The truth about immigration reform and “amnesty”

October 24, 2015

An essay worth reading on illegal immigration, amnesty, and Trump’s charlatanism.

agconservative

It’s time to talk about “amnesty” because a large portion of the entertainment wing is claiming this is a defining issue and using it to justify their support for a far-left candidate (Donald Trump).

Let’s address a few things before a full discussion of amnesty:

  • Every Republican currently in the race supports doing border security first. The differences between all of the candidates on security are almost non-existent. Some may argue about trust, but the candidate with the biggest promises (Trump) is also the one who has changed the most positions and proven the least trustworthy. In 2012, Trump claimed that Romney lost the election because he was too “mean-spirited” towards illegal immigrants with his talk of self-deporting, which makes no sense given his current advocacy for mass deportation and harsh rhetoric towards Latinos. Also, Trump met with illegal immigrants in 2013 and assured them he supported their position…

View original post 1,083 more words

Advertisements

#Immigration: Going off script, Obama admits he usurped power

November 25, 2014
"Caesar Obama"

“Caesar Obama”

(Photo credit: @exjon)

Dealing with radical immigration activists while in Chicago, President Obama spoke off the cuff, once again proving he should never leave the safety of his teleprompter:

“I have heard you, but you have got to listen to me, too. All right? And I understand you may disagree, I understand you may disagree. But we have got to be able to talk honestly about these issues, all right?”

“Now, you’re absolutely right that there have been significant numbers of deportations. That’s true. But what you are not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law.

That may be the first time he’s spoken the truth in years. To quote Article 1 of the United States Constitution:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

That includes the power to “change the law.” How odd that there’s no mention of that being a presidential power…

All across America, state attorney generals about to file suit are saying a quiet but heartfelt “Thank you, sir,” for the gift he just gave them.


An insult to the real Civil Rights movement

November 21, 2011

Democrats plan to make illegal immigration the next civil-rights crusade. Because foreigners breaking our laws to get into America are just like the US citizens who fought for the political rights guaranteed them as citizens.

If I were the NAACP, I’d be teed-off that the accomplishments of my parents and grandparents were being so diminished by the comparison, but that would require a NAACP that wasn’t deep in the hip pocket of the Democratic Party.

“Shameless” doesn’t half-describe it.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


If you go off the reservation, the Democrats will try to destroy you

November 20, 2011

We’ve seen it happen time and again: a public figure from an ethic minority considered “ours” by the liberal left gains prominence as a conservative, they do everything in their power to ruin him or her politically for fear that others might follow. Long ago, it was Clarence Thomas and the “high tech lynching.” More recently, minority conservatives such as Miguel Estrada, Condoleezza Rice, and Marco Rubio were all subjected to vicious, mendacious, even racist attacks questioning their truthfulness, morality, and “authenticity” (1).

Now it’s Susana Martinez’s turn. The Governor of New Mexico has committed a great sin: she is from a minority (2) , Mexican-American, a conservative and a Republican, and she has the temerity to govern as one.

She is thus a threat and must be destroyed, in this case by lying about her family:

Here we have a popular and successful Latina politician with a bold, conservative agenda in an important swing state. As far as the mainstream media is concerned, there has to be a catch.

“Ms. Martinez, who grew up along the border, is also Mexican-American, with news reports since her election revealing that her paternal grandfather came to the United States as an illegal immigrant,” wrote Marc Lacey in a New York Times profile three months ago.

“…The New Mexican’s Sandra Baltazar Martínez reported recently, at least two of the governor’s grandparents also were [undocumented immigrants],” wrote the Santa Fe New Mexican in a recent editorial.

Lest you be under any illusions about the nature and motives of these news items, bear in mind that Gov. Martinez wants to roll back certain of her predecessor’s policies regarding illegal immigration in New Mexico, most notably, a policy that allows illegal immigrants to secure drivers licenses. “The governor’s opponents have pointed to her immigrant grandparents as an example of why New Mexico should welcome illegal immigrants and continue to allow them to get a driver’s license,” reports the Associated Press.

Obviously, the stage is set for the media and her political rivals to paint Gov. Martinez as a hypocrite and a traitor to her people.

There’s only one problem: The story about Martinez’s grandparents is junk. The Governor’s grandparents were not U.S. citizens, but they were most certainly not illegal immigrants.

Read the rest to see why this charge is bogus.

It’s an old rhetorical trick, one beloved of demagogues everywhere: plant a leading question seemingly loaded with damning implications with the audience, then trust that their cynicism and distrust of politicians will prevent them from thinking critically and asking rational questions such as, “What was the state of the law at the time her grandparents arrived in the US?”

It’s a cheap, sleazy tactic, but it’s one that’s used so regularly because it often works.

Thankfully, in the cases of Marco Rubio and candidate for US Senate Ted Cruz (R-TX), it didn’t work. But now the “smear guns” have been turned on Governor Martinez, who’s increasingly seen as another threat to the Democrats’ death-grip on minority groups.

We mustn’t let them succeed.

Footnotes:
(1) Because, after all, what “authentic” minority could ever consider being a Republican. Must be a traitor.
(2) Twice-over. A Mexican-American and a woman. The horror…

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Does the White House endorse the view that Republicans are racists?

May 11, 2011

Have a look at this item from Conn Carroll. True, the shout “They’re racist” came from an audience member, but it was one of only a very few(1) the White House saw fit to include in the official transcript of Obama’s speech on immigration in El Paso(2), which does lend it a somewhat “official” quality.

So, question for 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue: Does the President of the United States agree that Republicans and border-security advocates are racists?

(1) The others being expressions of adulation for Obama, which we can assume have the WH seal of approval.

(2) Which happens to be in a state that’s burning to the ground, not that Obama has noticed.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Band of (Illegal) Brothers?

March 23, 2011

Call it a gut feeling, but my hunch is that this odd incident is more a reflection of clever stupidity than anything menacing:

13 Illegal Immigrants Arrested in California Wearing U.S. Marine Uniforms

Border Patrol agents recently arrested 13 illegal immigrants disguised as U.S. Marines and riding in a fake military van, U.S. Customs and Border Protection said Tuesday.

The illegal immigrants were clad in Marine uniforms when they were apprehended at the Campo Border Patrol Westbound I-8 checkpoint at 11 p.m. on March 14 near Pine Valley, Calif., border officials said. Two U.S. citizens in the van also were arrested.

Pine Valley is just east of San Diego.

Like I said, “clever.” There’s a big military presence around San Diego, and there are a lot of Hispanics in the military, so seeing a bunch of Hispanic US Marines being transported from one place to another wouldn’t be too odd.

But what was the “stupid” part, you ask?

The name labels on their uniforms all read “Perez.”

D’oh! 

via The Jawa Report, which has video.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Arizona to Fed: “You sue me and I’ll sue you. Criss-cross”

February 11, 2011

Last year, the federal government filed suit against the state of Arizona to block enforcement of Arizona’s controversial* SB 1070 bill, that required Arizona law enforcement to enforce federal immigration law, since Washington apparently refused to do so itself.

Now Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has fired back, suing Washington for failing to protect Arizona from invasion:

Arizona Governor Janice Brewer, in a filing today in federal court in Phoenix, accuses the U.S. government of failing to maintain operational control of the state’s border with Mexico, failing to protect it from invasion and violence and failing to enforce federal immigration laws.

“The federal government has effectively conceded its inability to protect Arizona and its citizens from criminal activities associated with illegal aliens,” Brewer said in the filing. “Within the last year, the federal government placed warning signs in the desert 80 miles north of the border and only 30 miles south of Phoenix warning people to stay away from the area.”

I believe Brewer is  relying on Article 4, Section 4 of the US Constitution:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Emphasis added.

Arizona has at least an arguable case, since the warning signs can be colored as refusal to defend a state’s territory and perhaps even a renunciation of sovereignty in those places. (Hey, if the government is telling citizens it cannot protect them on American soil, is it still American soil?)

On the other hand, an originalist interpretation of the relevant clause would probably** find that the Founders meant invasion by an army wielded by another sovereign power, and hence did not apply in this case. While the border problem is serious, the cartels are not sovereign powers (yet).

On the other-other hand, the 18th-century authors had experience of war on their frontiers with the Indian tribes — though they were treated as sovereign nations for legal purposes, so, forget that. Maybe a better originalist argument in favor of Arizona’s suit would be piracy, which colonies-turned-states had plenty of experience with. Surely the governors back then would have demanded federal help if pirates were raiding their coasts.

So, it’s a dicey proposition. Emotionally, I’m sick of the Fed not doing the things it is supposed to do, while refusing to do the jobs it’s charged with — such as border control. But, my gut feeling is that a judge will rule against the state. We’ll see.

*To open-border advocates, the ethnic grievance industry, and those they sucker

**In other words, I’m making a wild-arsed guess.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)