Archive for the ‘Illegal Immigration’ Category

Time for Conservatives to “Go Rogue” on Amnesty Advocates

Monday, August 5th, 2013

Our Only Option

Enough is enough. Readers will surely remember how in the summer of 2010, we nearly stopped Obama-care with great turn-out at town-hall events at which we grilled members (of both parties) on the matter of the “Affordable Care Act.”  Members of the House and Senate rose each morning to find new Youtube videos of their colleagues being outed as fools and charlatans.  Since then, many have gone to a system of tele-Townhalls in order to avoid such spectacles, but that shouldn’t stop us.  We need to know where these fence-sitters on immigration will be holding their town-hall events, and we need to know even where amnesty’s open supporters will be taking questions from constituents, even if it’s on the streets going in and out of meeting locations.  We need to show up in order to make a fuss.  No violence.  No foul language.  We’re polite people, but we shouldn’t be push-overs.  Just ask the damning questions and demand answers:

“Given that this legislation is likely to create 20-30 million new US citizens over the next decade, and given that seven in nine new immigrants register and vote Democrat, how do you propose that Republicans will ever have even a chance at future electoral victory?”

“Why do you insist on pretending that the House immigration bill now working its way through committees will be anything other than a Trojan horse for the treasonous Gang-of-Eight bill that has passed the Senate?

“Do you think we’re stupid?”

“What do you expect this bill will do to the American people?”

“Why would you go along with what is essentially a treason against the American worker?”

“What are you being offered or promised to support this treason?”

“If letting in 12-30 million people predominately from Mexico and points South will be good for the American economy, why isn’t their remaining in place good for the economies of their countries of origin?”

“Teen unemployment is over fifty percent this summer.  Unemployment among African Americans is at stunningly high levels.  How does infusing the economy with 12-30 million mostly low-skill workers assist our unemployed fellow-Americans who are struggling to make ends meet?”

“Why does Congress and this President together refuse to enforce the laws on the books today?”

“Why does the compassion and concern of members of Congress extend to illegal immigrants, but not to US Citizens?”

“Can you comment on the political influence of large corporations and unions in pushing this immigration bill?  The US Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO joining forces to help craft the Senate bill can’t possibly be good for America(ns.) What is your position on that bill? I ask, because it seems that House efforts are aimed at passing something so the Senate bill can be substituted in its entirety in conference.”

“Is it true that any House bill that passes could be essentially replaced by House-Senate conferees with the Gang-of-Eight bill?  Yes or no?”

“What is your position on the so-called “Hastert rule?” Do you believe Speaker Boehner will apply that rule to any immigration conference bill? What is likely to happen if he doesn’t?”

I’m sure you can come up with your own, but the simple fact is that these people need to be held to answer for this mess. We know what they’re trying to do, and it’s time we put a stop to it.

If you know where your Congressman is holding a town hall meeting, please post it in comments.  This will help other readers get to the meetings.  I will create a posting with as many of them as readers provide.  We need maximum participation.  What we will need to succeed on this and other issues is to put these men and women who we’ve elected to represent us on the spot.  They need to be able to explain their positions on immigration reform, but more, on the process by which the process will come to a vote.  They need most of all to explain how any House bill won’t become a Trojan horse for the Senate bill.

The truth is that they won’t be able to explain it away, so we must hold their feet to the fire on this issue by demanding they answer the hard questions.

GOP Preparing to Fool Constituents on Immigration

Sunday, August 4th, 2013

Obama’s Three House Stooges

Now that we’re in August, a time when Congress goes on recess, returning home to hear from their constituents, we grass-roots conservatives have an opportunity.  Somewhere near you, members will probably hold a few town hall meetings.  You need to be there.  Leadership has coached them on the issues of immigration and funding Obama-care, but for the sake of argument, let us prioritize a bit.  The Republican leadership wants to push a bill through the House that will be a head-fake on immigration.  It will promise all sorts of seemingly nifty gimmicks on border control, but you need not be fooled: This is about passing some bill, any bill at all, so that in conference with the Senate, they can shove the Gang-of-Tr8ors bill down our throats.  Our answer to them in their town hall meetings must be plain and simple:  No bill!  Any bill they pass in the House will merely become a vehicle for a Senate bill that will grant amnesty.  They don’t really give a damn about border security, or doing anything about the millions of illegals who have ignored our laws already.  We must stop this process cold, but we must not permit ourselves to be bought-off with phony promises that will never be kept.  When the opportunity arises to tell you House members what you think, don’t miss it, and let them know you will not be fooled.  Your only answer on immigration must be: “Kill the bill.”

They really do believe we are stupid.  Our less-engaged fellow Americans give them plenty of reason to believe this, since they’re often completely distracted by other things, but that’s where we come in.  We must let our fellow citizens know that the two parties in Washington DC are conspiring against them in order to manipulate them into a position in which it appears as though they have supported the laws Congress wishes to enact.  In order to help you understand what lies ahead in the coming weeks, I’ve drawn the process as a flow-chart.  (Click it to see full-size version.)

How they’ll push the bill…

The simple fact is that the bulk of the Republican party in Washington DC wants this bill.  They are doing the bidding of big business, but also the progressive wing of the party that is for all intents and purposes a fifth-column, stealth-mode gaggle of shills for the larger leftist-progressive movement that dominates DC, and the entire media establishment.  These are the elites in the Republican party, and they hate your guts.  In order to trick you, they are preparing to put on a show that will involve pretending to gather your opinions, while hoping you’ll be too busy or distracted to offer them.  They will go through this recess and take up the bill that has been working its way through committees in the House, and move to pass it before or immediately after the Labor Day weekend.  Once passed, the bill will go to conference, and all these promises of border security and combating illegal immigration will be scrapped in favor of the Senate version.  Then it will go back to both chambers for a final vote, where mostly Democrats will support the bill in both Houses.  There is only one way for the American people to win: We must kill any House bill on immigration, even if we are compelled to heckle our own members at town-hall meetings.  This must be defeated.

I cannot repeat this point often enough: The final bill will be passed with a majority of Democrats supporting it.  That’s right, this entire process is being rigged so that it can be passed with only a couple hands-full of Republicans supporting it.  They only need a few RINOs in the Senate, and in the House, they will only need a couple-dozen Republicans of the RINO wing of the party.  The key is to push some bill through the House so they can get it to conference.  Once that’s accomplished, the RINOs can and will do whatever they please. We have discussed ad nauseum all the reasons the “immigration reforms” being pushed by the DC establishment is horrible for the country, but the most important consideration for you is this:  It’s their attempt to permanently negate the conservative wing of the party.  Once they herd 30 million new immigrants into the voting booths, it won’t matter what you think about anything.

This means that our only hope of saving the country begins and ends with the defeat of any immigration bill brought up in the House of representatives. There is no other way around it, and no other way we can expect to bring this plot of the DC statists to an end.  We need maximum participation at such town-hall meetings as Republicans may hold in the coming weeks, and we need to be fearless, loud, and clear: On the issue of immigration, the only acceptable answer is “Kill the Bill.” If we permit them to fool us, we will have missed our last opportunity to begin the process of saving the republic. Any House immigration bill must die.

Spread the word: Kill the bill, or let it kill the republic.

Life On the Ice: Conservatives Must Join Fight

Friday, June 28th, 2013

Fight Where You Must

If you’re a politically-engaged conservative, you couldn’t possibly have failed to notice the passage of the so-called “Gang-of-Eight” immigration bill in the Senate on Thursday afternoon.  In the end, fourteen Republican sell-outs stepped up and voted for this abomination, with all fifty-four Democrats, meaning the bill will go on to the House.  There were many more than fourteen Republican sell-outs who made this bill possible, and I will be reminding you of the entire list as we move into 2014 mid-term election mode, but for now, we must focus on what lies ahead.  Readers will have heard reports that John Boehner is calling the Senate bill “dead on arrival,” or that “the House will have its own bill.”  Let me assure you that John Boehner is a liar, and he is attempting to manipulate those who don’t understand the process or follow so closely as my readers.  Speaker Boehner(R-OH) intends to give you the Senate bill, but to do it, he must shepherd some bill through the House, that could be almost anything pertaining to the broad scope of “immigration.”  Some will not be informed of the angle on which Boehner and the other Amnesty-Traitors’ gambit relies, so that in order to stop him and his henchmen of the GOP establishment of the House, I must now make clear why we must urge our Congressmen to kill any bill.  We must obstruct it altogether or get the Gang-of-Eight bill when it comes back from conference.

In order for a bill to go to the President to be signed into law, it must be passed in identical form in both houses of Congress.  Ultimately, the same legislative language that passes in the House must also pass the Senate, or vice versa. Since both the House and the Senate are independent in theory, the two frequently pass bills on a similar matter, but the two bills may be significantly different.  In order to rectify the bills, and make them identical, both chambers provide a certain number of people who will represent their body in a conference committee that works out the details of the law so that when they are finished, their final product is known widely as the “conference bill,” or the “conference report.”  At that point, the bill in its completed, rectified, unified form goes back to the both bodies, and they vote again.  If the conference bill passes in both houses, off to the President’s desk it goes for a signature enacting it as law, or a veto turning it aside.

The reason I am bothering with the Civics 101 recital of process is because I know that without understanding this, some Americans, many in fact, will fall for Speaker John Boehner’s ruse.  You see, Speaker Boehner can (and I can promise you he will try) to pass the most conservative-seeming bill he thinks he can get through the House.  It will doubtless be full of provisions that will seem strict, possibly “draconian,” compared to the Senate bill, and this will be done for a reason:  Speaker Boehner needs some bill to pass the House, and its particulars don’t matter in the least to him.  What Boehner and his henchmen Harry Reid and Barack Obama already know is that no matter how thoroughly conservative the House bill may be, it will be stripped from the final language of the conference report.

It is at this point that some people become frustrated with the process, because, they reason, it still has to return to the House for yet another vote for final passage after the conference produces the final form of the bill.  Surely, the Republicans who sent the bill to conference would not vote for a watered-down version of their bill?  True, most Republicans will not vote for such a watered-down bill, but John Boehner doesn’t need all the Republicans.  He needs only a few hands-full, along with the whole body of the Democrat caucus.  That’s right:  Speaker Boehner doesn’t care what the form of the initial House bill will be, because it will be discarded in any event.  In the end, what comes back from conference will be almost entirely the language of the Senate bill, and the House will be forced to vote on it, but even if four in five Republicans vote against its watered-down language, the one-in-five combined with all of the Democrats will be sufficient to pass the bill.  In other words, a Republican Speaker of the House will rely upon the Democrats to pass the bill, along with a few establishment Republican stooges.

Then you will be faced with a new law that Senator Richard Shelby(R-AL) termed “the mother-of-all-amnesties.”  The Democrats will march their members up to vote, even if they’re from relatively more conservative districts, and Boehner and the leadership will walk as many off the plank as needed to give them a margin of ten to fifteen.  If it’s close, members on both sides of the aisle will be threatened and extorted and it will be made clear to them that they will lose all committee assignments and maybe staff or office selection if they manage to be re-elected when the Speaker throws them under the bus in 2014.  Yes, and it could get more ugly even than this, but what you mustn’t forget is that the way to preclude this entire fiasco is still to convince your members of the House to vote against any immigration bill in any form, no matter how conservative it may seem.  Whatever they promise, it won’t be the final form of the bill, but in order to foist on us what will be substantially the Senate version of the bill, they must pass something.  Anything.  Four lines that say: Close the border!  It really doesn’t matter.  Any bill passed by the House will be a vehicle by which to put forward the President’s bill, which is the Senate bill.

Unspoken and invisible through most of this debate has been President Obama.  This is because he’s a political liability given his spate of scandals and his recent failure on gun control, such that if the bill becomes about him, it will fail.  They have kept him in the shadows.  This is why he has gone away to Africa.  They want him far away from Washington DC when all of this goes down, and you can be sure that when the time comes to pass a bill in the House, he’ll either be talking about other issues or be out of town on another golf outing.   Upon his return, the bill will have been passed, he’ll hold a Rose Garden signing ceremony, and accompany it with a signing statement proclaiming the border secure, so that there’s no reason to delay amnesty, even if one believes such provisions might materialize somehow in the final bill.

This is the dirty, fetid political sewer into which John Boehner and the other establishment Republicans have taken you.  This is the manner by which they intend to sell you out for once and for all.  They don’t care if you won’t vote for them in coming elections.  They’re either in safe seats, or they’ll jump ship and become Democrats in order to win re-election with the votes of all of those they will now make eligible.  Understanding the game that is afoot, it’s important to understand that the only way, the absolutely, positively only way to ensure that the Senate bill never sees the light of day as law is to make sure that John Boehner and his co-conspirators in the House cannot pass any bill of any sort on the subject of immigration.

This will be difficult, because Soros-funded, phony “conservative” groups are running radio ads that make it all sound as though the bill will be wonderful and conservative.  It’s all a lie, but these ads air during your favorite conservative radio talk-shows, and they’re formatted and scripted to mislead you.  The hosts don’t have much say-so about it, because they don’t own the networks or the radio stations, and they can’t necessarily affect the advertising that airs during their shows, and in some cases may not even be aware of some of it.  In any event, their contracts likely prevent them from talking badly about any advertiser, so that even if they do know, they may be forbidden from saying the first thing against it.

That makes our problem even more difficult, because many people who would be inclined to call their Representatives to oppose the passage of any bill if only they knew the full details are going to be hoodwinked by all of this.  At best, some will be confused, and they will be noncommittal, so that they will freeze in place and do nothing while Boehner and his cohorts put an end to the American republic.  I am detailing all of this for you, my readers, because I know you share these articles, because if we are to penetrate the wall of deceit that has been erected around this bill, we must inform our fellow Americans, and we must make it plain to them, and we must arm them with the full knowledge of the game.  Readers here know the game all too well, from sell-outs on the debt ceiling, or virtually anything else to pass out of the House since John Boehner became Speaker.  We must stop the House bill dead in its tracks, no matter how attractive it may seem, because it will be used to push a horrible bill through in its place without a single vote from anybody who might be considered even approximately “conservative.”

It’s a tall order, but Americans are tall in spirit, and the patriots that hold this country together even against this current onslaught are giants, and it is because I know this that I believe we can kill this bill, but we must educate, and inform, and agitate like we have never done before.  The left and the Republican establishment will try to get us off message, and try to derail us, but this legislation is the greatest threat to the future of the Republic in our lifetimes, and it’s high time we take the measure of this beast and knock it down.  I know we can, but will we?  That is the question I place before you, in the hope that you will answer as Americans always must.

 

Doing Combat With Alinsky, Cloward and Piven on Immigration

Thursday, June 27th, 2013

Leftist Mentor

Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals describes for would-be community organizers how they can carry out widespread attacks on as many fronts as possible, leaving their opponents in a hopelessly defensive position, confused, unfocused and rudderless.  In such a state, it’s far more difficult to organize a response and go on the offensive.  In our current political environment, it’s a standard approach of the statists to try to keep we conservatives off-balance, and continually spinning around to defend against another knife in the back, but falling for this is the easy path to defeat.  The Cloward and Piven strategy provides the blueprint for overwhelming the welfare state as a method to drive us into full-bore socialism.  We conservatives should be too smart to fall for these tactics, and we can use our energies so much more effectively if we focus on a single front, concentrate our efforts on one battle at a time, surging en masse in a single direction.  Knock them down one at a time, and we can prevail. It’s the reason this immigration bill has been the nearly singular focus of this site for the last two weeks.  If we stay on one message at a time, we can win, but if we spread ourselves too thin, on too many fronts, and the left and the DC establishment class can overwhelm us.

As an example, this morning a number of well-meaning people seem consumed by what the Supreme Court has ruled in a number of cases.  Here’s the question: Can we change it today?  No.  Can we do anything about it today? No, we can moan and groan, but there’s nothing to be gained by focusing on that.  Another is the IRS scandal.  What’s happening in that vein today?  Nothing of note, and bluntly, with Congress under the control of insiders, not much will come of it now anyway.  Skip it.  Today, the Senate is taking up an amendment to the immigration bill, and the whole thing is a sham.  We may or may not be able to stop it by voicing our concerns and displeasure with Senators, but at least there is some chance to swing things our way.  If we become too distracted by extraneous matters about which we can do little or nothing at all today, we fall directly into the overload trap that has been so carefully laid out before us.

Even on Wednesday, with the despicable rulings of Anthony Kennedy and his four statist pals, we must not lose focus.  The vote on the immigration bill is scheduled for Thursday, and we must again proclaim to senators our anger with the bill, and our rage with their participation in it.  It’s a long shot, but even if we fail, we must turn so many as we are able because this bill will next move to the House, where our initial goal must be to prevent the bill or any variation of an immigration bill from being discussed in any form.  This is because if the House passes any form of immigration bill, it will go to conference, and just like with Obama-care, the version that we will be saddled with will be the Senate bill, as amended, through and through.

Do not fall for the promises of Paul Ryan or John Boehner that this will be an improved bill.  It will not be improved from your perspective, at any rate, however “improved” the DC establishment believes it to be.  Thursday, come Hell or high water, you must call and fax your Senators, but even if the bill passes the Senate, you must be prepared to begin calling House members too, as the focus shifts from one chamber to the other.  I don’t need to tell you how important stopping this bill is to the fate of the country, because you already know it.

A friend on Facebook was kind enough to provide a list of Senators with toll-free numbers you can call.  I thank her kindly for providing this list:

Ayotte 888-995-1986 Baucus 888-995-2041 Begich 888-995-2055
Brown, Sherrod 888-995-2029 Burr 888-995-2097 Chambliss 888-995-1975
Coburn 888-995-1952 Cochran 888-995-1953 Corker 888-995-5271
Cornyn 888-995-2037 Donnelly 888-995-2034 Hagan 888-995-1994
Harkin 888-995-2023 Hatch 888-978-3148 Heitkamp 888-995-2048
Heller 888-995-5451 Hoeven 888-995-2047 Isakson 888-995-1978
Johanns 888-995-2038 Johnson 888-995-2052 Kirk 888-995-5459
Landrieu 888-995-2026 Manchin 888-995-1992 McCaskill 888-995-2019
McConnell 888-995-1997 Moran 888-995-6517 Murkowski 888-995-2057
Portman 888-995-2027 Pryor 888-995-2016 Rubio 888-995-5431
Sanders 888-978-3143 Stabenow 888-978-3092 Tester 888-995-2045
Thune 888-995-2051 Toomey 888-995-1993

We must focus our energies where we can make a difference.  I know there are other important issues all around us, coming at us from every conceivable direction.  We must prioritize our efforts, because otherwise, we become disorganized and off-message, or the message becomes lost altogether.  Let us speak with a clear voice until the outcome of the immigration bill is resolved.  Let us turn away briefly from other issues, particularly since there is little or nothing we can do about so many of them. We will not undo court decisions any time soon.  We will not get just on Benghazi, the IRS targeting scandal, Fast and Furious, or any of the other scandals, but we can change the outcome of this bill.  We can push hard enough to get their attention and keep it, and perhaps in so doing, avoid the brewing national disaster that is the Gang-of-Tr8ors bill.

On Wednesday evening, House Budget Committee Chairman and former vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan(R-WI) made his case to Sean Hannity.  Ryan lied to Hannity in front of a national audience, promising the House bill will be much tighter, but by now, conservatives and other common sense independents should recognize the misdirection in Ryan’s propaganda:  It is not the House bill itself about which we should worry, but the conference bill that will be dominated by the Senate.  That will be the final bill, whatever the House passes, which is why we must prevent the House from passing anything on immigration, should the bill make it through the Senate. It’s time we conservatives make our displeasure known and while it may or may not get the desired result, we mustn’t fail to give it our best effort.  This is for all the marbles.

The Real Immigration Reform Legislation None Will Offer

Thursday, June 27th, 2013

Go8 Bill Won’t Stop It

Throughout this debate on immigration reform, what has become clear is that so very few in Washington DC actually have any intentions of solving the problems.  As the Senate bill evinces, too many view the bill as an opportunity for “pork” while others view it as an opportunity to shift the polity of the country in their favor.  We won’t get real reform that will answer our problems so long as this is the case, because politicians don’t really solve problems so much as they tend to patch them and push them down the road for future legislators to tackle.  On the matter of immigration, there are a number of core problems that must be addressed as fundamental components to any alleged reform package.  It needn’t be complex, and it needn’t be left in the hands of political appointees or politicians.  We simply need a few honest laws that will be enforced uniformly and without exception.  First, let’s inventory the broad problems we face, and let us then discover if they’re so hard to solve as the DC crowd claims.

  • The border is too porous so that no enforcement measure will be effective
  • There are too many powerful magnets attracting immigrants who may not be willing to “stand in line”
  • There exists no serious effort to contend with those who are already in the US illegally
  • There are too many bureaucratic hurdles for people who are following the legal immigration procedures

These are significant problems, and there’s no way they will be addressed by the current Gang-of-Eight bill.  Even with the amendments that promise to improve the bill, it’s a completely disingenuous attempt to put one over on the American people, and it does nothing to address the four general points listed above.  In Washington DC, it seems easy to make anything complex, because everybody sticks their fingers into every pie, trying to get a slice for themselves, while being able to claim to have been instrumental to the process.  You and I don’t care about who gets credit, so long as things are fixed.  Here are some broad notions on how to address the points listed above:

Border security is a joke presently.  One can hardly expect to stem the tide of illegal immigrants if they’re pouring over our borders at an astonishing rate.  The CBO estimated that the current Gang-of-Eight bill will only slow the rate of border-crossings by between 20-25%, and that’s generously assuming all of the promised provisions are enforced.  In various pieces of legislation in the past, that has not been the case.  Invariably, the “new tough measures” are enacted, but they aren’t enforced, and no benefit is derived from all the hoopla.  Let us start from the basic premise that good fences make for great neighbors, and let us build a fence from end-to-end of our border.  To claim that a country capable of putting men in a dune-buggy on the Moon won’t be able to erect a reliable barrier across a border frontier on Earth is frankly preposterous, and any who claim this should be embarrassed.  A physical fence will not solve every problem, but it will serve as a line of demarcation between ours and theirs, and for many people, that is enough.  Enforcing a border is much easier for Border Patrol agents when a physical barrier exists, because just as it makes things clear for outsiders looking in, it makes things fairly black-and-white for our security personnel looking out. Giving our border security personnel the tools to more easily spot penetrations along that border will help to reduce the number of people entering the country illegally in the first instance, making it a good deal easier to contend with the rest of the list.

We have too many things drawing people across our borders.  Among them is our expansive and quite generous welfare state, while the other is employment.  What we must do is to curtail the availability of the first to those illegally in the United States.  While individual states can always do as they please, there is no reason not to attach Federal strings to our welfare-state, essentially telling states that if they wish to subsidize illegal immigrants, that’s a state matter, but that it may not be done with any funds from Federal coffers.   Insofar as job opportunities, we want America to become even more vibrant for businesses and job-seekers, but not to the extent that it endangers our civilization, our standard of living, or our security.  On this basis, we must make it somewhat less difficult to bring in guest workers, but we must raise the level of punishment for employers who hire illegals.  To take away their last excuse, we need to fully field the E-Verify system that was mandated by Federal law over one-and-one-half decades ago.  What we must also do is to ensure that guest workers don’t constitute a cost-savings over resident aliens or US citizens, so that we create a de facto “affirmative action” for guest workers that places our own citizens at a competitive disadvantage.  Once such a system is in place, employers should have no more reason to claim they hadn’t known, and that they too were victims of some sort of identity fraud.

There is a great deal of talk about additional Border Patrol agents, and while there’s little doubt that we need to augment current personnel, I think we need to discuss ICE agents if we’re going to contend with the number of illegals, particular criminals, who are already in the United States.  The Border Patrol doesn’t deal with illegal aliens who have penetrated much beyond the zone along the border, so that if you’re going to contend with the rest, you will be required to examine Immigrations and Customs Enforcement as the key area in which personnel must be augmented.  Another significant issue faced by existing ICE agents is that they are frequently hand-cuffed by executive branch policies and executive orders undoubtedly calculated to make their jobs harder.  This is where the real reform needs to come, because unless and until we’re willing to enforce all the laws already on the books, we have the de facto amnesty about which Marco Rubio and John McCain continue to blather incessantly.  This is a highly politicized issue in large measure because we have a President (and many others) who has no interest in enforcing the laws, since it serves his political purposes to bring as many illegal aliens as possible to our shores in the hope of eventually adding some percentage of them to the voter rolls.  There are many complicated subsidiary issues, like what to do about so-called “anchor babies,” and all of these other issues arising out of the fact that immigrants seldom remain here alone over the longer term, instead bringing in family and having children, oftentimes with people who are legally residing in the United States.  These complications make this part of any reform more difficult, but they do not make it impossible and it shouldn’t prevent us from enforcing the laws of the land.

Insofar as legal immigration is concerned, we have a process that is often subverted to the geopolitical purposes of whomever is in power at the time.  What should always be considered is whether issuing a visa to a particular immigrant is in the best interests of the United States and her people, and then establishing a firm set of rules under which this can occur.  Except in the most extreme cases, I do not think political asylum should be used in the way it has been in recent years.  Political asylum is the method by which the Tsarnaev brothers entered the United States, but it is clear that the elder Tamerlan was able to go back and forth to his homeland without much in the way of political impediment, in my view calling into question the legitimacy of the original request for asylum.  If one can largely come and go as one pleases, it seems that perhaps a normal immigration application is more suitable.  Instead, many people are permitted to seek asylum who may not really qualify by a strict understanding of the term.

There is no doubt that there is an extensive bureaucracy that acts as an encouragement to break our immigration laws when paired with other factors considered above.  We should set a quota based on what we believe is a reasonable number of new Americans each year, and in so doing, we should provide a little excess room since some number will somehow invalidate or waive the process, perhaps by criminal entanglements, or other matters.  Whatever that number is, we should permit one-fifty-second of that number to apply per week, with all their paperwork in good order, and fees paid, to begin the process of naturalization.  Our system has become too disorderly, and too chaotic, in large measure because we haven’t secured the border, so that our legal immigration system spends much of its time dealing with issues pertaining to illegals.  Another matter we should insist be addressed is an applicant’s suitability to be naturalized.  Simply put, if a given applicant isn’t adding something to the country, there should be no reason to consider the application.  We need to screen people applying to become legal immigrants with respect to their willingness to assimilate and contribute to our civilization.  If they’re not willing or able, why should we let them come in?

I think immigration is an important driver to the continued improvement of our nation, but I hardly think that quantity should be permitted to overrun quality.  There are too many good potential Americans in the world who wish to come here and who are willing to do so by legal means to let all comers into our country ahead of them.  The world is bursting at the seams with people who would come here in good will, seeking freedom and opportunity who would happily join us in order to become Americans rather than simply arriving to reestablish their own cultures here.  That is the point of assimilation, and it’s the reason we should take care in screening who should be permitted to enter our country.

Accomplishing these in legislation would be a tremendous boon to the people of planet Earth who look to America for its liberty and prosperity, but it would also constitute a great benefit to the American people, because it would ensure that our system works, securing the country against invasion or subversion, while helping to blend into our melting pot a vast number of people who come to these shores with the singular notion of becoming Americans.  This would augment the exceptional character and nature of America, but after all, isn’t that what any serious immigration reform should provide?  It’s time we tell our legislators that America is not up for grabs, but that its doors are still open as the land of the free and the home of the brave.  In America, we’re always looking for a few good men and women, and there’s no reason whatever that we shouldn’t insist that our elected representatives comply fully with that demand, but they must do in a manner that balances the security interests of our nation.  The current Gang-of-Tr8ors immigration bill merely offers to make things worse.

Sadly, there is no chance that we will see an immigration bill of the sort that will actually resolve the problems most Americans recognize in our current system, so that if the House passes a bill, even if it appears tougher than the Senate bill, in conference, where they must rectify the differences between the two versions, the Senate bill will prevail.  For this reason, we simply must stop any immigration bill offered in this Congress.

 

Overthrow of the United States in Progress – GOP to Assist

Monday, June 24th, 2013

America With GOP Help

Barack Obama promised fundamental transformation, and with the help of his own party, as well as a lengthy list of traitorous, sell-out vermin in the Republican Party, he’s having an easy time of it.  The Corker-Hoeven amendment to be voted on Monday will not have been read by anyone as the vote is tallied, but it constitutes a re-write of the bill almost in its entirety.  The details of the original bill and the amendment constitute more than merely awful legislation, to the extent all the provisions are known, and it is the intention of Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell along with a legion of co-conspirators in both parties to put this bill over on the American people before they can know what has hit them.  If this bill passes in any form, it will have been the final legal nail in the coffin of our Republic.  Swept aside will have been every possible obstacle to the overthrow of constitutional government in the United States of America, by virtually any interested foreign power.  This is only possible because a large segment of the GOP has decided to be on the side they believe will win.  It’s that simple: America will be ruined with Republican assistance.

There is a common temptation to think of the immigration reform bill as pertaining to people who have crept into our country from Mexico and points South.  I would ask my fellow Americans to reconsider this assumption carefully, because there is no language in this law that limits the benefits of this law to only those hailing from Mexico.  This law would pertain to Mohammed Atta, or other terrorist elements who overstayed visas.  This law will effectively throw our nation wide-open to a world full of people not all of whom love us or will come here merely for economic opportunities.  This bill will create a new class of residents who may lawfully remain in the United States despite having violated our laws. There will be no fear of deportation.  There will be no further purpose for ICE agents, except as tax collectors.  This is a statist pipe-dream come true.

Barack Obama is leading the overthrow of our form of government, our culture, and our economy while people wonder whether Nik Wallenda will survive his walk on a cable spanning the Grand Canyon.  Worst of all, the party elected to stand in opposition to all of this is lending an assist, while far too many of the American people are oblivious to what is being done.  For me, this is the most troubling aspect, because rather than zealously guarding their liberties and relative prosperity, a huge swath of America won’t know what will have been done until there is virtually no peaceable means remaining by which to reverse it.

I do not mean here to whine, because I have a small but loyal readership, and most who read these postings will appreciate them, but the fact that it is such a small sliver(relatively) of the overall population bothers me, not because they don’t read this site, but because so many don’t read anything of consequence to the future of our country.  I am mortified when I consider that some times, my biggest-drawing posts on a given day are things I wrote weeks or months, and in a few cases more than a year before that only then find their way into a bit of attention from a wider audience. Short of stripping naked and running down the street ablaze(and nobody wants to see that,) I don’t know what more we conservatives can do to pierce the veil of indifference that seems to have settled over this country.

On Sunday, we learned that there would be a vote on the Corker-Hoeven amendment that will serve as a vehicle to substitute for the entire immigration bill. Byron York seemed to spend most of Sunday busily tweeting various provisions and commentary on this issue. We also learned that all of these supposed new-hire Border Patrol agents won’t even begin until 2017.  By then, how much will it matter? We learned on Friday that the Corker-Hoeven amendment will permit those who overstay their visas to stay on a path to citizenship. Why bother with visas?  I suppose I should blend with the herd and figure out who Paula Deen is, but it seems fairly trivial alongside the overthrow of our constitutional republic.

Monday is the day on which we need to raise unholy Hell over this immigration bill.  I have my call list, and I’m starting early.  The sun will scarcely be up by the time I begin calling, and this is important enough that I intend to set aside several hours for this task.  These politicians don’t view our lives as important, because in their view, we’re simply cogs in a machine from which they profit tremendously.  It’s time to get a little fury in our voices and let them know that they’re not so special that we can’t send them home.  Sure, they’re reorganizing this country into a statist, third-world slave-pit, but nowhere is it written that we must accept it, or even go along quietly.  It’s time to make some noise, for the love of all you cherish.  They may overthrow us yet, but we mustn’t make it easy for them. Our only choice is to fight or to fold, and for all I hold dear, I will fight.

The Battle for the Republic (Remembering Who was FOR Amnesty Before Being “Against” It)

Sunday, June 23rd, 2013

There’s no disguising the fact any longer.  A number of Republicans have aligned with the left on this immigration bill in order to secure goodies for their home states, or in order to gain what they have been led to believe will be an electoral advantage(that will never materialize.)  Clowns, con-men, and suckers, this list of 18 Republicans went over to the dark side insofar as this writer is concerned, and there will be no retrieving them.  Without their votes to bring the immigration bill to the floor, it would still be languishing on the table, but they enabled this monstrosity to go forward.  Whatever amendments they now claim to support, you should know that these Republican members of the United States Senate intend to get this bill through, and that the immigration bill will be nothing but a giant drain on the American people, their future, their jobs, and their standard-of-living, never mind what it will do to the culture and to the American polity.  This bill was conceived by leftists, and it will be carried into execution with the help of Republicans if they should prevail.  I just wanted you to get a look at these people, and to know how to contact them on Facebook. I’ve listed them for you in a previous post, but I want you to know that these people have chosen to go against the will of the vast majority of Americans, and they will have been our nation’s downfall:

Lamar Alexander(R-TN) (202) 224-4944

Kelly Ayotte(R-NH) (202) 224-3324

Roy Blunt(R-MO) (202) 224-5721

Richard Burr(R-NC) (202) 224-3154

Saxby Chambliss(R-GA) (202) 224-3521

Jeffrey Chiesa(R-NJ) No Facebook Page or Twitter Account, so here’s his phone and email: (202) 224-3224  Senator_Chiesa@chiesa.senate.gov

Dan Coats(R-IN) (202) 224-5623

Thad Cochran(R-MS)  (202) 224-5054

Susan Collins(R-ME) (202) 224-2523

Bob Corker(R-TN) (202) 224-3344 (of “Corker-Hoeven Amendment” Infamy)

John Cornyn(R-TX) (202) 224-2934

Deb Fischer(R-NE) (202) 224-6551

Jeff Flake(R-AZ) (202) 224-4521

Lindsey Graham(R-SC) (202) 224-5972

Orrin Hatch(R-UT) (202) 224-5251

Dean Heller(R-NV) (202) 224-6244

John Hoeven(R-ND)  (202) 224-2551 (The Tweedle-dumb to Corker’s Tweedle-dee)

Johnny Isakson(R-GA) (202) 224-3643 (There’s also a “Recall Isakson” Page for this guy.)

Mike Johanns(R-NE) (202) 224-4224

Ron Johnson(R-WI) (202) 224-5323

Mitch McConnell(R-KY)  (202) 224-2541 Minority Leader in the Senate**

Jerry Moran(R-KS) (202) 224-6521

Rand Paul(R-KY) (202) 224-4343

Rob Portman(R-OH) (202) 224-3353

Marco Rubio(R-FL) (202) 224-3041  He was against it, then for it, and now he’s waffling hard… (Sarah Palin today noted this story from Townhall on her Facebook page)

John Thune(R-SD) (202) 224-2321

Pat Toomey(R-PA) (202) 224-4254

Roger Wicker(R-MS) (202) 224-6253

Oh, and don’t forget Gang-of-Tr8ors great-grand-daddy of them all: John McCain(R-AZ) (202) 224-2235 (I don’t know how he missed this vote… He’s usually attached at the hip to Lindsey Grahamnesty)

That should give you plenty to do, if you’re up for re-engaging in the battle for our Republic. Under no circumstances should these wheelbarrow-loads of RINO scat receive amnesty from you.

 

Ryan Whines About Future Labor Shortages; Gohmert and King Call BS (Video)

Friday, June 21st, 2013

Paul Ryan talked with Laura Ingraham about a possible, future labor shortage if the amnesty bill is not passed.  Right this moment, millions of American citizens are un/under-employed, and this guy is worried about a future labor shortage?  I guess after being portrayed by Democrats as throwing Granny off the cliff, he’s take up the real work of pitching US citizens and legal residents over the cliff in earnest.  This ridiculous man, who had been the Republican Vice Presidential Candidate only seven months ago actually believes this is the answer.  What he’s not willing to say, at least not directly, is that he wants illegals legalized so they can be new slaves and beneficiaries in the growing government welfare-state. Listen to this pandering RINO disgorge his platitudes and clichés:

Ladies and gentlemen, we must kill the bill, and we must kill it in the Senate.  Rep. Steve King(R-IA) along with Louie Gohmert(R-TX) appeared on Hannity Thursday to explain why we must kill the immigration reform bill in the Senate:  If this makes it to the House, Boehner will take up the bill, and it may be extensively amended before passage, but the bill will need to go to conference first because the two bills will be substantially different.  After the conference bill is finalized, there will be a vote for final passage, and it is at that time that Boehner and the GOP leadership in the House will screw us with a vast majority of Democrats and a few hands-full of RINOs voting for the conference version.  Then we’ll have our amnesty, and Boehner will appear as though his hands are clean. Here’s Gohmert and King on Hannity:

The two Congressmen reiterated my point of yesterday: There should be no discussion of amnesty/legalization of any kind until the border is secured and enforcement has been significant and effective for a number of years.

We must prevent this scam from going through. I have my own doubts about whether the Senate version of the bill if amended with security-oriented provisions will stand up, because the amendments being added introduce new appropriations, but the Constitution requires that any new appropriations or taxation must originate in the House.  We  already know that these weasels pay attention to the constitution if and when it suits them, so I would not be surprised to see some game-playing on technical grounds if that’s what is needed to stop enforcement of security provisions.

Keep the pressure on them!  I checked by a few of the Republican “Gang-of-Eight” Facebook pages, and noted that they are getting hammered by patriotic Americans everywhere. Let’s remind them whose country this is, and what their duty to the American people is supposed to entail.

Don’t forget to go by and sign the border security petition from Senator Ted Cruz(R-TX) Petition Here

 

McCain Busts a Spring on Senate Floor

Friday, June 21st, 2013

This morning, Senator John McCain(RINO-AZ) made an impassioned speech on behalf of the Amnesty bill.  Senator McCain is catching Hell as you continue to hammer him and his “gang-of-eight” cohorts.  He still wants this bill in the worst way, but this clip is evidence of the effect you’re having:

Sorry Johnny, we want our country.  There won’t be any amnesty for you, either…

 

 

It’s Time to Kill the Bill – “De Facto Amnesty” My Ass

Friday, June 21st, 2013

Ladies and gentlemen, the time has come to end this circus.  Barack, Harry, and John have sent in the “Gang-of-Eight Clowns,” and when you pushed back, they came across with this tepid, phony amendment that two more Senators carried through the door, even though, as Mark Levin reported on Thursday evening, it had been drafted with the approval and oversight of the “Gang-of-Eight.” Let us not extenuate the matter by pretending any of these charlatans had made their best effort, and let us not pretend that the bill was ever intended to give us the border security we deserve.  No, this entire thousand-page bill is another maneuver aimed at looting the American tax-payer because it’s a whole lot easier than old-fashioned methods of theft.  With the help of broadcast and print media, they are working together with social media giants and search engine giants to tamp down, hide, and otherwise befuddle any dissent, in order for its numerous opponents to become discouraged and give up in bewilderment. They’re letting their voice-mail remain full, and they’re leaving their in-boxes remain stuffed because they wish to give you the impression that they’re not really getting any sort of push-back, because the last thing they want is the building of momentum against this bill.  Today is Friday, and they fully expect that you will begin to tune out for the weekend.  They hope this will be enough to quash any momentum against their bill and rush it through the Senate so that you won’t even see it coming.  Even now, Breitbart is reporting that Texas Senator Ted Cruz is starting a national petition to kill the bill.

I’ve got news for you: The Republicans and not a few Democrats are beginning to waver, which is precisely why you must build the pressure now, more than ever, until the bill is finally killed. Although they’re disguising it, the momentum is running your way.  The media lied even on radio about how many showed up for the rally on Wednesday in Washington, referring to the number as “hundreds” when it was actually many thousands.  This is the game you’re up against, and the only way they’ll ever let you know that you might be winning is by their eventual capitulation.  When Harry Reid is forced to table the bill, that’s when you’ll know you have won, but not before.

This Corker Amendment was a pre-planned strategy to mollify you into believing you had forced them to improve the bill, but because you haven’t fallen for it, and since you saw straight through it as the transparent play-acting too common to Washington DC that it is, they’re trying to rustle up the numbers to push it through anyway.  The situation looks grave, because that’s how they need it to appear for you, but it’s only threatening to the extent that you relent and let it go.  This once, you must be dogged.  You must be unrelenting.  You must be forceful in your denouncements of the bill and all who support it.  You must flood their Facebook pages, their Twitter feeds, and every other avenue of reaching them, because that is what they’re hoping to stymie.  Marco Rubio’s Facebook page is awash in criticism, and for every one or two kind remarks or comments made by obvious shills, there are dozens condemning the Senator and explaining their disappointment and horror at what he has done with the office he was given in 2010.   Some were threatening to primary him, and wondered if he’d pull a Charlie Crist in order to recapture his seat.  Yes, for some of them, it has gotten as bad as that, but if we are to succeed,  we must spread this affect from one end of Capitol Hill to the other, lest some get the idea that they may be immune.

This is the time when it will seem thankless and pointless.  That’s what they desperately need us to believe.  All the calls and faxes; letters and emails; tweets and the Facebook posts will seem as though despite their numbers, they’re having no effect.  The proponents of this bill need you to believe that.  They’ll hide the numbers.  They will do all they can so that you won’t work to stop them, but at long last, and once more, I urge you to remember:  This is your country.  This is your sovereignty.  This is the future of your children they’re throwing away.  This is the time and this is our moment when we must raise our voice against them like they’ve never heard them before.

What will you say later if you fail to engage and come to find it had been much closer than they had led you to believe, but believing they had it in the bag, you relented?    We must turn it around on them:  We will permit them to consider amnesty at some future date, in four years or so, if they spend the next four years or so making a serious, concerted effort at enforcing the border now and getting this mess under control.  When they lament the fact that we have now “de facto amnesty,” be sure to remind them that to the degree this is true, it is only because they have failed to uphold their oaths and to compel the executive by every legislative lever available to carry into execution all the laws of the land.  If there is “de facto amnesty,” it is only because they have been dishonest, or slothful in carrying out their duties.

“De facto amnesty,” my ass… This collection of ne’er-do-wells could secure our borders any time they damned-well please, if they actually wanted to do it. It’s time we demand it: Kill the bill and secure the border, now!

Real Amnesty Snow-Job Begins: Time to Flip the Script

Thursday, June 20th, 2013

Marco Scrubio

On Wednesday evening, Marco Rubio(R-FL) appeared on Sean Hannity’s show on Fox News to reassure viewers that there would be a vast improvement in border security through an amendment he expected to be introduced by Thursday morning. Ladies and gentlemen, the fact that Rubio made this move indicates just how bad it’s gotten for him, but it’s also a part of the snow-job.  Rubio knew that he would take heat over his involvement with this bill, but he knew it would need to be amended to move or face outrage across the nation.  The problem is that whatever is in this promised amendment will amount to token measures that will rely upon the executive branch and Barack Obama for their enforcement.  I have a simple counter-proposal for the Senator if he’s got the guts, and he’s sincere about wanting security at the border first: Scrap the bill as it exists and just implement the security portion now.  If over the next four years, the security measures are diligently enforced, it should be no problem to come back to the American people to argue: “See, we’ve done as we’ve promised.”  Otherwise, we have every reason to believe this is yet another snow-job, just like it’s been every time before.

No sir, we need the security first, and independent of any other measures.  No more triggers, no phony commissions, and no more schemes to trick us into going along.  In 2016, Senator Rubio should be up for re-election, so that if he delivers on four years’ worth of promised improvements in security, deportation, E-Verify, physical fencing, electronic monitoring and surveillance, along with a massive increase in the number of agents, it should be no problem to demonstrate a success.

The obstinate truth of this issue is that we no longer trust you, Senator Rubio, nor do we trust most of your colleagues, and we have every reason to suspect that no matter what security provisions your promised amendment may put into place, this President and his rogue Attorney General will do everything possible to confound the law, confound the security measures, and otherwise undercut the promises you have made and seem to be making anew.

It’s a promise versus performance problem, and we simply don’t trust Marco Rubio, or much less anyone else in Washington DC to get this even approximately right.  The only viable solution after decades of intransigence on the part of legislators and Presidents is to deliver the security first.  If legislators will pass an enforcement law putting teeth into the measures we have previously passed, adding new measures to augment the effort, come some day four years hence, when Senator Rubio will have been re-elected on the strength of promises kept, I assure you that the American people will be far more amenable to considering reform of the immigration system.  This means passing a mechanism for enforcement into law, and doing so in a way that instructs the executive branch on its duties with respect to carrying out the law.

News laws can be passed at any time.  It is conceivable that new enforcement mechanisms will be such a thorough success that we will be ready to consider immigration system reforms sooner than four years, but we must first see a good faith effort that does not rely on a bunch of triggers and other trick language to move automatically from an enforcement phase to an immigration reform phase, because each and every one of the promises of previous Congresses have been violated and abandoned, but worse, we now have a President who has no problem ignoring the law altogether.

This is your put-up or shut-up moment.  This is your chance to build a legacy and good will for election cycles to come, and if you can meet this challenge, the American people will support you, but this must not be passed under the quid pro quo assumptions required in the current iteration of the legislation.  There must be no “this for that,” but instead merely a “this” in the present to be followed up at some future date with a “that.”  Do this, and you will have my support if you can carry it into execution.  Do this not, and I will oppose and dog you every step of the way, and with you every last legislator who follows along.

This is our country, and its security and sovereignty are not bargaining chips in their legislative tool kit. They have sworn an oath, and it’s damn well time they carry it out first, and without conditions or further considerations from the American people who have been entirely too patient on this matter. That patience has finally worn too thin, so that if legislators think they can present a bill that was a throw-away from the outset, tinker with it around the edges with loose legislative language, repackaging it at this late date for a quick second sales pitch, they are wholly mistaken to believe that approach will work this time.

To Senator Rubio and all the other purveyors of “comprehensive immigration reform:” Put up or shut up.  Security nowImmigration reform later. That’s the only deal you will get, and it’s the best Congress and the Obama administration have any plausible right to expect.

 

When Libertarians Abandon Reason

Wednesday, June 19th, 2013

Libertarian Poo

I readily admit that what makes me less-inclined to be a part of the Republican Party is that all too often, I believe that institution abandons reason for the sake of politics.  Too often, I find that these avenues of departure occur on issues in which it seems to me that the party is more interested in getting votes by superficial causes than by doing the harder worker of reasoning with would-be supporters.  I tend to have some very libertarian ideas in such fields as economics, in which I believe the best answer is remove government as an influence, for better or worse(as it’s almost always the latter,) from every economic consideration.   In this context, it’s easy to understand why I have some significant sympathies with libertarians, because I believe the freedom to choose in a market, rightly or wrongly, and the opportunity from those choices to profit or lose, is as fundamental to human progress as any virtue that has ever existed in human history.  Some libertarians over-extend this argument  and the best example of this over-extended idea is the fixation some libertarians seem to have with easy immigration and open borders, ignoring all the problems accompanying such ideas, to the extent that the contradictions explicit in their proposals seem to be invisible to them.

I believe in rational self-interest, a notion perhaps best explained by author and philosopher Ayn Rand, and I am hardly alone in my favorable impression of her ideas on that subject.  Many libertarians and advocates of reason will reference her works on the subject because of the power of her logic to persuade.  The problem arises, however, when some advocates of a free market go so far afield in their wide-eyed insistence that markets and people be perfectly free that they abandon reason in its material implementations. Immigration is one such issue, and to shed some light on where I think the disconnect occurs or how the problems become invisible to advocates, I’d prefer to address this in the sense of a study in the rational self-interest with which libertarians are generally concerned.  I noted today that one writer who I read from time to time had decided to attack Sarah Palin, and specifically, among all the more laughable claims, he seemed most displeased with her stance on the immigration reform bill. Wrote Reason Editor Nick Gillespie over at TheDailyBeast:

Palin herself has sneered at immigration reform, dismissing pending Senate legislation as “a pandering, rewarding-the-rule-breakers, still-no-border-security, special-interest-written amnesty bill.”

Far be it from me to let Mr. Gillespie in on a guarded state secret, but “a pandering, rewarding-the-rule-breakers, still-no-border-security, special-interest-written amnesty bill” is the most precisely accurate description of the “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” or “Gang-of-Eight” bill I’ve yet read.  This legislation is being pushed as the way to save the Republican Party, by ostensibly enticing more Hispanics to vote for GOP candidates, therefore meeting the precise definition of pandering.  The bill ultimately lets people cut in line, despite having broken our laws.  It fails to secure the borders as has been promised since 1986.  It was created in a devil’s brew of deal-making between the unions and the Chamber of Commerce, for Heaven’s sake.  In all respects, it is precisely as Gov. Palin described it.  In today’s article, Gillespie goes on to take numerous cheap-shots at Palin, but given the issues of the day, and Gillespie’s distinctly libertarian views, particularly on immigration, I couldn’t resist the opportunity to address this issue.  Gillespie is a forceful advocate for libertarian positions, and is particularly adamant in his views on open borders and liberal immigration policies.  His article today seemed as though it needed an FEC disclaimer because it read like a campaign advertisement for Rand Paul and also Justin Amash, two Republicans with decidedly libertarian viewpoints.

Nick Gillespie would tell you that he is an opponent of collectivism.  I too am an opponent of collectivism, but as Rand properly noted, I recognize that there are certain facets of human interaction for which government is the only rational answer.  We know governments simply cannot allocate wealth as efficiently or as honestly as a free market, so that government’s sole role in the field ought to be reduced to that of a referee.  That’s why we have a court system complete with all the possible avenues of civil redress and relief. We know also that the notion of a collectivized defense is probably the only rational way in which to protect one’s nation against foreign attackers, since we likewise recognize that while we may mean no harm to others, we can’t count on that as a driving motive behind the policies of other nations.  In short, we know that there are legitimate roles for government, but that much as our founders would have explained it, those roles are definite and limited.

After all, a nation is but a collection of persons, bound by the geographic description of a region, and each of those persons is entitled to a natural right of self-defense, and property, along with a general pursuit of happiness.  Together, they have an aggregated right to those same ends, so that it is only natural that they should decide the boundaries of their nation, and how they will be enforced.  A nation-state is exclusionary by design, the very object of its creation as an institution being the limiting of who may enter, and under what conditions.  National boundaries exist to create a delineation, so that a person may know that as he moves from one nation to the next, one is bound by the laws of the jurisdiction to which one has entered.

Libertarians will scream at me here, arguing that every person on the planet ought to be as free(or more so) than had been the residents of the United States.  While I agree in principle, what I know about the world tells me this can never be the case.  There are no Utopias to be found here.  Not even Rand’s Galt’s Gulch can be made on Earth, because there will always and forever be people who choose the shortcuts, the paths of least resistance, and the desire to dominate their fellow man. We may not like it, and we may wish we could create some sort of Heaven on Earth, but it will never be, whether proposed by the statists or the libertarians.

This being the case, any organization of people uniting to build a country and creating its laws to guarantee the rights of its residents ought to carefully guard that nation.  It must be guarded against invasion and attack, and its quality of life must be guarded to the benefit of those paying for all of this protection.  The libertarian mindset is that we must extend our liberties to all humanity through a permissive immigration policy while improving free trade across borders.  In this way, they surmise, it is possible to elevate many people’s lives, both immigrant and native-born, simply permitting them to come and partake of the same liberty current residents enjoy.  Lovely though it may sound, however, this is at odds with all human experience on the subject, and offers no real hope to those actually deserving to enter.

The object of any nation’s immigration policy ought to be simple, and it’s a construct much like the justification for a national defense: How does a given immigrant’s entry comport with the collectivized interests of the nation at large?   If this is the standard, and it should be, then we would permit many more immigrants from Asia and Europe, and many fewer from Central and South America.  You see, it is right to ask of immigrants: “What do you bring to the party?”  The sort of indiscriminate open-borders notions held by many libertarians would destroy the very thing they had hoped to extend to millions more humans.  It is this central contradiction, this hole in their reasoning, that damns their ideas on the subject as the child-like tantrums of a dream made of rainbows and unicorns interrupted by the intercession of reality.  There’s nothing wrong with such dreams, but once one wakes up to confront reality, it’s time to reconsider.

How much evidence does one need to demonstrate that not every person entering the United States shares in those visions of Utopia?  If a nation does not control its borders, how is it to discern among the many entrees, or who among them will contribute to or detract from the quality and standard of living in the country?  I live in Texas, a border state that has seen its share of tragedies born of those who made it into this country without proper vetting.  Scarcely a day goes by without a story in the press about some illegal immigrant who has inflicted untold suffering on our residents.  The clear point in all of this is that we have every manner of rational self-interest as individuals, but also aggregated as a nation, to ensure to the degree possible that those who come to our shores will be contributors rather than burdens.

I well understand the trials and tribulations of legal immigrants, inasmuch as my own spouse is an immigrant to this nation.  She has worked continuously for twenty-two of the twenty-three years she has resided in the US, making her a net taxpayer by a wide margin and providing little in the way of burdens upon the public, by way of her use of the roads and bridges of our state for which she is also taxed.  She creates economic activity by virtue of the expenditures of her earnings, and in point of fact, has worked two jobs for most of the last decade.  In addition, she works the farm, and has raised a child who is well on her way to likewise becoming a productive American.  I understand immigration, because particularly, my mother’s family was one of poor, hard-working immigrants who toiled endlessly to scratch their way to something approximating economic stability.  Some immigrants come here precisely for the economic opportunities, with a firmly-held work ethic and a love for their adoptive country, but this does not nearly describe all of them.

Sadly, in too many cases, immigrants who come to the United States not to partake of our liberty and our relative prosperity by contributing to it, but instead by finding ways to skim and scam from it.  How many now come expressly for welfare benefits?  How many come to engage in drug or human trafficking?  How many come solely for the attractions of a society ripe for the pillaging?  Surely, the latter do not wish to “come out of the shadows” in any event.  When my wife filed all of her immigration paperwork, one of the things I had to file was a statement of financial responsibility, stating that I would not permit her to become a burden on the government.  I always wondered how it could be that so many recent immigrants could apply for and gain access to welfare-state benefits with laws on the books that would seem, on the surface, to make that illegal.  The answer should have been obvious to me: Children.

The children born to immigrants are citizens under current US law.  This citizenship entitles them to all the benefits available as part of our welfare systems.  Health-care, food-stamps, and all the other provisions of the welfare-state are available to the American-born children of recent immigrants.  Are we going to provide Section 8 housing for the children but force Ma and Pa to live on the streets?  Are we going to provide food assistance to the kids while insisting that Mom and Dad do without? Simply put, if the benefits sufficient to feed a number of children are dispensed on the basis of their needs alone, it will be sufficient food to also care for the parents if they’re smart shoppers. In this way, the alleged barrier to welfare benefits for immigrants is bypassed or mooted.

I don’t blame immigrants for seeking out and taking advantage of benefits we offer.  I simply believe we should not offer them, but I wouldn’t limit that proscription only to immigrants.  Our vast welfare state is an enormous magnet, and one that permits some very unsavory characters to make their way to the US both illegally, and legally, as we have seen in the case of the Tsarnaev brothers in Boston.  The truth is that a liberal welfare state is wholly incompatible with a liberal immigration policy, as the experience of post-war Europe has demonstrated.  This is because those immigrants will tend to change the culture and the polity of their new country at a rate faster than the subject culture can tolerate, particularly when drawn in all the faster by liberal welfare-state offerings.

I also note that for all their wistful pondering over the benefits of an open border, such advocates seem to be all one-way in their thinking.  Why is it that this spreading of liberty must occur solely through immigration to this country?  Why aren’t the libertarians emigrating, so zealously desirous to see all men free, that they must be willing to take their message to countries like Venezuela and Mexico?  Surely, if only they can convince the governments of these third-world nation-states, they could prevail upon the leaders in those stricken countries to simply make their residents free.  No?  No takers?  I suspect not many libertarians are ready to pack their bags for that journey, and with good reason:  They wouldn’t stand a chance in Hell.

What gave the United States its edge in development and prosperity was not immigration, as Jeb Bush would have you believe.  Instead, it was a set of ideals and beliefs taken nearly to their logical conclusion that had set the stage for the American explosion.  It was not the immigrants alone, because the industrial revolution had commenced well before the great waves of immigrants at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries.  The growth of American prosperity had progressed with the extension of freedom.  Those early 20th century immigrants were indoctrinated rapidly in American history and culture, and they quickly blended into the great melting pot, further driving the growth of prosperity.  Still, they brought with them some bad things too, including pieces of a polity that preferred collectivism, and it was out of this forge that the progressive era was born.

Most of the ideas of the progressive era were really European ideas.  Margaret Sanger’s eugenics were well-received in Europe, and one wonders if with his fixation on the fertility of immigrants, Jeb Bush may be a fan.  He certainly is in the progressive mold, after all.  The point to understand, however, is that when the waves of European immigrants came to the United States, they had an immediate effect on the politics of the nation, both by force of their numbers, and by virtue of their political beliefs, then imported with them to their new home.  This will be true of any immigrants in any age, but now, we face a threat of socialism.  Some form of statism is dominant in virtually every nation from which we receive immigrants, and yet we do not hesitate even long enough to ask what cultural norms, beliefs, practices, and politics they will bring with them.  This is a tragic error.

If the United States is or had been the greatest and freest nation on the planet, then it had owed to the foundation laid by our earliest immigrants, our founders and framers.   To the degree its polity has changed, it owes in some large measure to the influx of immigrants.  My question to libertarians is whether they believe it is possible to import so many souls born to tyranny and despotism without changing the nation for the worse.  The one hopeful sign is that immigrants are, after all, the people who fled, whether for political or economic reasons, but if the greater number is for the latter, we cannot say with any surety how well they will reinforce the ideals that had built this country.  Some years, perhaps decades hence, when some dozens of millions of new immigrants will have converted this country to just another third-world Republic, will the libertarians who insist now on open borders and liberal immigration policies likewise insist that native-born Americans be permitted to flee?  If so, to where?

The United States of America has grown and prospered because for the most part, until the last half century, we had taken great care most of the time as to who could come and claim their bona fides as Americans, and under which conditions they could do so.  The immigration bill now in process takes no such care, in fact discarding many provisions that might have helped in preventing our eventual collapse under the weight of an immigrant-heavy welfare-state.  It’s time for libertarians to wake up, shake off the unicorns and rainbows of their perfect dreams, and realize that there is more at stake than some tortured notion of ideological consistency, of which I am generally myself a big fan.  Sometimes, the plane on which one must remain consistent is a good deal more obvious, and this case is one of those:  The United States, in order to remain a country into which any would willingly immigrate must remain a country of freedom and opportunity, but if we don’t first protect the culture that had created that freedom and opportunity, those virtues will rapidly diminish and die.  Two decades hence, living in a Venezuela-like paradigm, lost in the wild places between totalitarianism and anarchy, it will be of slim consolation to the libertarian, open-borders advocate when he sees finally his dreams going up in flames around him.

Time to wake up, Nick.

Jeb Bush and His Beasts of Burden

Saturday, June 15th, 2013

Road to the Minority

Jeb Bush was addressing the Faith and Freedom Coalition on Friday when he inexplicably said something that is almost certain to give him grief for a long time to come, and I promise to be among those reminding you.  His remark was aimed at the question of immigration reform, and his general point, I think, may have been that immigration sparks a certain vibrancy in an economic system(assuming it meets certain conditions,) but what Bush’s remark reveals is the reason I don’t think immigrants will wind up supporting him.  Establishment Republicans imagine immigrants as the way out of our budgetary morass, because they expect that an influx of working-age people having children will grow the tax base to the extent that it will overpower the generational problem presented by the retiring of the “baby boomers.”  The problems with this theory are many, but Republicans of the establishment mold like Bush have put on blinders.  For the better part of a half-century, the powers in post-war Europe adopted immigration policies aimed at the same basic problem:  The welfare state was unsustainable and the only way to prop it up would be by bringing in immigrants.  Europe is now paying mightily for this policy, and it is evinced by the riots we have seen across the continent as Muslim immigrants run rampant through the capitals of Europe.  Said Bush:

“Immigrants are more fertile, and they love families, and they have more intact families, and they bring a younger population. Immigrants create an engine of economic prosperity.”

The particularly egregious use of the term “fertile” aside, what Bush is here saying confirms every word I have alleged: This wave of immigration they’re now pursuing is intended to prop up our welfare state.  Bush, like his brother and father before him, doesn’t have any intention of slowing the growth of government, but merely wishes to increase the revenues available to it.  That’s it.  That’s all there really is to this, and all there’s ever been to this, and notions like assimilation go careening out the window.   There will be no border security, and no effort at assimilation, but instead a patently shrewd attempt to pad government revenues with the labor of young, “fertile” people.

I wonder if prospective immigrants understand, either waiting lawfully in line, or trying to short-cut around it, that all of this talk about compassion and coming out of the shadows is really about them taking on the yokes of beasts of burden, with nothing more or less than their ability to drag this nation along through the mire of the welfare state as as the object.  As if this isn’t bad enough, Marco Rubio now explains that we need the immigrants as new, legalized employees to pay the taxes that will fund border security.  If you have had any misunderstanding about the motives of this entire “immigration reform” bill nonsense, this must clarify the matter: It’s about funding the leviathan that has become our federal government.

People who are less politically-engaged frequently ask me what is the difference  between a Republican and a Conservative.  While the explanation is certainly worthy of an article or two all its own, the simplest way to view it seems to be that conservatives concern themselves with principles of right and wrong, while Republicans concern themselves only with how to make a thing work in a very pragmatic, morality-agnostic manner.  It doesn’t matter to Jeb Bush why existing Americans have a lower fertility rate than recent immigrants.  It doesn’t matter to him why it is that they create fewer new businesses than recent immigrants. He merely accepts it as is, and then looks for a way to fill the short-run or mid-term gaps, consequences be damned.

Since pinheads who call themselves “Republican” seem not to understand why Americans would slow their rate of reproduction, or why they would create fewer businesses, let me make it perfectly clear:  People like Jeb Bush and his family are the reason.  Rationally, once invested in life in America, it’s rather more difficult to decide to have more children if each successive child adds a substantial burden that may affect the prospects of each existing child.  When my own daughter was born, Mr. Bush’s father was President, preparing to break his “read my lips” pledge.  The economy was doing poorly, and this acted to shake up our view on whether it was proper to bring more children into the world.  We wondered if we wanted to bring more children into a world in which they would become beasts of burden for a welfare state  George H.W. Bush’s OMB director at the time projected that the net tax rate on children born in 1990(like our daughter) would wind up being around eighty percent!  Why did we have only one child?  We couldn’t afford two!

Immigrants don’t realize this yet, because they’re unaware of the nuts and bolts of our escalating welfare state from the paying side, at least initially.  Over time, they learn it, as their rate of reproduction or business creation likewise slows.  As they struggle to make a little ground against the economic forces weighing down upon them, they become disinclined to add new economic burdens to their own family situations.  Reproduction slows.  What Bush and those like him are gambling is that a new sea of immigrants freshly legalized will still be too poor, too uneducated, and too busy to notice this until they’ve created another generation or two of workers who will struggle to fill the coffers of government.

What Mr. Bush and those like him will not do is to consider why our existing population’s reproduction rate has slowed to below replacement.  What Mr. Bush will not concede is that finding new ways to fund the welfare state is not the answer.  It doesn’t need more funds.  It needs to be demolished.  The problem is that as people obtain slightly more prosperity, they tend to focus on how to maintain and extend it.  Part of obtaining that prosperity is education in one form or another, and all of these things lead people to slow their reproduction.  These things tend to make them more risk-averse, so until they cross another significant threshold, starting a new business venture is also unlikely.

What Jeb and the other members of his family(both real and political) wish for us to believe is that there is something innate about immigrants that makes them more “fertile.”  What they are unwilling to admit is that the problem isn’t with the “fertility” of existing Americans, except that in a struggle to maintain their standard of living, they have policed themselves, unless they are captive client-members of the welfare state, in which case, they’re another burden for the rest of us to carry.  Even if one is able to rationalize Jeb’s views as merely misguided pragmatism, one must confront the fact of how he views people.

Bush, like his brother and his father, seems to hold a worldview that permits him to see the issue as one of how to fulfill a need to keep the beast alive.  The fact that the beastly welfare-state is destroying the country is a matter of little significance if he can find enough human lubricant to keep its wheel turning a while longer.  Generations of Americans struggling against the growing weight of the state are of no consequence to him.  Lives of real people demolished in the process of building the leviathan are of little or no concern.  Neither his view of native-born Americans nor the legions of waiting immigrants offers any comfort when considering the future he envisions, in which the state continues to escalate as a burden upon the populace.

Some number of years into the future, Jeb Bush and those like him will appear before us to try to give us the next round of amnesty.  By then, the country will be in crippling poverty with few exceptions.  Civil strife will be rampant. The welfare state will reign supreme in all aspects of life.  The problem with his view is that he’s more interested in making it to that next occasion than he is in preventing it in the first place.  If you really wonder about the difference between a Republican and a Conservative, this then may serve as the key: Republicans don’t make waves, and go along with the flow because they wish to maintain the status quo indefinitely.  Conservatives know it cannot last.

Alternative content

Amnesty:The Road to Hell

Thursday, June 13th, 2013

Whose “Good Intentions?”

It shouldn’t be a surprise that nearly seven in ten Americans who look at the immigration bill pending in the Senate as another sell-out of America, with that number arguing that we must enforce our borders immediately.  It’s also not a surprise that Senate Republicans are helping to support this bill despite the damage it will ultimately do to our nation. Twenty-eight Republicans decided to sell us out and join with the Democrats in bringing the Immigration bill to the Senate for action, and as is ever the case, when you see substantial percentages of the two parties cooperating on anything, you must also know that they are acting in the name of the Washington DC establishment, that cares genuinely for no party but for the non-stop celebration inside the DC beltway, bought and paid-for by we taxpayers.  Now, they’re galloping toward a so-called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” bill that threatens to end the United States as you have known it.  The worst of it may be that while nearly three in four Americans realize this is a sell-out, and want to secure the border first, there are still one-fourth of Americans who actually think this amnesty plan is a good idea.

Imagine my surprise while talking to an SEIU member who thinks this bill is a boon to his prospects, and is four-square behind the bill, whatever may be in it, because he’s been told by union uppers that it’s important for the union, with the implication that what is good for the union will be good for him.  What the fellow doesn’t quite understand is that while this bill will certainly be  good for the union bosses, it will be devastating to his own life.  They’re being told that most of these legalized illegals will wind up as members of the union, but they do not question the veracity of the claim, or even whether if true, such a thing would be good for existing union members.  Instead, they’re given their marching orders, and they’ve been told to support the bill.  When twelve million illegals “step out of the shadows,” the first thing they’ll be looking for is legitimate, lawful employment.  Who will that hurt?  It will hurt every currently-employed person in the country, minus the politicians, who are insulated from market forces.  Are union bosses more like working folk, or more like politicians?

In much the same way, the libertarian sect that seems to follow anybody with the last name “Paul” continues to push the notion that this is an idea in favor of the free market.  In one sense, that is true, but it is an ideal to be pursued in the long run and not to be imposed by the registering of yeas and nays along with the sweep of a presidential pen.  You see, there can be no free market if there is no rule of law, or what would keep the market free?  A free market is only possible where there exists a framework of laws that protect the rights and properties of a society’s members.  There can be no protection of rights when lawlessness is the only rule, with the government imposing a legalized form of anarchy in place of the rule of law.  Without a thorough program in place to assimilate new would-be Americans, how is it expected that they would respect a rule of law in which they have no investment?

Ladies and gentlemen, we’re being shafted on a colossal scale, and every one of these politicians know it.  They’ve been bound and determined to shove this down the nation’s throat in a post-election environment for years, and now they have just the right mix of Democrats and Republicans, scoundrels all, to shove this down our throats.  The following 28 Republican Senators need never ask for my vote in any election, for any office, ever, and I don’t care who endorses them:

Alexander (R-TN), Ayotte (R-NH), Blunt (R-MO), Burr (R-NC), Chambliss (R-GA), Chiesa (R-NJ), Coats (R-IN), Cochran (R-MS), Collins (R-ME), Corker (R-TN), Cornyn (R-TX), Fischer (R-NE), Flake (R-AZ), Graham (R-SC), Hatch (R-UT), Heller (R-NV), Hoeven (R-ND), Isakson (R-GA), Johanns (R-NE), Johnson (R-WI), McConnell (R-KY), Moran (R-KS), Paul (R-KY), Portman (R-OH), Rubio (R-FL), Thune (R-SD), Toomey (R-PA), Wicker (R-MS)

These people are jackals and parasites who have sold out their respective electorates.  Don’t tell me how clever Rand Paul is, or how smart is Marco Rubio, or what a solid guy is John Cornyn.  (That last worthless weasel is up for re-election in my state next year, and I will vote for the devil himself if that’s what it takes to get Cornyn out of there. This is not the first time he has screwed the country in this fashion, and left in office, it won’t be the last.)

When all of this goes wrong, this same list of weasels, back-stabbers, fakes and flakes will claim that they had been voting with only the best of intentions.  No, they aren’t.  They’re participating in a gang-rape of the nation, and they’re quite pleased with themselves.  People may wonder why I’ve gone off the grid, and there’s no denying my various personal/health issues are the primary drivers, but this bunch – this gang – of America-hating corporatists are the primary reason.  They’re going to win if they have to immobilize the nation to have their way with her.

The most galling part may be that the few allies they have in the general populace are primarily the union workers who have been told by their alleged “leaders” that this is good for them, while their union bosses wine and dine at the White House with the President and the very captains of the industries who they tell their rank-and-file they are supposed to hate.  Both sides have been sold out by their respective parties, and both to the same cronies.

If we’re to have any chance to stop this, we will need to melt the phone lines, faxes, and in-boxes of every Republican in the House.  The Democrats are hopeless.  Most of the Republicans are treacherous.  We need something we do not now have, and that’s a voice.  If we do not find it, and soon, they’re going to break this country for all time by Labor Day, and there will be nothing that we will then do to stop this.

Remember, they have the magic formula all worked out: Get enough Republicans in the Senate to break the filibuster to let the bill come to the floor.  Then use the 60 rule to keep out amendments.  The bill will go to final passage, and then it’s off to the House, where Boehner will cobble together a gang of Republicans to join with the Democrats to pass a bill more than seventy percent of the American people oppose.  After that, it’s a Rose Garden signing ceremony at the White House, and the nation is finished.  That’s the procedure.  The only way that procedure can be stopped is to make a stand at every House Republican’s office, and even then, they won’t give a holy rip about what we think.

It’s time to end the poetic verbiage and simply state what is: These people, in both parties, are out to wreck the country and wreck it beyond retrieval.  There are undoubtedly a few in Congress who genuinely oppose this, but they are so few and so weakened that they afford little hope.  On the other hand, as somebody in Las Vegas recently reminded me, there’s always some hope, and some times, that’s all you have to hold.  We must push back with all we have or lose the country.  Hoping our best efforts will hold this bill back may be all we have left, but let this not deter us in that effort.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amnesty AssClowns

Monday, April 29th, 2013

An Unenforced Law

Speaking of the people who are fiddling while the nation burns, here’s a group happily stoking the fire.  While average Americans struggle to keep their heads above water, inside the DC beltway, the same crowd Sarah Palin observed “yukkin’ it up” at the White House Correspondents Dinner are actively plotting the end of the republic.  After all, it’s a new week and therefore a new opportunity to shove despicable legislation down throats of the American people to which most of them stand opposed.  As Byron York has pointed out in the pages of the Washington Examiner, your criticisms of the bill are being ignored.  They know you’re opposed, but they’re pretending not to hear you.  As York also reported, despite the fact that the response has been overwhelmingly negative to a page put up by Marco Rubio(R-FL) to take suggestions for improving the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, there has been no indication that Rubio or other members of the “Gang-of-Eight” have any intentions of backing down.  Yes, if there is anybody in Washington DC who is completely out of touch with American people, the Amnesty AssClowns are at the head of the class.

One friend today quipped that the reason Barack Obama is pushing so hard for an amnesty bill is that he will avail himself of the law, but one needn’t make jokes about the President’s questionable origins to get the real point across: If an amnesty bill passes the Congress, the Democrat Party will own the keys to the  kingdom in perpetuity.  Nobody is more conscious of that fact than Barack Hussein Obama.  It represents the opportunity to demolish  conservatives in the mid-terms next year, in which a large  number of fast-tracked illegals would move down the proposed “path  to citizenship,” offering Democrats an opportunity to pass any bill  they please.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the attendees at the White House Correspondents Dinner are indeed out of touch with the mainstream of America.  In the aftermath of the Boston Marathon Bombings, Americans have been reminded how a lack of enforcement of existing laws has made us more vulnerable at home, so they’re understandably in no mood for loosening immigration policies.  Despite the promises of politicians like Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Marco Rubio and the other members of the “Gang-of-Eight,” the American people understand that making allegedly tougher laws with hundreds of gaping loopholes will not improve our security, in part because it’s a logical farce, but also because more than three decades of promises on the issue have yet to be delivered.  After all, apart from a majority of New Yorkers, who really believes Charles “Chuck-U” Schumer(D-NY) has the best interests of the nation in mind, rather than the furtherance of the aims and agenda of the Democrat Party?

This week, the Senate will try to move this legislation, and they will try to do it without amendments if Harry Reid can find support.  This bill is the Holy Grail for Democrats, but as I explained on Saturday, the reasons so many Republicans are going along is because they’ve either been sold a bill of goods by the Beltway political class, or because they’re out to negate the influence of conservatives in the electorate.  There really can’t be any other reason apart from ignorance, or perhaps money, and if you don’t understand how Republicans could sign on for the extinction of their own party as an electoral force, you need only consider the party shift of 1995, in which Democrats moved over to the Republican Party for their electoral survival, not because their views had changed so much as because they wanted to remain in power.  Many Democrats who had barely survived the surge of 1994 merely changed horses.  If this amnesty bill goes through, you can expect the same thing in 2014, only this time, it will be Republicans jumping ship to join the Democrats.

It’s going to be a difficult fight, and conservatives should expect that the permanent political class in Washington DC will do everything it is able to ignore any outcry arising among the American people, but after more than a week for facts about the Boston jihadis and their subsistence on welfare as legal immigrants, this may turn out to have been the worst possible time for the DC “ass-clowns” to move this legislation.  If your response is ferocious enough, Harry Reid could be forced to shelve the legislation to await a more opportune moment.  Some blue-state conservatives have confided that they don’t bother calling their senators any longer, because staffers are frequently rude and obnoxious, but the truth is  that the members need to hear from their constituents particularly if they’ve been inclined to support this bill.  Besides, it’s time to make good on the promise to turn Barack Obama into a lame-duck President.  We need this win – America needs this win – and we shouldn’t let the Amnesty AssClowns deter us from being heard.

.

Make sure to go by Marco Rubio’s site and politely offer your suggestions. I offered mine, but they’ve yet to be approved.

Immigration Reform Bill a Death Warrant for America

Saturday, April 27th, 2013

The Immigration Reform bill pending in the US Senate is monstrous document, and the results of its passage would be catastrophic for our nation.  Politically, it’s the death-knell of conservatism, but fiscally, it will accelerate the demise of our economy and usher in a new condition we might call: “Third World America.”  You might be skeptical of this claim, and I’d understand if you asked for some kind of evidence.  According to the group Numbers USA, this bill enacted would bring at least thirty-three million people to our country over the next ten years, but it may be far worse.  At the same time, it has been admitted by the US Department of Agriculture that their foodstamps program does not check the immigration status of applicants, actively advertising  in Spanish in borders states and even in Mexico.  As if this is not bad enough, the traitorous Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder, is now professing the view that immigration to the United States is a human and civil right.  This legislation comprises an attack on our birthright, our financial health, and our political sovereignty.  The costs of this bill are too high to be borne by any people,and we must fight like Hell to defeat it.

Ladies and gentlemen, this really is the moment to draw a line.  As many as ninety-five percent of newly minted American citizens vote for one party: The Democrats.  I would like for you to understand that if thirty-three million people are added to our voter rolls over the next decade, chances are exceedingly high, a virtual numerical certainty, that they will add thirty-one million new Democrats.  What will happen to your “Red States” under this circumstance? The answer is simply: “Think Blue!”  Republicans, never mind conservatives, will find themselves unable to be elected in any place at any time. Remember in 1995 when the avalanche of Democrats changed party affiliation to Republican?  All of those and more will be going back. With them will go what remains of your principles of limited government, individual liberties, and fiscal responsibility.  We will see the nation as a whole become like California, and locales like California will become political analogs to Venezuela.

Your birthright is being stolen by the process of political dilution.  You will on some future day awake to find yourself in a foreign nation.  These ruthless bastards in Washington DC are intent upon stealing your nation from you.  In imagining US citizenship as some sort of human or civil right, what they are really saying is that they are going to throw open the doors to any who will come.  How many of the world’s billions of desperately poor will flood to our nation under the rules these people now imagine?  How will we feed them? How will we feed ourselves?  This immigration bill isn’t a recipe for reformation of a broken system, but instead a recipe for radical transformation of a civilization.

Some will insist that I am too harsh or caustic in my appraisal, but what would they have me say?  Shall I pretend that this bill represents only a “speed-bump” in the language of our President?  Shall we accept the claims of Senator McCain who tells us these illegal immigrants come only to “pick our lettuce?”  Let me explain to you what the sell-out anti-Republicans in favor of this bill are really trying to obtain:  You demand they behave and vote as conservatives, but they wish to be freed from those constraints.  In their states and districts at present, a Democrat could not win. Therefore, before they can change party and flip the bird at conservatives for good, they must set up a circumstance in which a Democrat could win in their states or congressional districts.  It is at this point that you must think very carefully and clearly: The easiest way for them to make conservatives irrelevant is to out-number them.  You’ve stirred-up so much trouble for them with your Tea Parties and your conservative activism that the only way to ignore you is to import a political force larger than you.  That is the purpose of these millions of immigrants they wish to bring to our country: To replace and supplant you as the dominant political force in the nation.

Who will insist now that I had been too harsh? Could it be that I’m over-stating the political impact of this mass migration bill?  According to Byron York, writing in the Washington Examiner, this legislation includes a number of loopholes that will fast-track many illegal aliens to full US citizenship.  Writes York:

“A little-noticed exception in the Gang of Eight bill provides a fast track for many — possibly very many — currently illegal immigrants.  Under a special provision for immigrants who have labored at least part-time in agriculture, that fast track could mean permanent residency in the U.S., and then citizenship, in half the time Rubio said.  And not just for the immigrants themselves — their spouses and children, too.”

“A second provision in the legislation creates another fast track for illegal immigrants who came to the United States before they were 16 — the so-called Dreamers.  The concept suggests youth, but the bill has no age limit for such immigrants — or their spouses and children — and despite claims that they must go to college or serve in the military to be eligible, there is an exception to that requirement as well.”

Have I been unnecessarily caustic in my appraisal, or does this bill offered by the “Gang-of-Eight” constitute a treason against the people of the United States?   Imagine if you will, my own state of Texas, under the constructs of this legislation: Inside five or six years, it will have become impossible for any office-holder at any level of government to maintain his or her position while remaining in the Republican Party.  The whole miserable lot will either retire, or merely change parties as happened in 1995.  Do you see it now?  Do you understand the dire meaning of our current situation?  We are headed for one-party rule, and your conservative principles will be swept aside in the building of the new Democrat hegemony.  If rank-and-file Democrats had any discernment, they too would be terrified, because they would understand that the only thing that offers any possibility of keeping their politicians honest is the competition of at least two vital parties.  For conservatives and Republicans, this immigration bill is a death warrant not only for the sake of politics, but for the sake of the nation.  Do you like losing?  If this bill passes, you had better become accustomed to the concept.  It will become a permanent condition for what will become a rapidly declining number of conservative office-holders, and indeed, for conservatives across the country. What you had known as America will be left in ashes.

This bill represents a threat against the American people far worse than that of al-Qaeda, because it will demolish the United States from the inside.   Those who have advanced and advocated  this bill knew or ought to have known its implications.  It’s intentional, and it is far worse than we had dared to imagine.  This one really is for all the marbles: We can be a sovereign nation that stands some chance of remaining a constitutional, representative republic, or we can fall into the abyss of a century of one-party rule and Third-World devolution.  The choice is ours, but if we permit them to enact this bill, it may be the last substantial political choice we are ever permitted to make.

.

Call, write, and fax your Senators. Emails are nice, but they go largely ignored.  Visit their home-state offices. It’s time for you to show up, again.  Call your Congressmen. Tell them that if they pass this bill(or any like it,) they won’t be left in office long enough to switch parties, because in 2014, you will send them home, while you still can. Tell every person you know what the game is, and what is being done. If we are to preserve this nation, this must be stopped.

 

 

Calling All Conservatives: Time to Draw a Line

Wednesday, April 24th, 2013

Drawing the Line

I  realize that at this very moment, you are being attacked on all fronts.  Our voices have earned us a temporary reprieve on gun control, but they’re trying to tax sales on the Internet again, and they’re pushing a ludicrous, maniacally self-destructive immigration bill. I realize we’re all a bit depressed by the unrelenting onslaught of big government, and I would understand if fatigue had set in for many of my friends  and fellow conservatives.  Ladies and gentlemen, we don’t have time to be depressed.  We might survive an Internet sales tax, but conservatism will not survive the immigration reform bill now being pushed by the “Gang of Eight” senators, or probably the version being pushed in the House by none other than Congressman and former Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan(R-WI.)  The immigration bill must be stopped if conservatives are to retain any political future.

There’s a very good reason the DC establishment has co-opted these “fresh faces:”  They know you won’t listen to the likes of John McCain or Lindsey Graham, but you might be convinced to listen to Paul Ryan or Marco Rubio. They walk these younger guys off a plank, in part because they’re more effective than the old bulls, but also in part to dominate them and keep them in check. If Rubio and Ryan are ultimately damaged by the immigration debate of 2013, who will benefit? Setting the inside politics aside, however, let’s be blunt about the ramifications of the immigration bill: If it is enacted, it will destroy movement conservatism as an electoral force for a generation or longer.  For conservatives, this is a fight for survival and it must be fought with all hands on deck.

Naturally, there are others who see danger in this bill.  Among them are African-American groups who see the potential for making themselves less vital and more disposable to the Democrat Party.  Wouldn’t it be astonishing to find that in the House, we may see the Congressional Black Caucus moving to oppose any immigration bill because it represents an almost complete displacement of their power base in the Democrat Party?  It is said that politics makes for strange bedfellows, but in this case, we may see an alliance of the extremely liberal members of the CBC with House conservatives to put the axe to immigration reform. Honestly, if it weren’t for the mortal  damage this bill would do to our nation, I’d almost be inclined to let it go through unchallenged just to make the Congressional Black Caucus moot.  Apart from the fact that the CBC would likely be an unreliable ally, the fact is that this bill would do immeasurable damage to the country and leave us wide open to more of the same we’ve faced over the last decade, with the added “bonus” of the “Californication” of the rest of the nation inside a decade.  States that are now light red would become deep blue, and states that were solidly red would become purple or even blue, in the case of Texas, and Arizona.  You can forget winning the White House. Just forget it.

This bill’s rejection is as important to the survival of conservatism as was the presidency of Ronald Reagan. If we don’t find a way to stop this, it will finish conservatism for the next two decades.  More, it will dispirit conservatives and we will lose the House in 2014, resulting in two years of a lame-duck President who will never be held to account and who will then have two years of a majority in both houses of Congress, a condition that we will find impossible to reverse.  If you have any doubts about the seriousness of the implications of this issue, I’d commend to you this clip from Tuesday’s Mark Levin Show.  In this clip, Dr. Levin sounds many of the same warnings, and for many of the same reasons I have brought to you previously on Tuesday.  You can download the entire show from Mark Levin Show Audio Rewind.  Here is the relevant clip:


Alternative content

If you understand what Dr. Levin has explained, then you must see the seriousness of the threat posed by this bill. We must begin to attack the provisions of  the bill, but also the basic concept that they are trying to shove another de facto amnesty down our throats, once again with promises of improved security for which they have no real intentions to enforce.  More, it will weaken our security in the face of continued attacks by radical Islamists, with no end in sight.  One of the provisions of the Rubio-Schumer bill actually requires that this amnesty must not be applied to any who arrived in the US illegally after December of 2011.  The idea is that  this prevents the law from acting like a magnet in the short run to draw more immigrants across the border in a mad rush for amnesty.  The problem is that there is absolutely no way to demonstrate when they arrived.  That’s right, we’re going to take their word for it, since they are by definition undocumented.  How many do you suppose will proclaim that they had arrived after that date? Even if there was the slightest willingness on the part of some to faithfully apply such a provision, what is to prevent Barack Obama from simply waiving it?  Nothing.  There is nothing to prevent the whole thing from blowing up in our faces.

Paul Ryan discussed with Joel Pollak at Breitbart the questions surrounding the immigration bill, and Ryan claimed dishonestly that this would create new economic growth.  As I explained on Tuesday in my rebuttal to Senator Rubio, such an argument is a farce.  There is no net economic benefit to the people of the US from immigration, and in fact, a notable economic detriment.  As Dr. Levin rightly observed in the clip linked above, if we are looking for unskilled labor on the cheap, we could just as easily begin cutting welfare-state benefits to our own citizens and realize a real economic gain, since we would be removing people from the roles and they would begin to fill all of those jobs “Americans aren’t willing to do.”  I imagine that if their option is starvation, booted from clutching bosom of the welfare state, they will damned-well become willing.

This isn’t the time to consider immigration reform that will merely strengthen the Democrats in perpetuity.  This isn’t the time to create new and larger holes in our security in exchange for contrived and demonstrably false economic advantage.  We are at a point in American history that if we do not rise to fight against this, the loss of our country and all the liberties we have enjoyed is certain.  I understand there  are those who will see the looming Internet sales tax proposal as the worst threat facing us at present, but I must ask those of that view to reconsider:  The Internet Sales Tax can be repealed if it’s enacted, but amnesty is forever, and so is the electoral advantage to be gained by Democrats if it should pass.  When even the leftist political site Politico notes the grotesque advantage the immigration bill represents for Democrats, we are right to try to stop this at all costs.  The simple fact of the matter is that we can defeat this bill or prepare to yield our shrinking liberties.  It’s as simple as that.

 

My Response to Senator Rubio: Not Good Enough

Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013

The Hard Sell

On Tuesday, FoxNews published an op-ed by Senator Marco Rubio(R-FL) discussing his views on immigration.  I have some thoughts on what Senator Rubio has discussed, and I find some of his article misleading and disappointing.  Rather than simply summarize his column, I am providing a link to its full text as well as taking it on, point-by-point here. The article is entitled Here’s the Truth About My Plan for Immigration Reform, and I suppose I could start with the title: Senator Rubio’s column does much to characterize his plan in a generous light, but those characterizations do not seem to match the bill’s substance. He opens:

“Americans believe in the value of immigration. We are the most generous nation on earth to immigrants, allowing over one million people a year to come here legally. They come here in pursuit of what we recognize as the American dream – the chance to live in freedom and have the opportunity to work hard to make a better life for themselves and their families.”

Like Senator Rubio, and most Americans, I too believe in the value of immigration.  My own wife is an immigrant, as were my grandparents and great-grandparents.  The United States is the most generous nation on Earth toward immigrants, but this may be part of the problem.  Sometimes, our naive generosity leads to policies that permit people who have malevolent designs land on our shores.  Not all native-born Americans recognize the American dream, much as they might like to, in part because they are forced to carry the burdens of politicians’ generosity with the public treasury.  The chance to live in freedom is a glorious thing, but I suspect that if one were to survey immigrants who have come here legally over the last three decades, liberty is in marked decline in part because our immigration policies have and continue to inflict a serious burden on the American people.  It is the job of Senator Rubio and his cohorts to explain why Americans ought to bear more burdens on the behalf of immigrants. Such explanations should come in terms of concrete legislative language rather than flowery prose. Senator Rubio continues:

“The problem is that our legal immigration system has been broken for decades. It has enabled 11 million people to come here illegally or overstay visas. It is a bureaucratic and inefficient system that does not address the needs of our economy.

All this has further deepened the American people’s mistrust in the ability of their government to perform basic functions.”

Our legal immigration system has been broken for decades. It is not, however, the laws that are malfunctioning, but instead the bureaucracy that is entrusted with executing them. There are only 11-20 million illegal immigrants because this government has taken no concrete steps to enforce the laws already on the books. To the contrary, this president and his predecessors have intentionally undermined those laws, or in the case of the current president, actively set out to ignore them by issuing orders preventing their enforcement.  The purpose of the immigration system is not to address the needs of the economy.  Its purposes are to serve the needs of the nation in all aspects, not merely economic, but also security, cultural, and moral.  Senator Rubio seems focused on the economic aspects at the expense of even our national security, much as the recent attacks in Boston demonstrate.  That our current system permitted those two to gain entry to the nation and to remain is a damning rebuke of our current system, but unfortunately, because Sen. Rubio’s bill is more focused on economics than on security, this is not likely to be addressed by his bill. Sen. Rubio warns us:

“Leaving in place a broken immigration system -– and the millions of people whose identities are a mystery to us –- is simply not an acceptable option. This must be fixed.”

Our current immigration system is broken, but what is more broken is our immigration enforcement systems.  As examples in opposition to Senator Rubio’s claim, the Tsarnaev brothers were legally in the country and we knew who they were.  The 9/11 hijackers were legally in this country and we knew who they were.  It is not merely the identities of illegal aliens that is a problem, but it is critical to remember it is a separate problem from legal visitors who overstay visas, or legal immigrants who are permitted to stay despite convictions for crimes and applications to welfare systems.  The problems born of the bureaucracy are clear, but they are separate and apart from the conscious decisions by those responsible for carrying our laws into execution who for whatever reasons or pretenses simply fail or even refuse to do so.  Senator Rubio’s bill does absolutely nothing to address a bureaucracy and an executive branch that refuses to carry out the law.

“That is why I am advocating for securing our borders, improving enforcement, modernizing our legal immigration system and changing it so that it prioritizes welcoming people to the U.S. based on skills, not just on whether they have a family member already living here.”

Senator Rubio says he is for securing our borders and improving enforcement.  If I take that on faith, let me suggest that the Senator could do a good deal to remedy the distrust he laments by taking these steps first.  As in medicine, when addressing something one claims is an emergency, one must evaluate the problem.  We cannot assess the true scope of the problem until there has been a good faith effort on behalf of the United States Federal Government to improve enforcement and to secure our borders.  Otherwise, what Senator Rubio herein promises is a preposterous reiteration of existing law that condenses to the sentiment: “We are going to pass a law to tell our government to more forcefully enforce existing law.” This is an absurd proposal, inasmuch as a government that cannot be entrusted to enforce existing law certainly cannot be entrusted to enforce a more stringent one.  It’s akin to claiming, “OK, well, we’re really, really serious this time.”  As much as anybody, I think immigration ought to include certain tests as to what skills a person brings to the game, but is Senator Rubio seriously suggesting that people from India are less-skilled than those from Central and South America?

Senator Rubio continues, ticking off a laundry list of measures:

“And that is why I support a process to identify and register those who are here illegally. They will have to submit biometric data in order to pass multiple national security and criminal background checks, pay $2,000 in fines, pay taxes, and learn English and American civics. They won’t be able to get any federal benefits like welfare or ObamaCare.

Fines?  Most of the people immigrating to this country can’t afford $2.00 in fines, much less $2000.00. Will there be waivers for the fines?  Will President Obama simply sign an extra-statutory waiver to fines, like he did with Obama-care?

“Before they can even apply to become permanent residents, they will have to wait at least ten years. They will have to get in line behind those who are trying to come the right way.”

Why should they be permitted into line at all? After violating the laws of the United States, why aren’t they prohibited? More, what is the real chance that somebody who is told they won’t get permanent resident status for at least ten years deciding voluntarily to “step out of the shadows” and be liable for fines and a ten year wait?

“They will have to wait until we have a system in place to prevent illegal immigrants from being hired.”

What will make them wait?  The same farcical enforcement exhibited by the Obama Administration?

“They will have to wait until we have a system in place to track people who overstay their visas.”

People who overstay their visas?  Those are people who started out with legal status, having arrived here legally. That’s an entirely different law enforcement problem from the immigrant who had sneaked into the country in disregard of our laws from the outset.

“And they will have to wait until we implement plans to spend at least $5.5 billion dollars to secure the border through more border patrol officers, more technology and more fencing.”

We’ve been promised all of this before.  In 1986, and several times since, we’ve been promised all sorts of improvements, and yet despite a mass amnesty in 1986, the Federal Government has managed to let another 11-20 million people come into the country. The truth is that the number may be even higher, but we can’t know, since in 1986, and all the years since, this government has not kept its promises.  What Senator Rubio here offers is another promise.  I’m afraid that I must insist that government finally fulfill its past promises before we consider any more, in the name of decency, and in the name of holding my government to its word.

“I thought long and hard before taking on this issue. I understand how divisive it can be. I’ve seen how the left has used it to accuse opponents of their version of reform of being bigots and racists. And I would much rather be having a debate on the more fundamental ways we can grow our economy and get our debt and spending under control. But with or without us, the president and the Democrats who control the Senate were going to bring this issue up.”

Sadly, even Senator Rubio’s spokesman uses the language of division. As many noted on Monday, your own spokesman, Mr. Conant, abrasively and dishonestly compared the status of immigrants to that of slaves.  Is the Senator seriously suggesting that his spokesman is a leftist, or only that his spokesman has resorted to the dishonest tactics of the left? The President and his friends in the Senate do not control the House, so that any such bill could be stopped there if Republicans weren’t insisting on shoving bad legislation down the throats of an unwilling American people.

“And I believe conservatives need to fight for the ideas and policies we believe are critical to fixing our immigration system.”

I agree that conservatives need to fight for the ideas and policies that are critical to fixing our immigration system, but they must be the right ideas, and they must conform to conservative principles and the rule of law.  Sadly, Senator Rubio’s proposal does no such thing. I am anxious for the day when we can eliminate undue burdens inflicted on lawful immigrants, but I will not flex or move so much as one inch on the legal liabilities of those who have already broken the laws of our country. More, before I will accept any movement on this, there must be a good faith enforcement of the laws of our nation, and a keeping of promises already made.

“The opponents of reform raise important points about not rewarding the violation of the law. I, too, have felt the frustration many feel that our nation’s generosity has been taken advantage of by some.”

Indeed.

“But policy-making is about solving problems. And to pick the right solution, you have to weigh the realistic alternatives. Deporting all illegal immigrants is not a practical solution. But ignoring the fact that they are here is just as bad.”

Are we to take from this that while the Senator finds those points raised by opponents to be important, he’s perfectly willing to dismiss them?  One needn’t talk dismissively of the idea of deporting all illegal aliens immediately and at once, but one must explain why a good faith effort isn’t being made to deport as many of them as reasonably possible.  I have tired of this dismissive approach to the issue as expressed here by Senator Rubio and some others, who derisively suggest that we cannot deport all of them.  The country that launched three men to the moon cannot deport people illegally in the country?  Preposterous!  The country that invented the Atom-Bomb cannot deport people who have come into the country illegally? Nonsense.   Nobody expects the US Government to flip a switch and instantaneously corral 11-20 million people, pushing them out of the country the next day, but if there are 11-20 million of them, it shouldn’t be too hard to find one-tenth of them.  This insulting line of dismissal is one of the reasons there is a distrust between the American people and their government on this issue, a distrust Senator Rubio laments, but herein promotes. Who has been ignoring the fact that they are here?  The American people are too well aware of the presence of millions of illegals, because while they allegedly hide in the shadows, they seem to fill our emergency rooms and our schools and our courtrooms.  Who is ignoring it?  The American people, or their government?

“For example, passing a law that only focuses on modernization and enforcement and leaves for another day the issue of those here illegally is not a good idea. Because as the enforcement measures kick in, millions of people living here illegally will be unable to work and provide for themselves and their families. The resulting humanitarian impact will then force us to scramble to address it. It is better to address it now as part of an orderly and measured process.”

Again, this expectation that we will force 11-20 million people to pack their bags in one day is preposterous.  Can we not begin with a somewhat less ambitious number and work our way up?  No, you see, the Senator is concerned first and foremost with the economic impact on the nation, and businesses that employ illegals may be hampered if they cannot continue.  Welfare workers would have less to do, and therefore justification for their jobs. Senator Rubio should not take such liberties in assuming that we are so desperately stupid and childish as to believe enforcement could come at once and immediately in complete perfection.

“The only solution I know that can work is to reform legal immigration in a way that is good for the economy, do everything we can to secure the border, and allow illegal immigrants to eventually earn permanent residency by passing background checks, paying a fine, learning English and waiting at the back of the line for at least 10 years, at the same time that border security and enforcement measures are put in place to prevent this problem from happening again.”

Again with the economy?  I have news for Senator Rubio: The economy is doing poorly already. The easiest improvement to the economy by virtue of our immigration policy is to be gained by deporting as many as we can, and preventing those here from making use of our welfare state.  That would address many issues, including our deficit and exploding national debt. The benefits to our economy and to our fiscal condition would be immediate.

“The bill I helped write is a good starting point, but it is not a take it or leave it proposition. I am open to any ideas others may have on how to do this, and I’ve been listening to the legitimate concerns people have raised with the expectation that we will be able to improve the bill as this debate continues.”

I am glad that Senator Rubio views this law as a proposal open to amendment and revision.  If he’s serious, he could scrap the 800-plus page bill and offer a simpler one, as an act of good faith on the part of the United States Government keeping its past promises to its citizens.  He can draft a resolution stating that before any easing of immigration requirements can commence, the current laws of the United States must be in full force for not less than five years, at which time the American people can re-evaluate the government’s efforts to earnestly enforce the law and secure our border.  In short, get back to us when you show you can enforce the current law, a law you claim is not even as stringent as your new proposal.  If the new law is so much tougher, it should be a simple matter indeed to merely enforce current law.

“We must do something to end today’s de facto amnesty, and conservative Republicans should lead on this issue. Because without conservatives at the table and in the fight, we are ceding this issue to President Obama and his allies in Congress. And as the last four years have proven, that is never a good idea.”

Senator Rubio should grasp that conservatives have no need or reason to come to a table to negotiate in good faith when past promises have been broken and previous laws ignored.  If the Senator is serious about his concerns regarding the prospective actions of President Obama, he should surely join in the open opposition to the President and his allies in Congress.  Perhaps rather than preach to conservatives as to how they must accept the “inevitable,” Senator Rubio could instead join with other senators in sufficient numbers to prevent its inevitability.  I recognize the fact that Senator Rubio has worked hard at pushing this legislation, but given what we’ve learned about the concrete legislative language in this bill, he should perhaps consider spending more time on the bill’s reformulation than on salesmanship.  Sufficiently addressing the former would certainly ease the chore that will be the latter.  It is on this basis that I oppose this bill, because if a serious proposal were brought forward that would address the concerns of conservatives, complying with their cherished principles without dismissively deriding them as unrealistic, conservatives might well go along.  Until then, I must respectfully disagree with the Senator’s bill. Simply put, it’s not good enough.

The Dishonesty of the Gang of Eight

Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013

Water Carrier?

Breitbart is carrying informative stories on the bogus “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” bill that is being pushed by the “Gang of Eight” senators.  I would urge readers to pay close attention to Breitbart.com for more news on the issue.  Byron York of the Examiner is also doing fantastic work exposing the gaping holes in this bill.  Breitbart’s William Bigelow has revealed another fatal flaw in the supposed reforms offered by the Rubio-Schumer/Gang-of-Eight bill that will leave a giant opening for the administration to do absolutely nothing in enforcing the allegedly strict measures contained in the new law.  As reported by the Byron York, via the Examiner.com, the feature of the bill described by Marco Rubio on Mark Levin’s show last week that would create a commission including the four border-state governors is nothing less than a sham.  There are no teeth to the provision, and no means by which to guarantee that provided there are recommendations by a commission of four governors, but also six bureaucrats selected by the President, any of these recommendations would see the light of day.  York explains:

“It sounded tough, intended to convince skeptical conservatives that reform would be based on stringent border security.  But as it turns out, the structure Gang sources described is simply not in the bill.”

York continues:

“In the legislation, the Commission would be formed if the Secretary of Homeland Security “certifies that the Department has not achieved effective control in all high-risk border sectors during any fiscal year beginning from the date that is five years after the enactment of this Act.” The Commission’s “primary responsibility,” according to the bill, “shall be making recommendations to the President, the Secretary, and Congress on policies to achieve and maintain the border security goal” of 100 percent surveillance and 90 percent apprehension.  The Commission will have six months to write a report “setting forth specific recommendations for policies for achieving and maintaining the border security goals [specified in the bill].”  That report shall contain, according to the bill, “recommendations for the personnel, infrastructure, technology, and other resources required to achieve and maintain [those goals].””

As if this isn’t bad enough, York then delivers what should be the final nail in the coffin of this horrible legislation:

“The bill requires that the head of the Government Accountability Office then review the report to determine whether the Commission’s recommendations are likely to work and what they will cost.  And then — the process stops.  “The Commission shall terminate 30 days after the date on which the report is submitted,” says the bill.

“There is nothing about the Commission going from “being an advisory panel to a policy-making one.”  The strict trigger that Gang sources advertised as being in the bill just isn’t there.

“As far as the “money set aside in escrow” for the Commission and its enforcement plan, the bill specifies that $2 billion “shall be made available” to the Secretary of Homeland Security “to carry out programs, projects, and activities recommended by the Commission.”  It is not clear whether there is any directive for the Secretary to actually do anything.”(emphasis added)

What this all means is that when Marco Rubio appeared on Mark Levin’s show on Wednesday of last week to explain the bill, he misled the audience and presumably the host. Levin asked tough questions despite being friendly with the Senator, but it seems that Senator Rubio “dissembled” a bit on some of the details.  The Daily Caller quotes Rubio from his appearance on Dr. Levin’s show:

“If, in five years, the plan has not reached 100 percent awareness and 90 percent apprehension, the Department of Homeland Security … will lose control of the issue and it will be turned over to the border governors to finish the job …. which is not a Washington commission, made up of congressmen or bureaucrats.  It’s largely led by the border state governors, who have a vested local interest in ensuring that that border is secure … and there’s money set aside in the bill for them to do it.” [Emphasis added]

You can listen to the audio of the segment here, from Mark Levin’s Audio Rewind:

Alternative content

Unfortunately, as the Daily Caller goes on to detail, this is a bit less than fully honest:

“True, the bill does create a $2B pot of money for the DHS to use to carry out the commission’s recommendations–but there’s nothing that compels the DHS to actually spend it on all of them, or any of them, let alone to actually achieve the “90 percent apprehension” goal.

“Nor, if the goal isn’t reached, does the bill delay the issuance of green cards to the already-legalized former illegals (as Rubio at one point seems to suggest to Levin).

“Oh, and the commission isn’t “made up of the governors” of the border states–they only control four of the 10 commission seats. The other six are “Washington” appointments (see pages 14-15)

“Aside from those things, everything Rubio said about the commission was true.”

Whether the statements of Senator Rubio were intentionally misleading, or whether he is simply being led around by the nose by staff or other senators on the plain language of the bill, what is deeply troubling is that by appearing on the Mark Levin Show, repeating falsehoods(whether or not he knew them to be falsehoods,) Senator Rubio has done much to contribute to the lack of ill will and distrust over this legislation.  Whatever other supposed virtues this legislation may have, it’s wrecked by the propaganda being spread in this instance by Senator Rubio.

As this goes on, Rubio’s own spokesman, Alex Conant, is on Twitter comparing immigrants, legal and illegal, to slaves, H/T Twitchy:

Alex Conant @AlexConant

@conncarroll We haven’t had a cohort of people living permanently in US without full rights of citizenship since slavery.

If this is the attitude of Rubio’s spokesman, one must wonder about the strategy being employed by Rubio. The claim that immigrant are akin to slaves is a ridiculous notion, and frankly, Rubio should fire Conant.  It leaves open the question as to whether Senator Rubio might endorse such notions, and while I doubt that to be the case, it won’t help the Senator’s cause. Likewise, it isn’t helpful when one sees a conservative senator going around arm-in-arm with Charles “Chuck-U” Schumer(D-NY,) one has every reason to believe that Rubio may have relied on the characterization of the bill provided by the likes of Schumer.  I wonder if Rubio isn’t being made a patsy, but then again, I’m not sure it matters because there is something disturbing about a purportedly “conservative” senator relying on the explanations of the legislation of anybody.  Why isn’t he reading the language?

Schumer has taken a slightly different approach, going on the offense and claiming that some would use the occasion of the Boston Marathon Bombing to stall or obstruct the Immigration Reform legislation.  I must say that given the disclosures about the actual provisions of the bill revealed over the last week, I sincerely hope some conservative senators will do precisely that.  It makes no sense to pretend that this ridiculous immigration bill will accomplish anything but to make our nation less secure, and the Boston bombing clearly exposes that for the average citizen. The dishonesty being employed by proponents of this legislation is very much like an Obama campaign, and that’s all the more despicable when you think that a rising star in the Republican party may have diminished himself into nothing more than a flash in the pan.  That’s a sad prospect, one that could be headed-off if these politicians would simply read the legislation they’re advocating.  Senator Rubio owes us an explanation for the incomprehensibly misleading statements made on Levin’s show, but one probably won’t be forthcoming.  Draw your own conclusions as to the reason(s).


Rubio Joins Forces With Norquist, CATO on Immigration Lie

Monday, April 22nd, 2013

Breitbart is reporting that a number of secret emails demonstrate that Senator Marco Rubio(R-FL)  is conspiring with Grover Norquist and the libertarian, pro-open-borders CATO Institute on messaging for the upcoming Immigration Reform bill.  Incredibly, they actually intend to use the Boston Marathon Bombers as an argument for the legislation, rather than as a condemnation of it. In this article, the talking points of Senator Rubio are outlined. From the article, H/T Breitbart:

The message contained three talking points from Sen. Rubio, the first of which argued that the immigration bill would prevent people like the Boston Marathon terrorists from getting into or staying in the country.

“These terrorists came here under the existing system, the one opponents of reform want to leave in place,” Sen. Rubio wrote in his first talking point.

The second Rubio talking point argued that the terrorists “didn’t cross the border” to get into America.

In his third talking point, Rubio argued that authorities only know who the terrorists are because they came here legally to begin with.

Let’s take these one at a time. These terrorists did indeed come here under the existing system, as the talking point asserts, but what the talking point leaves out is that the last four presidents’ administrations have done nothing but undermine the existing laws in a grotesque dereliction of their duties to uphold the law.

Rubio would argue that the terrorists “didn’t cross the border.” What he’s suggesting here is that they were in the country legally, but as a matter of fact, anybody who enters the US is crossing the border, whether they do it legally or illegally.  If our immigration laws had been enforced, they might well still have made legal entry, but after the domestic violence conviction, the elder Tamerlan Tsarnaev would have been deported at the very least.  Rubio’s twisted attempt to dismiss these facts by dishonestly characterizing the problem with the bombers actually exposes the fatal flaws in his proposed legislation: One would have to believe that this president (or any other) would actually act in earnest execution of that office to deport criminals.  We have more than two decades of evidence that this would not happen.

Rubio’s last argument is the most preposterous of all.  He implies that by legalizing various people, we would know “who they are” but the fact is that we knew who the two Boston bombers were and it did nothing to prevent their criminal, terroristic acts.  He pretends that  “knowing who they are” would have improved things, but the salient truth is that because we were not tracking or monitoring them as immigrants, we didn’t know who they were with respect to these bombings and other crimes until they were identified by virtue of footage at the scene of their crimes.  It is an embarrassing attempt to deflect criticism of the immigration bill, in part because  all he offers is excuses for how the new proposal would improve security despite all the evidence that makes it plain his proposition is fanciful at best.

It’s not uncommon for Charles “Chuck-U” Schumer(D-NY) to lie to the American people, and to attempt to push bad law on the basis of worse arguments, but to see Senator Rubio joining in this tactic is disappointing to say the least.  If Senator Rubio had any sense, he’d flee from this as quick as quick can, but it seems as though he’s been captured rather quickly by the Washington DC establishment that rules against the will of the American people.

The  plain fact is that the terrorist bombings in Boston should act as a natural brake on this immigration reform bill, but once again, it’s easier to lie to the American people and push ahead with a law they are bound and determined to shove down our throats.  I’m sick of it.  I’m sick of the betrayals.  I’m sick of finding that alleged “Tea Party Senators” are nothing of the kind when it comes to the issues.   Where is Senator Rubio’s jobs bill?  Where is his budget-cutting proposal?  Did he have secret emails with Norquist and CATO over those issues?  Hell no.  No,  instead, he conspires with the likes of Lindsey Graham(anti-Republican, SC) and Chuck-U Schumer(Communist-NY) to give us a “bipartisan bill” that is really an example of one-party rule.  It’s the Party of Washington DC, and they generally win, while the American people lose and get stuck with the bill…and the bombings…and the bodies.

 

The Shameful Statement of Senators McRINO and Grahamnesty

Saturday, April 20th, 2013

It should be incomprehensible that politicians who have helped to create our immigration woes would seize on the opportunity of the Boston attack to pimp their latest bad idea, but that’s precisely what happened on Friday night. Worried that some Americans might catch on to the fact that the bombers in the Boston Marathon case were immigrants legally in this country, and fearing that these inevitable disclosures would damage their efforts at making immigration even easier, Senators John McCain(anti-Republican, AZ) and Lindsey Graham(anti-Republican, SC) made the case that the case for pending legislation on “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” was now more important than ever.  Suspect number two wasn’t yet in custody when the RINO twins issued a joint bit of dishonest propaganda:

In the wake of this week’s terrorist attack in Boston, some have already suggested that the circumstances of this terrible tragedy are justification for delaying or stopping entirely the effort for comprehensive immigration reform.

In fact the opposite is true: Immigration reform will strengthen our nation’s security by helping us identify exactly who has entered our country and who has left – a basic function of government that our broken immigration system is incapable of accomplishing today. The status quo is unacceptable.

We have 11 million people living in the shadows, which leaves this nation vulnerable to a myriad of threats. That is all the more reason why comprehensive immigration reform is so essential.

By modernizing our system of legal immigration, identifying and conducting background checks on people here illegally, and finally securing our border, we will make America more secure.

Senators McRINO and Grahamnesty should be ashamed, but since they’re opportunists who don’t give a damn about the American people, they’ve instead made what must be regarded as a maniacally pompous statement aimed at pushing their “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” agenda forward despite  all the facts that make plain the absurdities of their ideas.

These two bombers weren’t “living in the shadows.”  They were right there, in the open, and at least one of them had a previous conviction for domestic violence.  Why was he still in the country?  Are we to believe the preposterous assertion that the elder Tsarnaev brother would have been deported under CIR?  No way.  Their mother is a convicted thief, and she still resides in the United States.  Why?

The immigration reform legislation being pushed by these two sell-outs won’t do a thing to lessen the problem, but instead threatens to  worsen the problem.  The two senators allege that we have 11 million people “living in the shadows,” but has either considered that some significant proportion of them would just as soon remain in the murky darkness on the fringes of our society?  To pretend that every immigrant is just a hard-working American-in-waiting is a preposterous absurdity.  The evidence tells a different story, and the fact is that among the 11-20 million illegal aliens now in the United States, there is a significant number who are evading justice in their home country, or who have already committed serious crimes in this country.

Given his service record, many are willing to give Senator McCain a pass, but I think that service record means he should be more cognizant than his colleagues in the Senate regarding the security interests of the American people.  Instead, he and his sidekick from South Carolina are waging an immoral war against the American people, siding with the likes of Barack Obama who will preside over any law these two push through the Senate.  Our current president refuses to enforce the immigration laws as exist right now, but we’re to believe that he will magically change his mind should the Comprehensive Immigration Reform proposals of these two senators be enacted? It’s preposterous on its face.

I am more than a little fatigued with Washington DC establishment politicians urinating on our heads while telling us it’s merely raining.  Senators McCain and Graham should be ashamed of this, but the fact is that they have no discernible shame, otherwise they would retire and make way for candidates who are willing to fight against Obama’s agenda, rather than propping it up and supporting it.  The American people express what should be a simple demand: Secure the border first. Deport illegals and resident aliens who commit crimes, even minor ones, because these should serve as warnings about worse things to come.  Instead, these two Senators are more concerned with pushing an agenda that is distinctly un-American than with protecting the American people.  They don’t deserve the title “Senator.”

In the wake of this bombing, what is clear is that the war against America is being waged by radicals from all over the world, and it goes on apace, while the war against Americans being waged by Washington insiders like McCain and Graham continues despite all evidence against their shoddy proposals.  Rather than expressing their concerns for the people whose lives were wrecked or destroyed in Boston this week, these two Senators were more interested in seeing to it that their pet legislation would not be derailed.  Senator McCain wants to disarm you, as demonstrated by his vote on the failed gun bill.  Now he wants to invite in more people, and legalize some who are already here, some of whom may be out to kill you.  Do the math.  “Despicable” and “shameful” are the only words that cross my mind when I think of these two senators, and particularly Senator McCain, whose service to the nation ought to have meant that he could be trusted to know better.

Sadly, he doesn’t.

Obama’s Leak of Immigration Plan an Endorsement of Rubio’s

Tuesday, February 19th, 2013

Conservatives should not be swayed by theatrics. whether they are born in the bowels of a Rove operation, or inside the Obama administration.  Open collusion with Republicans on “comprehensive immigration reform” isn’t necessary, and in fact, it’s not desirable.  Obama understands that to get Sen. Marco Rubio’s proposal through the Senate, and also the House, it will be a matter of positioning.  It’s not as though the two proposals are substantially different, but that conservatives around the country will be treated to the few ways in which they are dissimilar as the critical differences that have caused Senator Rubio to come out and call the President’s leaked proposal “dead on arrival.”  If you ever fall for the belief that there’s no bipartisanship in Washington DC, think again, because the two parties are quite capable of coordinating, not for the good of the American people, but strictly against them.

According to Charles Krauthammer, the only substantive difference between the proposals is when the alleged “enforcement” provisions kick in, but the truth is that enforcement will never arrive if either is enacted.  You’re being set up, and that’s all there really is to that.  These proposals are simple reiterations of the Simpson-Mazzoli Act of 1986, when Ronald Reagan was deceived by pro-amnesty sorts in his own party.  Just as with that Act, either of these two proposals will provide for a virtual Day One legalization of illegals already in the US.  It’s made cosmetically more acceptable by pretending the legalization consists of two steps, but the fact remains that a legal status to remain in the country is conferred on the first day.  There will be no enforcement of any law against the scoff-laws already in the country, with only a legislative head-fake in that direction.

If conservatives were fully aware of the details of Senator Rubio’s bill, they would flee from him as though from a leper colony, but the whole point of the Obama administration’s leak of their own plan is to present one against which conservatives can rally, so that Rubio’s will be seen as the more conservative bill.  It’s funny to hear news analysts contend that Obama getting into the middle of this is a mistake because he’s such a polarizing figure, and that his involvement will poison the well of “good faith efforts” being made by Rubio and others.  That too is a misdirection, and a false narrative you’re supposed to swallow, hook, line and sinker.  If either of these plans makes it through, Washington DC and the Democrats win, as well as a handful of GOP establishment types.

You see, the thinking in Washington DC goes that anytime they wish to put something over on us, they must make a big show of the fight between them, so that we’re tricked into believing every one involved made their best efforts, and that whatever the result, somebody was fighting the good fight on our behalf.  Nonsense!  In fact, in Washington DC, the only thing that happens to the benefit of your best interests is when the Congress goes out on recess, and the President takes off for some foreign destination, because these are the only times they may not be acting from a legal footing to harm you.

Senator Rubio’s proposal is a sham and a lie because of the provisions that create an amnesty, but they intend to give us a good show and stuff it down our throats.  If Rubio’s plan passes rhe Senate and the House, going on to be signed into law by the President, you can bet he will happily sign it.  Much like the maneuvering over the debt ceiling in 2011, the deal has been done for some time, and all that remains is to put it over on you in such a way as to prevent conservatives from discovering that they have been had.  Be prepared for some last-minute wrangling that will lead to the ultimate bait-and-switch in which Obama’s plan winds up being the one to go forward, though in real terms, it makes damnably little difference.

Obama’s slightly more radical plan is intended to make Rubio’s plan more palatable.  There will be much apparent gnashing of teeth, as Republicans attack the President’s proposal, but in the end, they will be duped into supporting Rubio’s bill as the lesser among evils.  If you think that’s a stretch, ask yourself how many times the opaque Obama administration has ever leaked anything to its actual detriment.  How frequently does the media report on leaks detrimental to the Obama administration’s agenda?  Isn’t it stunning that the typically flat-footed Republicans had in place a ready response in the person of their State of the Union responder whose big issue is currently “comprehensive immigration reform?”

If we are to believe these are coincidences, and that Marco Rubio wasn’t waiting for the leaked story he knew would come, I think we may have problems with what might be termed “excess gullibility.”  In short, we’d need to be suckers.  Just as with the debt ceiling, and the deficit, it’s understood in Washington DC that the Republicans alone cannot pass the bill, so that in order to get something in front of the President, a piece of legislation will need bipartisan support in both Houses of Congress.  Washington DC intends to win this round, and they’ll play upon the partisan reflexes of the grass roots, when the truth of the matter is that both plans are abominable.  Conservatives should begin assailing both plans now, focusing their efforts on House members as well as Senators.  The real fight will be in the House, if there’s to be a fight at all, and only the House stands even a slim chance of stopping this.  They’re doing it to us again, but this time, we have no excuses to pretend we hadn’t seen it coming.

 

Kennedy and Roberts Join Jihad on States’ Sovereignty

Wednesday, June 27th, 2012

The Last Sane Men?

Reading through the tortured legal arguments of the majority of the Supreme Court, in the case of Arizona v. United States, it’s clear to me that the court is now stacked to a majority with dullards.  This ruling is unconscionable, and makes no constitutional sense whatever.  This is the inevitable result of our cultural rejection of the rule of law.  The absolutely dictatorial claim of prosecutorial discretion on the part of the Obama administration in enforcing the immigration laws of the United States is just the beginning.  Now enters a Supreme Court to weigh in on the issue in such a manner as to confound the will of the people, subvert the rule of law, and turn aside long standing precedents, or to misapply them in a manner that defies all logic.  With this as our backdrop, we must wonder why we bother with a constitution at all.

Among the eight justices ruling(Kagan having recused from the case due to her participation in it while serving as  Solicitor General,) only three seemed to have even the vaguest idea what is at stake in the case, or to bear in mind any context of what our constitution actually provides.  If it were not for the minority opinion of Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joining him in dissent, there would be no indication whatever that this had been the ruling of an American court.  If this is any indication of the nature of our court as currently comprised, I suggest we get rid of the lot, keeping the three dissenters in this ruling, but otherwise starting from scratch.

Anthony Kennedy has always been a quirky, flaky, and vacuous, but to see Chief Justice John Roberts rule in a fashion befitting a leftist ideologue is incomprehensible, and signifies the worst decision since the abomination that was the Kelo decision. Ruth Bader-Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor are incompetent leftist hacks, and they ruled precisely as one would expect.  At stake in the case had been whether the State of Arizona could act to enforce federal immigration law, even when the Federal Government fails in that duty, or determines not to do its duty.  Apparently, according to these five justices, there is no distinction among the fifty states, and there is no sovereignty among them.  According to these five justices, the individual states are merely servants of the Federal Government, whomever may run it at any particular time.  Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinion nails every issue, and we should take a moment to consider what it is that Scalia has said.  His arguments are clear-headed and succinct, if lengthy and thoroughly considered.  You can read the decision in its entirety here.  Scalia’s opinion begins on page 30 of the PDF.

He begins this way:

The United States is an indivisible “Union of sovereign States.” Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch Co., 304 U. S. 92, 104 (1938). Today’s opinion, approving virtually all of the Ninth Circuit’s injunction against enforcement of the four challenged provisions of Arizona’s law, deprives States of what most would consider the defining characteristic of sovereignty: the power to exclude from the sovereign’s territory people who have no right to be there. Neither the Constitution itself nor even any law passed by Congress supports this result. I dissent.

There is no way around this basic issue Scalia raises, and yet five of his colleagues on the court seem to have been oblivious to reason.

As a sovereign, Arizona has the inherent power to exclude persons from its territory, subject only to those limitations expressed in the Constitution or constitutionally imposed by Congress. That power to exclude has long been recognized as inherent in sovereignty. Emer de Vattel’s seminal 1758 treatise on the Law of Nations stated: “The sovereign may forbid the entrance of his territory either to foreigners in general, or in particular cases,or to certain persons, or for certain particular purposes, according as he may think it advantageous to the state. There is nothing in all this, that does not flow from the rights of domain and sovereignty: every one is obliged to pay respect to the prohibition; and whoever dares violate it, incurs the penalty decreed to render it effectual.” The Law of Nations, bk. II, ch. VII, §94, p. 309 (B. Kapossy & R. Whatmore eds. 2008).

Here, Scalia points back to the philosophical principles under-girding not only immigration law, but indeed all law insofar as it is to be implemented and enforced by a sovereign.  Here, a sovereign is defined, and it is clear that Scalia recognizes the assault on the very concept underlying the majority opinion.  He immediately delved into the constitutional justifications for siding with the Arizona statute, and he pointed out the distinctions one must consider in ruling on such a matter.  Clearly, Scalia lives and breathes the Constitution, while the majority in this opinion are shallow, tinkering fools.  As usual, Scalia offers tremendous logic to the matter, explaining that the Federal jurisdiction over the matter does not exclude the States’ jurisdiction, except perhaps in such case as there is a conflict between the two. Fortunately, as Scalia notes, there is no conflict between the Federal statute and the Arizona statute:

In light of the predominance of federal immigration restrictions in modern times, it is easy to lose sight of the States’ traditional role in regulating immigration — and to overlook their sovereign prerogative to do so. I accept as a given that State regulation is excluded by the Constitution when (1) it has been prohibited by a valid federal law, or (2) it conflicts with federal regulation—when, for example, it admits those whom federal regulation would exclude, or excludes those whom federal regulation would admit.

Possibility (1) need not be considered here: there is no federal law prohibiting the States’ sovereign power to exclude (assuming federal authority to enact such a law). The mere existence of federal action in the immigration area—and the so-called field preemption arising from that action, upon which the Court’s opinion so heavily relies, ante, at 9–11—cannot be regarded as such a prohibition. We are not talking here about a federal law prohibiting the States from regulating bubble-gum advertising, or even the construction of nuclear plants. We are talking about a federal law going to the core of state sovereignty: the power to exclude. Like elimination of the States’ other inherent sovereign power, immunity from suit, elimination of the States’ sovereign power to exclude requires that “Congress . . . unequivocally expres[s] its intent to abrogate,” Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Florida, 517 U. S. 44, 55 (1996) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).Implicit “field preemption” will not do.

Scalia makes it plain that Arizona also should have the right to make their law more restrictive in certain respects:

But that is not the most important point. The most important point is that, as we have discussed, Arizona is entitled to have “its own immigration policy”—including a more rigorous enforcement policy—so long as that does not conflict with federal law. The Court says, as though the point is utterly dispositive, that “it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States,” ante, at 15. It is not a federal crime, to be sure. But there is no reason Arizona cannot make it a state crime for a removable alien (or any illegal alien, for that matter) to remain present in Arizona.

Perhaps the most scathing portion of his dissent arrives in this paragraph:

Of course on this pre-enforcement record there is no reason to assume that Arizona officials will ignore federal immigration policy (unless it be the questionable policy of not wanting to identify illegal aliens who have committed offenses that make them removable). As Arizona points out, federal law expressly provides that state officers may “cooperate with the Attorney General in the identification, apprehension, detention, or removal of aliens not lawfully present in the United States,” 8 U. S. C. §1357(g)(10)(B);and “cooperation” requires neither identical efforts nor prior federal approval. It is consistent with the Arizona statute, and with the “cooperat[ive]” system that Congress has created, for state officials to arrest a removable alien, contact federal immigration authorities, and follow their lead on what to do next. And it is an assault on logic to say that identifying a removable alien and holding him for federal determination of whether he should be removed “violates the principle that the removal process is entrusted to the discretion of the Federal Government,” ante, at 18. The State’s detention does not represent commencement of the removal process unless the Federal Government makes it so.(emphasis added)

This should serve as a rebuke to the other justices, if any of them gave a damn, but it’s clear that Chief Justice Roberts isn’t interested in logic.  Has he too become a DC  cocktail party gadfly, or has he simply slipped a mental gear?  Is he seeking favor with the “in” crowd?  I’ve lost all hope that Justice Kennedy will ever be a philosophically consistent jurist, and in fact, I don’t believe he observes any particular philosophy apart from whatever may suit him at the moment, but I hadn’t expected the Chief Justice Roberts would ever join that crowd.

It’s clear to me that a narrow third of the court fully understands the implications of the questions of State sovereignty, and the divisions of power constructed within our federal system.  Justice Scalia properly frames this as a matter of Arizona’s sovereign power, and rightly calls into question the woeful lack of observance of that characteristic by the ruling majority in this case.  He also recognizes it might be proper for Arizona to repeatedly detain and arrest people who have not been given appropriate privilege to remain in the United States, and punish them accordingly:

The Court raises concerns about “unnecessary harassment of some aliens . . . whom federal officials determine should not be removed.” Ante, at 17. But we have no license to assume, without any support in the record, that  Arizona officials would use their arrest authority under §6 to harass anyone. And it makes no difference that federal officials might “determine [that some unlawfully present aliens] should not be removed,” ibid. They may well determine not to remove from the United States aliens who have no right to be here; but unless and until these aliens have been given the right to remain, Arizona is entitled to arrest them and at least bring them to federal officials’ attention, which is all that §6 necessarily entails. (In my view, the State can go further than this, and punish them for their unlawful entry and presence in Arizona.)

This should have been the majority opinion, and it punctuates the reasons why I have no confidence in Mitt Romney, should he become president.  There is little doubt that he will continue the work of his predecessors in appointing justices who will further undermine individual liberty and States’ sovereignty.  The majority opinion that will now hold forth as precedent is an act of nearly criminal absurdity.  If only we could clone Justices Scalia, Alito, and Thomas, we might have a chance to save the Republic, but it seems instead that the only thing to be duplicated in Washington is grotesque Federal government operating in absolute disregard and open contempt of the Constitution, a founding document that now seems on the verge of irrelevance.  If the best we can manage is a Supreme Court that will not stand in firm majority for the founding principles on which our constitution rests, what good is it anyway?  This cannot end well.  When you combine the effects of the ruling in this case with the Obama administration actions on immigration policy, it’s clear that we will not maintain our country much longer.  Thank Chief Justice Roberts and associate Justice Kennedy.  These are two who ought to have known better, as Justice Scalia’s dissent should make clear.

Obama Phones to Illegals

Saturday, February 4th, 2012

The Western Center for Journalism is reporting that the so-called “Safety Link” program, known widely as the “Obama Phone,” that provides a phone and some number of free minutes to those on various “safety net” programs is now also providing them to illegal aliens in what is clearly a move to buy votes. This is the reason for Obama’s whole “Dream Act via executive order” that is intended to revisit the pending deportation cases of more than three-hundred-thousand illegals now in process.  This is a sickening abuse of our tax-payer dollars for what is clearly a partisan political goal, and it should be stopped, but it seems that the only way it will be discontinued is if this president is ushered out of office in January 2013.

From the article:

“A source contacted me saying she translated Latino publications, and they are urging Hispanic illegals to be sure to get their work permits, so they can get drivers’ licenses, so they can register to vote. In the Chicago way, are we seeing the Obama campaign begin now to pad their Democrat voter lists by providing illegals incentives to vote for Obama by paving the way to sidestep those onerous voter ID rules about 35 states have enacted?”

I would encourage you to see the rest of the article, as it is an eye-opening bit of serious journalism that reveals how far down the rabbit-hole we’ve already traveled.  Obama is going to use every device of tyranny to overthrow the coming election, and if he has to employ illegal immigrants to do so, he will.  He’s taking no chances, and if we ever manage to get him out of there, and restore our constitutional system of government, this guy and his henchmen need to face charges.  It’s well beyond dereliction of duty at this point.