posted March 29, 2006 09:39 AM            

BIG CORPORATIONS AND THE FAR-LEFT HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON: both like to employ cheap illegal immigrants to do their heavy lifting.

The leftist media have tried to portray this weekend’s massive protests against House measures to curtail illegal immigration as the uprising of “The Other America”: forgotten, humble, hidden Hispanic members of the working poor simply demanding their “rights.” As events spanned from California to Detroit, Phoenix to Washington, D.C., the media kept up its anti-enforcement drumbeat. Although some have credited Latino DJs for the 500,000-strong illegal immigrant turnout in Los Angeles alone – and some credit is deserved – the real legwork was done by a more eclectic group of organizations: leftist labor unions, George Soros-funded agitators, Open Borders lobbyists, Roman Catholic clergy, and teachers unions.

Los Angeles

Los Angeles predictably had the largest turnout – and the most disruptive. Half-a-million people crowded the streets demanding the “right” to flaunt this nation’s immigration laws, and underage students ran onto a California freeway, risking their lives and shutting down interstate traffic.

Andres Jiminez, director of the University of California's California Policy Research Center, told the media, “It's not only Latinos who are marching in the streets, its unions too: firefighters, farm workers and Hispanic students who had thought of U.S. law as protecting them and are now starting to see it as a threat to their future.”

He was right about this much: Latino organizations did not act alone. The media has failed to report that organized labor directed the illegals and minors. The L.A. Times revealed the rally’s “security” was handled by a union identified only as “Local 1877.” That would be local 1877 of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the far-Left union founded by New Left radical Andrew Stern, which called for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq in June 2004 and worked in concert with Ted Kennedy to roll back anti-terrorist Homeland Security measures. According to the L.A. Times, the SEIU’s goons kindly helped “herd marchers along the route.” That was not the extent of SEIU’s help, though. The union also “coordinated the more than 100 buses that dropped off marchers from throughout California, Las Vegas and a few Southwestern cities.”

In other words, the massive rally against Homeland Security – since that is what gaining control of America’s borders would promote – was staged by a leftist labor union and staffed primarily with illegal immigrants.

SEIU did not work alone in this. It was aided by other radical or left-wing political pressure groups, including:

·Southern California Human Rights Network (SCHRN), whose members are apparently affiliated with the International Socialist Organization. SCHRN drafted a resolution in Orange County declaring, “We believe that no human is illegal and oppose the criminalization, dehumanization, and exploitation of migrants, immigrants and or economic and political refugees, by means of media, legislation, ideology, rhetoric, etc. [This] includes augmenting border patrol units, commissioning other law enforcement agencies to work in conjunction with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and [includes] such policies as the Central American Free Trade Agreement, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and other policies that exploit the indigenous, peasantry, and environments of countries abroad.” In other words, capitalism and any form of immigration laws are exploitative.

·Pomona Day Labor Center, which helps employers hire “day laborers.” One must presume this organization knows its employees are illegals.

·Central American Resource Center, which advocates for illegals and lobbies for the government to make a “‘presumption’ of hardship” for and grant “permanent residency” to Central American illegals.

·Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), founded in 1986 to “get as many people as possible through the amnesty program established” by Ronald Reagan.

The cause is being helped in another way by the Los Angeles Unified School District – where more than 25,000 walked out of classes: through taxpayer-subsidized lobbying courses. According to the district, students “would remain in their home rooms through the day for discussions on the immigration issue, how to influence lawmakers and the consequences of walkouts, said Rowena Lagrosa, executive officer for educational service.” (Emphasis added.)

Michelle Malkin obtained a copy of a letter Lagrosa wrote Monday to the students of the school district stating LAUSD would chauffer students to high school after they protested on the freeway. The letter states after the rally, the district “will provide buses to return students to schools when appropriate.” Moreover, “we will do everything we can to ensure that those students who do leave the campus are supervised as they leave the campus.”

Naturally, the leftist groups, illegals, and teachers unions could count on the media to cover for them. Mickey Kaus pointed out in Slate that the L.A. Times wrapped the protestors in the American flag, erasing all references to the Mexican standard, although the Mexican flag was hoisted at least as often in the crowd as Old Glory.

Gone from the media coverage, too, was mention that these protests had all the hallmarks of leftist riots of bygone days. Although depicted as nonviolent and mainstream, FrontPage Magazine columnist Tammy Bruce noted Hispanic protestors burned American flags at the L.A. rallies. Michelle Malkin has preserved some of the protestors’ other extremist messages. L.A. protestors ran onto freeways and threw rocks and bottles. LAPD Chief William Bratton – who put his men on tactical alert – said the protestors diverted police resources from fighting crime in the City of Angels. Fights broke out at protests in Watsonville, CA, and police arrested 21 minors and three adults for riotous behavior, including assaulting a police officer, in Escondido, CA.

D.C.: “Clergy” Against the Law

On Monday, the “mainstream media” reported some 300 clergy met near the Capitol for a prayer service to support illegal immigrants. The rally flyer claims these concerns sacerdotal ministers objected to legislation that would “Deny basic civil rights to immigrants.” No outlet reported this meeting was organized by the far-Left Center for Community Change, a member of the United for Peace and Justice coalition, headed by atheist and Marxist Leslie Cagan. On the CCC Board of Directors are:

Former Rep. Ron Dellums, D-CA, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee 1993-7. A letter written by a Dellums staffer to Grenada’s Marxist dictator discovered by U.S. troops as they liberated the island stated besides that toppled Marxist, “The only other person that I know of that [Dellums] expresses such admiration for is Fidel [Castro]”;
Cecelia Munoz, VP of the National Council of La Raza;
Sara K. Gould of the Ms. Foundation for Women;
Peter Edelman, a professor at Georgetown Law School, former Clinton administration official, and board president of the New Israel Fund. Today, he is perhaps best known as the husband of Hillary Clinton mentor Marian Wright Edelman. ; and
Sandra L. Ferniza, Arizona State University’s director of the Office of Public Affairs.
CCC is generously funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Ford Foundation, the William Randolph Hearst Foundation, the George Soros-funded Open Society Institute, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Tides Foundation.

Other event sponsors include:

Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). A large, sometimes violent leftist organization with a history of invading welfare offices and intimidating left-wing groups it perceives as “rivals.” In 2003, the group supported a resolution condemning the U.S. liberation of Iraq. ACORN’s would-be platform calls for the establishment of socialism in the United States. It founded the socialist Working Families Party in 1998 and endorsed Hillary Clinton’s senate campaign two years later.
American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). Although it has long presented itself as a benign Quaker organization, the AFSC has a multi-decade history of supporting unilateral disarmament and aiding Communist regimes, even eulogizing the head of a Tanzanian Communist party 13 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. AFSC signed a document days after 9/11, saying the terrorist attacks should be treated as a police matter. It has for decades promoted the “rights” of illegal workers.
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). Steve Brown and Chris Coon reported, “José Velez, the head of LULAC 1990-1994 used his “special status with the INS” to submit false papers for over 6,000 illegals seeking amnesty.” LULAC is today associated with race-based Affirmative Action programs and often allied with Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow/PUSH Coalition.
Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition. As I noted in my book, 57 Varieties of Radical Causes, Teresa Heinz Kerry awarded a Heinz Family Foundation grant to MIRA. In June 2002, MIRA instructed its members, “Please do NOT aid people in applying with INS unless you are familiar with their immigration history and are certain they would not be at risk of deportation by doing so.” (Emphasis theirs.) Immediately after 9/11 a MIRA press release asked people to “Refer local Arab, Muslim, and affected groups to MIRA.” They also advocate for illegals to receive in-state college tuition rates.
National Council of La Raza, a race-based organization that signed the “Statement of Solidarity with Migrants,” calling on the government to recognize the contributions of illegal immigrants to the labor market. It calls reduced welfare payments (to illegals), ““a disgrace to American values” and has firmly opposed numerous Homeland Security measures; and
The Gamaliel Foundation, a leftist organization inspired by Saul Alinsky. In addition to lobbying for illegal aliens, this member of the “Religious Left” hosted a campaign event in 2003 featuring Sen, Russ Feingold, D-WI, and then-presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich.
The event was another attempt for the Left to wrap its message in clerical garb, this time executed successfully.

Phoenix

Also on Monday, several hundred underage students in Phoenix staged a walkout that culminated with protests at the state Capitol. Underreported was the role played in the rallies by MEChA, a radical Hispanic organization demanding the U.S. government give the Southwestern portion of the United States “back” to Mexican-Americans for the establishment of a new state called Aztlan. MEChA promotes its agenda alongside the National Council of La Raza, Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), and the American Friends Service Committee.

A sense of MEChA-like entitlement pervaded the entire rally, as an illegal alien told the media:

I'm not a criminal. I'm a good person and I deserve a quality education. That's why I'm here. To show that I'm willing to work toward that goal and that I've earned that right.

She did not elaborate on how she “earned” the “right” to illegally cross the border and access taxpayer-subsidized services restricted to U.S. citizens.

Georgia

Last Friday, tens of thousand of Georgians, including not a few illegals, staged a “sick-in” to protest a bill that passed the state house the day before. CNN reported, “That bill, which has yet to gain Senate approval, would deny state services to adults living in the U.S. illegally and impose a five percent surcharge on wire transfers from illegal immigrants.” Not only do immigrants have the “right” to live in Georgia illegally and collect government services, they also have the “right” to use Western Union without paying an extra five cents on the dollar. That’s some willingness to contribute to one’s home country. These are supposedly the minority members willing to work tirelessly to help their host country at jobs no one wants.

FrontPage Magazine columnist Allan Wall – whose National Guard brigade recently returned from serving our country in Iraq – has pointed out the Georgia protest’s organizer, Teodoro Maus, acted as Mexico’s consul general in Atlanta for 12 years. During that time, this Mexican government official protested Georgia’s declaration of English as the state’s official language, opposed a talk show host who supported border enforcement, and petitioned the Peach State to issue drivers licenses to illegals. Maus’ involvement raises the question whether Friday’s unofficial labor strike had the sanction of the Mexican government.

Dallas-Ft. Worth

Yesterday, area school districts estimated 4,000 students walked out in Dallas-Ft. Worth alone, staging a violent and disruptive rally to sanctify their illicit status.

Media accounts specify: “At Kiest Park, about 1,500 students from Dallas and Grand Prairie schools demonstrated. Dallas police outfitted in riot gear moved in on the crowd after some of the students started throwing rocks and bottles at a woman who staged a one-person counterprotest.” (Emphasis ours.)

Protestor Francisco Rojas, speaking in Spanish, told The Dallas Morning News, “It's like an animal that's waking from many years of sleep. We are very strong, and right now is our opportunity.”

These minor students then processed into a city council meeting, waving Mexican and El Salvadoran flags. To her credit, Councilwoman Elba Garcia courageously commandeered a police PA system to tell the truants to go back to school (where Dallas school officials said this week’s walkouts will be an unexcused absence).The warning came too late for one girl, whose hand was severed as a result of an accident that took place at the walkout.

Undeterred by the violence and harm done to their children’s education, leaders in the Open Borders Lobby set out plotting their next move. “At a dinner meeting of the Latino group LULAC, leaders announced a major rally on April 9. ‘We are going to be having, hopefully it will be the largest civil rights demonstration in the history of Dallas, Texas – 100,000-plus,’ said LULAC representative Domingo Garcia.”

No word on how many lone women will be battered the next time Mexican citizens exercise American First Amendment rights.

The Impact

These massive gatherings of illegals, who denounced their government unmolested by police or immigration officials, had an immediate impact – on legislation and on border security.

Reporter Sara Carter of the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin says since these protests, border patrol agents have reported an explosion in illegal crossings from Mexicans (and others) keenly observing the Senate debate and emboldened by same. Some were under the impression amnesty had already been granted and hoped to be the first to take part in the second California Gold Rush. [1]

The rallies had a political impact, too. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-CO, stated on Monday:

The immigration rallies over this weekend and today show how disordered our immigration system has become. For years, the government has turned a blind eye to illegal aliens who break into this country. It isn’t any wonder that illegal aliens now act as if they are entitled to the rights and privileges of citizenship.

As a sign of their political impact, Republicans immediately began discussing the potential threat their political careers face from an Hispanic backlash, should they have the temerity to pretend the United States is a sovereign nation with definable political boundaries.

Leftists and illegals began their massive protest – because they saw U.S. law “as a threat to their future” – the same day the Senate Judiciary Committee passed a bill that would allow illegals to attain American citizenship without facing deportation by a 12-6 vote. John McCain joined forces with Ted Kennedy to promote this amnesty measure. “It is not amnesty,” said Ted Kennedy, who has a 41-year history of fibbing about immigration bills.

The Judiciary Committee yesterday approved Dick Durbin’s amendment granting amnesty to individuals and non-profits that provide non-emergency aid to illegal immigrants. The committee had previously approved Durbin’s amendment to drop illegal immigration to a misdemeanor offense.

These measures are at odds with the will of the American people. According to the Associated Press, 59 percent of Americans oppose laws allowing illegal immigrants to apply for guest worker status, and 62 percent oppose easing the path to U.S. citizenship for those who are here illegally.

Americans know illegal immigrants account for nearly one-third of all inmates in federal prisons and add millions of dollars to their tax load every year. Even Mother Jones magazine exposed the health dangers posed to border towns throughout America, as a result of uninsured illegals bankrupting local hospitals – six years ago.

Americans cannot comprehend why Congress feels a need to add a guest worker program to mollify these disruptive, violent, lawbreaking protestors, who are occasionally political radicals and overwhelmingly individuals who are in violation of U.S. immigration law. What makes Congressmen think those whose first action in this country was to break the law will suddenly obey their newest futile measure?

posted March 29, 2006 10:03 AM            

It is lucky America has more than two centuries of mostly calm experience with self-government. We are going to need to fall back on that invaluable patrimony if the immigration debate continues as it has started this season. The Senate is attempting to legislate into the teeth of the will of the American public. The Senate Judiciary Committeemen — and probably a majority of the Senate — are convinced that they know that the American people don't know what is best for them.

National polling data could not be more emphatic — and has been so for decades. Gallup Poll (March 27) finds 80 percent of the public wants the federal government to get tougher on illegal immigration. A Quinnipiac University Poll (March 3) finds 62 percent oppose making it easier for illegals to become citizens (72 percent in that poll don't even want illegals to be permitted to have driver's licenses). Time Magazine's recent poll (Jan. 24-26) found 75 percent favor "major penalties" on employers of illegals, 70 percent believe illegals increase the likelihood of terrorism and 57 percent would use military force at the Mexican-American border.

An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll (March 10-13) found 59 percent opposing a guest-worker proposal, and 71 percent would more likely vote for a congressional candidate who would tighten immigration controls.

An IQ Research poll (March 10) found 92 percent saying that securing the U.S. border should be a top priority of the White House and Congress.

Yet, according to a National Journal survey of Congress, 73 percent of Republican and 77 percent of Democratic congressmen and senators say they would support guest-worker legislation.

I commend to all those presumptuous senators and congressmen the sardonic and wise words of Edmund Burke in his 1792 letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe: "No man will assert seriously, that when people are of a turbulent spirit, the best way to keep them in order is to furnish them with something substantial to complain of." The senators should remember that they are American senators, not Roman proconsuls. Nor is the chairman of the Judiciary Committee some latter-day Praetor Maximus.

But if they would be dictators, it would be nice if they could at least be wise (until such time as the people can electorally forcefully project with a violent pedal thrust their regrettable backsides out of town). It was gut-wrenching (which in my case is a substantial event) to watch the senators prattle on in their idle ignorance concerning the manifold economic benefits that will accrue to the body politic if we can just cram a few million more uneducated illegals into the country. ( I guess ignorance loves company.) Beyond the Senate last week, in a remarkable example of intellectual integrity (in the face of the editorial positions of their newspapers) the chief economic columnists for the New York Times and The Washington Post — Paul Krugman and Robert Samuelson, respectively — laid out the sad facts regarding the economics of the matter. Senators, congressmen and Mr. President, please take note.

Regarding the Senate's and the president's guest-worker proposals, The Post's Robert Samuelson writes: "Gosh, they're all bad ideas ... We'd be importing poverty. This isn't because these immigrants aren't hardworking, many are. Nor is it because they don't assimilate, many do. But they generally don't go home, assimilation is slow and the ranks of the poor are constantly replenished ... [It] is a conscious policy of creating poverty in the United States while relieving it in Mexico ... The most lunatic notion is that admitting more poor Latino workers would ease the labor market strains of retiring baby boomers ? Far from softening the social problems of an aging society, more poor immigrants might aggravate them by pitting older retirees against younger Hispanics for limited government benefits ... [Moreover], [i]t's a myth that the U.S. economy 'needs' more poor immigrants.

"The illegal immigrants already here represent only about 4.9 percent of the labor force." (For all Mr. Samuelson's supporting statistics, see his Washington Post column of March 22, from which this is taken.) Likewise, a few days later, the very liberal and often partisan Paul Krugman of the New York Times courageously wrote : "Unfortunately, low-skill immigrants don't pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the [government] benefits they receive ? As the Swiss writer Max Frisch wrote about his own country's experience with immigration, 'We wanted a labor force, but human beings came.' " Mr. Krugman also observed — citing a leading Harvard study — "that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren't for Mexican immigration. That's why it's intellectually dishonest to say, as President Bush does, that immigrants 'do jobs that Americans will not do.' The willingness of Americans to do a job depends on how much that job pays — and the reason some jobs pay too little to attract native-born Americans is competition from poorly paid immigrants." Thusly do the two leading economic writers for the nation's two leading liberal newspapers summarily debunk the economic underpinning of the president's and the Senate's immigration proposals.

Under such circumstances, advocates of guest-worker/amnesty bills will find it frustratingly hard to defend their arrogant plans by their preferred tactic of slandering those who disagree with them as racist, nativist and xenophobic.

When the slandered ones include not only The Washington Post and the New York Times, but about 70 percent of the public, it is not only bad manners, but bad politics.
The public demand to protect our borders will triumph sooner or later. And, the more brazen the opposing politicians, the sooner will come the triumph.

So legislate on, you proud and foolish senators — and hasten your political demise.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060328-102545-2371r.htm

posted March 29, 2006 12:38 PM            

quote:

---

BIG CORPORATIONS AND THE FAR-LEFT HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON: both like to employ cheap illegal immigrants to do their heavy lifting.

---

Interesting statement. Big Corporations often employ Republicans as well, and often into positions where they are in charge of hiring.

quote:

---

That would be local 1877 of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the far-Left union founded by New Left radical Andrew Stern

---

Preliminary research shows that Andrew Stern did NOT found this union, but rather gained leadership 10 years ago in 1996.

quote:

---

was staged by a leftist labor union and staffed primarily with illegal immigrants.

---

Where are the records that prove this statement?

quote:

---

Southern California Human Rights Network (SCHRN), whose members are apparently affiliated with the International Socialist Organization.

---

Affiliated in as much as they both stand up against Save Our State, an anti-immigrant activist group linked to Neo-Nazis.

Southern California Human Rights Network is such a huge and influential group, it's website isn't even up yet. http://schrn.org/

quote:

---

Central American Resource Center

---

Whose 2004-2009 Strategic Goals include:

Work to support permanent resident status, family reunification and active citizenship.

Whose first line of their website's front page history states: "The Central American Resource Center was founded in 1983 by a group of Salvadoran refugees whose mission was to secure legal status for the thousands of Central Americans fleeing the torture and brutality of civil war."

quote:

---

Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), founded in 1986 to “get as many people as possible through the amnesty program established” by Ronald Reagan.

---

Demonized for putting people through a Republican's plan?

--------------------------------------------

My own opinion is that I think it's reasonable to want to know who's coming in to our country. I think VISAs are a good condition of entrance. A new fence? That's a tough one. We don't really have the money for it, but (How weird! There's a song about immigration playing on the radio right now. I guess it was advocating green cards.) if people can currently just stroll across the border then perhaps it's an ok idea. I don't think we have one of those for Canada, however, so it seems unnecessarily biased against Mexico.

posted March 29, 2006 01:34 PM            

quote:

---

quote:BIG CORPORATIONS AND THE FAR-LEFT HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON: both like to employ cheap illegal immigrants to do their heavy lifting.
Interesting statement. Big Corporations often employ Republicans as well, and often into positions where they are in charge of hiring.

---

Find them, arrest them, charge them, convict them and put them in prison for about 5 years...without respect as to their party affiliations.

quote:

---

quote:That would be local 1877 of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the far-Left union founded by New Left radical Andrew Stern
Preliminary research shows that Andrew Stern did NOT found this union, but rather gained leadership 10 years ago in 1996.

---

Get back to me when you get past your preliminary research...if you think it matters or that Stern is not a radical leftist.

quote:

---

was staged by a leftist labor union and staffed primarily with illegal immigrants.
Where are the records that prove this statement?

---

Ummm, I would think it would be obvious acoustic...when the crowds are full of Mexican flags and the protesters don't seem to speak English...including those talking to the press. What do you think?

quote:

---

Affiliated in as much as they both stand up against Save Our State, an anti-immigrant activist group linked to Neo-Nazis.

---

I'm going to ask you to prove that acoustic. If demanding that immigration laws be enforced is the same as being a neo-nazi then about 70% of Americans are. That would include me. So, show me the links between the leadership of Save Our State and Nazi groups.

quote:

---

Southern California Human Rights Network is such a huge and influential group, it's website isn't even up yet. http://schrn.org/

---

What's your point? Your search proved the group exists and it's an activist group.

quote:

---

Central American Resource Center
Whose 2004-2009 Strategic Goals include:

Work to support permanent resident status, family reunification and active citizenship.
Whose first line of their website's front page history states: "The Central American Resource Center was founded in 1983 by a group of Salvadoran refugees whose mission was to secure legal status for the thousands of Central Americans fleeing the torture and brutality of civil war."

---

Again, what's your point. That civil war ended almost 20 years ago...when Ronald Reagan took action to kick the little communist bast*rd Daniel Ortega's ass back inside Nicaragua when he tried to spread communist revolution into El Salvador. So, what's your point? There's no longer any need to take refugees from El Salvador but some leaders of groups just can't let go of the gravy train provided by contributors...always a new cause for them to protest.

quote:

---

quote:Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), founded in 1986 to “get as many people as possible through the amnesty program established” by Ronald Reagan.
Demonized for putting people through a Republican's plan?

---

Again, what's your point? Giving citizenship to 10 to 15 million illegal aliens from Mexico in Reagan's administration only made it certain more would sneak across the border hoping for the same.

Listen up acoustic, there are immigration laws whether you like it or not. Millions have come here legally but not one single illegal alien should be rewarded for breaking US federal immigration laws. Period.

Neither should there be any amnesty for illegal aliens...no matter how long they've been breaking US immigration laws. Come through the front door or don't come at all.

posted March 29, 2006 03:59 PM            

The only thing that bothers me about this legislation is the blanket of "Homeland Security" that's been thrown on it. That's just not needed. Immigration laws have needed to be strenthened and enforced for a long, long time. But to claim that Mexicans and others below the border carry the same terrorist threat that Bin Laden and Co. do ... I find that insulting. How many of these countries south of us are on that big 'ol "axis of evil" list? How many of the terrorists on 911 came through the Mexican border?
Frankly, if they're building a huge wall/fence between the US and Mexico under the guise of "homeland security" I certainly expect them to build one between the US and Canada ... you know, Canada having a much bigger Arab population than any Central/South American country. *Note* I have nothing personal against Arabs but the terrorist attacks that lead to this whole homeland security craze were, as we all know, Middle Eastern, radical "Islamic" loons. Iraq and Iran, of course, are card carrying members of this "axis of evil". Heck, let's just make immigration for people from all countries equally difficult (except, of course, for political refugees).

posted March 29, 2006 04:36 PM            

My best friend all through grade school, high school and college was of Mexican descent. Our families were tight and many days after school we wound up at Vic's house where his mother made us fresh flour tortillas...on the spot. We traded Christmas gifts...theirs to us were usually something home cooked...like the little sweet white tamales..my favorite I admire them and other ethnic groups as well. The hardest working people I've ever had working for me were Mexicans and Cubans...and the least troublesome.

This protest contains none of those. Mexican national flags abounded as did a large banner declaring California to be Mexican lands stolen from Mexico. I have absolutely no use for any of those kinds of tactics.

posted March 29, 2006 04:45 PM              

quote:

---

This protest contains none of those. Mexican national flags abounded as did a large banner declaring California to be Mexican lands stolen from Mexico. I have absolutely no use for any of those kinds of tactics.

So, legal immigration YES. Illegal immigration and amnesty NO. If people are going to come to America, let them come to become Americans...not foreign nationals owing their alligence to Mexico or anywhere else.

---

posted March 29, 2006 05:25 PM            

We have had cows slaughtered, dogs killed, the environment trampled and houses wrecked by traffic.

Border security is priority No. 1

Saturday, March 18, 2006 11:46 PM MST

COMMENTARY BY GAIL GRIFFIN

SPECIAL TO THE HERALD/REVIEW

No one can deny that border security is one of the most serious problems in our state. In fact, more than 50 percent of illegal alien arrests in the United State are made along Arizona’s 370-mile border with Mexico.

The Border Patrol estimates one in five illegals are apprehended. Some believe that number is higher. The February numbers from the Border Patrol for the Tucson Sector are 42,837 illegal aliens arrested (that averages 1,529 per day), 71,519 pounds or 35.7 tons of marijuana were confiscated, 465 vehicles carrying illegal aliens or drugs were confiscated, and assaults on Border Patrol agents were numerous.

We are seeing increased levels of violence along our southern border with Mexican military incursions into the United States and the rise in the number of criminals coming across our borders. According to U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, more than 42,000 illegal aliens with criminal records — felonies, homicides, kidnapping, sexual assaults, etc. — have been apprehended within the last five months. In Cochise County, 359 illegal aliens were incarcerated with felony charges.

Everyone in the Republican Party understands the need to work together to find a solution to this ever-increasing problem. For every step forward the Arizona Legislature has made to address the issue of illegal entry and border security, it seems the governor has pushed them two steps back. Most recently, the governor vetoed legislation that would have provided funding to place the National Guard along the border to provide security. By so doing, she went against her own executive order signed earlier that week that called for additional National Guard assistance if funding were provided by the Legislature. In addition to this most recent veto, the governor has vetoed at least five other legislative measures that would have worked to decrease this serious problem.

The National Guard can be used to assist the Border Patrol in transportation and processing illegal aliens apprehended, thereby putting the Border Patrol on the border performing the job they are trained to do — not doing traffic control.

City, county and state officials have reported tremendous strains on law enforcement, medical services, our criminal justice system and our schools. Hospitals are on the verge of closing.

Many U.S. citizens living near the border are respectful stewards of the land. They know and appreciate the benefits of our close relationship with our Mexican brothers and sisters. Cochise County includes some of the most culturally diverse regions in America, and we are proud of our heritage and are respectful of our neighbors and responsibilities.

The safety of U.S. citizens, the enforcement of our laws and the protection and security of our borders is a duty and obligation we cannot shirk.

We continue to hear this is a federal issue. Yes, it is. However, when our failed federal immigration policies are affecting the safety of citizens of this state, it is the responsibility of the state to take action and secure our borders and protect our citizens. We don’t know who is crossing our border. They come from Russia, China, India, Mexico, Central and South America, the Middle East and Islamic countries. Are they criminals? Are they terrorists, drug or people smugglers, are they dangerous? We are a nation of laws, and they are breaking the law. This is not just a local problem or a state problem, it is a national problem. We must enforce our laws. National security is border security, and border security is national security.

Whether you are a supporter of a guest-worker program or not, we must agree to work together to secure our borders, enforce our laws and protect U.S. citizens.

Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl has said that “until we have an adequate force of Border Patrol agents to protect our border and have equipped them with the technology and infrastructure that they need to accomplish the mission, I will not buy into the notion that control of the borders is beyond our capability. I believe that the United States, like other nations, has both the obligation and the right to control its border — indeed, it is difficult to imagine a more fundamental, primary role of government.”

I’d like to take this opportunity to thank our Border Patrol agents, local and federal law enforcement organizations for their dedication and all their hard work.
http://www.svherald.com/articles/2006/03/19/local_news/features_and_opinions/columnist2.txt

Every day we see BP trucks going to and from the border every day or stopped along the highway arresting 30-40 illegals crammed in a van.

My office is only 4 miles from Naco, Mexico and it's nothing to see people down Double Adobe road running from Mexico to meet their coyote.

The ground is littered with Tuna cans, water bottles, dirty clothes, etc... I won't even mention what goes on when they find a house where the people are either on vacation or not home. Let's just say using a bathroom is an option and using the living room floor as a bathroom is preferred.

posted March 29, 2006 06:04 PM            

Does taking over land as the victor in a war mean you stole that land? If it does, then the whole world has been stolen.

posted March 29, 2006 06:37 PM            

quote:

---

Find them, arrest them, charge them, convict them and put them in prison for about 5 years...without respect as to their party affiliations.

---

That would certainly fill our prisons.

quote:

---

Get back to me when you get past your preliminary research...if you think it matters or that Stern is not a radical leftist.

---

I won't disagree that he's definitely 100% on the left, though he also definitely did not start the SEIU.

quote:

---

Ummm, I would think it would be obvious acoustic...when the crowds are full of Mexican flags and the protesters don't seem to speak English...including those talking to the press. What do you think?

---

"The L.A. Times revealed the rally’s “security” was handled by a union identified only as “Local 1877.” "

"the SEIU’s goons kindly helped “herd marchers along the route.”"

quote:

---

I'm going to ask you to prove that acoustic. If demanding that immigration laws be enforced is the same as being a neo-nazi then about 70% of Americans are. That would include me. So, show me the links between the leadership of Save Our State and Nazi groups.

---

Ok. http://www.indybay.org/archives/archive_by_id.php?id=3458&category_id=15 http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/07/1757019.php http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Save_Our_State http://www.elmerfudd.us/darkwind/tackle.htm http://www.splcenter.org/intel/news/item.jsp?aid=16 http://www.theredalert.com/features/saveourstate.htm

At the very least Neo-Nazis are very drawn to Save Our State.

With regard to your 70%:

Gallup Poll doesn't have a poll dated March 27 of this year. The closest match is a poll of investors.

Quinnipiac University Poll says:

* 62 - 32 percent opposed to making it easier for illegal immigrants to become citizens, with immigrant families opposed 56 - 36 percent;
* 54 - 41 percent opposed to making it easier for illegal immigrants to become legal workers, with immigrant families supporting the measure 51 - 44 percent;
* 72 - 25 percent opposed to allowing illegal immigrants to get drivers' licenses, with immigrant families opposed 66 - 30 percent;
* 84 - 14 percent in favor of requiring proof of legal residency in order to obtain government benefits, with immigrant families in support 80 - 18 percent;
* 50 - 42 percent opposed to eliminating the automatic U.S. citizenship for illegal immigrants' children born in the U.S., with immigrant families opposed 51 - 41 percent.

* Most (73%) favor a guest worker program for illegal immigrants, with a quarter (23%) opposing. The public is split though on whether they should be eligible to register for the program in the U.S. (50%) or have to return to their home countries to apply (46%).

* About two-thirds (64%) favor granting temporary visas to immigrants not currently in the United States to do seasonal or temporary work here and then return to their own countries;

* About 3-in-4 (76%) favor allowing illegal immigrants in the U.S., citizenship if they learn English, have a job and pay taxes;

* A majority (56%) think illegal immigrants are taking jobs that U.S. citizens do not want or cannot do.

quote:

---

What's your point? Your search proved the group exists and it's an activist group.

---

My point was that your article gave this group equal footing with some much larger groups. I'm just providing some balance to the exaggeration.

quote:

---

Again, what's your point.

---

Didn't you see the bold type? They are working to make their immigrants legal. Heaven forbid.

quote:

---

Listen up acoustic, there are immigration laws whether you like it or not.

---

I've never looked into immigration laws, nor do I mind their existence.

quote:

---

Millions have come here legally but not one single illegal alien should be rewarded for breaking US federal immigration laws. Period.

---

So, hypothetically, we can say that you'd be against offering asylum to an illegal alien who came here after leading a revolt in an attempt to bring democracy to his/her nation, and who is currently being pursued by Communists? Interesting.

quote:

---

There are plenty of people sitting on their dead a*ses being supported by state and federal taxpayers. Let them do what every other generation of Americans have done....get off their a*ses and go find a job.

---

Yeah, they should, but those people who sit on their @sses living off the government probably won't be any more inclined to look for a job just because all the Mexicans are gone.
-------------------------------------------

posted March 29, 2006 07:21 PM            

Sorry acoustic, this doesn't track either. Several people holding US flags and a banner displaying Save our State.org does not a neo Nazi group make...or any other Nazi group either. http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/07/1757019.php

Sorry acoustic, this one doesn't track either. Someone making an opposition statement on the self editing Wikipedia under alleged ties to a neo Nazi group or groups do not make SOS a neo Nazi group or Nazi group of any kind. Tell you what, acoustic, how about I go to dailykos.com, post a comment and then I can claim Daily Kos is a Republican website and their members are Republicans? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Save_Our_State

Sorry acoustic, this one doesn't track either. One cannot take out a permit to march and protest and then tell others they can't show up...either to join in or oppose. The best evidence of reality comes from the founder of SOS himself:
Turner has told members of his Web site's forum that he opposes white supremacists joining his protests, and he wrote to the Intelligence Report "there seems to be very little we can do to keep them from piggybacking off our activism. ... [W]e are unable to really do anything about it." http://www.splcenter.org/intel/news/item.jsp?aid=16

Sorry acoustic, this one doesn't track either. In fact, Turner says:
"I’ve had to delete a sh*tload of white supremacists who want to come over and throw epithets. I’ve also had to delete members of the opposition who come in and try to invade our boards and use trollish behavior.I don’t support any sort of racial supremacy ideology. We definitely have had a problem as far as an influx; essentially, our message board is public."
However, it didn't escape my notice that the Stalinist Communist organization, International A.N.S.W.E.R. oppose Save Our State. http://www.theredalert.com/features/saveourstate.htm

Wrong acoustic, the article I posted didn't assign rankings to any of the illegal alien support groups.

quote:

---

So, hypothetically, we can say that you'd be against offering asylum to an illegal alien who came here after leading a revolt in an attempt to bring democracy to his/her nation, and who is currently being pursued by Communists? Interesting....acoustic.

---

quote:

---

Yeah, they should, but those people who sit on their @sses living off the government probably won't be any more inclined to look for a job just because all the Mexicans are gone....acoustic

---

posted March 29, 2006 08:36 PM              

This is maybe worth noteing ...

quote:

---

One of the more negative parts of the march was when American flags were passed out to make sure the marchers were looked on as part of "America".

---

quote:

---

...American flags were forced on our people by vendidos to make our protest more acceptable to the mainstream media.

---

posted March 29, 2006 10:31 PM            

On the whole, I think the greedy sons of *bad mothers* who employ illegals deserve to be arrested. Back in Miami you'd be hard pressed to find an entry-level position that paid more than minimum wage ... or that increased your pay by any significant amount over time. And you could just forget about health care. Why? Illegals will work for next to nothing. That job I just complained about seems like a great opportunity to a lot of them. So employers don't have to worry about not being able to fill a position if someone quits or is fired. They'll hire an illegal or, if desperate, a teenager. They'll make their shifts mostly part-time to avoid the health care benefits for their employees. They'll work them overtime, on weekends, on standby without paying them extra ... and who is going to stop them?
Really, the situation is out of hand.
And that's not even counting the miserably poor illegals that just wait on street corners or under highways for people to driveby and pick them up for odd jobs, usually construction. And, from their own mouths, they usually get ripped off ... as in, no pay for a week's worth of work. I've seen grown men crying over two weeks worth of work unpaid because now he can't feed his wife and kids and they're going to lose their place in the efficiency they share with another family. It's just horrible.

quote:

---

Mr. Krugman also observed — citing a leading Harvard study — "that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren't for Mexican immigration. That's why it's intellectually dishonest to say, as President Bush does, that immigrants 'do jobs that Americans will not do.' The willingness of Americans to do a job depends on how much that job pays — and the reason some jobs pay too little to attract native-born Americans is competition from poorly paid immigrants." Thusly do the two leading economic writers for the nation's two leading liberal newspapers summarily debunk the economic underpinning of the president's and the Senate's immigration proposals.

---

You might think you're doing a good thing by supporting illegal immigrants but they're just being exploited. It's infinitely better to come here legally and have not just the rights of being an American citizen, but also the protection that comes with it.
As for amnesty ... it isn't political asylum ... so the guy/gal truly fleeing from Communists doesn't need it.

"Beginning in the post World War II period, the government devised a series of special measures to speed the admission of a variety of troubled groups such as holocaust survivors, displaced Europeans, Hungarian freedom fighters, anti-communist Cubans, and war-scarred Indochinese. Since 1945 the United States has admitted over 2.8 million people for humanitarian reasons outside the normal immigration stream.

The 1980 Refugee Act: Seeking an Elusive Discipline. Congress passed the 1980 Refugee Act to consolidate the profusion of special and ad hoc arrangements, to bring U.S. criteria and procedures for granting refugee status into line with international law, and to grant resettlement assistance. The Act (8 USC 1101 (a)(42)) defines refugees as persons who are persecuted or who have

". . . a well founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion."

The Act anticipated a "normal flow" of refugees into the United States of 50,000 a year. One of its goals was to establish political and geographic neutrality in judging refugee status, ending the then-existing presumption that all those leaving communist lands were refugees."
http://www.npg.org/forum_series/ref&asylum_policy.htm

*Note* I don't necessarily agree with everything that NPG stands for ... just using a quote from their site that demonstrates what political asylum is so that it isn't confused with amnesty.

posted March 30, 2006 12:21 AM            

quote:

---

Many will cut off the illegals right away. I highly doubt any legitimate businesses will continue to employ illegals after this.

---

posted March 30, 2006 11:58 AM            

quote:

---

Many will cut off the illegals right away. I highly doubt any legitimate businesses will continue to employ illegals after this.

---

Immigration threats are very real and taken very seriously, at least back in Miami. I've seen alot of people get fired over even the mention of stricter immigration laws, etc. Who wants to take the chance? The only businesses that usually don't care are those run by illegals. Granted, the constant influx of new illegal immigrants makes it possible to just hire more and keep your records confusing.
Add to the original quote, though, that probably sympathizers to the illegal immigrant "cause" will retain their employees, at least at first. So, yeah, I highly doubt that most legitimate businesses will continue to employee illegals, yada yada. And those who do keep them will have the legal troubles they deserve.

******

jwhop
It's nice to hear non-anti-immigrant comments these days. Sounds like you do understand what it's like for folks like my parents.

******

Harpyr
Do you think it's possible that the jobs in, say, agriculture left open will be added to the unemployment offices lists?