IT’S REALLY ABOUT HISPANDERING FOR THE ILLEGALS’ ILLEGAL L VOTES AND MUCHO MAS “CHEAP” LABOR, WHICH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE WAKING UP TO FIND IS STAGGERINGLY EXPENSIVE! NOT JUST IN DOLLARS PAID OUT IN HEAVY BREEDING MEXICANS, BUT PRISON COSTS.
MEXICANS HOP OUR BORDERS AND JOBS WITH A LOOTING MENTALITY!
CA PUTS OUT $20 BILLION A YEAR FOR SOCIAL SERVICES FOR ILLEGALS, AND NOW HAS THE WORST EDUCATION SYSTEM IN THE UNION, ALSO DUE SUBSTANTIALLY TO THE FACT MEXICANS LOATH LITERACY AND ENGLISH!
THE PEOPLE (LEGALS) ARE NOW PUSHING BACK AGAINST THE MEX INVASION, AND LA RAZA “THE RACE” MEX SUPREMACY, WHICH IS ALL “SANCTUARY CITY” STATUS IS! ILLEGALS WITH STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS GETTING OUR JOBS!
IN SANCTUARY COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, LEGALS ARE FORCED TO PAY IN TAXES $600 MILLION IN WELFARE TO ILLEGALS. MORE MILLIONS TO CLEAN UP MEX GRAFFITI! IN LOS ANGELES, 47% OF ALL JOBS ARE HELD BY ILLEGALS USING STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS!
A MAJOR REASON FOR THE SOARING UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS THIS STATES IMPORTING OF CHINESE AND INDIANS TO TAKE ALL SKILLED JOBS, AND HORDES OF MEXICAN TO WORK “CHEAP” IN ALL JOBS THAT DON’T REQUIRE LITERACY!
LA RAZA ENDORSED BUSH WAR PROFITEER, AND OBAMA DONOR, DIANNE FEINSTEIN HAS LONG HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER S.F. HOTEL. SHE IS LOATHSOME OF PAYING A LEGAL A LIVING WAGE!
LA RAZA ENDORSED OPEN BORDERS ADVOCATE NANCY PELOSI HAS LONG HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER NAPA WINERY. SHE IS LOATHSOME OF PAYING A LEGAL A LIVING WAGE!
LA RAZA BOXER HAS LONG PUSHED FOR NO ENGLISH, NO I.D. FOR ILLEGALS TO VOTE, NO E-VERIFY, NO WALL, NO I.C.E. ENFORCEMENT, NO WALL, AND NO ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS PROHIBITING THE EMPLOYMENT OF ILLEGALS.
YOU WONDERED WHY THE HISPANDERING PRESIDENT HAS MADE SO MANY TRIPS TO CA TO PUSH THE CORRUPT WOMAN’S PUSH FOR SIX MORE YEARS OF BRIBES???
THESE LA RAZA DEMS HAVE AND WILL SELL US OUT TO ANYONE WITH A BUCK TO TUCK IN THEIR (OR THEIR HUSBAND’S ) POCKETS.
THIS STATE DID NOT HEAD TO MELTDOWN BY ACCIDENT, IS THE STAGGERING CORRUPTION FO THESE RICH-OFF-ELECTED OFFICE TRAITORS!
VIVA LA RECONQUISTA! VIVA MEXIFORNA WHERE NO LEGAL NEED APPLY!
HEARD ENGLISH TODAY?
*
CITIES WHERE MEXICAN SUPREMACY IS THE RULE – NO LEGAL NEED APPLY!
To any illegal who wants to move somewhere safe these cities in California are sanctuary cities who will provide for your every need. Free medical, dental, food stamps, welfare for your children and many other beautiful things so run and embrace beautiful California.
Services will continue until their are no more taxpayers there so hurry and get what you are entitled to why the gravy train is still running.
California wants you!
# Bell Gardens, CA
# City of Industry, CA
# City of Commerce, CA
# Cypress, CA
# Davis CA
# Downey, CA
# Fresno, CA
# Los Angeles, CA
# Long Beach, CA
# Lynwood, CA
# Maywood, CA
# Montebello, CA
# National City, CA
# Norwalk, CA
# Oakland, CA
# Paramount, CA
# Pico Rivera, CA
# Richmond, CA
# So. Gate, CA
# San Diego, CA
# Santa Cruz, CA
# San Francisco, CA
# San Jose, CA
# Sonoma County, CA
# Vernon, CA
# Watsonville, CA
# West Hollywood, CA
# Wilmington, CA
Please pass along we really do want the cities in California to really practice what they preach.
*
Immigration a hot issue in state races
Joe Garofoli,Drew Joseph, Chronicle Staff Writers
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Even as a federal judge blocked some of the more controversial portions of a new Arizona immigration law this week, its political reverberations - and those of other immigration issues - are shaking California's statewide races.
Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina is using the example of the Arizona policy to argue against places like San Francisco that have declared themselves to be sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants.
Under its 1989 policy, San Francisco law officers report felony suspects to federal immigration officials only if their legal status can't be readily confirmed.
But Fiorina said that if the U.S. Department of Justice is going to challenge Arizona for trying to create its own immigration policy that deviates from the federal policy, then the agency should be consistent and also crack down on sanctuary cities.
Consistency questioned
"If the federal government wants to take the point of view that the Obama administration and Attorney General Eric Holder seem to be taking, which is all immigration issues are federal government issues and therefore we will challenge any authority, then they ought to be applying that standard consistently, and they clearly are not," Fiorina told KPIX.
But legal analysts say sanctuary city policies aren't at all similar to an entire state creating its own immigration policy.
First, the term "sanctuary cities" is not a definitive legal term, said Kevin Johnson, dean of the UC Davis Law School. Each city - including more than a dozen in California - defines its sanctuary policies differently.
"It's apples and oranges," Johnson said. "There's no city that's saying 'We're not cooperating with the federal government on immigration enforcement.' It's just different levels of cooperation. San Francisco is cooperating. I don't understand what (Fiorina) is talking about other than to use slanted political jargon to make political impact."
And while sanctuary cities do not conform to federal standards, federal officials can still enter a city and enforce their immigration policies, said Richard Boswell, a professor of immigration law at UC Hastings College of the Law.
This week, immigration activists on the left used the Arizona law to challenge Democratic Attorney General Jerry Brown on a different front.
Many groups believe that a federal program newly introduced to San Francisco called Secure Communities inspires the same distrust between immigrant communities and law enforcement that the Arizona law would have caused.
Fingerprint database
Developed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, Secure Communities requires states to forward the fingerprints of people who are booked into county jails so that ICE agents can check the prints against their database of people known to be in the country illegally, including those with criminal records.
While Secure Communities does not prevent illegal immigrants from obtaining education and health care in the city, it violates other aspects of the sanctuary city designation, critics said.
"Instead of being called Secure Communities, it should be called Terrorized Communities," Guillermina Castellanos of La Colectiva de Mujeres said at a San Francisco rally this week against the program.
Brown refused to let San Francisco opt out of the program, despite opposition from the Board of Supervisors and Sheriff Michael Hennessey. Brown wrote to Hennessey that the program "serves both public safety and the interest of justice."
Criminal records
Supporters of Secure Communities, which took effect in San Francisco on June 8, say it prevents people from being released before their criminal record is uncovered and going on to commit other crimes.
"Accordingly, identifying criminals is not simply a local issue, but has statewide significance," said Christine Gasparac, a spokeswoman for the attorney general's office.
"There are already indications that the Secure Communities program is working in San Francisco by uncovering serious criminals," Gasparac said.
Nationally, only 9 percent of people whose prints matched records in ICE's database were charged with serious crimes, according to a San Francisco Police Commission audit of federal figures for the year that ended in October. That same audit found that 5 percent of all detainees - 5,880 people - were actually U.S. citizens who were mistakenly held.
Politically, Brown's support for the program could fuel criticism by his more liberal supporters.
While Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, said at the rally this week that it is important to vote for Brown for governor, San Francisco Supervisor David Campos threatened that Latino and immigrant voters would pull their support if he does not change his position.
E-mail the writers at jgarofoli@sfchronicle.com and ajoseph@sfchronicle.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment