Tuesday, May 29, 2012

46% See Obama-Romney Race as Choice of Lesser of Two Evils - Rasmussen Reports™ - BUT WILL ILLEGALS HAND THE GREAT HISPANDERER OBAMA ANOTHER FOUR YEARS OF CORRUPTION, OPEN BORDERS, NO E-VERIFY, LAWSUITS AGAINST U.S. STATES, DREAM ACTS & LA RAZA SUPREMACY?

46% See Obama-Romney Race as Choice of Lesser of Two Evils - Rasmussen Reports™






INVESTORS.com
Dream Act Makes Children Pawns

Posted 12/07/2010 06:59 PM ET

Immigration: Congress is expected to vote on the Dream Act on Wednesday, providing a path to citizenship to millions of illegal immigrant youth. It's a bad precedent that uses kids, costs taxpayers and invites new amnesties.

After years of failing to sell mass amnesty to voters, the open-borders lobby has turned to tugging at Americans' heartstrings, presenting treacly stories of illegal immigrants brought here as children who then bettered themselves here.

Somehow legalizing this group ahead of all the other people awaiting immigration visas legally is supposed to specially benefit all of us, even though the most obvious beneficiaries are the individuals themselves. But out of guilt, or because we "owe" them "justice," the case is being made for passing the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act.

That act provides a path to citizenship for some 2.1 million illegals who have lived here continuously for five years, avoided felony convictions, came to the U.S. before they turned 16 and completed two years of college or U.S. military service within six years.

Now, in the lame-duck session of Congress, the open-borders lobby has lawmakers right where it wants them. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has filed Senate cloture to bring the Dream Act to a vote as soon as Wednesday, and the House may vote even sooner.

It's a scam, using children unethically to achieve an open-borders political agenda that opens the door to perverse incentives.

The Dream Act is an effort to mimic the benefits illegals derive from having anchor babies in the U.S., a tactic used by millions as an "insurance policy" to avoid deportation and achieve legal status.

The awfulness of that incentive can be seen in the case of Edgar Jimenez Lugo, the 14-year-old U.S. "citizen" who was arrested in Mexico after a rather spectacular career beheading rivals and innocent people for $2,500 each on behalf of a Mexican cartel enforcer.

Cronica, a Mexican newspaper, reported that the throwaway kid was born in San Diego and then spent his life with Mexican parents who took him back to Morelos, Mexico, and "wandered around." Apparently the child's birth in San Diego was the same gambit millions of other immigrants use to game the system for U.S. entry. And he's only facing three years in jail in Mexico, so he'll soon become our problem — not Mexico's.

The Dream Act makes every baby an anchor baby, commodifying children, as young Jimenez seems to have been. It extends the incentive for parents to use their kids to beat immigration laws.

Under the Dream Act it may take 10 years for an illegal to achieve full U.S. citizenship, but there's little doubt he will. And as soon as he does achieve citizenship, he will sponsor the parents who brought him into the country illegally — thus achieving the original intention of the law-breaking parents.

This bill is really an amnesty bill. The 1986 amnesty signed by President Reagan provided amnesty to 2.7 million illegals. Now, 24 years on, we have 12 million illegals to amnesty.

Columnist Michelle Malkin points to six successive amnesties since the 1986 act. Each has raised anticipation of new ones for illegals. For them, no need to hurry for the amnesty train — the next one will be along in just a moment.

Worse, the Dream Act will cost a lot. By some estimates it's a $6.2 billion bill for taxpayers, but it may be even more. Judges over the years have already ruled that children of illegals are entitled to "free" U.S. public education through the 12th grade, plus "free" medical care, bankrupting hospital emergency rooms.

The Dream Act will give them even more.

With a treasured U.S. green card as motivation, all they have to do is clog up community college enrollments with no minimum performance standards, crowding out legitimate students who are interested in learning, or else sign up for diploma-mill trade schools with government loans they aren't under any obligation to repay.

For every Harvard valedictorian the illegal immigration lobby presents as a poster boy, there will be thousands of gang members who will qualify because the cops haven't caught them yet.

Worst of all is the entitlement mentality this bill creates.

Suddenly the U.S. taxpayer "owes" all this, as the brazen illegal students parading around in graduation robes for cameras without fear of apprehension make clear. This entitlement mentality is no success ethic. And it won't stop at the Dream Act.

It just underscores the disgusting ethic of special interests playing grievance and identity politics by using children as pawns.

The only good answer to this is no.

Tomgram: Andrew Bacevich, The Golden Age of Special Operations | TomDispatch - WHAT ABOUT OBAMA'S NON-WAR ON THE MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS AND MEX GANGS?

Tomgram: Andrew Bacevich, The Golden Age of Special Operations | TomDispatch


GO TO ATTORNEY GENERAL KAMALA HARRIS WEBSITE AND SEND HER A MESSAGE IF YOU WANT HER TO FIGHT MEX CRIME TIDAL WAVE, OR FOR OPEN BORDERS, AMNESTY, AND CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT!







206 Most wanted criminals in Los Angeles. Out of 206 criminals--183 are hispanic---171 of those are wanted for Murder.


TEN MOST WANTED CRIMINALS IN CALIFORNIA ARE MEXICANS!


*

MEXICAN BOY BEHEADS 4 FOR MEX DRUG CARTELS – WHERE IS THE REAL TERRORISM? OVER THERE WITH THE MUSLIMS, BY MEXICANS HERE IN OUR OWN BORDERS?

THERE HAVE BEEN WELL OVER 2,000 CALIFORNIANS MURDERED BY ILLEGALS THAT FLED BACK OVER THE BORDER TO AVOID PROSECUTION. WHERE’S THE OUTRAGE?




Edgar Jimenez Lugo, who authorities said was born in San Diego, was wanted on suspicion of killing rivals — allegedly beheading some — as part of his work for a violent drug-trafficking cartel.

*




EVERY DAY LA RAZA “THE RACE” MURDERS 12 AMERICANS! DO YOU REALLY WANT THEM TO OCCUPY OUR COUNTRY?



http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53103 Did you know illegals kill 12 Americans a day?


*


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/1738432/posts FBI Crime Statistics - Crimes committed by illegals.




ASK YOURSELF IF YOU REALLY WANT OBAMA’S OPEN & UNDEFENDED BORDERS EVEN AS HE CONTINUES TO SQUANDER BILLIONS EVERY MONTH IN WARS TO PROTECT THE BUSH FAMILY’S FRIENDS, THE 9-11 INVADING SAUDIS FROM THEIR ENEMIES, THE IRAQIS AND IRANIANS???

JUDICIAL WATCH

Illegal Immigrant Rapist Had Been Deported 9 Times

Last Updated: Tue, 05/25/2010 - 9:24am

In what appears to be a growing national trend, an illegal immigrant with an extensive criminal record and multiple deportation orders remained in the U.S. long enough to commit yet another atrocious crime.

The tragic case in Washington State marks the latest of many examples illustrating the government’s inefficiency in keeping dangerous illegal aliens out of the United States, even when they have well-documented criminal histories and federal orders to leave the country.

In this case a Mexican national with an extensive criminal record and nine deportation orders raped a woman in Edmonds, a picturesque waterfront town famous for its views of the Olympic Mountains rising above Puget Sound. The illegal immigrant (Jose Lopez Madrigal) was first deported in California more than two decades ago and has since been convicted of a multitude of violent crimes, including armed theft, sexual assault and drug-related offenses.

The crimes were committed in different states—California and Colorado among them—and Madrigal had a staggering number of encounters with law enforcement in the last two decades, according to the local news report that broke the story of his multiple deportations. When he got arrested this last time, it took authorities longer than usual to learn his real identity because he had well over two dozen aliases.

The level of incompetence among federal immigration authorities in this case would be comical if Madrigal’s crimes weren’t so heinous. After the first deportation in 1989 for using a firearm to commit theft, Madrigal got deported several more times in the next few years. In 1999 he was deported three times in a four-month period after drug-related arrests. After a similar offense in 2000 he got deported yet again and in 2002 he got deported after pleading guilty to sexual assault in Denver. In 2003 Madrigal got deported three more times.

It would seem like a huge joke if the illegal immigrant didn’t brutally rape a woman last week. Evidently ashamed, officials at the Homeland Security agency (Immigration and Customs Enforcement—ICE) responsible for removing such thugs refuse to comment on the case. One criminal justice source quoted in the news report says Madrigal is a “poster boy” for the federal government’s ineffectiveness at keeping the most serious criminal aliens out of the United States.

It’s not like this is an isolated incident. In the last few years alone similar cases have rocked the nation. On Mothers’ Day last year a 17-year-old girl was murdered in Nevada by an admitted illegal alien gang member who had been convicted of a felony years earlier and deported.

A year earlier authorities in Arizona discovered that a serial rapist who targeted young girls was a twice deported Mexican who lived and worked in the U.S. despite his documented history of drug charges. He was caught only because the sheriff’s department in Arizona’s largest county (Maricopa) bothered to confirm his immigration status.


*




FOURTEEN YEAR OLD MEXICAN BOY BEHEADS FOUR NARCOMEX RIVALS -

Youth sought in Mexico killings arrested


Edgar Jimenez Lugo, who authorities said was born in San Diego, was wanted on suspicion of killing rivals — allegedly beheading some — as part of his work for a violent drug-trafficking cartel.

*
December 03, 2010|By Tracy Wilkinson, Los Angeles Times


Reporting from Mexico City — A 14-year-old boy who says he's been killing or working for drug cartels since he was 11 has been captured by the Mexican army after a monthlong hunt, authorities said Friday.
Edgar Jimenez Lugo, who authorities said was born in San Diego, was wanted on suspicion of killing rivals — allegedly beheading some of them — as part of his work for an especially violent drug-trafficking cartel.

Jimenez was attempting to board a flight for Tijuana with two sisters Thursday night when authorities detained him in Morelos state south of Mexico City. They were apparently planning to flee the country after the boy's alleged exploits made headlines last month.
"I've killed four people by chopping off their heads," the boy reportedly said after his capture. "I just cut off their heads; I never went and hung the bodies from bridges or anything like that."
Jimenez, alias El Ponchis, was quoted in media reports as saying he had been forced to work for a faction of the Beltran Leyva drug cartel under pain of death ever since henchmen from the group kidnapped him three years ago. He said he was usually high on drugs as he killed.
Marco Antonio Adame, the governor of Morelos, said in a news conference that Jimenez was a U.S. citizen by virtue of his San Diego birth.
The story of the boy had become something of a cause celebre here when it first emerged several weeks ago. Rumors abounded that he was a ruthless decapitator and that some of his work had been videotaped. (Initial reports erroneously put his age at 12.) Mexican media immediately dubbed him "the boy killer" and "the hit boy."
Photographs from Morelos on Friday showed a skinny Jimenez, dressed in baggy cargo pants and a black sweatshirt, standing between two well-armed soldiers in camouflage. His hands are stuck in his pockets and his head barely clears their shoulders.
The drug gang he allegedly worked for, the so-called South Pacific Cartel, has been locked in deadly battle with another Beltran Leyva faction for control of the city of Cuernavaca and other parts of Morelos — a dispute that erupted following the killing of drug boss Arturo Beltran Leyva by Mexican forces a year ago. More than 300 people have been killed in the conflict.
Jimenez reportedly ran with a group of boys and men ages 12 to 23 and represents a trend of ever younger Mexicans working for the cartels as killers, mules and enforcers and in other capacities. If judged guilty, the boy would be the youngest cartel killer known to be in prison.
His age poses a legal dilemma for Mexican authorities, who on Friday were scrambling to figure out which laws and agencies would handle a minor suspected of such egregious crimes.
Also Friday, in another setback for Mexican attempts to put away drug traffickers, a judge acquitted the nicknamed "Queen of the Pacific" of numerous drug-related charges. Sandra Avila Beltran has been in jail since her capture in 2007, accused of serving as a key link between the Sinaloa cartel and its Colombian counterparts. A rare woman in the world of reputed drug lords, Avila remained in custody because of an outstanding extradition request from the United
*

*

CA ATTORNEY GEN KAMALA HARRIS IS A LA RAZA DEM FOR SANCTUARY CITIES, OPEN BORDERS AND AMNESTY DESPITE THE FACT THAT HALF THE MURDERS IN MEXIFORNIA ARE BY MEX GANGS!



FROM JUDICIAL WATCH  - GET ON THEIR E-NEWS!


2 Illegal Aliens Protected By Sanctuary Policies Convicted Of Murder




May 11, 2012

In unrelated cases that illustrate the high price communities pay for sanctuary policies, two illegal immigrants—both with extensive criminal records—were convicted of first-degree murder this week in different parts of a border state that has longed protected the undocumented.

In San Francisco a jury found Edwin Ramos, a renowned gang banger, guilty of three first-degree murder counts for the 2008 killings of a 48-year-old man and his two sons. Ramos had a lengthy criminal record when he murdered the family, but San Francisco sanctuary laws shielded him from deportation.

Judicial Watch obtained public records that show police knew Ramos was an active member of the notoriously violent MS-13 street gang and that he had numerous run ins with the law, including arrests for weapons and gang-related charges. Furthermore, police knew Ramos was in the U.S. illegally yet released him after every encounter. In short, the records obtained by JW prove that don’t-ask-don’t tell sanctuary policies protect illegal alien gang bangers and put American citizens at risk.

Regardless, the famously liberal northern California city has long protected illegal immigrants and offered them costly public services that should be reserved for legal residents and citizens. In fact, illegal aliens are assured through costly, Spanish-language advertisement campaigns that they will never be reported to federal officials. In 2007 San Francisco became the nation’s first large municipality to offer illegal aliens official government identification cards.

A few hundred miles south in Los Angeles, another illegal immigrant gang banger (Pedro Espinoza) was also convicted of first-degree murder this week for gunning down a standout high school football player in 2008. Jurors deliberated for about four hours before reaching a verdict, according to a local news report, that says Espinoza proudly sports a tattoo with the initials “B.K,” which police says stands for “Blood Killer.”

Espinoza had just completed a jail sentence for a previous felony when he murdered the 17-year-old star running back, Jamiel Shaw, as he walked home. Like San Francisco Los Angeles has strict policies banning law enforcement officers from inquiring about suspects’ immigration status. In this case it allowed a violent gang banger to gun down a talented young athlete who was being recruited by top colleges.

JW has led a nationwide effort to eradicate don’t-ask-don’t-tell law enforcement policies like the ones that led to these horrific crimes. JW has filed lawsuits against police departments in Chicago, Los Angeles and Houston where officers are prohibited from inquiring about suspects’ immigration status.

*
Illegals Committing Heinous Acts Against Children & civilians in U.S.


PDThttp://www.immigrationshumancost.org/text/crimevictims.html

EXAMPLE #1 : • What sort of monster could murder three children in the most brutal manner — one child was beheaded and the two other were nearly decapitated. They also suffered a variety of injuries including blunt force trauma and asphyxiation. The victims, residents of Baltimore, (l. to r.) were siblings Alexis Quezada (10) and Lucero Quezada (9) and their cousin Ricardo Espinoza (9). The two men arrested for the crime were also relatives: Policarpio Espinoza, 22, brother of the father of the two siblings, and Espinoza's cousin Adan Espinoza Canela, 17. The accused are illegal aliens as are the parents of the murdered children. Apparently the arrests were based on DNA/blood evidence.

*

THERE HAVE BEEN MORE THAN 2,000 CALIFORNIANS MURDERED BY ILLEGALS THAT FLED BACK OVER THE BORDER TO MEXICO TO AVOID PROSECUTION. HOW MANY SINCE 2004 HAVE BEEN MURDERED? HOW MANY MILLIONS OF ILLEGALS HAVE CLIMBED OUR BORDERS AND JOBS SINCE THEN?

*
Illegal Immigration and Crime
By James R. Edwards, Jr.

Posted November 22, 2004


Immigrant criminality represents perhaps the worst abuse of the liberty aliens enjoy in the United States. Increasingly, the government closest to the people either finds its hands tied or cravenly abrogates its responsibility to fellow Americans within its jurisdiction. Moreover, the illegal element exacerbates the economic and other burdens caused by legal immigration.
The current high rate of sustained, mass immigration—more than one million legal immigrants plus half a million illegal aliens every year—forces many states and localities into turmoil. The illegals certainly live outside the obligations that those who live under the "consent of the governed" owe to each other: While the principles of the Declaration of Independence guarantee all human beings certain natural and unalienable rights, only parties who have consented to our government deserve the full rights of citizenship. Illegal immigrants are not part of the social contract giving legitimacy to this government. American citizens have not given their consent to higher taxes, crowded schools, jammed emergency rooms, clogged roads, unlawful turning of single-family homes into hotels or apartments into tenements, forced multicultural amenities such as bilingual education and multilingual ballots, or welfare and other services subsidizing poverty-prone immigrants. Above all, they never consented to higher crime rates.

While anyone who decries illegal immigration is required to distinguish it from legal immigration, the effects of legal immigration should first be noted. Robert Samuelson recently wrote in his Washington Post column that "Hispanics account for most of the increase in poverty" since 1990. "Compared with 1990, there were actually 700,000 fewer non-Hispanic whites in poverty last year . . . . Meanwhile, the number of poor Hispanics is up by 3 million since 1990. The health insurance story is similar. Last year 13 million Hispanics lacked insurance. They're 60 percent of the rise since 1990." And of course a growing proportion of the Hispanic population is immigrants poorer than their predecessors. Samuelson remarks that the black poverty rate in this period has actually dropped, from 32 to 24 percent.
To add to Samuelson's observations, consider the reports from the Center for Immigration Studies by its Steven Camarota and Harvard's George Borjas detailing the negative economic impact of recent immigrants on native-born wages and employment. Illegal immigrants impose an even greater burden, because they pay few taxes and they drain public services such as health care, education, and other benefits of the welfare state. While many federal programs deny assistance to illegals, many state and local programs and privileges are open to them. The National Academy of Sciences found in a 1997 landmark study that immigrantheaded households in 1994-1995 placed a net annual fiscal burden on California native-born residents of $1,178 per native household.That is, each American family in California subsidized that state's immigrant population by nearly $1,200 a year.
The NAS report also said fiscal impacts tend to benefit the federal government and drain state and local government resources. "Much like anyone else in the population, immigrants use services that are costly to provide, or that others can use less freely—so-called congestion costs. Examples include services from roads, sewers, police and fire departments, libraries, airports, and foreign embassies." Therefore, having a much larger immigrant population (29 percent of the U.S. foreign-born, a fourth of the State's population) bloats California's budget significantly.
The national government has exclusive power over immigration, and it has mandated certain public benefits for immigrants, legal or illegal, such as public education (see the 1982 Supreme Court case, Plyler v. Doe). States and localities then bear the costs and consequences of all immigration.And they respond differently, with differing consequences for their people.
The Florida legislature rejected a bill issuing driver's licenses to illegal aliens. Kansas state legislators voted to give illegal aliens instate college tuition. Alabama and Florida state police work closely with federal immigration enforcers. New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago have "sanctuary" policies that keep city employees, even police, from asking about immigration status. An Idaho county commissioner billed Mexico for the $2 million illegal aliens owe for county services.
The impact is seen particularly in crime: Record-high auto thefts in Arizona, drug trafficking in Salt Lake City, human smuggling rings in Los Angeles, D.C. sniper Lee Malvo, money laundering, prostitution, gang murders, and even slavery. Immigration authorities estimate that 84,000 state inmates are aliens, though state and local figures on foreign-born prisoners are hard to come by. At least three quarters of these immigrant state inmates are in Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, and Texas—the top immigrant destinations.
Police officers at the local or state level are the law enforcement officials most likely to encounter illegal aliens. Local residents are the crime victims of these aliens. Local, county, or state jails house many of the foreign criminals. Local, county, or state criminal justice systems try these lawbreakers. And local, county, and state taxpayers pay the costs of law enforcement and criminal justice associated with the crimes that immigrants, legal and illegal, commit.
Figures for 1999 State Criminal Alien Assistance Program compensation show claims of $1.5 billion in documented costs incurred by state corrections and local jails for covered aliens. County governments face a special burden, a 2001 report by 24 Southwestern border counties calculated. They spent, from general funds, $894 million on law enforcement and criminal justice in fiscal year 1999. Many of the costs that criminal aliens impose on all state, county, and municipal jurisdictions are not represented in such figures. To cite just one California example, San Diego now spends $50 million a year to handle illegal criminal aliens.
The underworld network built up by millions of alien lawbreakers, who by and large have no fear of capture or of being held accountable, enabled the September 11 terrorists to operate undetected. Latino illegal aliens in Northern Virginia helpfully showed several of the terrorists the ropes on how to secure Virginia driver's licenses fraudulently.
The advancement of "political correctness" and multiculturalism has caused politicians to be less willing to challenge limitations on their authority over resources. Local and state politicians in heavy immigrant-receiving areas have instead expanded immigrant eligibility for public benefits, welfare, assistance programs, health care programs for those without private insurance, and driver's and other licenses. Some states and localities have begun to accept the Mexican matricula consular ID card, though it has been determined to pose a great risk to U.S. national security. Even before the recently reported crossing of 25 Chechens into Arizona, authorities knew that the illegal aliens pose a national security problem.
Dealing with current levels and quality of legal immigration is an immense problem by itself. But it is clear that until alien criminality of every kind is punished, swiftly and surely, Americans who must live with the consequences will continue to suffer higher taxes, lower quality of life, higher threat and fear levels, and less actual safety.



*


                  

*

Obama Quietly Erasing Borders (Article)






*




VIDEO
Illegal Aliens Kill Americans Then Put Back on Our Streets
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTlqmjxF5m4&feature=channel_video_title


ARTICLE
8 Out of 10 Illegals Apprehended in 2010 Never Prosecuted
http://www.alipac.us/article-6162-thread-1-0.html

Workers and youth speak on Chicago, Quebec and the attack on democratic rights

Workers and youth speak on Chicago, Quebec and the attack on democratic rights

US student loan debt: Where did it come from and who benefits? CUTS TO PAY FOR MEXICO'S DREAM ACTS WELFARE IN OUR BORDERS

US student loan debt: Where did it come from and who benefits?


OBAMA'S HAS HANDED OVER MILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS TO THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA, WHICH NOW OPERATES OUT OF THE OBAMA WHITE HOUSE.

OBAMA HAS HANDED OVER BILLIONS TO MUSLIM DICTATORS, AND SQUANDERED BILLIONS TO PROTECT THEIR BORDERS, AS HE SABOTAGES OUR BORDERS TO EASE ILLEGALS INTO OUR JOBS AND VOTING BOOTHS!

Obama cuts student loan programs


Effective July 1, 2012, the federal government has ended the in-school interest subsidy for graduate and professional students with Stafford Loans. This relatively little-reported event was enacted as part of the 2011 Budget Control Act. It will substantially increase the cost of graduate school, already notoriously expensive, and will add an estimated $18 billion to student debt burdens over 10 years. Seventy-six percent of US graduate school students borrow to cover tuition, and their yearly costs vary from $15,000 to $45,000 for tuition alone.

*

*

Is Illegal Immigration Moral?

By Victor Davis Hanson

11/25/2010



We know illegal immigration is no longer really unlawful, but is it moral?

Usually Americans debate the fiscal costs of illegal immigration. Supporters of open borders rightly remind us that illegal immigrants pay sales taxes. Often their payroll-tax contributions are not later tapped by Social Security payouts.

Opponents counter that illegal immigrants are more likely to end up on state assistance, are less likely to report cash income, and cost the state more through the duplicate issuing of services and documents in both English and Spanish. Such to-and-fro talking points are endless.

So is the debate over beneficiaries of illegal immigration. Are profit-minded employers villains who want cheap labor in lieu of hiring more expensive Americans? Or is the culprit a cynical Mexican government that counts on billions of dollars in remittances from its expatriate poor that it otherwise ignored?

Or is the engine that drives illegal immigration the American middle class? Why should millions of suburbanites assume that, like 18th-century French aristocrats, they should have imported labor to clean their homes, manicure their lawns and watch over their kids?

Or is the catalyst the self-interested professional Latino lobby in politics and academia that sees a steady stream of impoverished Latin American nationals as a permanent victimized constituency, empowering and showcasing elite self-appointed spokesmen such as themselves?

Or is the real advocate the Democratic Party that wishes to remake the electoral map of the American Southwest by ensuring larger future pools of natural supporters? Again, the debate over who benefits and why is never-ending.

But what is often left out of the equation is the moral dimension of illegal immigration. We see the issue too often reduced to caricature, involving a noble, impoverished victim without much free will and subject to cosmic forces of sinister oppression. But everyone makes free choices that affect others. So ponder the ethics of a guest arriving in a host country knowingly against its sovereign protocols and laws.

First, there is the larger effect on the sanctity of a legal system. If a guest ignores the law -- and thereby often must keep breaking more laws -- should citizens also have the right to similarly pick and choose which statutes they find worthy of honoring and which are too bothersome? Once it is deemed moral for the impoverished to cross a border without a passport, could not the same arguments of social justice be used for the poor of any status not to report earned income or even file a 1040 form?

Second, what is the effect of mass illegal immigration on impoverished U.S. citizens? Does anyone care? When 10 million to 15 million aliens are here illegally, where is the leverage for the American working poor to bargain with employers? If it is deemed ethical to grant in-state tuition discounts to illegal-immigrant students, is it equally ethical to charge three times as much for out-of-state, financially needy American students -- whose federal government usually offers billions to subsidize state colleges and universities? If foreign nationals are afforded more entitlements, are there fewer for U.S. citizens?

Third, consider the moral ramifications on legal immigration -- the traditional great strength of the American nation. What are we to tell the legal immigrant from Oaxaca who got a green card at some cost and trouble, or who, once legally in the United States, went through the lengthy and expensive process of acquiring citizenship? Was he a dupe to dutifully follow our laws?

And given the current precedent, if a million soon-to-be-impoverished Greeks, 2 million fleeing North Koreans, or 5 million starving Somalis were to enter the United States illegally and en masse, could anyone object to their unlawful entry and residence? If so, on what legal, practical or moral grounds?

Fourth, examine the morality of remittances. It is deemed noble to send billions of dollars back to families and friends struggling in Latin America. But how is such a considerable loss of income made up? Are American taxpayers supposed to step in to subsidize increased social services so that illegal immigrants can afford to send billions of dollars back across the border? What is the morality of that equation in times of recession? Shouldn't illegal immigrants at least try to buy health insurance before sending cash back to Mexico?

The debate over illegal immigration is too often confined to costs and benefits. But ultimately it is a complicated moral issue -- and one often ignored by all too many moralists.

Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and a recipient of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.


THE STATE OF CA OPERATES DEFICITS OF $28 MILLION AND STILL PAYS OUT $20 BILLION IN SOCIAL SERVICES TO ILLEGALS!

NOT ONE LEGAL VOTED FOR ANY OF THIS!

BUT THEN THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA IS DOES NOT INCLUDE  LEGALS!

Lloyd Billingsley
The DREAM and the Nightmare
In California, students are better off being illegal immigrants than legal.
30 March 2012

Last year, Governor Jerry Brown signed the California DREAM Act, which makes students in the country illegally eligible for grants and waivers to attend one of the state’s public colleges or universities. The students must have attended school in the state for three years, “affirm that they are in the process of applying to legalize their immigration status,” and show both financial need and academic achievement. Assemblyman Gil Cedillo, the Los Angeles Democrat who authored the DREAM Act, hails the legislation as a victory for those “in the country through no fault of their own.” Opponents such as Republican assemblyman Tim Donnelly—a first-term legislator not given to understatement—called Cedillo’s legislation the “California Nightmare Act,” said it is “morally wrong,” and would create “a new entitlement that is going to cause tens of thousands of people to come here illegally from all over the world.”

Poster children for the DREAM Act abound. Mandeep Chahal, for example, was six years old when her parents brought her to the United States from India. Chahal wants to be a doctor; her fellow students at Los Altos High School near Palo Alto voted her the person “Most Likely to Save the World.” That’s a tall order, but to deny such a person the opportunity seems unreasonable. “Many parents of these children pay taxes for many services they cannot get,” argues Cedillo.

Cedillo’s point implies that illegal immigrants are the only ones subject to this dynamic. But consider: my taxes subsidize the Medi-Cal system, which provides medical care for low-income state residents, but I couldn’t “get” health care that way, even in the year my income was so low that my daughter qualified for a Pell Grant. Likewise, the taxes of, say, a California welder help pay for top-drawer pensions and benefits for state government employees, but he can’t enjoy those benefits himself. Neither is he entitled to get a government job merely because his taxes help pay the salaries and benefits of workers at the Department of Motor Vehicles, CalTrans, the California Air Resources Board, the Franchise Tax Board, California’s Department of Education, the State Board of Equalization, the Coastal Commission, and on and on.

The taxes of a fast-food worker help subsidize the University of California at Berkeley, but nothing guarantees that taxpayer admission to Berkeley. The state’s Master Plan for Higher Education does guarantee everyone a place in the system, whether at a community college, a state university, or within the UC system. But no one is promised a place at the top, and the system grants no special favors to legal immigrants. When I came to the United States, legally, in 1977, I had been studying at the University of Windsor, a four-year school in my hometown of Windsor, Ontario. I wanted to continue my studies at San Diego State University but was not allowed to transfer because I hadn’t attended high school in California. SDSU administrators suggested I try the state’s community college system, which seemed a step down from what I had in mind. But eventually, I put two children through San Diego State. They’re now working in productive careers, a tax burden to no one. No legislation rewards parents for that achievement or for coming to the United States with proper documents.

Cedillo’s law, by contrast, rewards those who came to California illegally. Will the law, therefore, encourage more people to enter the state illegally, as Donnelly and other critics assert?

(IN FACT THERE ARE MORE THAN 11 MILLION ILLEGALS IN SOUTHERN CA ALONE! NOW NEARLY 40% OF CA ARE ILLEGALS, 33% OF NEVADA AND 24% OF COLORADO. MOST  NON LA RAZA PROPAGANDA SOURCES BUT THE NUMBER OF ILLEGALS AT 40 MILLION AND BREEDING LIKE BUNNIES!)

Recall how Congress passed and President Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which gave amnesty to several million undocumented immigrants. A quarter of a century later, the number of illegal immigrants stands at 11.5 million. It seems clear that the 1986 act didn’t discourage foreign nationals from entering the United States without signing the guest book. One of those who obtained citizenship under the Act was Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa, who made his way through UC Berkeley and Harvard Medical School and is now associate professor of neurosurgery and oncology at the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center in Baltimore. Quinones-Hinojosa and others who have spoken out in support of the DREAM Act often give the impression that their cases are typical of illegal aliens. Not exactly. Amnesty measures, however well-intentioned, usually bring unintended consequences.

THE REALITY OF LA RAZA’S LOOTING OF CA:

Consider Ignacio Mesa Viera, subject of a recent front-page story in the Sacramento Bee. He came to the United States illegally in 1979 to work and help his family, as he explained, but was convicted on a drug offense in 1995. He was deported but returned to the United States, whereupon he was busted for another drug offense in 2008. Before his recent deportation, the U.S. government was paying for Viera’s kidney dialysis, a treatment that can cost more than $60,000 a year. “I imagine that the reason they don’t want to let me stay in this country,” Viera told the Bee, “is they don’t want to be paying for this.”

Cedillo and his colleagues need to know that everybody’s taxes pay for services they and their children “cannot get”—including kidney dialysis and other expensive medical treatments courtesy of the federal government. Meantime, as a University of California report noted last year, tens of thousands of middle-class, taxpaying legal residents are being squeezed out of an affordable college education even as the legislature contrives to provide scholarships for the children of illegal aliens. The lawmakers’ solution is to create yet another entitlement in the form of a new $1 billion scholarship program for students whose families earn less than $150,000 a year. Such is life in the Golden State, even with a DREAM Act in place.

Lloyd Billingsley is the author of Hollywood Party: How Communism Seduced the American Film Industry in the 1930s and 1940s and the former editorial director of the Pacific Research Institute.

*

*

OBAMA HAS PROMISED HIS LA RAZA “THE RACE” PARTY BASE of ILLEGALS AMNESTY, NO E-VERIFY, NO I.D. FOR REQUIRED OF ILLEGALS VOTING… OR AT LEAST CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT!

OBAMA HANDS MASSIVE WELFARE TO ILLEGALS, ALONG WITH OUR JOBS TO BUY THE ILLEGALS' ILLEGAL VOTES!






The truth about the DREAM Act






Published March 20, 2012



| FoxNews.com



·Text Size



The DREAM Act has become a rallying cry for President Obama, members of his administration, and liberal Democrats everywhere. President Obama has vowed to “keep fighting for the DREAM Act,” which would grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.



It’s true when listeners or those polled don’t know the facts that the DREAM Act has some appeal. After all, we are all naturally sympathetic when children are involved.



But the descriptions of the DREAM Act voiced by President Obama and his cohorts are not accurate. And the consequences are never told.



DREAM Act supporters claim that only children would benefit from such a bill, but the facts tell another story. Under most DREAM Act proposals, amnesty would be given to individuals up to the age of 30—not exactly children. And some other proposals don’t even have an age limit.



These supporters also maintain that illegal immigrants can’t go college without the DREAM Act. But the truth is that illegal immigrants can already go to college in most states.



And ultimately, most versions of the DREAM Act actually don’t even force illegal immigrants to comply with all the requirements in the bill, such as going to college or joining the military. The administration can waive requirements because of “hardship”at its complete discretion.



DREAM Act proposals are also a magnet for fraud. Many illegal immigrants will fraudulently claim they came here as children or that they are under 30. And the federal government has no way to check whether their claims are true or not.



Such massive fraud occurred after the 1986 amnesty for illegal immigrants who claimed they were agricultural workers. Studies found two-thirds of all applications for the 1986 amnesty were fraudulent.



(ANYONE THAT THINKS THERE ARE ONLY 11 MILLION ILLEGALS IN OUR BORDERS SHOULD COME VISIT CA! LOOK AROUND AND TRY TO FIND A NON-HISPANIC ENGLISH SPEAKING LEGAL! CA IS NOW 40% ILLEGAL. NEVADA IS NOW 33% ILLEGAL. COLORADO IS NOW 20% ILLEGAL. AND LA RAZA IS NOW MOVING INTO THE AMERICAN SOUTH)



And this amnesty did nothing to stop illegal immigration. In 1986, there were about three million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. Today, there are an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. and about seven million of them work here, unfairly taking jobs from unemployed Americans.



While DREAM Act supporters claim that it would only benefit children, they skip over the fact that it actually rewards the very illegal immigrant parents who knowingly violated our laws. Once their children become U.S. citizens, they can petition for their illegal immigrant parents and adult siblings to be legalized, who will then bring in others in an endless chain.



This kind of chain migration only encourages more illegal immigration, as parents will bring their children to the U.S. in hopes of receiving citizenship.



President Obama tried to get the DREAM Act passed during a lame duck session about a year ago but it faced bipartisan opposition in Congress. This hasn’t stopped the administration from passing its agenda. The Obama administration does everything it can to let illegal immigrants stay here, which compounds the problem.



Political appointees at the Department of Homeland Security recently issued new deportation guidelines that amount to backdoor amnesty and strike another blow at millions of unemployed U.S. workers.



Under the administration’s new deportation policy, DHS officials review all incoming and most pending cases before an immigration court to determine if the illegal immigrant can remain in the U.S. Since the administration has made clear that many illegal immigrants are not considered priorities for removal, including potential DREAM Act beneficiaries, this could open the door to allow millions of illegal immigrants to live and work in the U.S. without a vote of Congress.



The Obama administration has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by 70%, allowing illegal immigrants to continue working in jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal workers. And the list goes on and on – this administration has a pattern of ignoring the laws and intent of Congress.



The United States is based on the rule of law but the Obama administration already has dirty hands by abusing administrative authority to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants. The DREAM Act doesn’t stop illegal immigration—it only encourages more of it by rewarding lawbreakers.



Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) is Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee









The Obama administration has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by 70%, allowing illegal immigrants to continue working in jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal workers.



THE ENTIRE REASON THE BORDERS ARE LEFT OPEN IS TO CUT WAGES!



"We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers," said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. "President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws."


US student loan debt: Where did it come from and who benefits? AMERICA'S ASSAULT ON STUDENTS - LEGALS, THAT IS! NO DREAM ACTS FOR AMERICANS!

US student loan debt: Where did it come from and who benefits?

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2012/05/dream-acts-against-legals-how-mexico-la.html

INVESTORS.com

Dream Act Makes Children Pawns

Posted 12/07/2010 06:59 PM ET

Immigration: Congress is expected to vote on the Dream Act on Wednesday, providing a path to citizenship to millions of illegal immigrant youth. It's a bad precedent that uses kids, costs taxpayers and invites new amnesties.

After years of failing to sell mass amnesty to voters, the open-borders lobby has turned to tugging at Americans' heartstrings, presenting treacly stories of illegal immigrants brought here as children who then bettered themselves here.

Somehow legalizing this group ahead of all the other people awaiting immigration visas legally is supposed to specially benefit all of us, even though the most obvious beneficiaries are the individuals themselves. But out of guilt, or because we "owe" them "justice," the case is being made for passing the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act.

That act provides a path to citizenship for some 2.1 million illegals who have lived here continuously for five years, avoided felony convictions, came to the U.S. before they turned 16 and completed two years of college or U.S. military service within six years.

Now, in the lame-duck session of Congress, the open-borders lobby has lawmakers right where it wants them. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has filed Senate cloture to bring the Dream Act to a vote as soon as Wednesday, and the House may vote even sooner.

It's a scam, using children unethically to achieve an open-borders political agenda that opens the door to perverse incentives.

The Dream Act is an effort to mimic the benefits illegals derive from having anchor babies in the U.S., a tactic used by millions as an "insurance policy" to avoid deportation and achieve legal status.

The awfulness of that incentive can be seen in the case of Edgar Jimenez Lugo, the 14-year-old U.S. "citizen" who was arrested in Mexico after a rather spectacular career beheading rivals and innocent people for $2,500 each on behalf of a Mexican cartel enforcer.

Cronica, a Mexican newspaper, reported that the throwaway kid was born in San Diego and then spent his life with Mexican parents who took him back to Morelos, Mexico, and "wandered around." Apparently the child's birth in San Diego was the same gambit millions of other immigrants use to game the system for U.S. entry. And he's only facing three years in jail in Mexico, so he'll soon become our problem — not Mexico's.

The Dream Act makes every baby an anchor baby, commodifying children, as young Jimenez seems to have been. It extends the incentive for parents to use their kids to beat immigration laws.

Under the Dream Act it may take 10 years for an illegal to achieve full U.S. citizenship, but there's little doubt he will. And as soon as he does achieve citizenship, he will sponsor the parents who brought him into the country illegally — thus achieving the original intention of the law-breaking parents.

This bill is really an amnesty bill. The 1986 amnesty signed by President Reagan provided amnesty to 2.7 million illegals. Now, 24 years on, we have 12 million illegals to amnesty.

Columnist Michelle Malkin points to six successive amnesties since the 1986 act. Each has raised anticipation of new ones for illegals. For them, no need to hurry for the amnesty train — the next one will be along in just a moment.

Worse, the Dream Act will cost a lot. By some estimates it's a $6.2 billion bill for taxpayers, but it may be even more. Judges over the years have already ruled that children of illegals are entitled to "free" U.S. public education through the 12th grade, plus "free" medical care, bankrupting hospital emergency rooms.

The Dream Act will give them even more.
With a treasured U.S. green card as motivation, all they have to do is clog up community college enrollments with no minimum performance standards, crowding out legitimate students who are interested in learning, or else sign up for diploma-mill trade schools with government loans they aren't under any obligation to repay.
For every Harvard valedictorian the illegal immigration lobby presents as a poster boy, there will be thousands of gang members who will qualify because the cops haven't caught them yet.
Worst of all is the entitlement mentality this bill creates.
Suddenly the U.S. taxpayer "owes" all this, as the brazen illegal students parading around in graduation robes for cameras without fear of apprehension make clear. This entitlement mentality is no success ethic. And it won't stop at the Dream Act.
It just underscores the disgusting ethic of special interests playing grievance and identity politics by using children as pawns.
The only good answer to this is no.
*
Here’s one teacher’s report on the illegals in our schools.

Subject: Cheap Labor This should make everyone think, be you Democrat, Republican or Independent  From a California school teacher.


"As you listen to the news about the student protests over illegal immigration, there are some things that you should be aware of:  I am in charge of the English-as-a-second-language department at a large southern California high school which is designated a Title 1 school, meaning that its students average lower socioeconomic and income levels.  Most of the schools you are hearing about, South Gate High, Bell Gardens, Huntington Park, etc., where these students are protesting, are also Title 1 schools.  Title 1 schools are on the free breakfast and free lunch program. When I say free breakfast, I'm not talking a glass of milk and roll -- but a full breakfast and cereal bar with fruits and juices that would make a Marriott proud. The waste of this food is monumental, with trays and trays of it being dumped in the trash uneaten. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)  I estimate that well over 50% of these students are obese or at least moderately overweight. About 75% or more DO have cell phones. The school also provides day care centers for the unwed teenage pregnant girls (some as young as 13) so they can attend class without the inconvenience of having to arrange for babysitters or having family watch their kids. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)  I was ordered to spend $700,000 on my department or risk losing funding for the upcoming year even though there was little need for anything; my budget was already substantial. I ended up buying new computers for the computer learning center, half of which, one month later, have been carved with graffiti by the appreciative students who obviously feel humbled and grateful to have a free education in America. (OUR TAX DOLLARS A T WORK)  I have had to intervene several times for young and substitute teachers whose classes consist of many illegal immigrant students here in the country less then 3 months who raised so much hell with the female teachers, calling them "Putas" whores and throwing things that the teachers were in tears.  Free medical, free education, free food, day care etc., etc., etc. Is it any wonder they feel entitled to not only be in this country but to demand rights, privileges and entitlements? To those who want to point out how much these illegal immigrants contribute to our society because they LIKE their gardener and housekeeper and they like to pay less for tomatoes: spend some time in the real world of illegal immigration and see the TRUE costs.

Morning Bell: You Have To Pass This Amnesty To Find Out What Is In It

Posted December 8th, 2010 at 9:39am in Protect America, Rule of Law with 26 comments  Print This Post

The nation’s unemployment rate stands at 9.8 percent, a post–World War II record 19th month that unemployment has been over 9 percent. President Barack Obama is 7.3 million jobs short of what he promised his failed stimulus would deliver. The American people are staring down the barrel of the largest tax hike in American history. So what do Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–NV) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–CA) have Congress voting on today? Amnesty. Specifically, the House and Senate will be voting on the fourth and fifth versions of the DREAM Act, which would legalize anywhere between 300,000 and 2.1 million illegal immigrants.
Supporters of the DREAM Act claim the bill would provide citizenship only to children who go to college or join the military. But all any version of the legislation requires is that an applicant attend any college for just two years. And if President Obama wants to reward non-citizen service members with citizenship, he already has the power to do so. The Secretary of Defense already has the authority under 10 U.S.C. § 504 (b) to enlist illegal immigrants in the military if “such enlistment is vital to the national interest,” and 8 U.S.C. § 1440 allows such immigrants to become naturalized U.S. citizens, with their applications handled at accelerated rates. The military component of the DREAM Act is a complete red herring.
Neither of these bills has gone through their respective committees, and only one has been scored by the Congressional Budget Office. As a result, they are chock full of loopholes designed by open border advocates to make an even wider amnesty possible.

One bill would even grant Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano the power to waive the college and military requirements if the illegal immigrant can demonstrate “compelling circumstances” and the immigrant’s removal would cause a hardship to the them, their spouse, their parents, or their children. When exactly would removal from this country not cause a hardship? What other loopholes are in these bills? As Speaker Pelosi might say: “You have to pass this amnesty so that you can find out what is in it.”

The DREAM Acts are also an invitation for fraud. All of the bills would make it illegal for any information in an amnesty application to be used to initiate removal proceedings against an applicant. Law enforcement agencies would be forced to prove that any information they used to find, detain, and try to remove an illegal immigrant was already in their files before an application was received or was not derived from the application. If an illegal immigrant lies about his age to qualify for the program, and the lie is never detected, he gets amnesty. And if the lie is found out, no worries—law enforcement is forbidden from using that lie against him.

The real goal of the DREAM Act is to make it even harder for our nation’s law enforcement agencies to enforce any immigration laws. And Congress is not the only forum where amnesty advocates are working to undermine the rule of law today. Right across the street from the Capitol, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear arguments over an Arizona immigration enforcement law. This is not a hearing on the controversial SB 1070 law that passed earlier this year. This case, supported by the usual amnesty suspects (La Raza, the SEIU, the Chamber of Commerce, etc.), challenges Arizona’s 2007 E-Verify law, which penalizes employers who do not verify the legal status of their employees. This challenge by amnesty advocates to even common-sense immigration enforcement measures should send a clear measure to anyone wavering on the DREAM Act: Any enforcement mechanisms that DREAM Act supporters agree to today will be immediately challenged in court tomorrow. Enforcement is fickle; amnesty is forever.
Our country does need immigration reform. We need smarter border security, stronger interior enforcement, and a more efficient naturalization system. But amnesty plans like the DREAM Act undermine real reform. The DREAM Act encourages people to ignore our borders, undermines our law enforcement across the country, and makes fools of law-abiding immigrants who play by the rules.

*

Is Illegal Immigration Moral?

By Victor Davis Hanson

11/25/2010

We know illegal immigration is no longer really unlawful, but is it moral?

Usually Americans debate the fiscal costs of illegal immigration. Supporters of open borders rightly remind us that illegal immigrants pay sales taxes. Often their payroll-tax contributions are not later tapped by Social Security payouts.

Opponents counter that illegal immigrants are more likely to end up on state assistance, are less likely to report cash income, and cost the state more through the duplicate issuing of services and documents in both English and Spanish. Such to-and-fro talking points are endless.

So is the debate over beneficiaries of illegal immigration. Are profit-minded employers villains who want cheap labor in lieu of hiring more expensive Americans? Or is the culprit a cynical Mexican government that counts on billions of dollars in remittances from its expatriate poor that it otherwise ignored?

Or is the engine that drives illegal immigration the American middle class? Why should millions of suburbanites assume that, like 18th-century French aristocrats, they should have imported labor to clean their homes, manicure their lawns and watch over their kids?

Or is the catalyst the self-interested professional Latino lobby in politics and academia that sees a steady stream of impoverished Latin American nationals as a permanent victimized constituency, empowering and showcasing elite self-appointed spokesmen such as themselves?

Or is the real advocate the Democratic Party that wishes to remake the electoral map of the American Southwest by ensuring larger future pools of natural supporters? Again, the debate over who benefits and why is never-ending.
But what is often left out of the equation is the moral dimension of illegal immigration. We see the issue too often reduced to caricature, involving a noble, impoverished victim without much free will and subject to cosmic forces of sinister oppression. But everyone makes free choices that affect others. So ponder the ethics of a guest arriving in a host country knowingly against its sovereign protocols and laws.

First, there is the larger effect on the sanctity of a legal system. If a guest ignores the law -- and thereby often must keep breaking more laws -- should citizens also have the right to similarly pick and choose which statutes they find worthy of honoring and which are too bothersome? Once it is deemed moral for the impoverished to cross a border without a passport, could not the same arguments of social justice be used for the poor of any status not to report earned income or even file a 1040 form?
Second, what is the effect of mass illegal immigration on impoverished U.S. citizens? Does anyone care? When 10 million to 15 million aliens are here illegally, where is the leverage for the American working poor to bargain with employers? If it is deemed ethical to grant in-state tuition discounts to illegal-immigrant students, is it equally ethical to charge three times as much for out-of-state, financially needy American students -- whose federal government usually offers billions to subsidize state colleges and universities? If foreign nationals are afforded more entitlements, are there fewer for U.S. citizens?

Third, consider the moral ramifications on legal immigration -- the traditional great strength of the American nation. What are we to tell the legal immigrant from Oaxaca who got a green card at some cost and trouble, or who, once legally in the United States, went through the lengthy and expensive process of acquiring citizenship? Was he a dupe to dutifully follow our laws?

And given the current precedent, if a million soon-to-be-impoverished Greeks, 2 million fleeing North Koreans, or 5 million starving Somalis were to enter the United States illegally and en masse, could anyone object to their unlawful entry and residence? If so, on what legal, practical or moral grounds?

Fourth, examine the morality of remittances. It is deemed noble to send billions of dollars back to families and friends struggling in Latin America. But how is such a considerable loss of income made up? Are American taxpayers supposed to step in to subsidize increased social services so that illegal immigrants can afford to send billions of dollars back across the border? What is the morality of that equation in times of recession? Shouldn't illegal immigrants at least try to buy health insurance before sending cash back to Mexico?

The debate over illegal immigration is too often confined to costs and benefits. But ultimately it is a complicated moral issue -- and one often ignored by all too many moralists.

Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and a recipient of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.



THE SITUATION OF LA RAZA SUPREMACY IS MUCH WORSE THAN THIS AUTHOR COVERS IN HIS ARTICLE ON DREAM ACTS.

THERE ARE ONLY EIGHT (8) COUNTIES WITH A POPULATION GREATER THAN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, WHERE HALF OF ALL JOBS GO TO ILLEGALS USING STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS. LEAD BY LA RAZA SUPREMACIST LIKE GIL CEDILLO, THE STATE PASSED A LAW QUICKLY SIGNED BY LA RAZA DEM JERRY BROWN (ELECTED BY ILLEGALS) THAT MAKES IT ILLEGAL FOR EMPLOYERS TO USE E-VERIFY.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY PAYS OUT $600 MILLION TO ILLEGALS ON WELFARE (source: JUDICIAL WATCH). NOT A SINGLE LEGAL VOTED TO BE MEXICO’S ANCHOR BABY BIRTHING CENTER, OR WELFARE LOOTING STATE!

ONE-THIRD OF THE DRIVERS IN MEXIFORNIA ARE ILLEGALS DRIVING ILLEGALLY WITHOUT LICENSES, INSURANCE AND FREQUENTLY IN CARS REGISTERED IN NOMINEE’S NAMES TO AVOID BEING IMPOUNDED WHEN CAUGHT. LA RAZA SUPREMACIST GIL CEDILLO AND THE LA RAZA FACTION IN SACRAMENTO ARE PUSHING TO END THAT. HEY. THEY’RE ILLEGALS, INVITED HERE TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED FOR THE PAYMASTERS OF THE LA RAZA DEMS, LIKE CONGRESSWOMAN ZOE LOFGREN. NEARLY 95% OF THE CAMPAIGN BRIBES THIS ADVOCATE FOR OPEN BORDERS, CHAIN MIGRATION, AMNESTY OR AT LEAST CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT, ARE FROM EMPLOYERS THAT BENEFIT FROM SOME OF THIS STAGGERINGLY EXPENSIVE “CHEAP” MEX LABOR.
WHO BENEFITS?

LA RAZA DEM, AND ADVOCATE FOR OPEN BORDERS AND NO E-VERIFY SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN HAS LONG HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER S.F. HOTEL, JUST MILES FROM HER $16 MILLION DOLLAR WAR PROFITEER’S MANSION!
LA RAZA DEM, AND ADVOCATE FOR  OPEN BORDERS AND NO E-VERIFY CONGRESSWOMAN NANCY PELOSI HIRES ILLEGALS AT HER  RESTAURANTS AND HER ST. HELENA, NAPA WINERY.

BARBARA BOXER, ONE OF THE MOST CORRUPT POLITICIANS IN CA HISTORY, WAS REELECTED BY ILLEGALS BASED ON HER PLATFORM OF CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT AND NO E-VERIFY!

NOT ONCE, BUT THREE TIMES….!!! ON BEHALF OF THEIR BIG AG BIZ DONORS, BOXER AND FEINSTEIN HAVE PUSHED FOR A “SPECIAL AMNESTY” FOR 1.5 MILLION ILLEGAL FARM WORKERS…… DESPITE THE FACT THAT ONE-THIRD OF THESE FARM WORKERS COME TO GROW ANCHOR BABIES AND COLLECT WELFARE!

*

SOMETHING ELSE THE OCCUPIED LEGALS SHOULD KNOW: ACCORDING TO CA ATTORNEY GEN. KAMALA HARRIS (AN OPEN BORDERS LA RAZA DEM), NEARLY HALF OF ALL MURDERS IN MEXIFORNIA ARE BY MEXICAN GANGS!!!

*

THE STATE OF CA OPERATES DEFICITS OF $28 MILLION AND STILL PAYS OUT $20 BILLION IN SOCIAL SERVICES TO ILLEGALS!

NOT ONE LEGAL VOTED FOR ANY OF THIS!

BUT THEN THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA IS DOES NOT INCLUDE  LEGALS!

Lloyd Billingsley
The DREAM and the Nightmare
In California, students are better off being illegal immigrants than legal.
30 March 2012

Last year, Governor Jerry Brown signed the California DREAM Act, which makes students in the country illegally eligible for grants and waivers to attend one of the state’s public colleges or universities. The students must have attended school in the state for three years, “affirm that they are in the process of applying to legalize their immigration status,” and show both financial need and academic achievement. Assemblyman Gil Cedillo, the Los Angeles Democrat who authored the DREAM Act, hails the legislation as a victory for those “in the country through no fault of their own.” Opponents such as Republican assemblyman Tim Donnelly—a first-term legislator not given to understatement—called Cedillo’s legislation the “California Nightmare Act,” said it is “morally wrong,” and would create “a new entitlement that is going to cause tens of thousands of people to come here illegally from all over the world.”

Poster children for the DREAM Act abound. Mandeep Chahal, for example, was six years old when her parents brought her to the United States from India. Chahal wants to be a doctor; her fellow students at Los Altos High School near Palo Alto voted her the person “Most Likely to Save the World.” That’s a tall order, but to deny such a person the opportunity seems unreasonable. “Many parents of these children pay taxes for many services they cannot get,” argues Cedillo.

Cedillo’s point implies that illegal immigrants are the only ones subject to this dynamic. But consider: my taxes subsidize the Medi-Cal system, which provides medical care for low-income state residents, but I couldn’t “get” health care that way, even in the year my income was so low that my daughter qualified for a Pell Grant. Likewise, the taxes of, say, a California welder help pay for top-drawer pensions and benefits for state government employees, but he can’t enjoy those benefits himself. Neither is he entitled to get a government job merely because his taxes help pay the salaries and benefits of workers at the Department of Motor Vehicles, CalTrans, the California Air Resources Board, the Franchise Tax Board, California’s Department of Education, the State Board of Equalization, the Coastal Commission, and on and on.

The taxes of a fast-food worker help subsidize the University of California at Berkeley, but nothing guarantees that taxpayer admission to Berkeley. The state’s Master Plan for Higher Education does guarantee everyone a place in the system, whether at a community college, a state university, or within the UC system. But no one is promised a place at the top, and the system grants no special favors to legal immigrants. When I came to the United States, legally, in 1977, I had been studying at the University of Windsor, a four-year school in my hometown of Windsor, Ontario. I wanted to continue my studies at San Diego State University but was not allowed to transfer because I hadn’t attended high school in California. SDSU administrators suggested I try the state’s community college system, which seemed a step down from what I had in mind. But eventually, I put two children through San Diego State. They’re now working in productive careers, a tax burden to no one. No legislation rewards parents for that achievement or for coming to the United States with proper documents.

Cedillo’s law, by contrast, rewards those who came to California illegally. Will the law, therefore, encourage more people to enter the state illegally, as Donnelly and other critics assert?

(IN FACT THERE ARE MORE THAN 11 MILLION ILLEGALS IN SOUTHERN CA ALONE! NOW NEARLY 40% OF CA ARE ILLEGALS, 33% OF NEVADA AND 24% OF COLORADO. MOST  NON LA RAZA PROPAGANDA SOURCES BUT THE NUMBER OF ILLEGALS AT 40 MILLION AND BREEDING LIKE BUNNIES!)

Recall how Congress passed and President Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which gave amnesty to several million undocumented immigrants. A quarter of a century later, the number of illegal immigrants stands at 11.5 million. It seems clear that the 1986 act didn’t discourage foreign nationals from entering the United States without signing the guest book. One of those who obtained citizenship under the Act was Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa, who made his way through UC Berkeley and Harvard Medical School and is now associate professor of neurosurgery and oncology at the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center in Baltimore. Quinones-Hinojosa and others who have spoken out in support of the DREAM Act often give the impression that their cases are typical of illegal aliens. Not exactly. Amnesty measures, however well-intentioned, usually bring unintended consequences.

THE REALITY OF LA RAZA’S LOOTING OF CA:

Consider Ignacio Mesa Viera, subject of a recent front-page story in the Sacramento Bee. He came to the United States illegally in 1979 to work and help his family, as he explained, but was convicted on a drug offense in 1995. He was deported but returned to the United States, whereupon he was busted for another drug offense in 2008. Before his recent deportation, the U.S. government was paying for Viera’s kidney dialysis, a treatment that can cost more than $60,000 a year. “I imagine that the reason they don’t want to let me stay in this country,” Viera told the Bee, “is they don’t want to be paying for this.”

Cedillo and his colleagues need to know that everybody’s taxes pay for services they and their children “cannot get”—including kidney dialysis and other expensive medical treatments courtesy of the federal government. Meantime, as a University of California report noted last year, tens of thousands of middle-class, taxpaying legal residents are being squeezed out of an affordable college education even as the legislature contrives to provide scholarships for the children of illegal aliens. The lawmakers’ solution is to create yet another entitlement in the form of a new $1 billion scholarship program for students whose families earn less than $150,000 a year. Such is life in the Golden State, even with a DREAM Act in place.

Lloyd Billingsley is the author of Hollywood Party: How Communism Seduced the American Film Industry in the 1930s and 1940s and the former editorial director of the Pacific Research Institute.

OBAMA HAS PROMISED HIS LA RAZA “THE RACE” PARTY BASE of ILLEGALS AMNESTY, NO E-VERIFY, NO I.D. FOR REQUIRED OF ILLEGALS VOTING… OR AT LEAST CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT!

OBAMA HANDS MASSIVE WELFARE TO ILLEGALS, ALONG WITH OUR JOBS TO BUY THE ILLEGALS' ILLEGAL VOTES!



The truth about the DREAM Act



Published March 20, 2012



The DREAM Act has become a rallying cry for President Obama, members of his administration, and liberal Democrats everywhere. President Obama has vowed to “keep fighting for the DREAM Act,” which would grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.

It’s true when listeners or those polled don’t know the facts that the DREAM Act has some appeal. After all, we are all naturally sympathetic when children are involved.


But the descriptions of the DREAM Act voiced by President Obama and his cohorts are not accurate. And the consequences are never told.


DREAM Act supporters claim that only children would benefit from such a bill, but the facts tell another story. Under most DREAM Act proposals, amnesty would be given to individuals up to the age of 30—not exactly children. And some other proposals don’t even have an age limit.
These supporters also maintain that illegal immigrants can’t go college without the DREAM Act. But the truth is that illegal immigrants can already go to college in most states.

And ultimately, most versions of the DREAM Act actually don’t even force illegal immigrants to comply with all the requirements in the bill, such as going to college or joining the military. The administration can waive requirements because of “hardship”at its complete discretion.

DREAM Act proposals are also a magnet for fraud. Many illegal immigrants will fraudulently claim they came here as children or that they are under 30. And the federal government has no way to check whether their claims are true or not.

Such massive fraud occurred after the 1986 amnesty for illegal immigrants who claimed they were agricultural workers. Studies found two-thirds of all applications for the 1986 amnesty were fraudulent.

(ANYONE THAT THINKS THERE ARE ONLY 11 MILLION ILLEGALS IN OUR BORDERS SHOULD COME VISIT CA! LOOK AROUND AND TRY TO FIND A NON-HISPANIC ENGLISH SPEAKING LEGAL! CA IS NOW 40% ILLEGAL. NEVADA IS NOW 33% ILLEGAL. COLORADO IS NOW 20% ILLEGAL. AND LA RAZA IS NOW MOVING INTO THE AMERICAN SOUTH)

And this amnesty did nothing to stop illegal immigration. In 1986, there were about three million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. Today, there are an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. and about seven million of them work here, unfairly taking jobs from unemployed Americans.

While DREAM Act supporters claim that it would only benefit children, they skip over the fact that it actually rewards the very illegal immigrant parents who knowingly violated our laws. Once their children become U.S. citizens, they can petition for their illegal immigrant parents and adult siblings to be legalized, who will then bring in others in an endless chain.

This kind of chain migration only encourages more illegal immigration, as parents will bring their children to the U.S. in hopes of receiving citizenship.

President Obama tried to get the DREAM Act passed during a lame duck session about a year ago but it faced bipartisan opposition in Congress. This hasn’t stopped the administration from passing its agenda. The Obama administration does everything it can to let illegal immigrants stay here, which compounds the problem.

Political appointees at the Department of Homeland Security recently issued new deportation guidelines that amount to backdoor amnesty and strike another blow at millions of unemployed U.S. workers.

Under the administration’s new deportation policy, DHS officials review all incoming and most pending cases before an immigration court to determine if the illegal immigrant can remain in the U.S. Since the administration has made clear that many illegal immigrants are not considered priorities for removal, including potential DREAM Act beneficiaries, this could open the door to allow millions of illegal immigrants to live and work in the U.S. without a vote of Congress.
The Obama administration has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by 70%, allowing illegal immigrants to continue working in jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal workers. And the list goes on and on – this administration has a pattern of ignoring the laws and intent of Congress.

The United States is based on the rule of law but the Obama administration already has dirty hands by abusing administrative authority to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants. The DREAM Act doesn’t stop illegal immigration—it only encourages more of it by rewarding lawbreakers.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) is Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee

Read more:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/20/truth-about-dream-act/#ixzz1pwy31dOU


WIKILEAKS EXPOSES OBAMA'S SECRET AGENDA OF OPEN BORDERS WITH NARCOMEX:

The Obama administration has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by 70%, allowing illegal immigrants to continue working in jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal workers.

THE ENTIRE REASON THE BORDERS ARE LEFT OPEN IS TO CUT WAGES!

"We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers," said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. "President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws."

MEXICO PROCLAIMS A VICTORY OVER ILLEGALS IN MEX-OCCUPIED MEXIFORNIA!

NO MORE E-VERIFY!!!

ILLEGALS USING STOLEN AMERICAN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS GET THE JOBS FIRST! AN ILLEGAL WORKING IN OCCUPIED MEXIFORNIA WILL MAKE APPROXIMATELY 8XS TIMES MORE THAN HE/SHE WOULD IN MEXICO, AND CAN GET 18 YEARS FOR EACH “FREE” ANCHOR BABY THEY BREED, AS WELL AS UNLIMITED “FREE” MEDICAL AT HOSPITAL EMERGENCY ROOMS, AND A LOOOOOOOG MENU OF EVER EXPANDING DREAM ACTS!

VIVA LA RAZA! THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION IS NOW EXPANDING TO ALL OTHER 49 STATES!

HERE’S HOW NO E-VERIFY BREAKS DOWN:

Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal

 CA MAKES E-VERIFY ILLEGAL! COURTESY THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA!

Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal

Here is an example of why hiring illegal aliens is not economically productive for the State of California...


You have 2 families..."Joe Legal" and "Jose Illegal". Both families have 2 parents, 2 children and live in California.


"Joe Legal" works in construction, has a Social Security Number, and makes $25.00 per hour with payroll taxes deducted...."Jose Illegal" also works in construction, has "NO" Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash "under the table".


Joe Legal...$25.00 per hour x 40 hours $1000.00 per week, $52,000 per year
Now take 30% away for state and federal tax


Joe Legal now has $31,231.00


Jose Illegal...$15.00 per hour x 40 hours $600.00 per week, $31,200.00 per year
Jose Illegal pays no taxes...

 
Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00


Joe Legal pays Medical and Dental Insurance with limited coverage
$1000.00 per month
$12,000.00 per year
Joe Legal now has $19,231.00


Jose Illegal has full Medical and Dental coverage through the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year
Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00


Joe Legal makes too much money is not eligible for Food Stamps or welfare
Joe Legal pays for food
$1,000.00 per month
$12,000.00 per year
Joe Legal now has $ 7,231.00


Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for Food Stamps and Welfare
Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00


Joe Legal pays rent of
$1,000.00 per month
$12,000.00 per year
Joe Legal is now in the hole... minus (-) $4,769.00


Jose Illegal receives a $500 per month Federal rent subsidy
Jose Illegal pays rent
$500.00 per month
$6,000.00 per year
Jose Illegal still has $25,200.00


Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work.


Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family.


Joe Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend the same school. Joe Legal pays for his children's lunches while Jose Illegal's children get a government sponsored lunch.


Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL program. Joe Legal's children go home.
Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same Police and Fire Services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay.


Don't vote/support any politician that supports illegal aliens...
Its WAY PAST time to take a stand for America and Americans!

LA RAZA, THE RACIST MEXICAN SUPREMACIST FASCIST PART  FOR “THE RACE” DEMANDS EVEN MORE GRINGO WELFARE.
FAIR Legislative Update - June 22, 2009

La Raza Demands Obama's Health Reform Plan Cover Illegal Aliens

On Monday, June 15, the National Council of La Raza (La Raza), an open borders advocacy group, issued a statement calling upon Congress to ensure that illegal aliens are given health benefits if and when Congress considers health care reform.

La Raza's statement "strongly urge[d] President Obama and Congress to make every effort to ensure that health care reform reaches all communities" in the United States, and stressed that "one out of every three uninsured persons and roughly 40% of all uninsured children [in the United States] are Latino," and demanded "health care reform that makes coverage affordable and accessible for everyone — all families and all children."


SINCE WHEN HAVE THE MEXICAN FLAG WAVERS EVER “ACCEPTED THEIR RESPONSIBILITY”  FOR ANYTHING? THEY’RE HERE TO PILLAGE ONLY.
La Raza President and CEO Janet MurguĂ­a used the statement to emphasize that "everyone in the U.S. should contribute to a new health system," and that "Latinos [would] accept their responsibility" to contribute to a new health care system and "will pay their fair share for the health coverage they need." While the statement does not reference illegal immigration specifically, or distinguish between legal and illegal aliens, it does express concern that adding new, expensive verification and documentation procedures for immigrants would "severely restrict access to health care coverage." (La Raza Press Release, June 15, 2009).

Specific research has shown that many illegal aliens lack health insurance and represent a disproportionate share of the United States' uninsured population. The Pew Hispanic Center's recent report, A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States, found that 59% of illegal aliens in the United States had no form of health insurance in 2007, and that 45% of illegal alien children were also without health coverage in 2007. It also found that even the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens were insured at the low rate of 25%, and that there was a significant disparity between the volume of uninsured illegal aliens and the volume of uninsured U.S. citizens and other legal residents. (Pew Hispanic Center Report, April 14, 2009).

Pew's information has support in federal statistics: data collected by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Census Bureau for the same time frame show that approximately 33.2% of the foreign-born population in the United States (a category which does not differentiate between newly naturalized citizens, legal permanent residents, and illegal aliens) were uninsured in 2007, and that almost 10 million foreign-born non-citizens lacked health insurance in 2007. (DHS Fact Sheet, February 2009).

(For more information on how illegal immigration is financially impacting the U.S. health care system, see FAIR's Legislative Updates for April 13, 2009, and April 20, 2009).

Democrats on House Approps Committee Kill Another E-Verify Amendment
Last week, during a House Appropriations Committee mark-up for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration Appropriations spending bill, Committee Democrats rejected an amendment to require federal contractors to use E-Verify if they received federal contracts funded by the bill. (Appropriations Summary).

The week before, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) had offered a similar amendment to the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations spending bill. His amendment was subsequently rejected by the Appropriations Committee. (FAIR's Legislative Update, June 15, 2009). This week, Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA) offered the amendment to the Agriculture Spending bill. Calvert's amendment was rejected entirely on a party-line basis with 23 Republicans supporting and 34 Democrats rejecting the amendment.

The Agriculture spending bill spends almost $23 billion in taxpayer dollars. Over $4 billion dollars alone will be allocated to the Food and Drug Administration and Food Safety and Inspection Service, two important organizations in protecting America's food and drug supply. In addition, the bill provides billions more for programs like the Nutrition for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and International Food Aid. The bill will also provide funding for rural development, conservation projects, and oversight and enforcement.

With so many American jobs and tax dollars at stake, many Americans are frustrated that Congress refuses to demand that federal contractors use E-Verify. (To learn more about E-Verify, see FAIR's Fact Sheet.). This vote marks the third time in two weeks that Democratic Leadership has rejected amendments requiring federal contractors to use E-Verify.

Pressure Mounting on Obama to Extend TPS Status to All Haitians, Including Illegal Aliens
The Haitian community and other open borders advocates are engaging in a full-court press to have the Obama Administration extend Temporary Protected Status to all Haitians in the United States, including extending legal status to nearly 30,000 illegal aliens, under the premise that environmental and economic conditions in Haiti mandate such a policy.

Under § 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) may extend Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to individuals — including illegal aliens — from specific nations if that nation is experiencing conditions that create serious risks to health or safety, including armed conflicts, disasters, or other extraordinary but temporary circumstances. TPS, by its nature, was never intended to create a permanent immigration status change, but rather only a temporary one, with DHS making the final decision about when TPS ends. (USCIS Fact Sheet, April 30, 2009).

The Bush Administration rejected appeals by the Haitian government to extend TPS to Haiti as recently as January 2009. Since then, several members of Congress have continued to seek a reversal of that decision including Reps. Eliot Engel (D-NY) and Gregory Meeks (D-NY). Engel and Meeks have been working with international organizations to lobby for TPS status for Haitians. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) has introduced legislation during the 111th Congress that would formalize TPS for Haitians. Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) have also expressed support for the idea. (Washington Times, March 18, 2009; Dominica News Online, May 26, 2009; South Florida Caribbean News, June 19, 2009).

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano had initially rejected the idea of extending TPS to Haitians, but Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton recently commented that the Administration is contemplating the idea. (Associated Press, May 28, 2009). Lobbying groups have seized upon the Obama Administration's indecision, and have made themselves seen and heard in Washington in an effort to force the change in policy. (Id.). These groups include the Haitian Coalition for TPS, the Haitian Citizen United Task Force, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. These groups have reached out to the White House and federal officials to press for the policy shift, arguing that the United States has a humanitarian obligation to do so. (Dominica News Online, May 26, 2009; South Florida Caribbean News, June 19, 2009).

Advocates for extension of TPS to Haitians point to recent economic and weather-related devastation in the small Caribbean nation as justification for the change in policy. (Palm Beach Post, May 21, 2009; Miami Herald, May 26, 2009). AFSC recently declared in a statement that "TPS is the most immediate form of humanitarian assistance the United States government can provide" in light of the current "devastating and overwhelming conditions in Haiti." This same AFSC statement stated that it was not unusual for the United States to extend TPS to foreign nationals of countries experiencing "significant hardship and suffering." (Id.).

Critics of TPS say that the U.S. government has a poor track record of terminating the temporary status, even long after the original justification for TPS existed and despite conditions having improved in the TPS country. For instance, TPS was first extended to Salvadoran nationals in March 2001, but since then TPS status has been extended seven times and still remains in effect. Likewise, Honduras was originally designated for TPS status in January 1999 but has since been extended 13 times with TPS still in effect. Somalia and Sudan were both designated for TPS in the mid-1990s and are still under TPS. (U.S. House Judiciary Committee Hearing, March 4, 1999; DOJ Virtual Law Library).

The idea of extending Temporary Protected Status to Haiti raises the concern that such a move would create an unmanageable wave of refugees coming from Haiti to the United States. In an effort to discourage this possibility, a DHS spokesman said in March: "let me be clear: No one living in Haiti right now should be attempting to come to the United States in hopes that they will be granted TPS." (Washington Times, March 18, 2009). Daniel Erikson, of the Washington think tank Inter-American Dialogue has said TPS "what Haiti needs most is a long-term nation-building effort, not short-term stop-gap measures [like TPS]." (Id.). Erikson also said that: "Granting TPS to Haiti is merely a Band-Aid that cannot heal a deeply wounded country and may raise the risks of a new wave of migration." (Id.).

Senators introduce Legislation to Weaken Secure Driver's License Standards
Last week, Senator Daniel Akaka introduced legislation entitled PASS ID (S. 1261), a bill that would gut the REAL ID Act. Congress passed the REAL ID Act in the wake of the September 11th Terrorist Attacks in order to improve the security of U.S. issued driver's licenses. (Bill Text).

After the 9/11 attacks, the 9/11 Commission found that lax security standards had enabled the hijackers to obtain "13 driver's licenses (two of which were duplicates) and 21 USA or state-issued identification cards (usually used for showing residence in the U.S. or a state)." (9/11 Fact Sheet).

With these findings, the Commission recommended that Congress enact requirements for secure identification, stating: "Secure identification should begin in the United States. The federal government should set standards for the issuance of birth certificates and sources of identification, such as driver's licenses.... At many entry points to vulnerable facilities, including gates for boarding aircraft, sources of identification are the last opportunity to ensure that people are who they say they are and to check whether they are terrorists." (Commission Report, p. 390). Congress responded to the Commission's recommendation by passing the REAL ID Act, a law that takes steps towards a secure form of identification in the United States.

REAL ID's provisions include the following: (1) a requirement that individuals present proof of lawful presence when applying for a driver's license or ID card; (2) a requirement that states "verify" the documents presented by an applicant to prove his or her identity; and (3) a requirement that driver's licenses expire on the same date as an alien's immigration status expires.

Since the enactment of REAL ID, however, illegal alien advocates have sought to undo the law in order to allow illegal aliens to obtain driver's licenses. Akaka's bill scales back the purposes for which a secure ID will be needed in the U.S., thereby undermining security. The PASS ID Act also strips the requirement that states "verify" the identification presented, thereby making it easier for illegal aliens, identity thieves and criminals to fraudulently obtain driver's licenses. Finally, PASS ID also dramatically expands eligibility for persons who may obtain a secure ID. For example, under the bill, an illegal alien need only file an application for asylum and receive temporary work authorization in order to be eligible for a secure ID. (Section 242(c)(2)).

Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano has endorsed the Akaka bill, stating: "Today's introduction of Pass ID… in the U.S. Senate brings us closer to greater compliance with federal standards for secure driver's licenses…. I am committed to supporting this important bill and it is my hope that Congress will pass it into law as quickly as possible." (DHS Press Release).


Newsmax

Obama's 'Hispanicazation' of America

Monday, January 10, 2011 08:28 AM

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/obamas-hispanicazation-of-america-most.html

*
Immigrating America Into a Colony of Mexico

Article by Frosty Wooldridge
(THERE ARE MANY POSTED ARTICLES ON THIS BLOG BY FROSTY WOOLDRIDGE - DO A SEARCH)
2004

Published on The Washington Dispatch.
America faces a greater and more dangerous threat from within than from without. While our armed forces secure Afghanistan and Iraq, our own borders stand unguarded 24 hours a day. Al-Qaeda insurgents plan their next attacks somewhere inside our country. They advocate a violent overthrow of America.
We’ve got an even more ominous enemy within our borders that promotes “Reconquista of Aztlan” or the reconquest of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas into the country of Mexico. With 9.2 million Mexicans now living in America, their goal of colonizing our country back into Mexico moves forward. A more sobering reality stems from the evidence that it’s Mexican-American citizens in the forefront of this disintegration of our country.
What is the evidence? Because of massive immigration from south of the border, more Mexican flags brazenly fly in Los Angeles and surrounding cities than Old Glory. More Spanish speaking radio stations broadcast than English speaking. More people speak foreign languages than English in the City of Angels. More school kids can’t speak our national language in California. It’s so bad in the Golden Bear State, last year 800,000 Americans fled abrasive conditions growing like a cancer in southern California. Worse, the “18th Street Gang” in Los Angeles features 20,000 members with 60 percent of them being illegal aliens. They coordinate drug traffic, robberies and extortion. Finally, the corruption is so great, ‘Special Order 40,’ augmented by the Los Angeles Police Department, makes it impossible to arrest, detain or deport illegal aliens. Little wonder more than three million operate in California.
But as their numbers grow and their allegiance remains with Mexico, this country is at risk of an internal coup. But the worst danger comes from our own citizens of Mexican heritage. They want our southwestern United States back. Will they take it by violence? Use an army? No! They are colonizing us by sheer numbers. They are the fastest growing ethnic group in America, but they have no allegiance to our country.
They are organized, too. The following are two speeches from a dozen others: Augustin Cebada, Information Minister of Brown Berets, militant para-military soldiers of Aztlan shouting at U.S. citizens at an Independence Day rally in Los Angeles: "Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets, we're here today to show LA, show the minority people here, the Anglo-Saxons, that we are here, the majority. We do the work in this city, we take care of the spoiled brat children, we clean their offices, we pick the food, we do the manufacturing in the factories of LA, we are the majority here. We're here in Westwood, this is the fourth time we've been here in the last two months, to show white Anglo-Saxon Protestant LA, the few of you who remain, that we are the majority, and we claim this land as ours, it's always been ours, and we're still here, and none of the talk about deporting. If anyone's going to be deported it's going to be you! Go back to Simi Valley, you skunks! Go back to Boston! To back to the Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You're old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you, leave like beaten rats. You old white people, it is your duty to die. Right now we're already controlling those elections by violence or nonviolence. Through love of having children we're going to take over." Other demonstrators: "Raza fuerza (brown race power), this is Aztlan, this is Mexico. They're the pilgrims on our land. Go back to the Nina, the Pinta, the Santa Maria."

If you don’t think he’s serious about taking over our border states, try this guy on for size: Jose Angel Gutierrez, Professor, University of Texas at Arlington, founder La Raza Party at UC Riverside: "The border remains a military zone. We remain a hunted people. Now you think you have a destiny to fulfill in the land that historically has been ours for forty thousand years. And we're a new Mestizo nation. And they want us to discuss civil rights. Civil rights. What law made by white men to oppress all of us of color, female and male. This is our homeland. We are not immigrants that came from another country to another country. We are migrants, free to travel the length and breadth of the Americas because we belong here. We are millions. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. The explosion is in our population."
For a sleepy American public and a politically correct Congress, the colonization of America by a foreign country proceeds quietly, pervasively, methodically and perversely. Forty-six Mexican consulates operate and dictate in major cities across our country. Mexico’s President Fox visits and makes demands. They’re pouring over our borders like water over a broken dam.
Our resources are being drained at $56 billion annually. Immigrants send $15 billion back to Mexico. They send $25 billion back to South America and $16 billion back to Asia. Our annual trade deficit exceeds $400 billion. Over $100 billion in cash flows out of our borders for drugs. We pay billions for illegals in our medical systems, schools and ESL classes. According to Professor Borgas of Harvard, American workers lose $133 billion in wages to illegal aliens taking over American jobs.
“Immigrant advocacy groups no longer promote legal immigration, citizenship, learning English or any other assimilation into this country. Hispanic-rights groups talk of reoccupation and repatriation of the southwestern United States,” wrote Linda Bentley in “Paving the Way to Aztlan: With Propaganda, Politics, Racism.”
Do you want America to be split up? Do you want Texas to become a state of Mexico? Do you want America to become as corrupt as Mexico? Do you want the filth, squalor and diseases of Mexico to become a part of America’s reality? Do you want to give up California to Aztlan? Do you want America to become a part of the Third World?
Keep doing nothing about this immigration invasion and you’ll get your wish.
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2012/05/dream-acts-against-legals-how-mexico-la.html