Monday, July 5, 2010


3 headless bodies found in car in Mexico

Mexico (AP) — Police have found the decapitated bodies of three men inside a burned-out car in the drug gang-plagued Mexican state of Sinaloa. The heads had been put on the vehicle's hood.
The Sinaloa state attorney general's office says one of the burned bodies was in the driver's seat, another in the back seat and the third was in the trunk.

Investigators found the car Monday in the city of Angostura, near the Pacific coast.

The office's statement provided no information on possible suspects or the motive for the killings.

Sinaloa has long been considered the home state of many of Mexico's most powerful drug lords.



By Dennis Wagner, The Arizona Republic

On May 9, a 15-year-old girl walked into Arizona through the San Luis port of entry, near Yuma, with 5 pounds of marijuana strapped around her belly, Customs and Border Protection records show.

She was busted by customs officers.

Later that day, a 16-year-old boy tried the same thing with 2 pounds of cannabis taped to his legs. He, too, was arrested.
The marijuana, with a combined street value of $72,000, was confiscated.
The juveniles — both U.S. citizens — were turned over to police, but others keep taking their place.
In the past two years, Homeland Security officials have witnessed a disturbing development along the Mexican border: kid smugglers.
"It's going up," said Michael Lowrie, a public-affairs agent for the U.S. Border Patrol. "Not a whole lot, but more than we've seen in, well, pretty much ever."
The Border Patrol does not keep data on juvenile drug runners caught trying to sneak into Arizona. Customs and Border Protection records show 130 minors were caught attempting to bring drugs through entry ports from Sonora into Arizona during fiscal 2009, an 83% increase over the previous year.
Teresa Small, a Customs and Border Protection spokeswoman in San Luis, said narcotics organizations are recruiting American teens with claims that they won't face major punishment if caught.
"Drug-trafficking organizations lead them to believe they will not have a substantial sentence," Small said. Prison terms are not uncommon for teen smugglers.
The problem escalated last year to a point where federal and local authorities created programs to warn Yuma County students about the dangers and consequences of drug smuggling. The federal campaign includes a presentation by border agents.
Judge Maria Elena Cruz said she has noticed a surge of young smugglers who are stunned when she orders them incarcerated.
Small said most of the youthful offenders are Americans with family members in Mexico. She said port officers generally refer suspects to local authorities for prosecution under Arizona law, rather than to the federal justice system.
"One thing for sure: They will get the hardest punishment possible," Small said.
Still, the cases pile up.
On June 24, Customs and Border Protection reported, a 16-year-old American boy was arrested at the San Luis port of entry with cocaine taped to his leg.
"They think they're going to get away with it or get a slap on the wrist," Lowrie

What's needed to discourage illegal immigration into the United States has been known for years: Enforce existing law. CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday August 18, 2008

The largest business lobby in the country is again meddling in Immigration policy. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has issued a scathing report on requiring federal contractors to use E-Verify, the federal program designed to check the legal status of all workers. President Bush signed an executive order
requiring federal contractors to use the system, but the open-borders Chamber of Commerce calls the initiative, "misguided, premature, and unwarranted.”

Small Business Owners: 79 percent said inadequate enforcement ( 17% unemployment)
Date: 2010-02-05, 11:11AM PST
Reply to: [Errors when replying to ads?]

New Poll Reveals Business Leaders and Union Members Favor Enforcement over Amnesty
Wednesday, - posted on NumbersUSA

A new Zogby poll (see the full report from the Center for Immigration Studies) reveals that when given the choice between enforcing immigration laws causing illegal aliens to leave the country or offering a mass amnesty, senior business executives, small business owners and union members favor enforcement. This is in stark contrast to the business and union lobbyists who are pushing for an amnesty.

Among the findings...

When asked to choose between enforcement that would cause illegal immigrants in the country to go home or offering them a pathway to citizenship with conditions, most members of the business community and unions choose enforcement.

Executives (e.g. CEOs, CFOs, VPs etc.): 59 percent support enforcement to encourage illegals to go home; 30 percent support conditional legalization.
Small Business Owners: 67 percent support enforcement; 22 percent support conditional legalization.
Union Households: 58 percent support enforcement; 28 percent support conditional legalization.
One of the most interesting findings of the survey is that members of the business community think there are plenty of Americans available to fill unskilled jobs. Union members feel the same way.

Executives: 16 percent said legal immigration should be increased to fill unskilled jobs, 61 percent said there are plenty of Americans available to do unskilled jobs, employers just need to pay more.
Small Business Owners: 13 percent said increase immigration; 65 percent said plenty of Americans are available.
Union Households: 10 percent said increase immigration; 72 percent said plenty of Americans are available.
Most members of the business community and union households do not feel that illegal immigration is caused by limits on legal immigration, as many of their lobbyists argue; instead, members feel it is due to a lack of enforcement.

Executives: Just 13 percent said illegal immigration is caused by not letting in enough legal immigrants; 75 percent said inadequate enforcement.
Small Business Owners: 10 percent said not enough legal immigration; 79 percent said inadequate enforcement.
Union Households: 13 percent said not enough legal immigration; 74 percent said inadequate enforcement efforts.
In contrast to many businesses group and union leaders, most executives and union members think im- migration is too high.

Executives: 63 percent said it is too high; 5 percent said too low; 16 percent said just right.
Small Business Owners: 70 percent said it is too high; 4 percent said too low; 13 percent said just right.
Union Households: 63 percent said immigration is too high; 5 percent said too low; 14 percent said just right.
The key question in the poll asked whether business leaders and union members would choose enforcement versus amnesty, and the overwhelming majority choose enforcement.

What's needed to discourage illegal immigration into the United States has been known for years: Enforce existing law.


By David R. Francis
from the June 23, 2008 edition
What's needed to discourage illegal immigration into the United States has been known for years: Enforce existing law.
Amazingly, that is happening now – to some degree. This trend may already be shrinking the flood across the Mexican border and have a modest positive impact on job prospects for "native born" Americans during the present economic slump.
Immigration prosecutions reached an all-time high in March, reports the Trans_actional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), a data research and distribution group at Syracuse University in New York. Using data from the Justice Department, it calculates that prosecutions were up 49 percent from February and 72.7 percent from March of last year. This highly unusual surge is filling up US detention centers and jails.
March prosecutions numbered 9,360. That's small compared to the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants in the US. Nonetheless, "It's working," says Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington think tank that would like immigration levels reduced considerably.
The hike in prosecutions stems from an expansion of "Operation Streamline" last year by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Under the effort, undocumented aliens caught by border guards are no longer simply steered into "air-conditioned buses," as Mr. Krikorian puts it, and driven back across the border to try crossing again. Instead, they are charged with crimes and detained.
The most common charge is "reentry of a deported alien." But there are at least nine other crimes, including entry of an alien at an improper time or place. The result is detention until trial, usually before US Magistrate Courts. A typical sentence is one month, and then "removal."
That time under detention, DHS hopes, will deter these aliens from trying again and discourage others from even trying. Border crossings have plunged, especially in areas where those caught are put into lockups. Border patrol apprehensions along the Mexican border were down 17 percent to 347,372 between October 2007 and March 2008, compared with the same period a year previous.

In addition to the border measures, immigration officials have stepped up well-publicized raids on meatpacking firms and other companies hiring undocumented workers. States, including Arizona, also have been cracking down on employers of illegal immigrants, a crime often harder to prove in court than illegal border crossing.
Krikorian guesses that in the past, 800,000 to 900,000 illegal immigrants successfully entered the US every year, and about 400,000 left voluntarily or were deported each year – a net growth of about 500,000 illegal immigrants a year.
If current moves to restrain illegal immigration trim that growth by 100,000 to 200,000 immigrants, it should have some effect on the nation's labor supply, notes University of Chicago economist Jeffrey Grogger. He's coauthor of a paper calculating that a 10 percent increase in the supply of a particular skill group caused by higher immigration prompted a reduction in the wages of similarly low-skilled black men by 4 percent between 1960 and 2000, lowered their employment rate by a huge 3.5 percentage points, and increased their incarceration rate by almost a full percentage point.
So, presumably, fewer low-skilled immigrants could gradually induce more work for low-skilled native Americans.
The weaker economy and labor market should also prove less of a draw for immigrants, mostly undocumented ones, over the next year or two, cutting the flow by "several hundred thousand" per year, reckons a new study by four economists with Goldman Sachs, a prominent Wall Street investment bank. That would reduce labor-force growth by 0.2 to 0.3 percentage points compared with the growth rate in the past few years – and thus the potential for greater economic growth. The Goldman Sachs economists would welcome an increase in the flow of immigrants as a way to absorb the excess inventory of homes troubling the housing industry, and mitigate the "incipient pressures on the federal budget due to the impending retirement of the baby boom generation."
But a study by Northeastern University's Center for Labor Market Studies in Boston attributes the "unprecedented" levels of legal, illegal, and temporary immigration as a factor underlying the "devastation" in the job scene for America's teens and young adults over the past seven years. That's especially the case for males with no schooling beyond high school and youths from low-income families. Summer seasonal jobs as a proportion of all jobs are at the lowest level now in the past 30 years.


from the March 28, 2005 edition - j
Joke on America: Hiring Illegals
The Monitor's View
Ha ha ha. That's a good one. Wal-Mart, a company with $285 billion in sales, gets fined a mere $11 million earlier this month for having hundreds of illegal immigrants clean its stores.
The federal government boasts it's the largest fine of its kind. But for Wal-Mart, it amounts to a rounding error - and no admittance of wrongdoing since it claims it didn't know its contractors hired the illegals.
If it weren't so easy for illegals and employers to skirt worker ID verification, the settlement's requirement that Wal-Mart also improve hiring controls might have a ripple effect in corporate America. But the piddling fine will hardly deter businesses from hiring cheap labor from a pool of illegals that's surged by 23 percent since 2000.
It's commonly argued that Americans don't want the jobs illegals take. But a workforce of perhaps 7 million undocumented workers depresses wages. Those wages would readjust upward, and be attractive to Americans and legal immigrants, if the stream of illegals significantly abated. Promise of work in the US encourages illegal (and dangerous) border crossing. That's why the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 provided for sanctions against businesses that hire the undocumented.
But enforcement is pathetically inadequate, especially since 9/11.
Facing limited resources, immigration officials have necessarily redirected priorities to protecting critical infrastructure. For instance, more than 1,100 unauthorized alien workers with access to sensitive areas at airports have been arrested.
Even so, the sanctions' decline is staggering. In 1999, fines totaling $3.69 million were collected from 890 companies. Last year, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) collected $118,500 from 64 companies. But it levied zero fines. Zero.
Lax enforcement spans administrations, and experts blame the twin pressures of ethnic advocacy and business interests. Decentralized hiring and high turnover compound the problem. Many large corporations have fobbed off hiring responsibility on contractors, and after them come scads of smaller businesses that rely on the undocumented.
That's why it's especially important that local law enforcement be alert. The ICE might never have stumbled upon the Wal-Mart case had it not been for the local police in Honesdale, Pa., whose follow-up on a hit-and-run accident led them to the Wal-Mart workers. But like the feds, state and county governments also face limited resources.
The ICE says Wal-Mart's fine will fund future enforcement. That could be a model - but only if fines amount to more than a slap on the wrist.


Study: Illegal alien population may be as high as 38 million A new report finds the Homeland Security Department "grossly underestimates" the number of illegal aliens living in the U.S.
“Walsh stated. Walsh said his analysis indicating there are 38 million illegal aliens in the U.S. was calculated using the conservative estimate of three illegal immigrants entering the U.S. for each one apprehended.”
Illegal alien population may be as high as 38 million

Study: Illegal alien population may be as high as 38 million A new report finds the Homeland Security Department "grossly underestimates" the number of illegal aliens living in the U.S. Homeland Security's Office of Immigration Studies released a report August 31 that estimates the number of illegal aliens residing in the U.S. is between 8 and 12 million. But the group Californians for Population Stabilization, or CAPS, has unveiled a report estimating the illegal population is actually between 20 and 38 million. Four experts, all of whom contributed to the study prepared by CAPS, discussed their findings at a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington Wednesday. James Walsh, a former associate general counsel of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, said he is "appalled" that the Bush administration, lawyers on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and every Democratic presidential candidate, with the exception of Joe Biden, have no problem with sanctuary cities for illegal aliens. "Ladies and gentlemen, the sanctuary cities and the people that support them are violating the laws of the United States of America. They're violating 8 USC section 1324 and 1325, which is a felony -- [it's] a felony to aid, support, transport, shield, harbor illegal aliens," Walsh stated. Walsh said his analysis indicating there are 38 million illegal aliens in the U.S. was calculated using the conservative estimate of three illegal immigrants entering the U.S. for each one apprehended. According to Walsh, "In the United States, immigration is in a state of anarchy -- not chaos, but anarchy."
Obama soft on illegals enforcement

Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday. Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.

The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). Mr. Smith, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said a period of economic turmoil is the wrong time to be cutting enforcement and letting illegal immigrants take jobs that Americans otherwise would hold.
“What's needed to discourage illegal immigration into the United States has been known for years: Enforce existing law.” ….. CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR

August 6, 2009
U.S. to Reform Policy on Detention for Immigrants
The Obama administration intends to announce an ambitious plan on Thursday to overhaul the much-criticized way the nation detains immigration violators, trying to transform it from a patchwork of jail and prison cells to what its new chief called a “truly civil detention system.”
Details are sketchy, and even the first steps will take months or years to complete. They include reviewing the federal government’s contracts with more than 350 local jails and private prisons, with an eye toward consolidating many detainees in places more suitable for noncriminals facing deportation — some possibly in centers built and run by the government.
The plan aims to establish more centralized authority over the system, which holds about 400,000 immigration detainees over the course of a year, and more direct oversight of detention centers that have come under fire for mistreatment of detainees and substandard — sometimes fatal — medical care.

One move starts immediately: the government will stop sending families to the T. Don Hutto Residential Center, a former state prison near Austin, Tex., that drew an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit and scathing news coverage for putting young children behind razor wire.
“We’re trying to move away from ‘one size fits all,’ ” John Morton, who heads the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency as assistant secretary of homeland security, said in an interview on Wednesday. Detention on a large scale must continue, he said, “but it needs to be done thoughtfully and humanely.”
Hutto, a 512-bed center run for profit by the Corrections Corporation of America under a $2.8 million-a-month federal contract, was presented as a centerpiece of the Bush administration’s tough approach to immigration enforcement when it opened in 2006. The decision to stop sending families there — and to set aside plans for three new family detention centers — is the Obama administration’s clearest departure from its predecessor’s immigration enforcement policies.
So far, the new administration has embraced many of those policies, expanding a program to verify worker immigration status that has been widely criticized, bolstering partnerships between federal immigration agents and local police departments, and rejecting a petition for legally binding rules on conditions in immigration detention.
But Mr. Morton, a career prosecutor, said he was taking a new philosophical approach to detention — that the system’s purpose was to remove immigration violators from the country, not imprison them, and that under the government’s civil authority, detention is aimed at those who pose a serious risk of flight or danger to the community.
Janet Napolitano, the secretary of homeland security, said last week that she expected the number of detainees to stay the same or grow slightly. But Mr. Morton added that the immigration agency would consider alternative ways to assure that those who face deportation — and are not dangerous — do not flee.
Reviewing and redesigning all facilities, programs and standards will be the task of a new Office of Detention Policy and Planning, he said. Dora Schriro, special adviser to Ms. Napolitano, will become the director, assisted by two experts on detention management and medical care. The agency will also form two advisory boards of community groups and immigrant advocates, one focusing on detention policies and practices, the other on detainee health care.
Mr. Morton said he would appoint 23 detention managers to work in the 23 largest detention centers, including several run by private companies, to ensure that problems are promptly fixed. He is reorganizing the agency’s inspection unit into three regional operations, renaming it the Office of Detention Oversight, and making its agents responsible for investigating detainee grievances as well as conducting routine and random checks.
“A lot of this exists already,” he said. “A lot of it is making it work better” while Dr. Schriro’s office redesigns the detention system, which he called “disjointed” and “very much dependent on excess capacity in the criminal justice system.”
Asked if his vision could include building new civil detention centers, he said yes. The current 32,000-bed network costs $2.4 billion a year, but the agency is not ready to calculate the cost of a revamped system.
Vanita Gupta, an American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who led the lawsuit against the Hutto center, was jubilant over the decision to stop sending families there, but cautious about the other measures.
“The ending of family detention at Hutto is welcome news and long overdue,” she said in an e-mail message. “However, without independently enforceable standards, a reduction in beds, or basic due process before people are locked up, it is hard to see how the government’s proposed overhaul of the immigration detention system is anything other than a reorganization or renaming of what was in place before.”
Ms. Gupta said the changes at Hutto since 2006 illustrated the importance of enforceable rules. Before the A.C.L.U. lawsuit was settled in 2007, some children under 10 stayed as long as a year, mainly confined to family cells with open toilets, with only one hour of schooling a day. Children told of being threatened by guards with separation from their parents, many of them asylum-seekers from around the world.
Only through judicial enforcement of the settlement, she said, have children been granted such liberties as wearing pajamas at night and taking crayons into family cells. The settlement also required the agency to honor agency standards that had been ignored, like timely reviews of the decision to detain a family at all. Some families have been deported, but others were released or are now awaiting asylum decisions in housing run by nonprofit social service agencies.
That kind of stepped-up triage could be part of the more civil detention system envisioned by Mr. Morton and Dr. Schriro, who has been reviewing the detention system for months and is expected to report her recommendations soon.
But the Hutto case also points to the limits of their approach, advocates say. Under the settlement, parents and children accused of immigration violations were detained when possible at the country’s only other family detention center, an 84-bed former nursing home in Leesport, Pa., called the Berks Family Shelter Care Facility. The number detained at Hutto has dropped sharply, to 127 individuals from as many as 450.
Advocates noted that Berks, though eclipsed by the criticism of Hutto — the subject of protest vigils, a New Yorker article and a documentary — also has a history of problems, like guards who disciplined children by sending them across the parking lot to a juvenile detention center, and families’ being held for two years.
The Hutto legal settlement expires Aug. 29. In the most recent monitoring report last month, Magistrate Judge Andrew W. Austin wrote: “Although the use of this facility to hold families is not a violation of the settlement agreement, it seems fundamentally wrong to house children and their noncriminal parents this way. We can do better.”
Mr. Morton, a career prosecutor, seemed to agree. Hutto will be converted into an immigration jail for women, he said, adding: “I’m not ruling out the possibility of detaining families. But Berks is the better facility for that. Hutto is not the long-term answer.”
"Remember 187 -- the Proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to
non-citizens -- was the last gasp of white America in California."
---Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party
Some Interestng Quotes from Hispanic "Leaders" :

"Go back to Boston!
Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims!
Get out!
We are the future.
You are old and tired.
Go on.
We have beaten you.
Leave like beaten rats.
You old white people.
It is your duty to die . .
Through love of having children, we are going to take over."
---Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets

"They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions
and other institutions.
They're right.
We will take them over . .
We are here to stay."
---Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council.

"The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction
of Mexico without firing a single shot."
---Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico

"We have an aging white America.
They are not making babies.
They are dying.
The explosion is in our population and
I love it.
They are shitting in their pants with fear.
I love it."
---Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas

Anchor Baby Power
La Voz de Aztlan has produced a video in honor of the millions of babies that have been born as US citizens to Mexican undocumented parents. These babies are destined to transform America. The nativist CNN reporter Lou Dobbs estimates that there are over 200,000 "Anchor Babies" born every year whereas George Putnam, a radio reporter, says the figure is closer to 300,000. La Voz de Aztlan believes that the number is approximately 500,000 "Anchor Babies" born every year.
The video below depicts the many faces of the "Anchor Baby Generation". The video includes a fascinating segment showing a group of elementary school children in Santa Ana, California confronting the Minutemen vigilantes. The video ends with a now famous statement by Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez of the University of Texas at Austin.


“The principal beneficiaries of our current immigration policy are affluent Americans who hire immigrants at substandard wages for low-end work. Harvard economist George Borjas estimates that American workers lose $190 billion annually in depressed wages caused by the constant flooding of the labor market at the low-wage end.” Christian Science Monitor

From the above blog, email articles to those concerned about Obama’s endless push for amnesty.

Despite Arizona Law, Illegals Vow to Keep Coming
Posted: Mon May 03, 2010 5:33 am
by Associated Press

Illegal migrants targeted by a tough new Arizona law dismiss it as just another obstacle that pales in comparison to the extortion, arrests and kidnappings they already risk to reach U.S. soil.

NOGALES, Mexico — The line of Mexicans waiting to go shopping in Arizona snakes twice around the sun-drenched plaza, even as politicians nearby slap stickers on cars calling for a boycott of the U.S. state.

And the illegal migrants targeted by a tough new Arizona law dismiss it as just another obstacle that pales in comparison to the extortion, arrests and kidnappings they already risk to reach U.S. soil. They vow to keep on coming.
Topics: Illegal Immigration, Arizona SB 1070,
Resentment has erupted throughout Mexico over the immigration law in Arizona that is considered racist here. But crossing back and forth between the countries is so intrinsic to their lives that many Mexicans find it hard to give it up despite calls by immigration activists for a boycott of Arizona.

"Border cities depend on each other and it has been that way for many years," said Maria Romero, a nurse from Nogales, which lies across from the Arizona town of the same name. "It seems they don't understand that on the other side and are always looking for ways to make things more difficult."

There are few signs so far that the bill has deterred Mexicans from crossing into Arizona — legally or not. The wait to drive across the border is more than two hours.

The legislation signed by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer last week requires local and state police who stop people for another reason to question them about their immigration status if there's reason to suspect they're in the country illegally. Suspects would be detained if they are not carrying proper documents.

Supporters say the law is necessary because the federal government has failed to secure the border and because of rising anxiety over crime.

The measure has provoked huge protests in the United States by immigrant advocates who say it will encourage racial profiling. But the outcry south of the border has been subdued as Mexicans wait for the law to take effect and see how it will be implemented.

Some Mexican officials even warn that an economic boycott of Arizona could backfire if companies there lay off Mexican workers who would then no longer be able to send remittances back home.

For many of the tens of thousands of Mexicans who legally visit Arizona every day to shop for bargains or visit relatives, the cost of not going is too high — despite their dislike of the law.

In Nogales, Mexico, Romero lined up with hundreds of others at the border crossing, inching forward around a plaza and past vendors hawking jewelry and cheap souvenirs. She needed to buy a tuxedo for her 5-year-old son to wear to his kindergarten graduation and hoped to find it for a third of what it would cost in Mexico.

"No one should cross, but we go because we want to save," Romero said.

Life in the two cities is tightly interwoven despite the corrugated steel wall that runs along the hillsides, separating a string of fast-food restaurants and cheap clothing stores on the U.S. side from the dusty streets and nightclubs to the south.

The Mexican city, founded in the 19th century along a north-south railway line built to promote trade between the two countries, has become the largest point of entry for the estimated 65,000 Mexicans who visit Arizona every day, mostly for the big shopping malls.

At least 23,400 jobs in Arizona depend on the more than $7.35 million that Mexican visitors spend every day in stores, restaurants, hotels and other businesses, according to a University of Arizona study sponsored by the state's Office of Tourism.

In Santa Cruz county — where Arizona's Nogales is located — Mexican visitors account for 50 percent of taxable sales, the research found.

Mexicans angry about the immigration law want to deprive Arizona of that income.

The Institute for Mexicans Abroad, an autonomous government agency that supports Mexicans living and working in the United States, called for boycotts of Tempe, Arizona-based US Airways, the Arizona Diamondbacks and the Phoenix Suns until those organizations denounce the law.

Mexican legislators of all political stripes have called on the government of President Felipe Calderon to consider breaking commercial ties with Arizona. The government has issued a travel alert for the state, warning that migrants face an adverse political environment there.

A group of politicians handed out stickers at the Nogales border crossing over the weekend, urging Mexicans not to buy Arizona products.

"Made in Arizona SB 1070. I don't buy from those who discriminate," the stickers read, in reference to the bill.

The movement has yet to take off.

Nogales Mayor Jose Angel Hernandez said many Arizona shops, business and factories employ Mexicans who send money back to relatives south of the border.

"I have family in Nogales, Arizona, and I have a lot of friends who live and work there, and they help Nogales, Sonora," Hernandez said in an interview with The Associated Press. "That's why I worry that if the boycott is not directed correctly, it could harm our Mexican brothers who are there and are helping us."

At a shelter in Nogales, meanwhile, deported migrants discussed how soon they could get back across the border.

"I'll return to Arizona because I know a lot of people there, and I'll go where people will give me work, law or no law," said Nicasio Benitez, who worked in landscaping there until he was deported last week after being caught in a car with a cracked windshield.

He said he would visit family in the Gulf coast state of Veracruz before heading back to the border in a month.

"You live under a lot of pressure in Arizona. You have a hard time finding a place to rent, being able to drive," said Benitez, a father of three teenagers. "But what you make in the U.S. in one day, you make it in Mexico in one week."

"Life there is awful, but I don't go to the U.S. because I like living there," he added. "I go because I like dollars."
Judicial Watch
Mexicans Say Amnesty Will Boost Illegal Immigration
last Updated: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 3:02pm
If President Obama keeps his promise of giving the nation’s 12 million illegal aliens amnesty it will encourage more Mexicans to enter the United States, according to residents of the struggling Latin American country who are undoubtedly rooting for the commander-in-chief’s plan.
The majority of illegal immigrants in the U.S. are from Mexico therefore the president’s reprieve project will greatly affect that nation. Two-thirds of Mexicans say they know someone living in the United States and around one-third have an immediate member of their household or close relative living in the U.S.
A majority of those residing south of the border say legalizing their undocumented countrymen will inspire more Mexicans to head north, according to a recent survey conducted by an internationally known polling and market research company. A vast majority of Mexicans with a relative in the United States said a legalization program would make people they know more likely to go to America illegally.
The results of the survey were made public this week by a research organization dedicated to studying the economic, social, fiscal and demographic impacts of immigration in the U.S. It reveals that nearly one-third of Mexican residents (nearly 40 million people) would like to live in the U.S. and if there was an amnesty a large number would come illegally with the hope of qualifying for a future exoneration.
An amnesty, therefore, would stimulate more illegal immigration which is the last thing this country needs. Furthermore, rewarding those who have violated our nation’s laws with coveted U.S. residency and possibly citizenship demeans the system, especially for those who follow the appropriate steps to come lawfully.
It’s bad enough that U.S. taxpayers annually dish out billions of dollars to educate, medically treat and incarcerate illegal aliens who are, in many cases, depleting local governments. Los Angeles County alone spends more than $1 billion a year, including $48 million a month in welfare costs, to provide services for illegal aliens. The crisis is hardly limited to border states, which have traditionally been the most impacted. Georgia’s skyrocketing illegal population costs taxpayers nearly $2 billion a year.

“As one member of the U.S. Border Patrol (search) told me, “They believe that they are only responding to an invitation.”

Thursday , February 19, 2004
By Matt Hayes
On Jan. 27, the Copley News Service reported that shortly after President Bush announced his plans to amnesty millions of illegal aliens in the U.S., more than half of the Mexicans trying to sneak into the U.S. through San Ysidro (search) told authorities they were doing so to position themselves for the amnesty.
As one member of the U.S. Border Patrol (search) told me, “They believe that they are only responding to an invitation.”
The percentage suggested by Copley probably does not come close to the actual number of people who are running for the American border as word of Bush’s immigration plan (search) spreads through Mexico -- and indeed throughout the world. Mexico, it seems, is now regarded the world over as the doorway to the United States.
In the last several weeks, a staggering 90 percent of all illegal aliens intercepted in one sector in southern Texas claim they’ve come for the amnesty.
Officers of the Border Patrol have now been directed to ask a set of questions of the illegal aliens they apprehend running across the border. One of those questions is: Is the person attempting to illegally enter the U.S. in response to the Bush amnesty proposal? To make arrests, Border Patrol officers often must dodge rocks being thrown at them by aliens as they cross. They then are told by all but 10 percent of the illegals they apprehend that it is the Bush amnesty (search) they've come for.
“The agents were soon told to stop collecting this information, presumably because it appeared as if the proposal was acting as a lure,” says my source within the Border Patrol.
Word of the 2000-mile wide open door between Mexico and the U.S. has spread far beyond Mexico. It is not just Mexicans who are flooding into our border states anymore. Along with the Nicaraguans, Brazilians, Venezuelans, Ecuadorians, and Chileans, agents of the Border Patrol now encounter Chinese, Pakistanis, and Indians. Nationals of countries other than Mexico are known, in Border Patrol parlance, as “OTMs.” (search) Because they cannot easily be returned to their home country (whereas a Mexican national might be driven right back across the border), OTMs are permitted to enter the U.S. and given a Notice to Appear, which is a piece of paper demanding their appearance before an Immigration Judge.
“I’m an OTM and I want my NTA,” some have been known to declare to the Border Patrol. Rules require that most be given their NTA, upon which the OTM departs forever for some unknown location in America.
“A lot of OTMs want to be caught so they can get their "papers," which makes them legal enough to get past our checkpoint without having to ride in the back of an 18-wheeler or crammed into the trunk of a car,” says one agent.
This is what the Bush amnesty proposal has caused to happen at our border with Mexico. Foreign nationals walk nearly unimpeded into our country -- fully aware of ways in which our immigration laws can be used to their advantage and even the nomenclature of immigration law enforcement-- and demand that our federal officers take a certain action that gives them the greatest likelihood of disappearing within the U.S.
Like a loss-making business that is kept alive by its corporate parent so it can be used as a tax write-off, the Border Patrol remains deliberately undermanned and hogtied while the administration tries to keep up the appearance that the borders of the United States actually mean something.
At a Democratic rally in Tennessee, Al Gore dumbfounded observers when, in criticizing President Bush's invasion of Iraq, he baroquely claimed the president had "betrayed his country." Right now, thousands of registered Republicans -- particularly those in border states -- are experiencing a tangible sense of betrayal. Some things are sacrosanct to the modern Republican, and along with such values as a strong national defense and limited government, one is a secure national border. That disappeared with President Bush’s amnesty proposal, just as if he had announced that the GOP is no longer interested in reducing taxes.
I doubt that most principled Republicans will forget it.

ALIEN NATION - On Becoming A State of NARCOmex

ALIEN NATION: Secrets of the Invasion

Date: 2007-01-03, 9:46AM

May 2006 – ALIEN NATION: Secrets of the Invasion – Why America's government invites rampant illegal immigration

It's widely regarded as America's biggest problem: Between 12 and 20 million aliens (MOST SOURCES SUGGEST THERE ARE MUCH MORE LIKELY NEARLY 40 MILLION ILLEGALS HERE NOW) – including large numbers of criminals, gang members and even terrorists – have entered this nation illegally, with countless more streaming across our scandalously unguarded borders daily.

The issue polarizes the nation, robs citizens of jobs, bleeds taxpayers, threatens America's national security and dangerously balkanizes the country into unassimilated ethnic groups with little loyalty or love for America's founding values. Indeed, the de facto invasion is rapidly transforming America into a totally different country than the one past generations have known and loved.

And yet – most Americans have almost no idea what is really going on, or why it is happening.

While news reports depict demonstrations and debates, and while politicians promise "comprehensive border security programs," no real answers ever seem to emerge.

But there are answers. Truthful answers. Shocking answers.

In its groundbreaking May edition, WND's acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine reveals the astounding hidden agendas, plans and people behind America's immigration nightmare.

Titled "ALIEN NATION," the issue is subtitled "SECRETS OF THE INVASION: Why government invites rampant illegal immigration." Indeed, it reveals pivotal secrets very few Americans know. For example:

Did you know that the powerfully influential Council on Foreign Relations – often described as a “shadow government" – issued a comprehensive report last year laying out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter"?
Roughly translated: In the next few years, according to the 59-page report titled "Building a North American Community," the U.S. must be integrated with the socialism, corruption, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open U.S. borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada. As Phyllis Schlafly reveals in this issue of Whistleblower: "This CFR document asserts that President Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin 'committed their governments' to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the 'Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America' and assigned 'working groups' to fill in the details. It was at this same meeting, grandly called the North American Summit, that President Bush pinned the epithet 'vigilantes' on the volunteers guarding our border in Arizona."

The CFR report – important excerpts of which are published in Whistleblower – also suggests North American elitists begin getting together regularly, and presumably secretly, "to buttress North American relationships, along the lines of the Bilderberg or Wehrkunde conferences, organized to support transatlantic relations." The Bilderberg and Wehrkunde conferences are highly secret conclaves of the powerful. For decades, there have been suspicions that such meetings were used for plotting the course of world events and especially the centralization of global decision-making.

Did you know that radical immigrant groups – including the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (MEChA) and the National Council of La Raza (La Raza) – not only share a revolutionary agenda of conquering America's southwest, but they also share common funding sources, notably the Ford and Rockefeller foundations?
''California is going to be a Hispanic state," said Mario Obeldo, former head of MALDEF. "Anyone who does not like it should leave." And MEChA's goal is even more radical: an independent ''Aztlan,'' the collective name this organization gives to the seven states of the U.S. Southwest – Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas and Utah. So why would the Rockefeller and Ford foundations support such groups? Joseph Farah tells the story in this issue of Whistleblower.

Why have America's politicians – of both major parties – allowed the illegal alien invasion of this nation to continue for the last 30 years unabated? With al-Qaida and allied terrorists promising to annihilate major U.S. cities with nuclear weapons, with some big-city hospital emergency rooms near closure due to the crush of so many illegals, with the rapid spread throughout the U.S. of MS-13, the super-violent illegal alien gang – with all this and more, why do U.S. officials choose to ignore the laws of the land and the will of the people to pursue, instead, policies of open borders and lax immigration enforcement?

Reply To This Post



I’ve worked with all races of people, from Mexicans(and other Hispanics) to blacks, to whites, to Asians, to Middle Eastern, and many Samoans and other Polynesians, and one India. Okay so I work in the warehouse opps of the company with over 1000 people.

Of all those ethnics, I would have to say Mexicans are the hardest people to work with, especially Mexican females. First and foremost, they're racist, ignorant, bitter, spiteful and xenophobic beyond belief. From the young ones at 18y/o fresh out of high school, to the ones in their 60's. Outside of mexicans or whites, they bascialy don’t know shit about any other race, and are very quick to give into stereotypes of new ethnic groups that come into work. The older mexicans hate blacks and aren’t afraid to bash them or use the "n" word in front of you (in front of non-blacks of course), while the younger mexicans hate Asians, especially the mexican females and are always asking other males if they "think shes pretty". When it comes to other races, especially the Asian female workers, the Mexican female workers are very jealous and hateful and downright racist in their attitudes towards them. Third, Mexican females are just like their mexican male counterparts, they're always horny! My goodness are these creatures always horny, they're always talking about "look look look hes cute", "look he was staring at me" and they're are always trying to attract other males. Im not surprised, everyone knows how oversexed and perverted mexican males are, and i am not surprised the females have evolved to counteract this behavior. And of course, they all stick together, but then again all ethnic groups here at this place stick together, the more diverse the setting is, the greater the segregation. That’s what I love about the management here, they love to hire from all ethnic groups, and they like to keep the place diverse. But the thing is Mexicans do not know how to exist in a multi-cultural environment!!!

Am I generalizing too much? The people here in general are very uneducated, and the positions here pay average 10-18 bucks an hour depending on your senority with some good benefits. But I guess you don’t need a degree to have ethics and morals. The mexicans here should know that its not polite to call people the "n" word, or bash other ethnic females. It’s funny because all the other races here keep it cool and neutral, while the mexicans like to turn this workplace into some kind of hostile competition, always talking about other people. Im serious! None of the other races here talking about other races except for the mexicans, this is their daily conversation, its normal to them. If you get into it with another non-mexican worker here, they will stop talking to you, and act like you don’t exist okay, fine by me, but if you get into with a mexican here, they will fuck with you and gang up on you!! They got a huge chip on their shoulders for some reason. They see every non-Mexican as competition. I don’t know why they do, there’s enough room in this workplace for everyone to work and earn a living.


Anchor Babies: born in the USA - Enormous taxpayer costs
Article by Stephany Gabbard and Frosty Wooldridge
July 9, 2004
Published on
If you don’t think our Congress is taking Americans for a ride, think again. According to Dr. Madeleine Cosman, "At least 300,000 to 350,000 anchor babies annually become citizens in California." In 1994, 74,987 anchor babies in maternity units cost taxpayers $215 million in Stockton, California. In 2003, 70 percent of the 2,300 babies born in San Joaquin General maternity ward were from illegal aliens. That number has exploded today with over three million illegal aliens residing in California.
The French economist Frederic Bastiat said, "The unseen is more expensive than the seen." In Stockton, California, the Silverio Family was featured in the Wall Street Journal in 2003. They were fruit pickers who arrived illegally from Oxtotilan, Mexico in 1997. The wife, Felipa had three kids, but popped an anchor baby named Flor. The child was premature and spent three months in a neonatal incubator at a cost to the San Joaquin Hospital of over $300,000.00. They conceived another, Christian. The second baby made them eligible for $1,000 per month welfare. Because Flor is disabled, she receives $600.00 monthly for asthma. Although the illegal aliens made $18,000.00 annually picking fruit, they collected $12,000.00 of your tax dollars for their anchor babies. One night the father, Cristobal crashed his van. He had no license or insurance. Taxpayers paid for all hospital bills. That’s why 77 hospitals in border states were going bankrupt in 2003, but Senator John McCain wrote a rider into the Medicaid Bill for $1.4 billion of your tax dollars. It passed. Not to finish the spending spree on these anchor babies, the children attend California schools at a cost of $7,000.00 per year over and above what their parents pay in taxes. The cost for all five of their children for one school year exceeds $35,000.00 times 18 years for a grand taxpayer total of $630,000.00. This is only one family. No wonder California is $38 billion in debt.
Additional costs for illegal alien children stem from translators, advocates and middlemen. MediCal in 2003 sponsored 760,000 illegal aliens. Supplemental Security Income is a non-means-treated federal grant of money and food stamps. Be assured that scams and fraud run rampant. Over 500,000 ‘mentally disabled kids’ are on drugs for ADHD and ODD. One lady, Linda Torres was arrested in Bakersfield with $8,500.00 in small bills in her pocket. It was her SSI lump award for her disability, which was heroin addition.
Just so Americans across the country don’t feel left out, let’s move to Georgia. Net Fiscal Costs of Illegal Immigration for Georgia: Births of illegal aliens in Georgia cost to taxpayers:
2000-- 5,133 births cost: $13 million
2001-- 9,528 births cost: $23 million
2002—11,188 births cost: $27 million
Additionally, receiving public assistance in 2002 for 25,000 children of illegal aliens cost Georgia taxpayers $42 million annually. Health care costs to Georgia taxpayers for illegal aliens in 2002 was 64,000 doctor visits which ran Grady Health System into a $63 million deficit. What is it in your state? This picture is a small window into the massive fraud being perpetrated on your wallet by your congressional leaders. What is your senator or congressman doing about it? The simple answer fulfills French economist Bisbiat’s rule of the unseen. Your congressional reps assist this fraud! They encourage it every day by doing nothing about 2,200 illegal aliens crossing our borders and they have done nothing since 9/11 to deport the estimated 13 million that are already here.
So what will you do? How about taking action! Join and and and and and and
With over one million illegal aliens arriving annually, they birth 300,000 anchor babies in California alone and you pay the maximum. When those legal ‘American’ babies grow to 18, they can ‘chain migrate’ their kin into our country. We’re talking about a crisis SO huge, your children and this country will not survive it.
Part III: ‘Anchor Babies: Long Term Crisis to Society’ Sources: "Madeleine’s Guns and Medicine: Why is California Going Broke?" Madeleine Cosman, Ph.D. "Third World in the Making" by George Putnam
Stephany Gabbard, RN, CLNC, is a
Anchor Babies: Born in the USA -- The Abuse of the Fourteenth Amendment - Part I
Article by Stephany Gabbard and Frosty Wooldridge
July 6, 2004
Published on
My commute to work exceeds fifty miles but it gives me time to reflect. It is 1987 and I am an obstetrical nurse working in the crowded San Fernando Valley of California. Tonight I drive to my job in "Labor and Delivery," knowing the scenario before I arrive. Eight other nurses will battle through the night in this very busy obstetrical unit. Our patients are 99 percent pregnant illegal alien women who have broken United States immigration law to birth an American citizen child.
This will be their families' entry ticket into the United States. For them, no pesky visa applications and no waiting in line for several years like so many millions that enter this country through the front door. Pregnant Third World women have discovered that the only thing they have to do is cross the U.S.--Mexico border. The Fourteenth Amendment is their ticket.
It is now seventeen years later and things have worsened. The babies I helped deliver are older teenagers. When they turn 21, they will be eligible to bring their family members from Mexico, Central America and South America, i.e., chain migration on an ever-accelerating spinning wheel. Whole industries have now developed around abusing the Fourteenth Amendment. Pregnant Korean tourists come to the U.S. on travel visas to have their "anchor" babies. Coyotes dealing in human traffic are paid $1,500.00 to $25,000.00 per person to shuttle pregnant illegal aliens across our southern border. Our politicians and elites wink at this blatant law breaking and do nothing. The colonization of our country continues with the cooperation of our government. That means your senator and representative aid this illegal baby invasion. None dare call it treason. Most Americans mistakenly trust their politicians to do the right thing. Congressional members from every state betray that trust daily.
The Fourteenth Amendment: It's a simple document, a constitutional amendment drafted after the Civil War to assure that newly emancipated black slaves would never be denied citizenship by the States. The drafters had no idea that years later it would be used to make a mockery of our immigration laws. Alan Wall, an American journalist living in Mexico states, "An illegal alien can cross the border, have a baby five minutes later, and that baby is automatically declared a citizen of the USA automatically."
The illegal aliens don't have to go through any legal doors. They are exempt from that. They are, in fact, rewarded for disobeying U.S. laws by having their children granted automatic citizenship. In addition, the happy family is entitled to welfare benefits. And, illegal alien parents who have children born in the U.S. are seldom deported. That's why their children are called "anchor babies" - they anchor their families securely in the USA.
It doesn't have to be this way. Most European countries have done away with birthright citizenship because they experienced the same abuses we are seeing. The Irish Supreme Court recently ruled that immigrant parents could be deported even if they have an Irish child. "It was becoming common for 'single pregnant woman' to come to Ireland from countries outside the 15-nation EU, most frequently from Nigeria, to claim political asylum," states Shawn Pogatchnik, AP writer. Ireland saw a wave of immigration abuse and promptly put a stop to it. Recently, the Irish voted to end birthright citizenship. Britain and Australia both changed their citizenship laws in the 1980's for the same reasons. If you are born in Switzerland you will not automatically become a Swiss citizen. Why should Americans allow our country to be invaded by people who do not honor allegiance to our laws?
Allegiance is the key word. Senator Jacob Howard, co-author of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, stated in 1866, "Every Person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons."
The Fourteenth Amendment states,"(A) Persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." However a proviso limits foreigners who have babies in America. It couldn't be clearer, children of foreigners, aliens or diplomats, who are subject to the jurisdiction of their home country, are ineligible for citizenship. At the time the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified we didn't have immigration laws. One hundred and thirty eight years later we are paying for the misinterpretation of it.
Congress has the power to step in and correct this wrong, but don't hold your breath. There have been several bills dealing with this issue and most have died in committee. Except for a few brave individuals like Tom Tancredo of Colorado and Rep. Goode of Virginia, there isn't enough chutzpah on Capital Hill to fill a thimble. Where are the Thomas Jefferson's and Ben Franklin's when we need them? An important case, Hamdi vs Rumsfeld was recently heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. Yaser Hamdi was captured during the Afghanistan war fighting for the Taliban. It was later learned that he had been born in Louisiana to Saudi nationals when his father was employed as a chemical engineer on a work visa. The family subsequently moved back to Saudi Arabia where Hamdi was raised. Hamdi sued the U.S. government for holding him in a Navy stockade for two years. He demanded full rights of U.S. citizenship since by accident he happened to be born here. The U.S. government wanted Hamdi charged as a non-combatant and denied due process. Rumsfeld representing the U.S. government didn't raise this issue because he wanted to end birthright citizenship but other groups saw the possibility to finally challenge this fatal flaw in our immigration law that is wrecking havoc on our country.

One such group, Friends of Immigration Law Enforcement, submitted a 'friend of the court' or Amicus brief. They asked the Supreme Court to address the issue of whether Hamdi should be considered an American citizen at all, since at the time of his birth his parents were foreign nationals with no fealty to this nation.

The decision came down this week and just like the rest of the elite establishment in this country the U.S. Supreme Court ignored the issue of birthright citizenship except for a brief statement by Justices Scalia and Stevens stating Hamdi was a "presumed American citizen." So we live to fight another day. In the meantime the invasion/colonization of our country marches on. South Korean women can continue to visit and plan their very pregnant United States vacations!
In Part II: The costs of anchor babies will have you reaching for Pepto Bismol, Excedrin, Advil, Motrin, Paxil and Valium. And, you'll still be sick to your stomach!





We are a nation “buried” in Mexican trash.....SCHOOLS, HOSPITALS, PRISONS, IN MELTDOWN.... 2000 CALIFORNIANS MURDERED BY MEXICANS...... They export their illiterate poor, which is about 90% of the country, along with their criminal classes and also PREGNANT WOMEN for AMERICAN TAXPAYERS TO SUPPORT THEIR “ANCHOR BABIES”..... 1 in 10 births in this country is by an illegal!

Sept. 24, 2006, 'Border baby' boom strains S. Texas More illegal immigrants are pouring into the state to give birth

“Why pay $1,000 in Mexico when you can get it for free?"

By JAMES PINKERTON Houston Chronicle

RIO GRANDE CITY — First it was a trickle, now it's a flood. Rising numbers of undocumented immigrants from Mexico and Central America are streaming into Texas to give birth, straining hospitals and costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, health officials say. Doctors and health officials say they are overwhelmed by both the new arrivals and those immigrant mothers who already are in the state. Even Houston's feeling the pinch. An estimated 70 percent to 80 percent of the 10,587 births at Ben Taub General Hospital and Lyndon B. Johnson General Hospital last year were to undocumented immigrants, administrators say. Also feeling the strain is Starr County, an already poor South Texas county that has the region's only taxpayer-supported hospital district. Immigrants "want a U.S.-born baby" and know that emergency room staffers don't collect any money up front, said Dr. Mario Rodriguez, an obstetrician in Starr County. "The word is out: Come to Starr County and get delivered for free. Why pay $1,000 in Mexico when you can get it for free?" Rodriguez said. 'Unfortunately, doctors say, Starr County isn't alone.

“OUR LITTLE SNAPSHOT IS DUPLICATED IN ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES BETWEEN HERE AND CALIFORNIA.....” how about every muni in all 50 states? Know of a state not overrun by illegals? ''Our little snapshot is duplicated in all the municipalities between here and California," said Tony Falcon, a Rio Grande City physician who was appointed to the U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission in April. ''What you see here is what is happening in Brownsville, McAllen, El Paso and San Diego." 'Anchor babies' ....easy American citizenship! Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, an open borders advocate, also wants CHAIN IMMIGRATION. For every illegal here, they’re able to bring the rest of the extended family with them. CNN reports that may be as many as 272 more illegals for EVERY ONE HERE ALREADY! Immigration-control advocates regard the U.S.-born infants as "anchor babies" because they give their undocumented parents and relatives a way to petition for citizenship. They estimate that 360,000 of these babies are born in the U.S. every year and warn that the numbers are rising. Once parents have an "anchor baby," they become more difficult to deport, said Jack Martin, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a lobby organization in Washington, D.C. ''It's a fairly big factor in complicating the removal of illegal aliens," Martin said. "Illegal aliens know that and, to some extent, we think they're being influenced into having children as soon as they get into the U.S. to complicate their removal." Some lawmakers want to begin denying citizenship to babies born to illegal immigrants. Birthright citizenship, as it is known, has been in force since the approval of the Constitution's 14th Amendment in 1868. But several bills under consideration in Congress would abolish the longstanding federal policy. Sponsors include U.S. Reps. Ron Paul, R-Lake Jackson, and Nathan Deal, R-Ga. In a largely symbolic move, the Michigan House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly on Sept. 8 to end birthright citizenship. Uncollected medical bills Starr County Memorial Hospital had $3.6 million in uncollected medical bills in 2005, up from $1.5 million in 2002. The total when fiscal 2006 ends on Sept. 30 is expected to hit $3.9 million, chief financial officer Rafael Olivarez said. Unpaid bills for the past five years will reach nearly $13 million, he said. To make up for the shortfall, Starr County's hospital district is proposing a 25 percent tax hike. Already, the U.S. government is pitching in, setting aside $1 billion in Medicaid funds to pay for emergency care received by undocumented migrants over the next four years. But Olivarez said getting the reimbursements isn't easy. Federal officials ''told us at a meeting they would pay us about 20 cents on the dollar," he said. "But it's better than nothing." No one knows for sure how many undocumented immigrants there are or what they cost the health care system. Most hospitals don't ask whether patients have papers. Total cost unknown ''It puts them in the position of being border police," said Amanda Engler, a spokeswoman for the Texas Hospital Association in Austin. Harris County Hospital District officials say their policy is not to question patients directly about their citizenship. ''We do not explicitly ask if our patients are illegal, but we do ask them for proof of Harris County residency," district spokeswoman Shannon Rasp said. "Often citizenship status becomes clearer when billing issues come up." Eighty-three percent of the undocumented immigrants receiving in-patient care at the district's hospitals and clinics last year were from Mexico, officials said. Six percent were from El Salvador or Guatemala. And the remaining 11 percent were from such countries as Britain, Canada, Haiti, India, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria and Vietnam. ''Using anecdotal information provided us by our staff, statistics from other public hospital systems and our patient demographics, we believe that approximately 70 to 80 percent of our obstetrics patients are undocumented," Rasp said. In all, 57,072 patients visited the district's hospitals, clinics and health centers last year, and nearly a fifth were undocumented, Rasp said. The cost of their treatment was $97.3 million, up from $55 million in 2002.



Anchor babies account for roughly 10% of all US births. In 2003, anchor babies accounted for 70% of all births in San Joachim General Hospital in Stockton, California. US taxpayers spent an estimated $7.4 Billion in 2003 to educate illegal immigrants. 34% of students in the Los Angeles school system are illegals or children of illegals. Two thirds of Illegal Immigrants adults DO NOT have a high school degree or equivalent. The illiteracy rate for Illegal Immigrants is 2.5 times higher than that of US Citizens. Reprinted from Illegal Immigrants Drive Up ER Costs, Pollute Border Crossings Michael Arnold Glueck, M.D., and Robert J. Cihak, M.D., The Medicine Men Wednesday, Aug. 30, 2006 In one of a series of hearings occurring in 13 states over the month of August, a panel of the U.S. House of Representatives was told that TennCare pays about $15 million yearly in emergency care for illegal aliens. TennCare pays only for illegal aliens who would otherwise qualify for the program; the remainder of the burden falls on hospitals. So notes The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons Inc. in a statement on August 26, 2006. Gary Perrizo, director of accounting at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, estimates that his facility incurs $3.8 million in unreimbursed costs annually because of illegal aliens, a fraction of the more than $74 million total. Republican Representatives Marsha Blackburn and Nathan Deal, both from Georgia, are concerned that many illegal immigrants are receiving care with forged documents. No evidence concerning the actual amounts was presented at the hearing (Tennessean, 8/11/06). In general, hearings have been poorly attended, and activists complained that citizens were given no opportunity to speak (Houston Chronicle, 8/25/06). Another cost of illegal immigration is that crossing routes are becoming buried in garbage. After three years of cleanups, federal government programs have cleaned up about 1 percent of the debris, removing 250,000 pounds of trash, more than 600 abandoned vehicles, and 1,725 abandoned bicycles. More than 50 miles of illegally made roads were rehabilitated. Hikers in the Huachuca Mountains say they are almost wading through empty gallon water jugs. The rotting garbage and human waste is a health hazard to humans and also to wildlife. Trash is commonly found in bears' stomachs. The cost of removing all the trash in one area of southeastern Arizona is estimated to be about $4.5 million, not including the real trash hotbeds such as the Ironwood Forest National Monument. Without effective border controls, the task is believed to be impossible (Arizona Daily Star, 7/30/05). Compounding the current higher ER, hospital and environmental costs is the fact that nearly a quarter of U.S. births are to immigrants. This, according to a study in 2005, is a record higher than at the peak of the previous great immigration wave in 1910. Nearly 42 percent of those births are to mothers in the country illegally. Do the math, and this means that 10 percent of U.S. births are to illegal aliens. "We are heading, if you will, into uncharted territory," said last year's study author, Steve Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies. "In the past, immigration was significantly reduced when it reached a similar level, but that's not happening today." Comments noted historian Philip Gold, Ph.D., of Seattle, "This whole situation sounds like an excerpt from an Ayn Rand novel." To which we add that to allow this absurdity to happen we must be either the most foolish people on earth, delusional, or as a country have a latent wish for destruction.

CALIFORNIA’S DIM FUTURE is here and now. Think what it would be when the number of occupiers doubles? Where California goes, so goes the Nation! What this articles doesn’t discuss, is that fact that the population doubling will be with illiterate Mexicans from over the border. As are the case of the Mexican occupiers now, they will have no loyalty to anything that isn’t Mexican. They will go great lengths to avoid learning English, even after being here decades. They will not embrace literacy, as to do so is aping stupid gringos. They will wave their Mexican flags in our faces, and Cinco de Mayo will be a State holiday while they will sit on their ass’ when our National Anthem is played in public. Gangs will have taken over even more territory than it controls in Los Angeles. The cost to the above-ground tax payers of social services to the illegal will double from the 11 billion now to what? Our prison system, already a national calamity will be catastrophic to the state. Small communities like Maywood, (google) will surrender to Mexican corruption Tijuana style. Our education system, now almost worst in the fifty states, will be totally worthless, but cost us billions just to graduate Mexicans that don’t want to read or write. The State’s economy will continue to be transferred through bank accounts illegally opened at La Raza donor banks of Wells Fargo and Bank of America which will make the greedy bankers even happier. Wells Fargo is the biggest financial backer of PAYDAY LOAN sharks that really like the illegals. The number of Californians murdered by illegals who fled back to Narco-Mex, now about 2000, will double also. The tunnels under the border which have existed for years, one being the length of three football fields, will be lighted and air-conditioned for the convenience of Big Business wanting easy passage of “cheap” Mexican labor. Also good news for Mexican drug cartel the Congress refuses to defend our borders from. The then 30 billion Mexican meth operation. .......................................

The Mexican Welfare System In Our Borders

Every Citizen of the USA is paying dearly for this invasion. They should be shipped back home for their care and stay there. Our kids are learning less in school, they are being dumbed down by the invasion of non-English speaking children. Our next generation is suffering.,0,4990201.story?page=2

Prenatal cases flood local clinics for poor

Robyn Shelton Sentinel Medical Writer

March 11, 2007 Medical clinics that serve the poor in Florida are being overwhelmed by illegal immigrants and other uninsured women needing prenatal services, creating a looming crisis that already has forced at least one health department to close its doors to pregnant patients. Two groups that serve the poor in Orange County say they are booked to capacity for prenatal services, with women waiting up to five weeks to get an initial appointment at the busiest locations. That's the good news. Mark S. Williams worries that local women may not get care in the future because providers do not have the staff, money or ability to meet the rising need. In Orange County, the number of women seeking prenatal services from these groups has climbed 65 percent since 2002. "We are at our limit; we have to begin to look at how we can just maintain what we have or reduce the number of patients that we see for prenatal care," said Williams, chief executive officer of Community Health Centers Inc. "If the growth in the region continues -- and we have no reason to believe that it won't -- there will be patients who just aren't going to be seen." Counties throughout Central Florida are reporting an increasing demand for prenatal services, but Orange stands out for its sheer volume. Its main providers for poor women are the Orange County Health Department and Community Health Centers, a nonprofit organization that offers a variety of health services. Combined, the agencies treated more than 6,300 pregnant women in 2006, up from about 3,800 in 2002. But doctors say the number of individual women doesn't tell the whole story. Each patient needs ongoing care during her pregnancy, accounting for a combined 36,292 prenatal visits to both agencies in 2006, an 84 percent increase from 19,718 in 2002. The Orange County Health Department, which has a higher patient load, has opened two additional sites for obstetrics care in recent months and is trying to recruit more nurse practitioners. "Almost as soon as we open [a new location], we're fully booked with appointments," said Patricia Nolen, the department's program director for women's health. Yet the problem is not simply the rising numbers -- it's that more patients are uninsured. Many are illegal immigrants, who do not qualify for government coverage for the poor through Medicaid. But there's also a growing number of uninsured U.S. citizens who earn slightly too much to qualify for Medicaid but too little to buy private insurance. As a result, providers are treating more women but getting paid for a smaller proportion of their clients. For example, about 80 percent of the prenatal patients at the Orange County Health Department were covered by Medicaid in the past, leaving about 20 percent who were uninsured. Today, the breakdown is closer to 50-50, said Dr. Kevin Sherin, Health Department director. Statewide, an estimated 650,000 women of childbearing age have no coverage. "There's a significant number of moms who cannot access health insurance for a variety of reasons," Sherin said. This creates crushing budget demands for centers that serve these women. Demand keeps growing Danielle Phillips, 21, is among the thousands of prenatal patients at the Orange County Health Department. She works in a clothing store and didn't have medical insurance when she became pregnant. Phillips now is covered by Medicaid and grateful for the care she receives at a clinic near her home. "I really like it there," she said. "I was surprised at how well they take care of you." It's expensive to provide the services. This fiscal year, the Orange County Health Department expects to bring in about $3 million from a variety of funding sources to cover women's-health expenditures. However, the total cost of the services is expected to run about $3.4 million, creating a $400,000 shortfall. Officials say illegal immigrants are contributing to the crisis because of their growing numbers and lack of insurance because of restrictions on the use of Medicaid for non-U.S. citizens. The Pew Hispanic Center estimates there are about 850,000 illegal immigrants in Florida and about 12 million nationwide. In Florida, these women can get short-term Medicaid coverage for prenatal care while their paperwork is processed, but they quickly drop off the rolls when they do not have valid Social Security numbers and required documentation. As a result, the bulk of their pregnancy care is uncovered. One way to gauge the growing burden in Florida is through the state's "emergency Medicaid deliveries" that cover births by non-U.S. citizens. Many of these emergency patients are undocumented, and state statistics show a fourfold increase in their numbers since 1996. That year, Medicaid paid for 4,556 emergency deliveries at a cost of more than $10 million in state and federal funds. By 2006, the number surged to 20,099 deliveries costing more than $85 million. Turning away patients Illegal immigrants are just part of the prenatal-care picture. The overall population boom in Florida has been straining the system for years, said Ann Davis, immediate past president of the Florida Association of Healthy Start Coalitions. The coalitions are private, nonprofit groups that help poor, pregnant women and their babies throughout the state. Davis said Healthy Start's budget was flat for years, and even with an increase last year, there aren't enough funds. "For years, we did not have any increases, and yet, the fastest-growing segment of our population are young women of child-bearing age," Davis said. "This is not rocket science. There's not going to be enough" money to serve everyone. Many counties are sounding the alarm about the problems they see down the road. In Okaloosa County, the crisis already forced the Health Department to stop offering prenatal care in July. The small county went from an average of 30 to 40 prenatal cases each month to more than 130 a month in recent years. Dr. Karen Chapman, the department director, said her local Healthy Start coalition was providing about $167,000 annually to help pay for prenatal services, but the actual cost was almost four times that much. After covering the shortfall for years, the department couldn't do it anymore. Chapman said poor women now must travel to clinics in other counties or see private doctors willing to put them on payment plans. In the end, she said, some women surely are falling through the cracks. "It was a very painful and difficult and traumatic decision for us," Chapman said, "but even as a government agency, we still have to make payroll and pay our bills. It's just a real tragic situation." A look at solutions In Orange County, advocates for the poor are pushing for a number of changes: The state could increase the income limits for Medicaid eligibility, as other states have done, so more poor women would qualify for coverage, said Linda Sutherland, executive director of the Orange County Healthy Start Coalition. Florida could fund prenatal care for illegal immigrants. Williams said this would be a cost-saver in the long run because women with inadequate prenatal care are more likely to have low-birthweight babies, who often require expensive hospitalizations. Taxpayers end up footing the bill for their care one way or another, he said. "The immigrant issue is a tough one that people aren't going to agree on," Williams said. "I think there are moral issues here, and there's a right thing to do, but you don't even have to feel that way to see that there are also economic issues." Private doctors could bring much-needed manpower to the system. In Brevard County, the Health Department has recruited local obstetricians to work for hourly wages in its clinics. Dr. Heidar Heshmati, department director, said the system is financially viable because the hourly compensation is slightly less than what the department can bring in through Medicaid reimbursements. Until something is done, medical providers expect to grapple regularly with the prenatal-care demands of their communities. More closings are possible. "It's clearly one of the options that [groups] have to keep in mind," said Dr. William Sappenfield, state epidemiologist with the Florida Department of Health. "They do have a limited budget, so they have to figure out how to provide services, and if they spend money in one direction," then less remains for other needs.



“A recent Pew poll indicated that a very large percentage of Americans of Mexican descent regard themselves as Mexicans. Not Mexican-Americans, not American-Mexicans. Just Mexicans.”

AN AMERICAN SEES & SPEAKS – Comments Posted on Washington Post

One of the reasons anchor babies are such a burden to the US is the practice of chain migration. That baby gets to bring in his parents, siblings and in some cases grand parents and no one needs to be economically "sponsored" so all are eligible for the welfare state bennies. Parkland Hospital in Dallas recently went bankrupt due to the maternity ward where most, perhaps all the babies were born to illegals and their cost of care never paid. While it is quite understandable that some one from a poor country or any country for that matter might like to give the gift of citizenship to their offspring, it is the sole right of the sovereign nation to grant that gift. We exploit the poor and undocumented and it is time to stop. Your cheap cleaning lady or lawn guy is very expensive for the nation as a whole. Pay a living wage for what you don't want to do and the problem may, in part, disappear.
3/30/2010 9:58:56 PM

What this article does not address is the racist aspects of ANCHOR BABIES. We are Mexico’s WELFARE and PRISON SYSTEM. Yearly Mexico sends thousands of pregnant women over our borders to give birth a gringo expense. One in five births in Los Angeles are ILLEGALS. It doesn’t stop there. This Mexican mom will then collect 18 years of welfare for this child. More for every child she gives birth to, which is why birth rates for illegals is STAGGERING.

Currently $40 - $50 billion of the American economy is shifted back to Mexico, making it one of the largest revenue streams for the highly corrupt Mexican government.

La Raza considers the staggering ANCHOR birthing system a major component of the Mexican occupation. While these children will NOT CONSIDER THEMSELVES AMERICAS, BUT MEXICANS BORN ON GRINGO SOIL, WHICH THEY ARE INDOCTRINATED INTO THINKING IS REALLY NORTHERN MEXICO.


An argument to be made about immigrant babies and citizenship
By George F. Will
Sunday, March 28, 2010; A15
A simple reform would drain some scalding steam from immigration arguments that may soon again be at a roiling boil. It would bring the interpretation of the 14th Amendment into conformity with what the authors of its text intended, and with common sense, thereby removing an incentive for illegal immigration.
To end the practice of "birthright citizenship," all that is required is to correct the misinterpretation of that amendment's first sentence: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." From these words has flowed the practice of conferring citizenship on children born here to illegal immigrants.
A parent from a poor country, writes professor Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school, "can hardly do more for a child than make him or her an American citizen, entitled to all the advantages of the American welfare state." Therefore, "It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry."
Writing in the Texas Review of Law and Politics, Graglia says this irrationality is rooted in a misunderstanding of the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." What was this intended or understood to mean by those who wrote it in 1866 and ratified it in 1868? The authors and ratifiers could not have intended birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants because in 1868 there were and never had been any illegal immigrants because no law ever had restricted immigration.
If those who wrote and ratified the 14th Amendment had imagined laws restricting immigration -- and had anticipated huge waves of illegal immigration -- is it reasonable to presume they would have wanted to provide the reward of citizenship to the children of the violators of those laws? Surely not.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866 begins with language from which the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause is derived: "All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States." (Emphasis added.) The explicit exclusion of Indians from birthright citizenship was not repeated in the 14th Amendment because it was considered unnecessary. Although Indians were at least partially subject to U.S. jurisdiction, they owed allegiance to their tribes, not the United States. This reasoning -- divided allegiance -- applies equally to exclude the children of resident aliens, legal as well as illegal, from birthright citizenship. Indeed, today's regulations issued by the departments of Homeland Security and Justice stipulate:
"A person born in the United States to a foreign diplomatic officer accredited to the United States, as a matter of international law, is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. That person is not a United States citizen under the 14th Amendment."
Sen. Lyman Trumbull of Illinois was, Graglia writes, one of two "principal authors of the citizenship clauses in 1866 act and the 14th Amendment." He said that "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" meant subject to its "complete" jurisdiction, meaning "not owing allegiance to anybody else." Hence children whose Indian parents had tribal allegiances were excluded from birthright citizenship.
Appropriately, in 1884 the Supreme Court held that children born to Indian parents were not born "subject to" U.S. jurisdiction because, among other reasons, the person so born could not change his status by his "own will without the action or assent of the United States." And "no one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent." Graglia says this decision "seemed to establish" that U.S. citizenship is "a consensual relation, requiring the consent of the United States." So: "This would clearly settle the question of birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens. There cannot be a more total or forceful denial of consent to a person's citizenship than to make the source of that person's presence in the nation illegal."
Congress has heard testimony estimating that more than two-thirds of all births in Los Angeles public hospitals, and more than half of all births in that city, and nearly 10 percent of all births in the nation in recent years, have been to mothers who are here illegally. Graglia seems to establish that there is no constitutional impediment to Congress ending the granting of birthright citizenship to those whose presence here is "not only without the government's consent but in violation of its law."

A recent Pew poll indicated that a very large percentage of Americans of Mexican descent regard themselves as Mexicans. Not Mexican-Americans, not American-Mexicans. Just Mexicans.

Anchor Baby Power
La Voz de Aztlan has produced a video in honor of the millions of babies that have been born as US citizens to Mexican undocumented parents. These babies are destined to transform America. The nativist CNN reporter Lou Dobbs estimates that there are over 200,000 "Anchor Babies" born every year whereas George Putnam, a radio reporter, says the figure is closer to 300,000. La Voz de Aztlan believes that the number is approximately 500,000 "Anchor Babies" born every year.
The video below depicts the many faces of the "Anchor Baby Generation". The video includes a fascinating segment showing a group of elementary school children in Santa Ana, California confronting the Minutemen vigilantes. The video ends with a now famous statement by Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez of the University of Texas at Austin.

LA RAZA AGENDA: 3 Examples
Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council "They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over. . We are here to stay."

Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Bill Clinton "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave."

Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General We are practicing "La Reconquista" in California."


majorman06 wrote:

Another negative yet seldom discussed effect that illegals have on Americans obtaining jobs is, especially in Houston, the requirement of being bilingual – speaking in both English and Spanish!

In 2002, when I was unemployed, I, as American citizen, was at a distinct disadvantage because even then, the majority of job opportunities listed – bilingual as a requirement for employment.

In 2002, I was naive, ignorant, and gullible since I believed the “lie” that they were gentle, hardworking, family folks just looking for a better life. In 2007, I was educated regarding the true mission of illegal aliens by illegal aliens. I have since done a 180 on many long held beliefs; I am no longer a bleeding-heart, tree-hugging liberal- not that I fit the mold of a conservative either…I do expect any candidate worthy of my vote, regardless of party affiliations, to be an American first that does not bow at the alter of politically correct while seeking votes and unlimited power, nor ignores our citizens while providing their campaign contributors with cheap labor (landscapers, highway and home construction companies, hospitality and fast food entities, etc…the people that run these anti-American companies do not live next door to drug/human traffickers—they have no idea what fearing for your life really means); I no longer trust my government to protect our citizens. Yet, “special interest” groups/advocates have labeled me a “racist” while they only promote and protect those that look themselves…they are the racists determined to destroy our country with the help of those we have elected!

cmarshdtihqcom wrote:

Illegal aliens are pushing drugs, slaughtering, raping and kidnapping our children on tribal lands. They are racist and a corrupt group of people, who feel entitled to violate our rights, because they've been allowed to feel that they are preferred.

Recommend (12)

jenn3 wrote:

We can't change the past, but we know full well that allowing the destruction of the US constitution and bill of rights, the destruction of the sovereignty of the US will only exacerbate the problems facing all of us here in the US. Illegal aliens are pushing drugs, slaughtering, raping and kidnapping our children on tribal lands. They are racist and a corrupt group of people, who feel entitled to violate our rights, because they've been allowed to feel that they are preferred.

3/30/2010 12:58:52 PM

Yes, the 14th Amendment was indeed designed to prevent discrimination--against former slaves and their childre4n. The language of the amendment certainly seems to include illegals' spawn, and SCOTUS has affirmed this interpretation in the past.

That makes it a loophole. After all, a loophole is a law with consequences--often at a later time than its crafting--unintended by its framers, and often perceived as unfair.

I'm pretty confident that if closing this loophole were put to a national referendum, you'd get at least 2/3 of Americans favoring closing it, so that only the children of at least one American citizen would get automatic citizenship.

However, I'm equally confident that an amendment repealing this loophole wouldn't pass, because of both parties' need to pander to Mexicans with American citizenship--by which I mean people who vote for politicians and laws that help Mexicans specifically, regardless of whether they're good for America. A recent Pew poll indicated that a very large percentage of Americans of Mexican descent regard themselves as Mexicans. Not Mexican-Americans, not American-Mexicans. Just Mexicans.

So we're stuck with the 14th, like it or not. Historically it has been responsible for the Latino ethnic group swelling from .5% of the population in 1940 to 14% today. That's one out of seven.

Never has America's cultural composition been changed so much by so many.

And the American public was never consulted about this shift. It's not like the Mexican Embassy was asked to put on a dog and pony show to the American people during the Eisenhower era, and then have the American people vote on whether we'd like America to shift from one in two hundred Latinos to one in seven--and to have that one in sever come almost exclusively from Mexico's poorest, least educated cohort.

And then some people are shocked that we object to this being foisted upon us without us having any say-so in the matter.

Especially since many are not assimilating. Why should they? Empuje uno si quiere hablar en espaƱol. You can now live your entire life in the Southwest of the United States without having to learn one word of English.

Americans from outside the Southwest are often incredulous when I say that. But you can visit Quebec and meet many who don't speak any English. Our situation is coming to resemble that more and more.