On Illegal immigrants live on edge of society, fearing deportation

Posted on February 20 at 4:14 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Thanks for the update on Normy...even the day of the vote, he seemed the type to put that day's expediency ahead of the long-term betterment of the country...i.e. voting to look tougher on immigration that day, and now carrying on with an organization supporting amnesty and kowtowing to all immigration.

Normy dovetails nicely with the voter ID issue currently making so many folks mad...since he can claim to be an officeholder who actually lost due to fraudulent votes cast by felons. Sadly, current voter ID measures don't do enough to have prevented most of those votes, but one can dream, someday, of a voter roll closed 20-30 days before an election, with checks and double-checks installed to make sure each vote is from a real person, alive, residing where they say they are, eligible to vote, and a U.S. citizen. Wow...wouldn't that be nice?

On Hispanic series intended to promote understanding

Posted on February 20 at 11:49 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

And Sarah, this, from NumbersUSA.com's Chris Chmielenski (my CAPS added):

"A recent Politico story reveals how the 2012 Obama re-election team plans to use immigration as a wedge issue during next year’s presidential campaign. According to the article, the team is using results from a June Gallup poll that shows that the majority of Americans support a pathway to citizenship for the nation’s 11-18 million illegal aliens. But the re-election team is ignoring a major flaw in the poll question.

Here’s the quote from Pres. Obama’s re-election team as printed in the Politico piece:

'The Republican field has become increasingly out of step on immigration. While 64% of Americans believe the U.S. should allow undocumented immigrants to become citizens under certain conditions, the leading Republican candidates oppose a path to citizenship for immigrants [Gallup 6/12/11]. And a majority of Americans have consistently supported the DREAM Act, which the Republican candidates universally oppose at the federal level.'

The Gallup poll referenced by the campaign does show that 64% of Americans favor a pathway to citizenship for the 11-18 million illegal aliens living in the United States. BUT the poll ONLY presented respondents with a choice between mass deportations or a pathway to citizenship. As Roy pointed out during his interview on MSNBC this past weekend, NumbersUSA doesn’t support a policy of mass deportations.

The Obama re-election team should consider a poll conducted by Zogby in late-2009. They asked 42,026 adults (compared to the 1,020 adults surveyed by Gallup) to choose between a policy that included a pathway to citizenship or enforcing existing laws causing illegal aliens to return home over a period of time (ATTRITION THROUGH ENFORCEMENT). SIXTY-ONE percent of Americans chose the attrition through enforcement policy over a pathway to citizenship (26%).

In fact, the most significant piece of immigration legislation currently making its way through Congress – Chairman Smith’s Legal Workforce Act (H.R.2885) – is an attrition through enforcement approach. Gallup’s failure to offer poll respondents attrition through enforcement as an option is like asking them to choose between President Obama and Mickey Mouse in next year’s election. It simply doesn’t present all the different policy options, and instead presents as an alternative option and unlikely solution."

Still think Obama's "tough" on illegal immigration?

On Hispanic series intended to promote understanding

Posted on February 20 at 11:40 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

Not to mention the fact that both illegal invasion and legal immigration both conflict with a "greener" country so many liberal/progressives claim to want, to wit, this from Dave Gorak:

"The president has talked a lot since taking office about creating new energy guidelines, and the White House paid the usual lip service to Earth Day. But I’m wondering: How does this president square his energy and environmental concerns with his apparent willingness to continue fueling our population growth with a reckless immigration policy that benefits only vote-hungry politicians and companies fearful of losing their abundant supply of cheap foreign labor?

In other words, when those charged with establishing these “needed” energy guidelines that would include reducing greenhouse gases finally sit down and begin their calculations, will they take into account the Census Bureau’s population projections for 2100? Whichever Census projection one chooses to believe - 600 million or 1 billion – I’m thinking: Good luck!

Look at it this way: If for years it’s been nearly impossible to convince the American people that they must reduce what today is commonly known as their “carbon footprint,” just how much success will the federal government have in convincing millions more immigrants, especially those from impoverished countries, that they’re going to have to scale back their search for a better life? Will, for example, the government have to place limits on the number of children per household? Outlaw new homes exceeding a set number of square feet? And (gasp!) allow no more than two cars per family? How will all this work if the Congress refuses to deal with the central question?

Unless we get serious about cutting back legal immigration levels and removing all incentives for illegal immigration, then I think the gloomy forecast offered by George F. Kennan in his 1994 book “Around the Cragged Hill” will come to pass:

'It is obviously easier, for the short run, to draw cheap labor from adjacent pools of poverty…than to find it among one’s own people. And to the billions of such prospective immigrants from poverty to prosperity, there is, rightly or wrongly, no place that looks more attractive than the United States. Given its head, and subject to no restrictions, this pressure will find its termination only when the levels of overpopulation and poverty in the United States are equal to those of the countries from which these people are now so anxious to escape.' "

(DAVE GORAK is a retired career journalist and has been executive director of the Midwest Coalition to Reduce Immigration since 2001.)

On Hispanic series intended to promote understanding

Posted on February 20 at 11:34 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

Sarah, you are sadly mistaken if you think the Obama administration has not been rigging immigration enforcement to perpetuate MORE illegals remaining here, knowing they'll continue to change the electorate down the road as we continue to misinterpret the 14th Amendment and wave the magic citizenship wand over anyone lucky enough to pop out on our land, water, or in our airspace.

Their cute little "audits" were very laudable on their face, combing through the documents employers keep on file with their I-9's, and then telling the employer whose stuff didn't make the grade...leading to firings.

BUT THEY DIDN'T ARREST A SINGLE ONE!!!...as the Bush administration had at least done after their own attempt at amnesties from 2005-07 were turned back by us patriots!

So the illegal invaders could simply shuffle down the street to another illegal job.

Not to mention the Obama administration's latest pronouncement that prosecutors in deportation cases are to now use a "litmus" test of whether the person has relatives here, has served in military, or is relatively felony-free, and then use "discretion" in prosecuting these cases. TRANSLATION: Don't deport anyone who's not an axe-murderer! Internally, immigration enforcement agents and prosecutors have confirmed that this was more than just "advisement;" it was arm-twisting to allow more illegals to stay put.

On Hispanic series intended to promote understanding

Posted on February 20 at 11:22 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

Supply and demand, people. Take away the supply of cheap, illegal labor, and even the supply of cheap high-tech labor that is allowed in "legally" whenever Bill Gates testifies to Congress he needs more foreign computer engineers, and the demand for all positions previously held by foreigners will go up, thereby increasing wages, salaries, benefits, and conditions in those jobs. Will you pay more for a computer or a head of lettuce?...yes. Will any company price itself out of you eventually buying it?...no.

Go to NumbersUSA.com for the best education on what we face in America today as a country that's already the most generous on the face of the earth with helping other countries and taking in more immigrants than anyone else...and how it STILL will never solve the world's problems and will only ruin what was, and still basically is, a great country.

On Student learns about her roots during semester in Mexico

Posted on February 20 at 10:54 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

Reposted:

For a great video explaining the math behind NumbersUSA...just google "immigration gumballs" and you'll find at least two versions...the original, which has to do with how many we allow into the U.S.A. and the unsustainability of that path...and the other, newer version, which focuses on how America, already the most generous immigration country in the whole world, could do even MORE and still not make the slightest dent in the poverty and ruination in so many areas of the world...point being that our generosity is already way above sustainability, but even becoming more unsustainable wouldn't make a whit of difference worldwide...so it's not selfish to want us to go back to manageable levels and true enforcement!

On Student learns about her roots during semester in Mexico

Posted on February 20 at 10:53 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

Reposted:

Please go to NumbersUSA.com for lots of education on these matters, both illegal and legal. They are the foremost organization that advocates for taking our immigration levels back down to sustainable levels, and closing the door to illegals until they go through the legalities. They do not advocate immigrant-bashing, just simple math: our current immigration policies and the lack of their enforcement assumes infinite resources in this country; basic math shows that is not the case. NumbersUSA.com allows free membership, and anytime votes come up in government that can help turn the tide, you are alerted to call and fax for FREE to your representatives, Senators, and various movers and shakers...all FREE to make your voice heard loud and clear! NumbersUSA members turned the tide in the last amnesty vote, during the summer of 2007, when the Bush administration and that old warhorse Teddy were trying again for amnesty for all the illegal invaders...NumbersUSA members actually MELTED DOWN the Senate phone system the morning of the vote, prompting many Senators who were going to vote for amnesty to reconsider and change their vote. Norm Coleman of Minnesota was one of these at the time...changing his final vote after having supported amnesty all along up to that morning. You can make a difference and we CAN take this country back to sustainability of government and resources!

On Student learns about her roots during semester in Mexico

Posted on February 20 at 10:53 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

Reposted:

....And don't even get me started on what a joke our "legal" immigration system is...so absurd it even allows a visa lottery, where we just hand out 50,000 magic tickets to America to random applicants, many of whom apply under 3 or more variations of their name to increase their chances. Where we allow F-1 student visas for foreign students to take valuable college spots away from our own students, and find ourselves now at the HIGHEST level EVER of these F-1's invading our colleges, and all this during a recession? Where we extend F-1's from 12 months to 29 months and beyond now, so instead of doing two semesters and a summer and going back to their country, they now can put down roots, have "citizen" babies, and take valuable H-1B visas to work good jobs and thereby take valuable internships and good jobs right out of the hands of our own graduates? Where we let folks into the U.S.A. on tourist, cultural, student, work, and other visas, only to have no system in place to track whether they actually LEFT WHEN THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO or not? And, where our very own government watches 3 million jobs get lost in the first year of the recent downturn, but still hands out over ONE MILLION GREEN CARDS during the same period (!!!!), putting our jobless into direct competition with them, and putting our aid-seekers in direct competition with their own pleas for help and money?

Is our policy and enforcement serving our national interest?

I think not.

On Student learns about her roots during semester in Mexico

Posted on February 20 at 10:52 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

Reposted:

The combination of Johnson's Great Society and Teddy Kennedy's overhaul of immigration law in 1965 will forever be viewed by historians as the beginning of the end for the American self-sufficiency and freedom ideals. The generations of dependency and permanent underclass created by too many goodies from the government, and too many incentives for poor choices, along with too many penalties for good choices (paying for all the poor choosers), all sprang from Johnson's reworking of the New Deal into the Great Society, with the underlying idea that government should take responsibility for OUTCOMES, over and above just insuring equal OPPORTUNITY. We see where a half-century of that has brought us. Kennedy's reworking of immigration law in '65 really opened the floodgates to making America's melting pot ideal lose the heat it needed to melt all together, as it had before. It upset the idea of immigrants proving they could support themselves before coming here, it started the chain migration assumption where as soon as one person gets a foothold here, they could start waiving in family members right and left, and it put the burden on America to have to have a reason to say "No" to an immigrant rather then make the immigrant give us a reason to say "Yes."

These two forces have taken America to where it is now, fractured and suffering from loss of unity in our most basic principles, with a half-century of momentum built up for the misguided idea that America and its previously principled hegemony can absorb all who arrive, can wave the magic wand of citizenship over anyone who happened to pop out of their mom on our land, water, or airspace, and can provide all baseline requirements of life to all who need them, ask for them, or cheat to get them.

The results are clear in what has become of our country at this point.

Throw in the illegal alien amnesty of 1986 (again at the urging of Teddy Kennedy), the rise of "political correctness" and identity politics as bankable entities that provided a comfortable living to the entire "diversity" apparatus, the rise of the courts as a "first resort," and the rise of the culture of "taking offense," and we have a slide into the absurdity of today's American society and culture.

Barbara Jordan, the eminent black stateswoman who sat on the Clinton administration's immigration task force, said it best:

“It is both a right and a responsibility of a democratic society to manage immigration so that it serves the national interest.”

Has our policy and enforcement of that policy done so?

I think not.

On Student learns about her roots during semester in Mexico

Posted on February 20 at 10:51 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

Reposted:

By definition, illegal "immigration" is NOT immigration...it's an invasion. Immigrants, by definition, are people who plan permanent settlement under legal guidelines and carry through will all responsibilities in order to later receive "rights." Illegal invaders are not adhering to any definition of "immigration," so I wish we would all stop using the term "immigration" in association with illegal invaders.