http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/obama-la-raza-plan-written-by-mexico.html
*
ON THE GROWING POWER OF “LA RAZA” FASCISM FOR MEX SUPREMACY
*
WHEN BARACK OBAMA IS NOT
WORKING FOR HIS CRIMINAL BANKSTER DONORS, HE’S WORKING FOR LA RAZA!
OBAMA IS DETERMINED TO ONCE
AGAIN WIN THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES. HE HAS INFESTED HIS ADMINISTRATION WITH LA RAZA
PARTY SUPREMACIST, SUCH AS SEC. OF (ILLEGAL) LABOR, HILDA SOLIS, AND PROMISED
ILLEGALS AMNESTY, NO E-VERIFY, NO (REAL) I.C.E., DEPT of HOMELAND SECURITY =
PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP, NO BORDERS, CATCH AND RELEASE OF ILLEGALS, ENDLESS
DREAM ACTS PAID FOR BY LEGALS, LAWSUITS ON BEHALF OF LA RAZA AGAINST AMERICANS
IN ARIZONA, AND THE END OF BUILDING THE WALL TO KEEP THE HORDES OUT! IF ALL
THAT DOES NOT BUY THE LA RAZA VOTE, OBAMA PROMISES CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT!
VIVA LA RECONQUISTA! VIVA LA
RAZA SUPREMACY! Obama does every day!
*
James Jay Carafano: The administration's
secure-the-border trap
When the public clamors for action to
curb illegal immigration, politicians push the "easy button." They
mobilize the National Guard and send them to the border.
It's a time-honored tradition, though
not always efficacious.
For example, in 1916, Poncho Villa
launched a series of cross-border raids into the U.S. In response, we sent a
few thousand troops under the command of Blackjack Pershing to hunt down the
bandits.
It cost U.S. taxpayers hundreds of
thousands of dollars a day. Pershing never captured Villa. And, on several
occasions, the Army got its butt kicked. On June 21, 1916, the Mexican Army
almost completely wiped out a detachment of the 10th U.S. Cavalry at Carrizal.
Most U.S. troops were withdrawn by
1917. They returned to the border in the 1920s. Ultimately, border violence
subsided, not so much due to the U.S. troop presence, but because the
revolutionary ardor wracking Mexico had finally run its course.
Recently, President Obama ordered the
National Guard back to the border. And Congress rushed to pass another border
bill before sprinting off for summer recess. This frenzy of activity reflects a
desire to be seen as "doing something" more than a calculated,
serious response to our border security problems.
For several years, Republicans have
chanted a "secure the border first" mantra. It allowed them to look
tough on the illegal immigration issue while dodging the issue of
"comprehensive" reform. It's a bad strategy. It suggests that, if the
Obama administration overcomes the "border first" problem, it will be
clear sailing for a push for amnesty.
The administration knows an opportunity
when it sees one. Hence we saw Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano
trot out the "border has never been more secure" argument in
congressional testimony earlier this year. However, as violence on the Mexican
side of the border continues to escalate, the administration's "secure
border" argument isn't gaining traction -- even among congressional
Democrats.
So now the White House is on a
different tack: Throwing money at the problem. Far too many Republicans as well
as Democrats are comfortable with that approach -- even when it promises to
accomplish little. But, in the end, unfocused spending on the border may give
the administration an excuse to push through a massive amnesty.
At some point, after shoveling huge
sums of money into low-value border security gambits, pro-amnesty politicians
will throw up their hands. "We tried," they'll say, "but we just
can't secure the border without amnesty."
Whether progress is made on the border
or not, the real problem is that any strategy for reducing illegal immigration
that includes amnesty is bound to fail. Granting a general amnesty will just
encourage another wave of illegal border crossing. That is exactly what
happened when the 1986 amnesty bill was passed. And that is exactly what will
happen if Washington does it again.
But waiting until we get the border
right before doing anything else to reform immigration policy makes no sense
either.
Securing the border requires solving
larger problems. It means working with Mexico to bust the cartels, enforcing
our immigration and workplace laws, creating effective temporary-worker
programs, and rejecting amnesty once and for all. And, of course, it requires
better and more cost-effective border security.
Washington can't solve the problem of
illegal immigration without tackling all aspects of the problem. Simply
pounding the table and chanting "border first" is not just
inadequate; it puts us on the short road to a general amnesty.
Examiner Columnist James Jay Carafano
is a senior research fellow for national security at the Heritage
Foundation.
*
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.
*
The
Administration's Phantom Immigration Enforcement Policy
According
to DHS’s own reports, very little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or
otherwise) are secure, and gaining control is not even a goal of the
department.
By Ira Mehlman
Published on 12/07/2009
Townhall.com
Published on 12/07/2009
Townhall.com
The setting was not quite the flight
deck of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln with a “Mission Accomplished” banner as the
backdrop, but it was the next best thing. Speaking at the Center for American
Progress (CAP) on Nov. 13, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared
victory over illegal immigration and announced that the Obama administration is
ready to move forward with a mass amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens
already living in the United States.
Arguing the Obama administration’s case
for amnesty, Napolitano laid out what she described as the “three-legged stool”
for immigration reform. As the administration views it, immigration reform must
include “a commitment to serious and effective enforcement, improved legal
flows for families and workers, and a firm but fair way to deal with those who
are already here.”
Acknowledging that a lack of confidence
in the government’s ability and commitment to effectively enforce the
immigration laws it passes proved to be the Waterloo of previous efforts to
gain amnesty for illegal aliens, Napolitano was quick to reassure the American
public that those concerns could be put to rest.
“For starters, the security of the
Southwest border has been transformed from where it was in 2007,” stated the
secretary. Not only is the border locked up tight, she continued, but the
situation is well in-hand in the interior of the country as well. “We’ve also
shown that the government is serious and strategic in its approach to
enforcement by making changes in how we enforce the law in the interior of the
country and at worksites…Furthermore, we’ve transformed worksite enforcement to
truly address the demand side of illegal immigration.”
If Rep. Joe Wilson had been in
attendance to hear Secretary Napolitano’s CAP speech he might well have had a
few choice comments to offer. But since he wasn’t, we will have to rely on the
Department of Homeland Security’s own data to assess the veracity of
Napolitano’s claims.
According to DHS’s own reports, very
little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or otherwise) are secure, and
gaining control is not even a goal of the department. DHS claims to have
“effective control” over just 894 miles of border. That’s 894 out of 8,607
miles they are charged with protecting. As for the other 7,713 miles? DHS’s stated
border security goal for FY 2010 is the same 894 miles.
The administration’s strategic approach
to interior and worksite enforcement is just as chimerical as its strategy at
the border, unless one considers shuffling paper to be a strategy. DHS data, released
November 18, show that administrative arrests of immigration law violators fell
by 68 percent between 2008 and 2009. The department also carried out 60 percent
fewer arrests for criminal violations of immigration laws, 58 percent fewer
criminal indictments, and won 63 percent fewer convictions.
While the official unemployment rate
has climbed from 7.6 percent when President Obama took office in January to 10
percent today, the administration’s worksite enforcement strategy has amounted
to a bureaucratic game of musical chairs. The administration has all but ended
worksite enforcement actions and replaced them with paperwork audits. When the
audits determine that illegal aliens are on the payroll, employers are given
the opportunity to fire them with little or no adverse consequence to the
company, while no action is taken to remove the illegal workers from the
country. The illegal workers simply acquire a new set of fraudulent documents
and move on to the next employer seeking workers willing to accept substandard
wages.
In Janet Napolitano’s alternative
reality a mere 10 percent of our borders under “effective control” and sharp
declines in arrests and prosecutions of immigration lawbreakers may be
construed as confidence builders, but it is hard to imagine that the American
public is going to see it that way. If anything, the administration’s record
has left the public less confident that promises of future immigration
enforcement would be worth the government paper they’re printed on.
As Americans scrutinize the
administration’s plans to overhaul immigration policy, they are likely to find
little in the “three-legged stool” being offered that they like or trust. The
first leg – enforcement – the administration has all but sawed off. The second
– increased admissions of extended family members and workers – makes little
sense with some 25 million Americans either unemployed or relegated to
part-time work. And the third – amnesty for millions of illegal aliens – is
anathema to their sense of justice and fair play.
As Americans well know, declaring
“Mission Accomplished” and actually accomplishing a mission are two completely
different things. When it comes to enforcing immigration laws, the only message
the public is receiving from this administration is “Mission Aborted.”
*
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, September 28, 2009
And T.J. BONNER, president of the National Border Patrol Council, will weigh in on the federal government’s decision to pull nearly 400 agents from the U.S.-Mexican border. As always, Lou will take your calls to discuss the issues that matter most-and to get your thoughts on where America is headed.
Monday, September 28, 2009
And T.J. BONNER, president of the National Border Patrol Council, will weigh in on the federal government’s decision to pull nearly 400 agents from the U.S.-Mexican border. As always, Lou will take your calls to discuss the issues that matter most-and to get your thoughts on where America is headed.
No comments:
Post a Comment