PELOSI DEMANDS OPEN BORDERS and more ILLEGALS! She hires them!

EMAIL: NANCY PELOSI

http://speaker.house.gov/contact/


NANCY PELOSI WAR AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE to the benefit of her vast fortune. There is a reason why Pelosi is listed on JUDICIAL WATCH’S TEN MOST CORRUPT. Like Feinstein and Boxer, Nancy has and would sell us out every inch of the way if it put money in her pockets!

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR article that follows
THERE ARE SOME HIGHLY MISLEADING POINTS IN THE BELOW ARTICLE, STARTING WITH THE FACT THAT THERE ARE NOT 11 MILLION ILLEGALS IN THIS COUNTRY. MOST RELIABLE SOURCES PUT THE NUMBER AT CLOSER TO 38 MILLION, AND BREEDING FAST. BREEDING FAST AND AT YOUR EXPENSE. 1 IN 5 BIRTHS IN LOS ANGELES ARE BY ILLEGALS PAID FOR BY AMERICANS. 1 IN 10 THE REST OF THE COUNTRY.

THERE ARE ONLY EIGHT STATES THAT HAVE A POPULATION GREATER THAN LOS ANGELES WHICH HAS A POPULATION OF NEARLY 15 MILLION, AND YOU HAVE TO LOOK HARD TO FIND AN AMERICA, OR FOR THAT MATTER HEAR ENGLISH SPOKEN.
Another liberal, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, said the American people are “too stupid to understand the opening the nation's borders to anyone who wants to come in is good for them.” Feinstein said amnesty opponents "don't understand the bill." Feinstein urged her colleagues to vote for cloture because "if we miss this opportunity, there is not likely to be another opportunity in the next few years to fix this."
47% OF THOSE EMPLOYED ARE ILLEGALS, MOST CAN’T OR WON’T SPEAK ENGLISH.

DRIVE FROM THE BORDER WITH NARCOMEX, TO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA AND I CHALLENGE YOU TO FIND A COMMUNITY NOT OVERRUN BY ILLEGALS!

NANCY PELOSI, JUST AS FEINSTEIN, BOXER, WAXMAN, SABOTAGES ANY EFFORT TO CONTROL THE FLOODS OF ILLEGALS, DESPITE THE FACT THAT CALIFORNIA PAYS OUT $20 BILLION A YEAR IN WELFARE-SOCIAL SERVICES TO ILLEGALS. LOS ANGELES ALONE PAYS OUT $40 MILLION PER MONTH TO ILLEGALS ON WELFARE, AND GRAPPLES WITH 500 -1000 MEXICAN GANG RELATED MURDERS WHICH COST ONE MILLION EACH TO PROSECUTE.

PELOSI HAS VOWED THERE WILL NEVER BE A WALL WITH NARCOMEX, EVEN AS MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS HAVE INVADED AND SPREAD ALL OVER THE COUNTRY NOW. THE MEXICAN DRUG CARTEL IS CALCULATED TO BE NEARLY 50 BILLION AND GROWING FAST.
YOU WON’T HEAR PELOSI’S MOUTH OPEN ABOUT UNEMPLOYMENT IN CALIFORNIA, NOW WAY OVER 15% IF YOU FACTOR IN SELF-EMPLOYED. YOU WON’T HEAR ANYTHING OUT OF PELOSI’S MOUTH ABOUT FORECLOSURES. LA RAZA DONORS BANK of AMERICA and WELLS FARGO MADE OUT LIKE BANK ROBBERS HANDING MORTGAGE SCAMS TO ILLEGALS. LEGALS WILL PAY FOR THAT ONE ALSO! STATES WITH THE HIGHEST FORECLOSURES ARE THE ONES WITH THE HIGHEST RATE OF MEXICAN OCCUPATION AND CRIME.

NANCY PELOSI, LIKE FEINSTEIN, HAS LONG ILLEGALLY HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER $20 MILLION ST. HELENA WINERY AND RESTAURANT. FEINSTEIN AT HER San Francisco HOTEL. PELOSI HAS ALSO LONG TAKEN BIG MONEY FROM HUGE BUSINESS THAT BENEFIT FROM “CHEAP” MEXICAN LABOR, SUCH AS SUNKIST.

FEINSTEIN AND BOXER, BOTH IN THE POCKETS OF BIG AG BIZ (AMONG MANY OTHERS, SUCH AS WELLS FARGO and BANK of AMERICA) WORK TIRELESSLY FOR A “SPECIAL AMNESTY” FOR THEIR BIG AG BIZ DONORS. THIS FARM WORKERS AMNESTY WOULD BE FOR 1.5 MILLION ILLEGALS AND THEIR FAMILIES DESPITE THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATES, AND DESPITE THE FACT THAT ONE-THIRD OF ALL ILLEGAL FARM WORKERS ARE IN WELFARE. NO STATS ON HOW MANY END UP AS PART OF MEXICAN CRIME WAVES!
*
Ask yourself what Feinstein, Boxer, Waxman, or Pelosi has ever done beyond get rich off elected office by servicing the special interests?!?!?!?!?!
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
ECONOMIC SCENE: How recession has changed the immigration debate
Politics, economics, demographics all come into play.
By David R. Francis | Staff Writer/ June 25, 2009 edition
The deep US recession has had one effect that polls say would please most Americans: Illegal immigration is falling.
More illegal immigrants are leaving. Fewer people are sneaking in – perhaps 200,000 a year instead of 500,000 in recent years, estimates Steven Camarota, an economist at the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington. Thus, America’s illegal population has fallen from about 12 million in February 2007 to almost 11 million this February, he calculates.
So when immigration becomes a hot topic again – as it will, inevitably – will the recession have shifted the terms of the debate?
In some ways, yes. The US slump proves that immigration is sensitive to economic conditions. It also weakens the argument of pro-immigration forces that there are some jobs Americans won’t do. Mr. Camarota finds that claim “absurd on its face.”
He points to a newly available sampling of 4.7 million workers in 465 occupations, a massive survey that asks respondents whether they were born in the US. The US-born already hold a clear majority of jobs people often regard as being left to immigrants, such as housekeeping and grounds-maintenance workers. Only in picking fresh produce do immigrants hold a small majority.
Of course, economics is just one component of the immigration debate. Politics plays a huge role.
For example: some 1 million immigrants become US citizens every year. About 300,000 more of them become Democrats than Republicans.
That advantage could be one reason that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, has blocked several immigration-control bills from coming to the floor, says Roy Beck, executive director of NumbersUSA, a nonprofit advocate for cutting immigration.
Similarly, Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) of Nevada has been “aggressively pushing amnesty” for illegal immigrants, says Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, another Washington group urging limits on immigration.
Critics sometimes call various forms of amnesty “a Democratic registration program.”
The third component of the debate – the demographics – is vital in the long run. In the 1990s, the US had its biggest 10-year jump in population in its history – 32.7 million – and the fastest growth rate since the 1960s. The growth rate has slowed this decade, but the US is still on track to add some 28 million residents.
That’s the elephant in the room, Mr. Beck says. If President Obama really wants to reach his goals of energy independence and lower carbon emissions, he will have to restrain immigration, he argues. (US-born Americans have a birthrate slightly below the replacement level.) Otherwise, the projected population rise from 307 million today to 439 million in 2050 will swamp his intentions – and heighten other challenges, such as congestion and education.
So far, though, Mr. Obama has shown no enthusiasm for braking that growth, Beck and Mr. Stein say. Obama has said he would like to get illegal immigrants “out of the shadows and on a pathway to citizenship.” The one big change he’s made from the last years of the Bush administration is that instead of raiding plants to round up illegal immigrants, he wants to focus pressure on their employers.
The president plans to hold a key meeting with congressional leaders on immigration reform on June 17. The session is expected to clarify (at least a little) the White House’s position.
Meanwhile, a multimillion-dollar fundraising battle has broken out between pro-amnesty and antiamnesty groups.
It will, warns Stein, be “vitriolic, vicious.”
*
Pelosi's corrupt insider passing of bills that make her rich.
Check for yourself
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_nancy_pelosi_get_wage_breaks_and.html

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's home House District includes San Francisco.

Star-Kist Tuna's headquarters are in San Francisco, Pelosi's home district.

Star-Kist is owned by Del Monte Foods and is a major contributor to Pelosi.

Star-Kist is the major employer in American Samoa employing 75% of the Samoan workforce.

Paul Pelosi, Nancy's husband, owns $17 million dollars of Star-Kist stock.

In January, 2007 when the minimum wage was increased from $5.15 to $7.25, Pelosi had American Samoa exempted from the increase so Del Monte would not have to pay the higher
wage. This would make Del Monte products less expensive than their competition's.

Last week when the huge bailout bill was passed, Pelosi added an earmark to the final bill adding $33 million dollars for an "economic development credit in American Samoa".

Pelosi has called the Bush Administration "corrupt".

Check some more for yourself

http://www.snopes.com/politics/pelosi/americansamoa.asp
*
PELOSI, FEINSTEIN, AND BOXER HAVE LONG FOUGHT HARD TO GIVE ILLEGALS DE FACTO RIGHTS AND CITIZENSHIP. THE THREE HAVE ENDLESSLY FOUGHT ANY ATTEMPT TO HAVE ENGLISH ONLY LAWS ENACTED, THIS DUE TO THE FACT THE MEXICANS LOATHE ENGLISH, AS THE LOATHE LITERACY.
THE THREE LA RAZA ENDORSED CORPORATE POLITICIANS ALSO HAVE FOUGHT AGAINST REQUIREMENTS TO HAVE AN I.D. TO VOTE. THEY DON’T WANT ILLEGALS HAVING TO PULL A HANDFUL OF FRAUDULENT I.D’S OUT OF THEIR POCKETS TO VOTE DEM!
*
Nancy Pelosi tries to force the Salvation Army to hire people
http://opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110010881

It's been less than a week since New York's Sen. Hillary Clinton and Gov. Eliot Spitzer had to climb down from their support of driver's licenses for illegal aliens. Now House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has moved to kill an amendment that would protect employers from federal lawsuits for requiring their workers to speak English. Among the employers targeted by such lawsuits: the Salvation Army. Sen. Lamar Alexander, a moderate Republican from Tennessee, is dumbstruck that legislation he views as simple common sense would be blocked. He noted that the full Senate passed his amendment to shield the Salvation Army by 75-19 last month, and the House followed suit with a 218-186 vote just this month. "I cannot imagine that the framers of the 1964 Civil Rights Act intended to say that it's discrimination for a shoe shop owner to say to his or her employee, 'I want you to be able to speak America's common language on the job,' " he told the Senate last Thursday. But that's exactly what the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is trying to do. In March the EEOC sued the Salvation Army because its thrift store in Framingham, Mass., required its employees to speak English on the job. The requirement was clearly posted and employees were given a year to learn the language. The EEOC claimed the store had fired two Hispanic employees for continuing to speak Spanish on the job. It said that the firings violated the law because the English-only policy was not "relevant" to job performance or safety. "If it is not relevant, it is discriminatory, it is gratuitous, it is a subterfuge to discriminate against people based on national origin," says Rep. Charles Gonzalez of Texas, one of several Hispanic Democrats in the House who threatened to block Ms. Pelosi's attempts to curtail the Alternative Minimum Tax unless she killed the Alexander amendment. The confrontation on the night of Nov. 8 was ugly. Members of the Hispanic Caucus initially voted against the rule allowing debate on a tax bill that included the AMT "patch," which for a year would protect some 23 million Americans from being kicked into a higher income tax bracket. Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a moderate from Maryland, was beside himself. Congressional Quarterly reports that he jabbed his finger on the House floor at Joe Baca, the California Democrat who chairs the Hispanic Caucus, and yelled, "How dare you destroy this party? This will be the worst loss in 10 years." Mr. Baca was having none of it. "You see this on the [voting] board?," he yelled back. "This is against me. This is against me personally." Luckily for Democrats, C-Span's microphones did not pick up the exchange. But it was audible to reporters in the press gallery. They also heard Rep. Luis Gutierrez of Illinois say that English-only efforts were symbolic of "bigotry and prejudice" against those who speak other languages. After testy negotiations, the Hispanic Caucus finally agreed to let the tax bill proceed after extracting a promise from Ms. Pelosi that the House will not vote on the bill funding the Justice and Commerce Departments unless the English-only protection language is dropped. "There ain't going to be a bill" with the Alexander language, Mr. Baca has told reporters.

THOUSANDS OF SMALL BUSINESSES HIRING “CHEAP” MEXICAN LABOR THAT CAN’T SPEAK A BIT OF ENGLISH WILL BE INCONVENIENCE .Sen. Alexander says that if that's the case, "thousands of small businesses across America will have to show there is some special reason to justify requiring their employees to speak our country's common language on the job." He notes that the number of EEOC actions against English-only policies grew to some 200 last year from 32 a decade ago. In an attempt at compromise, he has offered watered-down language that would still allow the EEOC to file many actions, but he says House Democrats rejected it.
*

PELOSI’S STAKE IN KEEPING THE OPEN BORDERS OPEN
You pick up the cost!
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=25180

The Minuteman Project, founded by Jim Gilchrist (who is also the co-author of the book Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America’s Borders), is made up of citizen volunteers who watch our border with Mexico and report illegal entry to the border patrol. For performing that thankless task in full compliance with the law, Gilchrist and his colleagues have been falsely maligned as fascists, racists, and even murderers. They have been driven off the speaker’s platform at Columbia University and vilified by Leftist politicians and their handmaidens in the liberal press. So it was no surprise that the mainstream media chose to ignore a recent press release, issued by his publisher, in which Gilchrist asked the question about Nancy Pelosi’s ethics that should be on the minds of every law-abiding American – including those immigrants who are following the law to become citizens here the proper way: “Do we really need a House Speaker whose every action is calculated to enhance her own financial interests, instead of focusing on how porous borders will affect the security of everyday American citizens?” Gilchrist did not stop there. He demanded an investigation into Pelosi’s “economic stake in just the kind of illegal alien exploitation that we deplore in Minutemen.” But you would never know it from the liberal media, who - while ignoring this demand - have had no compunctions in calling for Speaker Hastert’s head in the wake of the Foley page controversy. Gilchrist was reacting to my report several weeks ago in FrontPage Magazine that Pelosi – who owns non-union vineyards in Napa Valley where grape-picking depends chiefly on the availability of cheap foreign labor – is doing everything she can to help open the floodgates to more illegal immigration. And she wants the American taxpayers to pay their way. As even more proof of this than I previously reported, Pelosi does not want employers like her to be required to pay the cost of illegal aliens’ hospital care. She voted against a bill that would make employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee seeks medical attention. And she voted in favor of rewarding illegal aliens from Mexico with Social Security benefits. At the same time, Pelosi has led the Democratic opposition to any effective border controls or documentation requirements. She opposed the Secure Fence Act of 2006, signed into law by President Bush, and voted against final passage of a border security and enforcement bill in 2005 which required that all businesses must use an electronic system to check if all new hires have the legal right to work in this country. She voted against a bill to bar drivers' licenses for illegal aliens in 2005. This year she opposed legislation requiring presentation of a legitimate government-issued photo ID to prove eligibility to vote, claiming that “there is little evidence anywhere in the country of a significant problem with non-citizen voters.” She is dead wrong. For example, an accused terrorist by the name of Nuradin Abdi was just recently reported to have illegally registered to vote at the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Nuradin Abdi was indicted earlier this year as part of a conspiracy to blow up the Columbus Mall. How many other terrorist suspects may have slipped through the system because Leftists like Pelosi oppose any meaningful screens? Instead she continues to advocate our recognition of the flimsy, non-validated ID card that the Mexican consulates provide to illegal aliens before they cross over our border, called the “matricula consular”, which gives them phony documentation to set up bank accounts, apply for jobs, obtain social benefits, board airplanes, identify themselves to police, enter buildings that require IDs, obtain drivers’ licenses and then perhaps use those drivers’ licenses to try to illegally register to vote in our elections. Pelosi also believes in giving sanctuary to illegal aliens. She opposed legislation to deny federal homeland security funding to state and local governments who refuse to share information they learn about an individual's immigration status with Federal immigration authorities. Pelosi’s hometown of San Francisco is one of the sanctuary cities she voted to protect for the benefit of illegal aliens. Pelosi even voted against strengthening our immigration law with regard to the deportability of alien terrorists. Jim Gilchrist cut to the chase with this devastating observation that the mainstream media does not want you to read: "As we’ve shown again and again in ‘Minutemen,’ the Democrats aren’t just hypocrites, but are working actively to subvert our legislative system to their own ends. Their only goal is votes, votes and more votes, no matter where they come from, no matter if they’re cast legally, no matter whether the person casting them is dead, alive, a citizen or an illegal alien." Pelosi sees Jim Gilchrist’s Minutemen Project as a threat to her pro-illegal alien agenda. More illegal aliens mean more votes for the Democrats and more grape-pickers for Napa Valley vineyards like hers. So she even voted against a measure that would have cut off the use of U.S. taxpayers’ funds to tip off illegal aliens as to where the Minutemen citizen patrols may be located! She obviously wants to see the Minutemen put out of business – permanently. She can count on the liberal press to distort the work of the Minutemen and to keep out of the public eye Gilchrist’s pointed questions about her motivations for helping illegal aliens during the run-up to the mid-term elections that may make her the next Speaker of the House. Gilchrist, of course, is accustomed to being vilified and prevented by the Left from getting his message out. In early October, he was prevented from finishing his speech at the "Minutemen Forum" sponsored by the Columbia College Republicans. Gilchrist had spoken for just a few minutes and managed to utter the words “I love the First Amendment” when a group of radical protestors took the stage and interrupted him, displaying a big banner saying "There are no illegals." More protestors then stormed the stage. Chaos erupted and the audience members who had come to hear Gilchrist speak never got the chance, which was precisely the protestors’ objective. As reported online by the staff of Columbia’s undergraduate newspaper, “a mosh pit of triumphal students and community members danced and chanted outside, "Asian, Black, Brown and White, we smashed the Minutemen tonight!" They also put out a statement declaring: “The Minutemen are not a legitimate voice in the debate on immigration. They are a racist, armed militia who have declared open hunting season on immigrants, causing countless hate crimes and over 3000 deaths on the border. Why should exploitative corporations have free passes between nations, but individual people not? No human being is illegal.” (Emphasis added) We have come to the point in this country where a bunch of radical protestors get to decide who is and who is not a legitimate voice in the debate on as critical a public policy issue as immigration. Such Leftists think that migration in a borderless world is a basic human right. They want no barriers, no guards, and no proof of lawful residency. They certainly do not want the Minutemen watching the border and reporting illegal entry to the authorities. Leftist slogans like “no human being is illegal” are red herrings. It is not the human being who is illegal; it is what the human being does that may be illegal. One’s conduct is the test, not simply who one is. Immigrants who follow our rules are welcome here. Those who do not abide by our laws have no right to be here. A person who breaks into your house without your permission does not deserve room, board and a job as a reward, even if the intruder may be much poorer than you. He has broken the law and deserves to be punished for what he has done. Our country’s boundaries and rules for entry and residency similarly define who is permitted to be here and how we choose to protect ourselves. We are a land of immigrants, but we are also a land of laws with certain core values. Those seeking to enter our country and remain here must learn to accommodate to our laws and values, not the other way around. That is the way prior generations of immigrants did it, including those who passed through Ellis Island. Why should the law be thrown aside now? What we are witnessing is a frontal challenge to our nation’s sovereignty. Mexico’s Foreign Secretary wants to drag us before the United Nations for intending to build a fence on our side of the border with our money to keep out aliens who seek to enter our country illegally. They will probably get a sympathetic ear as some UN bureaucrats believe there should be no such thing as “illegal” immigrants in the first place. For the first time in our history, Americans are being asked to cede the right to decide how we define ourselves as a nation and protect our own borders to a globalist governance body. Will Pelosi lead her liberal loyalists as House Speaker to support the UN against America’s right to control its own borders? Do we really want to risk finding out? It is high time, as Jim Gilchrist demanded in the press release ignored by the mainstream media, that Pelosi come clean under oath as to her personal stake in the illegal immigration issue before she can do even more damage as House Speaker.

WHY DO YOU THINK THAT PELOSI IS LISTED BY JUDICIAL WATCH AS ONE OF TEN TOP CORRUPT POLITICIANS?

Please call and overwhelm the switchboards with a different message:
THE WHITE HOUSE

Main line 202-456-1414
Leg Affairs: 202-456-2230

You can contact President Obama and let him know of your opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/
*
Report Illegals & Employers Toll Free... (866) 347-2423
INS National Customer Service Center Phone: 1-800-375-5283.
http://www.ice.gov/ ICE, ice, ICE
http://www.reportillegals.com/

*
EMAIL: NANCY PELOSI

http://speaker.house.gov/contact/