, reason and American sovereignty have no appeal to the hard-core Mexican fifth column. Several students were arrested last week for trespassing after a news conference held by Tom Horne:

More than a dozen TUSD students arrested protesting ethnic studies law, KVOA TV, May 12, 2010

[The students] gathered at the state education office on Stone, while upstairs behind closed doors, Horne spoke to the press. Horne says classes designed for students of a particular ethnic group promotes a climate of fear and a dysfunction education. He and deputy superintendent Margaret Dugan showed a picture recently published in the Los Angeles Times of TUSD students at a rally, before the bill was signed into law Tuesday. [NOTE: the photo shown above.)

“The class itself is just one piece. But when you have students wearing brown shirts, bandanas, and sunglasses, this is serious. We are teaching kids to hate the very country they are living in,” says Dugan.

It’s pretty crazy to to allow teaching kids that they should revolt against this country and be doing it on the citizen taxpayer’s dime in the public schools. Good for Arizona for turning off that particular spigot of cultural insanity.

Presidente Calderon Booked for Washington Whiner

The boss-man of the crackhouse next door, Presidente Felipe Calderon, will be paying Mr. Obama a visit next week and will even be addressing a joint session of Congress on May 19. Won’t that be a memorable occasion?

We already know that Calderon (pictured) will complain up a storm about the prospect of actual immigration enforcement, courtesy of the state of Arizona. Obie will bow and apologize profusely that we still have a border at all, which is so inconvenient to Mexico (which enforces its own sovereignty rather severely).

I’m guessing that some high-stakes mooching will go on behind closed doors, and Calderon’s hurt feelings (stemming from Arizona’s border enforcement) will be assuaged by either cash or some nice military hardware to fight Mexico’s failing war against the drug cartels.

Mexico’s Calderon to protest Arizona law to Obama, Reuters, May 14, 2010

Mexican President Felipe Calderon will protest to U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington next week about Arizona’s crackdown on illegal immigrants, Calderon told Reuters Thursday.

Calderon said a law that will come into force in Arizona in July, requiring police to check the immigration status of anyone they suspect is in the United States illegally, was already affecting relations between the two neighbors.

“It contains elements that are frankly discriminatory, terribly backward,” Calderon told Reuters in an interview.

He said he would bring Mexico’s protest over the law to a meeting with Obama and in front of the U.S. Congress during an official visit to Washington next week.

“The fact the law has introduced, regardless of all the nuances being used, the possibility of detaining, arresting somebody on the grounds of their physical appearance implies one of the most serious reversals that I remember,” he said.

The move by Arizona, which borders Mexico, has sparked outraged protests, pushed some U.S. states to seek economic boycotts of Arizona and pushed the immigration debate in the United States into the political foreground.

There are an estimated 10.8 million illegal immigrants, mostly from Latin America, in the United States.

Mexico, which sends 80 percent of its exports to the United States and has millions of citizens working there legally or illegally, has condemned the legislation, issued a warning for Mexicans living or traveling there, and asked its consulates in Arizona to offer Mexicans legal protection.

Right, we Americans are “backward” because we want to keep Mexican chaos OUT. One example: on Thursday, a candidate for mayor from Calderon’s own party was murdered apparently by cartel gunmen.

Illegal Alien Costs Considered

Former Republican and current Governor of Florida Charlie Crist has joined the ranks of the extreme innumerate by claiming a massive amnesty would be a fine strategy to rescue Social Security (which has been the government’s extra piggy bank for decades).

Common sense alone would reveal that adding millions of uneducated foreigners to the legal workforce would be a loser deal for federal coffers. They are poor people and therefore make little money.

But in politics, common sense is a rarity.

Crist: Immigration reform can help Social Security, AP, May 13, 2010

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who’s running for Senate as an independent, said Friday that providing a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants will help keep Social Security solvent — an idea he favors over his opponent’s suggestion to raise the eligibility age for benefits.

Crist told The Associated Press there are as many as 14 million illegal immigrants in the country as part of an underground economy. If they paid into the Social Security system, it would help increase the worker-to-retiree ratio.

Fortunately, Rep. Lamar Smith has been following the costs of illegal immigration for years and recently wrote up an analysis for Investors’ Business Daily:

Contrary To Amnesty Supporters, Illegal Aliens Drain Social Security, IBD, May 12, 2010

A recent Rasmussen Reports survey revealed that voters remain concerned about Social Security and whether the system can deliver what the government has promised.   According to the survey, 58% of U.S. voters lack confidence that the Social Security system will pay them their future benefits.

Advocates for amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants like to claim that amnesty will “save” Social Security. They also claim that dramatically increased immigration levels will safeguard our retirements and those of our children because more people will pay into the system.

Unfortunately, the opposite is true.

During the last Congress, I asked the Social Security Administration (SSA) to calculate the value in today’s dollars of the payroll taxes paid by typical illegal immigrants and their employers as well as the value of their retirement benefits should they receive amnesty.  Not only the typical illegal immigrant but any low-skilled immigrant will affect the solvency of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Illegal immigrant workers, often with false identities, can’t avoid paying into Social Security but are not eligible to receive retirement benefits for their illegal work. But if they receive amnesty, they can qualify for Social Security retirement benefits based on their earlier illegal work.  And those benefits will amount to much more than what they paid into Social Security!

A single male illegal immigrant who works for very low wages and is now 25 years old will receive (at today’s value) $15,596  more in Social Security retirement benefits. A similar female illegal immigrant will receive $20,936 more in retirement benefits.

A married illegal immigrant couple in which one spouse works can expect $52,460 more. And a married illegal immigrant couple where both spouses work will receive $39,037 more.

What would be the fiscal impact on the Trust Fund of the legalization of 5 million illegal immigrant couples who both work for very low wages? A staggering $500 billion!  That would jeopardize the solvency of Social Security and threaten everyone’s retirement.

Of course, Social Security is not the only way in which illegal immigrants negatively impact American taxpayers. Continue reading this article

Arizona Polling Remains Overwhelmingly Positive

Polls over the last little while have been unanimous that Americans are supportive of Arizona’s attempt to bring immigration anarchy under control. It’s a testament to the common sense of the American people that the media’s barrage of outright lies about the Arizona law has not dissuaded the majority of citizens that immigration anarchy must stop. The law is also strictly enforcement, with no morally repugnant amnesty.

Mainstream surveys from CBS/New York Times, Investor’s Business Daily and Rasmussen have all shown the public to be positive toward Arizona’s crackdown.

More recently, the Pew pollsters released a similar report of general agreement with Arizona’s enforcement-only approach.

Broad Approval For New Arizona Immigration Law, Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, May 12, 2010

The public broadly supports a new Arizona law aimed at dealing with illegal immigration and the law’s provisions giving police increased powers to stop and detain people who are suspected of being in the country illegally.

Fully 73% say they approve of requiring people to produce documents verifying their legal status if police ask for them. Two-thirds (67%) approve of allowing police to detain anyone who cannot verify their legal status, while 62% approve of allowing police to question people they think may be in the country illegally.

After being asked about the law’s provisions, 59% say that, considering everything, they approve of Arizona’s new illegal immigration law while 32% disapprove.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted May 6-9 among 994 adults, finds that Democrats are evenly split over Arizona’s new immigration law: 45% approve of the law and 46% disapprove. However, majorities of Democrats approve of two of the law’s principal provisions: requiring people to produce documents verifying legal status (65%) and allowing police to detain anyone unable to verify their legal status (55%).

Republicans overwhelmingly approve of the law and three provisions tested. Similarly, among independents there is little difference in opinions of the new Arizona law (64% approve) and its elements, which are viewed positively.

See the complete Pew report here.

And that’s not all. The Wall Street Journal‘s new poll headlined party politics, but drilling down into the paragraphs revealed still more agreement with Arizona, except for a certain ethnic group. The WSJ survey broke out the opinion of hispanics, who are not friendly to American sovereignty. (Poll data here.)

Voters Shifting to GOP, Poll Finds, WSJ, May 13, 2010

The poll also showed sharp divisions among voters on the subject of illegal immigration.

Among all adults, support is high for the new Arizona law that makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally and requires law enforcement officers to question people if they have reasonable suspicions about their immigration status.

Some 64% said they strongly or somewhat supported the law, compared with 34% who strongly or somewhat opposed it.

Divisions were even sharper between whites and Hispanics. Among Hispanic respondents, 70% opposed the law, while 69% of whites in the survey supported it.

The survey oversampled Hispanics to increase accuracy.

Hispanics also held a different view of immigration generally than did white respondents.

In the survey, 58% of Hispanics said that immigration helped the U.S. more than it hurt, while 56% of white respondents said that immigration hurt more than it helped.

The survey found that, at the moment, Hispanics greatly favored Democrats over Republicans, particularly among Hispanics under age 40.

That stands as a danger sign for the GOP given the rapid growth of that voter bloc.

How typically self-serving that illegal aliens and their pals think they are improving America by their uninvited presence. Someone should tell them them lowering the average educational level and creating a permanent underclass are not usually considered to be advantageous.

Vietnamese Translators Sought for Gulf Oil Spill

How long have Vietnamese been residing in the United States? It’s been more than 30 years since the fall of Saigon and the influx of more than a million refugees.

But the most basic act of assimilation, namely learning English, seems to have eluded many.

We learn this only because Vietnamese fishermen in the Gulf are complaining that they are not able to avail themselves of replacement jobs during the oil clean-up. Whose fault is that? You snooze, you lose, bub.

And the rush of politicians to supply translators only exacerbates the problem. Why should any foreigner bother to learn English when they can get whatever they want from the government without it?

Local Vietnamese fishermen battle oil, language barrier, Fox 8 TV, New Orleans, May 7, 2010

Because of a language barrier, a large number of Vietnamese fishermen have been out of the loop when it comes to the latest on the oil disaster in the gulf.

Due to language access issues and bad representation, these fisherman are not really sure what to do two weeks after officials discovered the oil well was leaking a mile underwater.

Community leaders hope to clear up some confusion.

Vietnamese fisherman from across the Gulf Coast – from Texas all the way down to Florida – packed the community center at Mary Queen of Vietnam Church in New Orleans East, hoping to finally get some good information.

“The language barrier, you know so they cant understand so well,” said Hung Tran, a local fishermen.

A critical language barrier that has left thousands of Vietnamese fishermen in the dark.

“If we can get somebody from the community to help us, we’d love to hire up that resource to specifically help with this community,” said U.S. Senator David Vitter.

Vitter, along with Congressman Joeph Cao and several local and federal officials, offered help to Vietnamese speaking fishermen.

“And I know a big issue with that vessel of opportunity program is that language issue,” Vitter said.

Boo hoo, we demand help.

Meanwhile, the New York Times scoffed at a small community which decided to make English the language of town business.

Small New York Town Makes English the Law, NYT, May 12, 2010

It’s about 2,500 miles from this green, rural town in the rolling hills near Vermont to the Mexican border at Nogales, but that hasn’t stopped Jackson from making a bid to be New York’s small version of Arizona in the immigration wars.

Or that’s how it is beginning to feel two months after Jackson — which has 1,700 people, no village, no grocery store or place to buy gasoline, no church, no school, two restaurants and maybe a few Spanish-speaking farm workers — decided it needed a law requiring that all town business be conducted in English.

One nearby town, Argyle, has since passed a similar resolution. A third, Easton, is likely to consider one at its Town Board meeting in June. The law has already put Jackson at odds with the New York Civil Liberties Union, which says it violates state and federal law. But in the great American echo chamber, every mouse gets to roar, so Roger Meyer, who proposed the law, feels he is making progress toward protecting the English language from threats near and far.

In California, the drivers license exam is given in 32 languages, but the New York Times thinks that language assimilation is no problema in 2010 America.

Poll: Massachusetts Soundly Rejects Benefits for Illegal Aliens

Interesting poll results from the uber-blue state of Massachusetts — they are nuanced, shall we say.

According to the Rasmussen pollsters, a stunning 70 percent of those polled reject taxpayer-funded goodies for illegal aliens, while only 41 percent support Arizona’s enforcement law.

(Of course, many rank-and-file Democrats dislike immigration anarchy as much as anyone, unlike the D-elites, although at lower levels than Republicans and independents.)

70% in Massachusetts Favor Ban on Public Benefits For Illegal Immigrants, Rasmussen Reports, May 12, 2010

Seventy percent (70%) of Massachusetts voters favor a proposal recently rejected by the state legislature that would stop illegal immigrants from receiving public benefits.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows that just 17% oppose the proposal to prevent illegal immigrants from gaining access to public housing, unemployment benefits, welfare or workers compensation. Thirteen percent (13%) more are not sure.

The proposal failed to pass in the Democratically-controlled State House last month by a 75 to 82 vote.

Fifty percent (50%) of voters in Massachusetts oppose a boycott of Arizona like the one just passed by Boston City Council to protest that state’s new law cracking down on illegal immigration. Thirty-four percent (34%) favor such a boycott, while another 16% are undecided.

But just 41% favor a law like Arizona’s that empowers local police to stop anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant. Forty-eight percent (48%) oppose such a law. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure.

Nationally, 58% support a law like the one recently adopted in Arizona. Continue reading this article

Employer of Houston Cop Killer Sentenced

In 2006, previously deported criminal Juan Quintero shot and killed Officer Rodney Johnson (pictured) after a traffic arrest in Houston, a sanctuary city known for protecting dangerous foreign criminals.

In 2008, Quintero was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison — quite a disappointment for us citizens who expect cop killers to pay the ultimate price, particularly in Texas.

Lurking around as a background element was the killer’s employer, Robert Lane Camp, the owner of a landscaping company, who was more than helpful toward an illegal alien with a long rap sheet. Quintero must have been a heck of a gardener.

Details were provided in a 2008 article:

Employer of murder suspect arrested, Houston Chronicle, January 10, 2008

Court documents show that Robert Lane Camp, 47, went to considerable lengths to help Juan Leonardo Quintero and keep him on the job at his Deer Park landscaping company before the September 2006 killing of officer Rodney Johnson.

In August 1998, Camp posted a $10,000 bond for Quintero after he was jailed on an indecency with a child charge and hired an attorney to defend him. After the worker was deported in May 1999, Camp sent him money in Mexico and later bought him a plane ticket from Phoenix to Houston after Quintero re-entered through Arizona illegally, according to an affidavit by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent. Camp then purchased a house in Houston and rented it to Quintero.

The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they do move along. This week Robert Lane Camp was sentenced to prison. Not a very long sentence, mind you, but how often does an employer ever face the big house?

Prison for boss of immigrant who killed Houston officer, Houston Chronicle, May 10, 2010

Landscape business owner Robert Lane Camp was sentenced this morning to three months in prison and another three months under house arrest as part of a federal five-year probation for harboring an illegal immigrant who later murdered a Houston police officer.

Camp, 48, pleaded guilty to employing and harboring Leonardo Quintero, the Mexican laborer convicted of shooting Rodney Johnson four times in the head after a traffic stop in 2006.

Camp told U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore that he thought it was just a civil violation that he employed Quintero, who he knew was illegally here, so he paid his salary to the worker’s wife, who had a Social Security number.

“I never for an instant thought I would be here,” Camp said as he stood before the federal judge. He said it’s hard to hire people with legal documentation to help in his landscaping business because “it’s hot, it’s dirty and it’s long hours.” But he also said he’s kept up his business using legal workers since his employee killed a policeman.

“I’m very sorry and apologize to the court and my family and friends. I’ve shamed a lot of people, including myself,” Camp said to a courtroom half filled with his supporters.

Also in court was Houston police Sgt. Joslyn Johnson, the widow of Officer Rodney Johnson. “It was a slap in the face,” she said. “He’s just as guilty as Quintero in my eyes and just as guilty as Carter’s Country for selling the gun.”

Page 264 of 270« First...102030...262263264265266...270...Last »