COLLECTIVE MADNESS


“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."
Showing posts with label amnesty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label amnesty. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

The Politicians are Crafting Your Future. Let's Craft Theirs.



"We've got to convince the American people that this bill is the best way to enforce our border," Bush said. "The status quo is unacceptable."



You know this is a cynical trick. Let them prove to us they are going to enforce existing laws. They need to do that first. The Congress cannot enforce laws. They make them. There is one man responsible and sworn to enforce US law. That is President Bush. If he cannot do it he should resign. If he refuses to enforce the law and does not resign, then he needs to be impeached and removed from office.

Senators work to revive immigration bill

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS Associated Press Writer
© 2007 The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Key Republican and Democratic senators are reaching for a deal to resurrect their stalled immigration compromise by requiring that some $4 billion be spent on border security and workplace enforcement.

The mandatory security funding is part of a plan to attract more Republican support for the measure, which grants legal status to millions of unlawful immigrants.

In private meetings Wednesday, the bipartisan group that crafted the delicate compromise was hammering out a plan to allow votes on a limited set of Republican- and Democratic-sought changes in exchange for a commitment from GOP holdouts that they will back moving ahead with the bill.

Republican architects of the measure, which grants legal status to millions of unlawful immigrants, expressed confidence that such an agreement was possible as early as Thursday.

"The list is there," said Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., adding that GOP senators were ready to present their plan to Senate leaders.

With the tentative package, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid "should have what he needs to move forward," said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. "This is just to let him know that it can be done."

Reid has said he would revive the measure if at least 20 more Republicans commit to moving ahead with the broad immigration bill. It stalled last week when only seven GOP senators supported a Democratic bid to limit debate and expedite a final vote.

Reid expressed optimism that negotiators would strike a deal that could pave the way.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, the lead Democratic negotiator, said he supported the bid to provide mandatory funding for border security and enforcement.

"You give the assurance that when this is signed, that there are going to be the resources to do the kind of security protections that are in this legislation," Kennedy said.

Under the proposal by Kyl and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., border security and workplace enforcement would be funded up front, and eventually covered by the fines and fees set out in the broader immigration bill.

"Everybody's trying to prove that they are willing and able to enforce the law this time, unlike 1986," Kyl said, referring to the last major immigration overhaul, which established a one-year amnesty program for illegal immigrants who had been in the U.S. at least four years.

"What better way to demonstrate that other than to say, 'We're not going to let congressional appropriations dictate this — we are going to put the money up front,'" Kyl said.

As part of the tentative deal, the Senate would vote on a proposal by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, to require all illegal immigrant household heads to return to their countries of origin before obtaining legal status, Graham said. Under the legislation, only those seeking green cards — permanent legal residency — would be required to return home first.

Negotiators spent hours Wednesday huddled in meetings or on the phone. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who with Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez helped craft the bill in a series of intense and secretive talks earlier this year, was again on hand to help broker a deal.

"There's no question it's an uphill battle," Kennedy said. "It's difficult but not impossible."

A day after Bush went to Capitol Hill to field criticism from Republicans who derailed the bill, the White House said it would be open to changes to the delicate bipartisan compromise. Architects have argued their so-called "grand bargain" could collapse under the weight of poison-pill amendments.

"You may have a carefully crafted compromise, but on the other hand, you have members of both parties who want to have their say and have their input," White House press secretary Tony Snow said.

Snow also signaled support for the idea of pumping additional money into border security, which he said was worth pursuing, and played down the bitter divisions among Republicans on the issue. "This is not an internal 'fight,'" he said, and added that Bush "considers fellow Republicans friends and colleagues."

Republicans have coalesced behind the idea of assuring a funding stream for border security and workplace enforcement. Georgia Republican Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson want a separate emergency spending bill that could total as much as $15 billion to pay for such measures.

Additional funds for border and workplace crackdowns could persuade the Georgians to back the effort to resurrect the immigration bill, Chambliss said.

"We're thinking about it," he told reporters.


Friday, June 08, 2007

Reflections on our Victory.

And yes it is a victory. There is nothing permanent about any victory but this will change some things. Do not let them lie to you about the inevitability of the outcome. There is no inevitable outcome. There needs to be some accounting done and questions asked of some political defeatists in the Republican ranks. Follow up is important.

The National Archives yesterday unveiled a handwritten note by Abraham Lincoln exhorting his generals to pursue Robert E. Lee's army after the battle of Gettysburg, underscoring one of the great missed chances for an early end to the Civil War. There is a lesson to be learned in that. Had Lincoln's generals listened, the country could have been saved a lot of suffering on both sides. We need to follow-up our victory, but maybe not as much as you think.

The social engineers, who supported this bill, knew that the longer the debate lasted, the more the public would learn and the less the public would like the amnesty. They were right. The public gets it. The momentum has shifted. The media tried to help the Bush-Kennedy-McCain amnesty cause by discouraging some less than courageous Republicans. None knew it more than the disgraceful New York Times. I want to remind everyone of how the Times twisted the truth and tried to demoralize the opposition to this amnesty bill.
_____________________________________________
I repeat this post to illustrate what the NY Times did in the middle of the debate. It was never true and they knew it:
_____________________________________________

The NY Times headlines, widely quoted by the MSM read, "Immigration Bill Provisions Gain Wide Support in Poll".

Not too encouraging to the opponents of this bill. Could it be that it was printed to encourage our masters and rulers in DC, who will not read the details behind the headlines, as they will probably not read the bill itself? I asked myself, how is this possible?

I decided to do something quaint. Read the data.

The poll itself covers many subjects. It contains over one hundred questions. The published pdf version has been edited.

I simply highlight some of the questions in the same poll that would point to a far different picture from the propaganda and outrageous distortion portrayed by the New York Times. Could it be that the New York Times has an agenda?




8. Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the issue of
immigration?

approve 27% disapprove 60%

41. Which comes closer to your opinion: 1) America should always welcome all immigrants, OR 2) America should always welcome some immigrants, but not others, OR 3) America cannot afford to open its doors to any newcomers?

Welcome all 24% Welcome some 48% No newcomers 24%

42. Which of the following three statements comes closest to expressing your overall view of immigration policy in the United States? 1) On the whole, our immigrationpolicy works pretty well and only minor changes are necessary to make it work better. 2) There are some good things in our immigration policy, but fundamental changes are needed. 3) Our immigration policy has so much wrong with it that we need to completely rebuild it.

Only minor changes 8% Fundamental changes 41% Completely rebuild 49%

46. In the long run, do you think the people who are emigrating to the United States
today will make American society better, will make American society worse, or do you
ink today's immigrants won't affect American society one way or the other? th

Better 28% Worse 35% Won’t affect society 29%


51. What about ILLEGAL immigration – How serious a problem do you think the issue of
ILLEGAL immigration is for the country right now — very serious, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not at all serious?

Very 61% Somewhat 30% Not too 6% Not at all 1%

52. What, if anything, is your main concern about immigrants in the U.S.?

They use public services 17%
They don’t pay taxes 8%
Terrorism/security threat 8%
Take jobs away from residents 13%
Breaking law by being here 11%
Don’t learn to speak English 5%
Commit crimes 6%

56.Do you think illegal immigrants do more to strengthen the U.S. economy because they provide low-cost labor and they spend money or do illegal immigrants do more to weaken the U.S. economy because they don't all pay taxes but can use public services?

Strengthen 23% Weaken 70%


59. As a result of LEGAL immigration into the United States, do you think the threat of terrorism against the United States has increased, decreased, or stayed about the same? ASKED OF HALF THE RESPONDENTS N=568

Increased 42% Decreased 3%

60. As a result of ILLEGAL immigration into the United States, do you think the threat of terrorism against the United States has increased, decreased, or stayed about the same? ASKED OF HALF THE RESPONDENTS N=564

Increased 45% Decreased 2%

74. Should illegal immigrants be prosecuted and deported for being in the U.S. illegally, or shouldn't they?

Should be prosecuted 69% Should not 24%



The full poll pdf here



Thursday, May 31, 2007

Damn the Bastards. Listen to a Real American Speak. Fight Back!


Immigration bill would doom American way of life

Commentary by E.J. O'Brien

It is ironic that on Memorial Day, when we honored those who served to defend the American way of life, there is a cabal in Washington, D.C., that seeks to destroy it. In my 50 years of observing politics, this so-called Immigration Reform Bill in Congress is the most egregious affront to our constitution I have ever witnessed.

Our elected representatives no longer represent the American electorate. Because of gerrymandering and other legislative chicanery, the desire of the people is irrelevant. With re-election assured, our members of Congress are free to toady to the paying special interests.

Will Rogers said decades ago that “We have the best Congress money can buy.” That is true now more than ever, aided and abetted by the academic left that sees nothing special in the American culture. These allied forces are on the verge of insidiously destroying our country.

If this Immigration Bill, as it is horrifically constituted, becomes law, our American way of life is doomed. All that countless Americans have fought and died for will be destroyed, not in a cataclysmic blast as the terrorists hope for, but in a slow cultural and economic decline.

Our inundated and overwhelmed schools will no longer be able to teach, and our abysmal educational system will decline further into irrelevance. This may not matter to those in Congress, who are well-heeled enough to enable their families to attend the finest private schools to become well-educated and, hence, competitive in today's world.

The already insolvent Social Security system cannot survive an influx of millions of non-contributing, and uneducated aliens. The result is that the tax burden on the middle class will marginalize even the most productive citizens, since they will be expected to take up the slack for the unproductive. If saving Social Security is our aim, we should be bringing in millions of well-educated, highly-paid people, not the exact opposite.

South of our border, the narco army may already be too powerful for the corrupted Mexican government to control. The violence is now spilling across our own borders as carnage mounts. Thirty-five percent of the U.S. prison population is composed of aliens, and there are hundreds of thousands of un-apprehended felons wandering our streets. (Incidentally, if you read the fine print, the proposed Immigration Bill would, in effect, make them legal! )

Our cities and towns - yes, even Santa Barbara, Santa Maria and Lompoc - will gradually slip into anarchy, as local law enforcement is unable to cope. How many gang murders will it take to tip the scales?

The monetary price tag for this Immigration Bill is estimated to be in the trillions, but the cost to the fabric of our nation is incalculable. If you thought our political elites (Democrats and Republicans) lied about the authorization for war in Iraq, that measure pales in comparison to the authorization of an Immigration Bill capable of destroying our republic.

Rational analysis of this Immigration Bill is hard to come by in the media. I do not believe the bill would survive objective scrutiny by the American people. Perhaps that is why those who champion it are trying to rush its passage through Congress, after which it would immediately become the law of the land.

Like the other “grand compromise” amnesty legislation in years past, rest assured it will be one law that as many as 20 million illegal aliens in this country willingly embrace, even if it means falsifying the scant documentation needed to climb aboard.

E.J. O'Brien lives in Vandenberg Village. The Lompoc Record

May 30, 2007


Monday, May 28, 2007

Truth or Consequences on Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants



Joe Murray: One Criminal Immigration Response Deserves Another
By: Joe Murray, The Bulletin
05/25/

"Compromise used to mean that half a loaf was better than no bread. Among modern statesmen it really seems to mean that half a loaf is better than a whole loaf," mused famed English writer G.K. Chesterton. With decades passing since Chesterton penned those words, it appears the U.S. Senate has not only agreed to give away its half of the loaf in regards to immigration reform; it is also throwing in the keys to the store.

Last week, a group of U.S. senators proved that politics (or, in this case, special interest) makes strange bedfellows. This Tequila troupe of piƱata politicos, led by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), created an immigration bill unlike any seen before. This dynamic duo, however, was not without assistance, as Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Mel Martinez (R-Fla.), and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) were more than happy to hold the pencil as an eraser was taken to the border.

For a number of weeks Senators and White House officials had been working behind closed doors to draft a comprehensive immigration reform package that would protect America's bleeding border while simultaneously dealing with the 12 million-plus illegal immigrants already in the nation. The result? A Corona Compromise.
Despite the preemptive proclamations by Sen. Specter that the Senate bill "is not amnesty," the devil is in the details of this legislation, and it is clear that while the amnesty may not be de jure, it is clearly de facto.

Just what exactly does the bill do? Well, it immediately legalizes the 12 million immigrants who evaded the U.S. Border Patrol and broke into the country. Rather than facing deportation, these immigrants now face open arms and a "Z visa." Put simply, this bill not only allows illegals to stay in the country; it makes Uncle Sam roll out the red carpet of citizenship for them.

Under the bill, the path to citizenship, starting with a Z visa, will be an 8-13 year journey. During that journey, only the head of household will have to return the native country, briefly, to file papers and obtain citizenship. And to quell any fears, the right to re-entry back into America is guaranteed.

While the Gang of 12 argues that the denial of instant citizenship is proof that the deal is not amnesty, such an argument is as hollow as Nicole Richie, because even though the illegal immigrant may not be technically a citizen, he will be treated like one. Just look at the details hidden within the Z visa program.

A Z visa is available only for an illegal alien, and, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform, the probationary benefits include work authorization, protection from removal, and a Social Security number. These benefits are granted immediately and are subject only to the submission of an application (with fingerprints) and a 24-hour wait on a background check.

And what about the border security concerns (i.e., triggers) the Gang of 12 argue must be realized before the humanitarian elements of the bill kick in? The Z visa probationary benefits are not subject to such triggers and begin as soon as the bill is signed by President Bush -border security be damned.

Another interesting tidbit is that the illegal immigrant who "comes out of the shadows" does not have to become a U.S. citizen. A Z visa is valid for four years and can be renewed indefinitely. An applicant for a Z visa need not understand English but merely demonstrate "an attempt to gain an understanding of the English language" upon renewal of the visa.

Translation: Those Mexican immigrants that broke into America out of love of currency rather than love of country will be permitted to stay indefinitely. Their wallets will be filled with money while their hearts are retained by Mexico.

Make no mistake, this bill is de facto amnesty and will create a tsunami of immigrants that will crash upon America's shores. If a person can break into this nation and obtain citizenship without significant repercussion, what does that say to the rest of the world?

It says America does not value citizenship; it values cheap labor. It does not value a sense of national pride; it values the Wall Street bottom line. It says we granted amnesty twice, and we will be sure to do it again. It says America is on the road to becoming a third-world nation that will be unrecognizable in the next 50 years.
This immigration bill is a watershed moment for America, as it will determine whether she retains her status as a great nation or becomes the "polyglot boarding house" feared by Teddy Roosevelt. The face of America is changing and the white population that used to claim the majority mantle is no longer reproducing-it is no longer sustaining the population.

Rather, third-world people of different races are coming to America in droves, and unlike the Germans, Irish and Italians that came before them, these people are not assimilating into the culture. They are holding onto the apron strings of the Motherland and establishing cultural barrios in the hearts of American cities.
If this immigration deal passes and 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants are thrust into the U.S. population, the character of America will be under siege. America will no longer be one people united by a common history, language, culture, literature and history. She will become a people whose only common denominator is the almighty dollar. And as Texas taught Mexico a century or so ago, a country needs more than currency to command loyalty.

"The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities," Roosevelt told the Knights of Columbus. This is what the immigration debate is all about.

It is clear that the American people do not want this Corona Compromise jammed down their throats, as a Rasmussen poll showed only 26 percent of voters favor the proposal. Sensing the storm clouds over the horizon, President Bush, so desperate for a legacy that he would turn over our borders to Mexico City, has dispatch Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to quell dissent.

"If they don't leave, then you are going to give them silent amnesty. You're either going to let them stay or you're going to be hypocritical," Chertoff said. Translation: Chertoff will not do his job. Such an understanding was further realized when Chertoff proclaimed that the deportations sought after by some Congressmen were "not going to happen."

Enough is enough. This Administration, while more than willing to secure the borders of a desert nation who wants neither our presence nor our aid, has told America that it has no intention of filling the gaps in America's borders. Such an act is criminal.


©The Evening Bulletin 2007



Saturday, May 19, 2007

Families United Can Kill Your Own United States.



First order of business requires we give the Amnesty Bill the proper name. I nominate: "Families United Can Kill Your Own United States", or FUCK YOUS, for short. It captures the true nature of the bill and how it will affect all of yous guys.

There is a story on CNN that highlights one of the guaranteed consequences of the George W. Bush, FUCK YOUS bill. That of course is that some very nasty business types will be interjected into our society, along with the very nice people. No one is taking the time to examine the many potential consequences of FUCK YOUS. The pols are in a big hurry to pass FUCK YOUS and hope you forget they fucked yous all.

There will be a lot of people, amnetized, from who knows where, that believe and practice things that are outrageous, dangerous and deadly. The forgiveness and welcome will not just be nice little Christian cleaning ladies from Tricloragaloopydo.

One of the many included will be Muslims of many different persuasions. It will include a group that everyone in the US seems to love, and no one seems to know much about, the purple fingered Kurds. Trust me on this, the Kurds, as a group are no particular bargain, and neither were all the Albanian Muslims that flooded into the US after we decided to help the Kosovars. They came in droves. Remember the Albanians from Cherry Hill who wanted to target Fort Dix? Why should Christian Mexican families be treated the same as radical Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Palestine? They will be there in line with the nice Christian cleaning lady. FUCK YOUS makes no distinction from country, race, religion or practices. It is very multi-cultural, deliciously diverse and guaranteed to blow your mind. We may even have some honor killing in our future:

Relatives arrested in girl's stoning death
CNN

Four people have been arrested in connection with the "honor killing" last month of a Kurdish teen that was captured on cellphone video, authorities tell CNN. Two of those arrested are relatives and police are also searching for the victim's cousin. Dua Khalil, 17, was dragged into a crowd in a headlock and stoned to death in Iraq's Nineveh province. The killing was videoed and broadcast around the world -- throwing 'honor killings' into the public eye.



Thursday, May 17, 2007

The Fix is In.




Republicans, Democrats strike immigration deal with White House

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS Associated Press Writer
© 2007 The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Key senators and the White House reached agreement Thursday on an immigration overhaul that would grant quick legal status to millions of illegal immigrants already in the U.S. and fortify the border.

The plan would create a temporary worker program to bring new arrivals to the U.S. A separate program would cover agricultural workers. New high-tech enforcement measures also would be instituted to verify that workers are here legally.

The compromise came after weeks of painstaking closed-door negotiations that brought the most liberal Democrats and the most conservative Republicans together with President Bush's Cabinet officers to produce a highly complex measure that carries heavy political consequences.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., said he expects Bush to endorse the agreement.

The accord sets the stage for what promises to be a bruising battle next week in the Senate on one of Bush's top non-war priorities.

The key breakthrough came when negotiators struck a bargain on a so-called "point system" that would for the first time prioritize immigrants' education and skill level over family connections in deciding how to award green cards.

The draft bill "gives a path out of the shadows and toward legal status for those who are currently here" illegally, said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

A spokesman for Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., one of his party's key players in the talks, confirmed that the group had reached agreement